Remove this Banner Ad

Mega Thread Trading, Drafting & General Cattle Rustling Part III

  • Thread starter Thread starter grizzlym
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Books said:
Is this the last day for GWS to sign uncontracted players?

There has been no news on that this year. If Gilham is going to GWS, which has been mentioned, will that also be announced today?
Click to expand...
Interesting question. Not sure if their date is linked to the FA period. Assuming we are allowed to trade or bank the pick then I'd guess yes but don't honestly know.
 
Getting back to Hawthorn

Two pieces of the puzzle are in place now with Murphy and Young gone. Just waiting on whether Gilham chooses to go to GWS, GC or Port (or stays) before finalizing list adjustments.As he isn't a free agent this could take another week.

Hawthorn don't seem to be fighting hard to keep Gilham so you would expect they are happy with their defensive structure and if the can get somewhere around a 2nd round or early 3rd for him they will jump at it.

If Gilham goes (for around a pick 30-45), Murphy should net around pick 50-55 and Young around pick 25-35 that would leave us with 5 picks - 4 if we upgrade Schneider. I suspect they may also want to use their pick 80 and that would mean one more player may be delisted but they will also need to wait on the AFL to find out what compensation picks they land. If Gilham stays then it may well be 2 more delistings.

While making assumptions about compensation, if Gilham goes and they do delist one more, I think the draft scenario for us would now be:
Pick 27 (likely to drop to about pick 29-30 after other clubs get compo picks)
pick 35 approx (Young)
pick 42 approx (Gilham if traded)
pick 55 approx (Murphy)
pick 60 (likely to be around 65 after other club compo picks)
pick 80 (likely to remain around pick 80 as clubs will pass or not utilise more than 3 picks - to be used on upgrading Schneider)

That's not a bad way to approach a draft that apparently has depth enough for 100 good players.
 
aussie80s said:
Getting back to Hawthorn

Two pieces of the puzzle are in place now with Murphy and Young gone. Just waiting on whether Gilham chooses to go to GWS, GC or Port (or stays) before finalizing list adjustments.As he isn't a free agent this could take another week.

Hawthorn don't seem to be fighting hard to keep Gilham so you would expect they are happy with their defensive structure and if the can get somewhere around a 2nd round or early 3rd for him they will jump at it.

If Gilham goes (for around a pick 30-45), Murphy should net around pick 50-55 and Young around pick 25-35 that would leave us with 5 picks - 4 if we upgrade Schneider. I suspect they may also want to use their pick 80 and that would mean one more player may be delisted but they will also need to wait on the AFL to find out what compensation picks they land. If Gilham stays then it may well be 2 more delistings.

While making assumptions about compensation, if Gilham goes and they do delist one more, I think the draft scenario for us would now be:
Pick 27 (likely to drop to about pick 29-30 after other clubs get compo picks)
pick 35 approx (Young)
pick 42 approx (Gilham if traded)
pick 55 approx (Murphy)
pick 60 (likely to be around 65 after other club compo picks)
pick 80 (likely to remain around pick 80 as clubs will pass or not utilise more than 3 picks - to be used on upgrading Schneider)

That's not a bad way to approach a draft that apparently has depth enough for 100 good players.
Click to expand...


Young compo will be either end-of-first-round (25-ish) or 2nd-round (45-ish).
Murphy compo will probably be 3rd-round, (65-ish).
If Gilham leaves outside of a trade his compo would be either end-of-2nd-round (45-ish) or 3rd-round (65-ish).

Some recruiters say the quality drops off after the top 25 or so.

If Gilham leaves, that will be six mature bodies out and only one in (Lake). Will we chase a couple of delisted players or mature bodies in the draft? Or will we just go with kids? I hope we get a couple ready to play next year, even if they are only depth players.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

aussie80s said:
Getting back to Hawthorn

Two pieces of the puzzle are in place now with Murphy and Young gone. Just waiting on whether Gilham chooses to go to GWS, GC or Port (or stays) before finalizing list adjustments.As he isn't a free agent this could take another week.

Hawthorn don't seem to be fighting hard to keep Gilham so you would expect they are happy with their defensive structure and if the can get somewhere around a 2nd round or early 3rd for him they will jump at it.

If Gilham goes (for around a pick 30-45), Murphy should net around pick 50-55 and Young around pick 25-35 that would leave us with 5 picks - 4 if we upgrade Schneider. I suspect they may also want to use their pick 80 and that would mean one more player may be delisted but they will also need to wait on the AFL to find out what compensation picks they land. If Gilham stays then it may well be 2 more delistings.

While making assumptions about compensation, if Gilham goes and they do delist one more, I think the draft scenario for us would now be:
Pick 27 (likely to drop to about pick 29-30 after other clubs get compo picks)
pick 35 approx (Young)
pick 42 approx (Gilham if traded)
pick 55 approx (Murphy)
pick 60 (likely to be around 65 after other club compo picks)
pick 80 (likely to remain around pick 80 as clubs will pass or not utilise more than 3 picks - to be used on upgrading Schneider)

That's not a bad way to approach a draft that apparently has depth enough for 100 good players.
Click to expand...
Compo is tied to round and ladder position from what I can tell.

That would give us:
Pick 27 (Lake Deal)
Pick 42 (Young Compo)
Pick 60
Pick 61 (Murphy)

Would be great to get a top 35 for Gilham which would give 5 picks in the first 61 picks. Not too bad as we also picked up Lake.
 
Books said:
Young compo will be either end-of-first-round (25-ish) or 2nd-round (45-ish).
Murphy compo will probably be 3rd-round, (65-ish).
If Gilham leaves outside of a trade his compo would be either end-of-2nd-round (45-ish) or 3rd-round (65-ish).

Some recruiters say the quality drops off after the top 25 or so.

If Gilham leaves, that will be six mature bodies out and only one in (Lake). Will we chase a couple of delisted players or mature bodies in the draft? Or will we just go with kids? I hope we get a couple ready to play next year, even if they are only depth players.
Click to expand...
I'd be tempted to rookie a guy like Isles or Salopek given all the experience we have lost.
 
Books said:
If Gilham leaves, that will be six mature bodies out and only one in (Lake). Will we chase a couple of delisted players or mature bodies in the draft? Or will we just go with kids? I hope we get a couple ready to play next year, even if they are only depth players.
Click to expand...

I hope we go with kids unless there is someone who really fits a specific need.

The 6 outs, assuming Gilham goes, are all fringe players so it is more a loss of depth than mature bodies. We need to get some more kids into the team to see if they can play or are list cloggers.

We have enough mature bodies in the side and need to get the next batch ready. We only had 3 debutants this year in Gunston, Boumann and Hill, and one has already left. This is the lowest debutants figures I can recall. When you look at Geelong with 10 and Collingwood had about 7, we need to blood the kids gradually so they can learn the system or we could hit a wall in a few years.
 
aussie80s said:
The 6 outs, assuming Gilham goes, are all fringe players so it is more a loss of depth than mature bodies. We need to get some more kids into the team to see if they can play or are list cloggers.
Click to expand...


Its a loss of depth in mature bodies. We have a few injuries to our best line up and or depth, we may be in a little bit of trouble.....we were blessed this year up untill round 24. Like i said you plan for the worst possible outcome.

aussie80s said:
We have enough mature bodies in the side and need to get the next batch ready. We only had 3 debutants this year in Gunston, Boumann and Hill, and one has already left. This is the lowest debutants figures I can recall. When you look at Geelong with 10 and Collingwood had about 7, we need to blood the kids gradually so they can learn the system or we could hit a wall in a few years.
Click to expand...

Our sole focus next year is to win the premiership, not a rebuild...... our kids next year will get a run either way due to injury and Or the resting of players through the season so they are well rested for finals.....I still think that we need 1 more mature body, either depth or best 18.
 
Comparing Young with Dawes or Wellingham is irrelevant, Collingwood traded we lost a FA. Collingwood did it well, we got screwed.

Compensation is based on the age of player and the size of the contract at the new club. Young and Murphy are both 26, pretty much as young as you can get for a FA and we have no idea how much they are getting. But from speculation Young is on 300-350k over 3 years and Murphy probably 250-300k over 2 years. We will probably get a 2nd rounder for Young and a 3rd rounder for Murphy.

Doesnt matter though as they will just be traded to Sydney for Kennedy.
 
If Gilham was to request to be traded I would think we would package him with a pick to get us back up the order, so we are likely to wait until compensation is settled in any case.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Books said:
If Gilham leaves, that will be six mature bodies out and only one in (Lake). Will we chase a couple of delisted players or mature bodies in the draft? Or will we just go with kids? I hope we get a couple ready to play next year, even if they are only depth players.
Click to expand...

Than i would take a guess and say Tom Gillies would be more likely to get a chance i really liked some of his defencive pressure in the VFL Grand final!!!

If he does well in our back half we can then release Gibson up the ground with stints in the middle as a big body type midfielder
clear.png
when need be!!
 
Hedgehodgy said:
Comparing Young with Dawes or Wellingham is irrelevant, Collingwood traded we lost a FA. Collingwood did it well, we got screwed.

Compensation is based on the age of player and the size of the contract at the new club. Young and Murphy are both 26, pretty much as young as you can get for a FA and we have no idea how much they are getting. But from speculation Young is on 300-350k over 3 years and Murphy probably 250-300k over 2 years. We will probably get a 2nd rounder for Young and a 3rd rounder for Murphy.

Doesnt matter though as they will just be traded to Sydney for Kennedy.
Click to expand...

Has Kennedy re-signed yet?
 
Have been thinking about how Collingwood have gone about this period and was thinking what players will turn 25 next year and we could trade like Collingwood (don't get me wrong don't really want anyone to leave but just exploring). So 25 next year is born 1988 so that's draft 2006....hmmm who we have from that draft? No one, Thorpe, Renough, Morton, Kennedy and Moss all gone. So don't think we will be able to take advantage of free agency like Collingwood has for a while. The next year 2007 we have Rioli and Whitecross both are best 22.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

dipper86 said:
Our sole focus next year is to win the premiership, not a rebuild...... our kids next year will get a run either way due to injury and Or the resting of players through the season so they are well rested for finals.....I still think that we need 1 more mature body, either depth or best 18.
Click to expand...

You get no argument from me there, I fully agree we need to be all out to win next year. Drafting kids is not a rebuild as we have a settled experienced list, but perhaps one mature on-baller with a late pick could be useful. Rather than look at another defender (just because we have lost some) maybe just look for the best 22-25 year old ball winners in the VFL, WAFL and SANFL and use that as a depth choice. There's plenty more Zorko's and Magner's there.

Keeping Gilham would be handy and more preferable than letting him go if the club felt it needed another defender. It's just the vibes out of Waverley don't seem to feel like they are trying to hold on to him. Really depends on what Clarko wants.

If you look at our best line-up it may look something like the following:

B: Guerra, Lake, Gibson
HB: Birchall, Schoenmakers, Burgoyne
C: Suckling, Mitchell, Smith
HF: Lewis, Franklin, Gunston
F: Breust, Roughead, Rioli
Foll: Hale, Hodge, Sewell
Int: Shiels, Stratton, Puopolo, Savage

Emerg: Bailey, Hill, Cheney, Ellis, Gilham, Osborne (inj), Whitecross (inj)

Therefore we have Stratton, Hodge, Roughead, Cheney, Puopolo and Suckling who I have not placed in my speculative best defenders who can all go down there if needed. Thereby we have 4 talls, 5 mid and 3 small defenders available already if needed. Our back end is fairly well catered for even without Gilham and Murphy.

Who knows, maybe Kelly and Boseley come on next year and we will be awash with depth players in our defence. If Hawthorn lets Gilham go then it is unlikely they will look at getting a back up defender as whatever were to be available would be on par or lesser value.

Our forward line also looks to bat fairly deeply, and again, from what I selected, you can slot Puopolo, Savage, Osborne, Whitecross (later in the year), Burgoyne. Schoenmakers can play if a tall is required.

Our biggest issue with depth is ball extractors, and a back up ruckman to Hale, so that Roughy can stay KP - really need Bailey to stand up. As for midfielders Mitchell, Sewell, Hodge and Lewis are great, Shiels is coming along nicely, Rioli is great as a burst player and Burgoyne does that role well but a few more are needed. Savage and Hill look more comfortable as outside players. Hallahan and Woodward will be looked at to step up there. If you want depth anywhere it really needs to be through the midfield.
 
Stratton_Gun said:
Has Kennedy re-signed yet?
Click to expand...

He signed a 3-year deal when he left, which would be finishing this year.

AFL Swan supporter recon he is still contracted, however I have never heard/seen any contract announcements, you would think that the AFL Swans would announce a big extension like that
 
Hedgehodgy said:
He signed a 3-year deal when he left, which would be finishing this year.

AFL Swan supporter recon he is still contracted, however I have never heard/seen any contract announcements, you would think that the AFL Swans would announce a big extension like that
Click to expand...

Actually it would be very interesting if Kennedy announced he wants back to Hawthorn. After the contempt that the AFL Swans have treated Adelaide with the Tippett negotiations, arguing that Tippett has nominated AFL Swans and that Adelaide should be gentlemen and let him get there for pick 22 and Jesse White!!!!!!! It would be very funny indeed if the shoe was on the other foot.

Wont happen though :(
 
They are taking the player's photos off the club website as they go but Boumann is still up there - are they planning to re-draft him as a rookie? Was he on a 1 or 2 year contract?

If Gilham departs that leaves the following jumpers vacant - 1, 10, 11, 17, 27, 29 and 31.
I would be happy for Lake to take No.1 and Hill to take No.10. Can't see any obvious choices to fill that many though.
Our first draft pick should probably take No.27, 2nd pick No.29, 3rd pick No.31

Whatever they choose they will get announced at the AGM which is normally mid December. Does anyone know the date of the AGM? Usually mid December
 
What we need is some depth in midfield runners. Other clubs historically have done well with 2&3rd round picks to build out their midfield. The picks received from free agency players should give us a good shot at rebalancing our midfield.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

I got the outside word
    • Like
    • Haha
    • Love
Unofficial Preview Death Ride ‘25! A Carltank campaign (pick 8) - traded to Carlton as part of a pick swap to give Hawthorn two first round draft picks
88 89 90 91 92
Replies
2K
Views
197K
ReturningHawk
ReturningHawk

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom