Recruiting AFL Trade & Free Agency XII - 💰💰💰

[Lore]

Quick links: Player Contract Status | Draft Watch 2023 | AFLW Draft, Trade & Sign

The embedded resources below are kept up to date by the trade board mods (as much as possible – we are human after all). Enjoy!

Spoiler: 2024 Draft Order

 

[ant555]

We should have been in on doing something similar in hindsight. Move our pick 31 for a whole bunch of junk picks like this.

Rosa on record we're wanting 3 - 4 so those would be 'live' selections anyways

31 is not the pick at the end of the first round and the Tigers where the only club with that many junk picks. What Rosa wants and what we get is not set in stone anyway and some of those picks can be rookie picks. It is not something that could have happened.

 

[ant555]

Tbf eagles dont have an option but to say that now, i wonder if theyre having a play for Warner with that mindset

I think this draft and how its rated is getting a bit murky

The way i see it

The top few isnt anything amazing compared to recent years, in fact average. There is probably another couple after that, that could be number 1

Clearly clubs seem fairly keen on the 10-14 range. Im not sure i see it, but i havnt seen Hotton justs surprised off an ACL

Thats the Travaglia, Berry, Hotton, Lindsay sortve range

Then i think its pretty deep from the 20-50/60 range

The way I see the draft is there is no Reid or a Jed Walter as far as KP forwards go but there are a lot of midfield types similar to the level of McKercher / Duursma / Sanders / Windsor and it runs a bit further in. For me it is a real question mark draft simply because it is hard to line everyone up. Are they all pretty good or is the fact because it is hard to seperate them are they as good as we think ?

 

[Travisty1331]

If you’re Adelaide, you don’t do that. The guy is a FA next year. As in, free. You don’t downgrade from 4 to 9 and future 1st to a future 2nd just to get him a year earlier.

Sure the argument could be made that it would be a “sure thing” this year if they got him, and minds change/anything can change in 12 months, nothing is guaranteed. But if I was them and that did happen, I’d just pivot to the next target. Not worth giving all that up.

Only reason I could see Adelaide even considering it is because the heat is massively on Nicks

 

[Keystone agony]

The way I see the draft is there is no Reid or a Jed Walter as far as KP forwards go but there are a lot of midfield types similar to the level of McKercher / Duursma / Sanders / Windsor and it runs a bit further in. For me it is a real question mark draft simply because it is hard to line everyone up. Are they all pretty good or is the fact because it is hard to seperate them are they as good as we think ?

Even i think id prefer Mckercher and Duursma over most of these guys tbh

Im not doubting alot of these guys will have impact and earlier on being 180cm mids, just think it will plateau fairly quickly for them and wont reach the levels of what a Duursma probably reaches

I would say i think Bo Allen is better than Koltyn, although i have Bo higher than most

I think alot of it comes down to the 8 KPPs from the 8-40 range have had a big say in the depth which is fair

 

[Yoda_]

31 is not the pick at the end of the first round and the Tigers where the only club with that many junk picks. What Rosa wants and what we get is not set in stone anyway and some of those picks can be rookie picks. It is not something that could have happened.

that's all semantics, the point remains about trying to garner mid round selections to offset and abolsve a Kako bid

 

[ghostdog]

You're making it seem like my suggestion was trading Stringer for 2 firsts. That is unrealistic. I don't think my hypotheticals are unrealistic and unreasonable at least from a value perspective. And it's also not unrealistic to trade players that have been stuck in the twos or played as a sub.

I'm just discussing the type of list management decisions the club could have made to take the more aggressive approach they promised to take.

"Essendon coach Brad Scott says “everything is on the table” when it comes to list management decisions after a failed 2024 campaign with confirmation champion and former captain Dyson Heppell will get the farewell game fans wanted after the “gut-wrenching decision” to leave him out of last week’s final game in Melbourne."

Apparently we're supposed to believe trading a contracted Stringer for a token pick is "everything on the table" when its not.

Agree.
Another example is Hind. Clubs are reportedly talking with Hind's manager, but because we've already delisted him we've precluded ourselves from any possible trade benefit. Why we would do that when we need points for Kako, I'm not sure.

 

[ydc55]

I wonder why we did not consider Houston?
Pick 9 seems a good pick for him and we could then add two best 22 players from this draft.

 

[ant555]

that's all semantics, the point remains about trying to garner mid round selections to offset and abolsve a Kako bid

But that is just it. It is not semantics. You can not just wish a situation to happen. Have you looked at a points table ?
Richmond are not going to give up 4 picks for 31. They got 20. That is why they gave up 2 x 3rd round and 2 x 4th round. They will have more picks inside the top 25 coming in.
If it is us giving up 31 then the deal is likely to be for 43 and 45 which ends up being just over 100 points more and does not change a lot. You may not be reading it on the internet but we will have been talking to a lot of clubs about late picks. It will be discussions about late picks that has seen Stringer not just being sent off. GWS just want to offer 56 which is worth only 194 points.
You want to know why we but heads so often these days ? I think you throw up too many opinions that seem to lack much thought and they seem to be based around "optics" and you being desperate to be seen as a supporter of a relevant club. It is nothing like the level of conversation we used to have at the VFL.

 

[Keystone agony]

that's all semantics, the point remains about trying to garner mid round selections to offset and abolsve a Kako bid

Agree.
Another example is Hind. Clubs are reportedly talking with Hind's manager, but because we've already delisted him we've precluded ourselves from any possible trade benefit. Why we would do that when we need points for Kako, I'm not sure.

This will be done live

We should get plenty for Stringer with 53, 57 and 74 at the absolute minimum

 

[ant555]

I wonder why we did not consider Houston?
Pick 9 seems a good pick for him and we could then add two best 22 players from this draft.

Maybe we knew the answer and his management had the list of clubs where he was willing to go even well before the event. There would have been an initial call from every Melbourne club. Personally as good as I think Houston is he is 28 now. I am looking at maybe 5 years younger before I am trading top end draft picks. I think we should be playing a slightly longer game.

 

[ant555]

This will be done live

We should get plenty for Stringer with 53, 57 and 74 at the absolute minimum

53- 233 points
57- 182 points
74- 0 points.
Just giving the exact value. Not making any other insinuations or comments

 

[Zach Package]

The media seem to think we are standing still and risk being overtaken - like in their minds teams flow a linear path and we just missed the 8 so we should naturally progress to just making the 8.

Ousting our premier goalkicker lends me to believe we don’t necessarily believe that progress is linear.

It sounds like we believe removing him will improve the mix and it will be addition by subtraction.

 

[JayJ20]

Great in theory . Although in saying that are the Tigers looking for another inside midfielder ?
I can understand the Pies interest as Hobbs would fit in their side.
Anyway that is not just unlikely it will not happen as Richmond has just landed pick No.20 from the Lions in exchange for two second-round picks (No.32 and 42) and two third-round picks (No.43 and 45).

Yeah that's the trade I was referring to.

You can use the Scott quote but it does not matter if he says everything is on the table as 1) players have to want to leave and 2) another club wants to pay for what we have. We do not know how aggressive they have been as we do not know what conversations they have had with our players and their managers or exactly what enquires we have had. It is just standard talk for we will do what we can. You can not really take comments in the press literally. Sott can say everything is on the table. Then Rosa says well this is what we can actually put on the table. That is why I said it will be a quiet trade period months ago.

I just think we can be a bit more creative than we've been. That's all.

When we're inevitably behind the likes of Richmond and North again, people will start to complain about how teams always pass us, but that's what being mid table gets you.

After the last 20 years, it's just frustrating to see us falling behind most teams that are ahead, around and behind us in young talent again. It's just the same cycle over and over again.

 

[gillon]

You can use the Scott quote but it does not matter if he says everything is on the table as 1) players have to want to leave

Did Treloar or Grundy want to initially leave? Obviously Collingwood had cap issues, but players can be pushed a certain way.

 

[JayJ20]

You guys take too much of what the club says as gospel and take it the wrong way

That still requires players wanting to leave or not being contracted

Its unrealistic because it cant be done

Ok I thought it was a pretty reasonable solution to what is stagnant list management/development (IMO), but I accept that it's unrealistic from the perspective of it happening.

Still, I personally don't dislike discussions about hypotheticals, ways of improving the list and how things went wrong on here. If others don't like it, then I guess I'll just leave out hypotheticals and stick to what's happening now.

 

[bombreys]

We were 4th after Round 17

and 2nd after round 12

Why would we be playing a 4th round draft pick 18 year old that isnt absolutely smashing down the door. Just because he was named in the best isnt the entire story. It still wasnt better than what our side was doing to be 2nd half way through the year and 4th 3 qtrs of the way through the year.

There not the best comparisons, because there not top 10-15 pick like Kako is. But even a guy who is a 4th round small forward was seen ready to play 10 AFL games when we very successful early in that year aswell

If we genuinely thought we were a top 4 side next year we wouldnt be moving on Shiel, Lav, Stringer, Kelly, Weideman and Setterfield. So id be pretty confident the mindset has shifted from what it was entering into 2024

Please keep ignoring the 4 names ive mentioned aswell though

If you thought Tsatas and Caddy were ready made for their roles then your inept in this area

Davey was literally your comparison - but now that it doesn’t suit your argument you’ve changed your mind there?

I think you’re stuck in your own head and don’t want to listen to logic. I’ll leave it there.

 

[Keystone agony]

I wonder why we did not consider Houston?
Pick 9 seems a good pick for him and we could then add two best 22 players from this draft.

28 next year and were a bottom 5 side before him

 

[Yoda_]

But that is just it. It is not semantics. You can not just wish a situation to happen. Have you looked at a points table ?
Richmond are not going to give up 4 picks for 31. They got 20. That is why they gave up 2 x 3rd round and 2 x 4th round. They will have more picks inside the top 25 coming in.
If it is us giving up 31 then the deal is likely to be for 43 and 45 which ends up being just over 100 points more and does not change a lot. You may not be reading it on the internet but we will have been talking to a lot of clubs about late picks. It will be discussions about late picks that has seen Stringer not just being sent off. GWS just want to offer 56 which is worth only 194 points.
You want to know why we but heads so often these days ? I think you throw up too many opinions that seem to lack much thought and they seem to be based around "optics" and you being desperate to be seen as a supporter of a relevant club. It is nothing like the level of conversation we used to have at the VFL.

I was suggesting a group of later picks for a semi valuable pick. Id even suggested in the last page or two as one of many options we should explore.

 

[Keystone agony]

Davey was literally your comparison - but now that it doesn’t suit your argument you’ve changed your mind there?

I think you’re stuck in your own head and don’t want to listen to logic. I’ll leave it there.

No

Stephenson
Kozzie
Rachelle
Nick Watson

All top 10-12 picks as small forward. All played 72% + of the 1st season

My mention was even a way worse small forward Davey was seen capable to play 10 games and it wasnt like we were bottom of the barrel winning less than 2 games that year, we started very well and were eyeing off top 4 for the first half of the season

But continue to completely over look those 4 names

Small forwards can impact sooner than others due to the non physical nature of the position compared to mids and KPPs/Talls

Anyway im just repeating myself now. You got caught out being wrong thinking Tsatas and Caddy were ready made and didnt take into account 1) their body shapes/sizes and 2) their position at the next level and 3) in Tsatas case not being capable of many other positions

 

[Keystone agony]

53- 233 points
57- 182 points
74- 0 points.
Just giving the exact value. Not making any other insinuations or comments

Should be plenty

Think i worked out we would want about 850 outside of 9

Pick 10 - Lombard Bid
Pick 11 - Sam Marshall Bid (Maybe tad too risky)
Pick 12 - Bo Allen
Pick 13 - Earliest Kako Bid (969 points)

A deficit for next year of ~120 shouldnt impact. We have too many

Id be hopeful for Shiel and Stringer its for F2, 53 and 74

Also pick 31 i feel will be seen as very valuable aswell. May get an F2 and later points potentially

 

[ant555]

Did Treloar or Grundy want to initially leave? Obviously Collingwood had cap issues, but players can be pushed a certain way.

No they did not but it is a different situation. Add to that Grundy had played 3 years of the deal and Treloar was also a number of year in. Parish has just finished the first year of the deal. What can certainly happen with us is Parish has another year with injury and average form to the point he is in the same spot that Wright ended up in and playing seconds. Then you get a situation where both sides may want out.
I just do not think it is practical to say we can be creative by forcing guys out who do not want to leave this year as there are no circumstances to say either side is unhappy.

 

[Vindicater]

Wonder who Osa is in discussions with. I assume we are talking to Gold Coast about moving up to 6 but not sure why else to d with our bum hand.

 

[ant555]

I was suggesting a group of later picks for a semi valuable pick. Id even suggested in the last page or two as one of many options we should explore.

I saw it . I am simply arguing against the reality of your hindsight comment. I am sure that we have shopped 31 around to see its value.

IMHO, I would go one of three ways;

(1) move 9 into a combination of later picks. Acknowledge we won't get a second top 10 talent (Kako + 9)
(2) Move 9 into the future and take Kako + two 2025 first rounders
(3) try and maximise the quantity of picks in a supposed deep draft. Accept our second gets absolved by a Kako bid and any subsequent picks but try to finish with 2 - 3 picks inside 40 (+ Kako)
(4) Accept whatever happens happens. If Kako is bid before 9 leave him, take a player with our pick 9, then 31 and move on

Maybe looking to patter out our picks into bulk top 40 picks may work, doubtful but maybe an option

I think the scenario will be we do nothing with pick 9 until draft night. We will have an idea of which club want to trade in and have had discussions with them. What happens will depend on trades and I suspect we will have back end points lined up before draft night even if that involves using a F3 or F4 and any players we trade. They will need something lined up if there is no bid on Kako before 9.

 

[ant555]

Should be plenty

Think i worked out we would want about 850 outside of 9

Pick 10 - Lombard Bid
Pick 11 - Sam Marshall Bid (Maybe tad too risky)
Pick 12 - Bo Allen
Pick 13 - Earliest Kako Bid (969 points)

A deficit for next year of ~120 shouldnt impact. We have too many

Id be hopeful for Shiel and Stringer its for F2, 53 and 74

Also pick 31 i feel will be seen as very valuable aswell. May get an F2 and later points potentially

Not hearing a lot about Shiel being traded now after a couple of initial stories that GWS may have some interest. Pretty sure Cal said in the last day or two he expects Shiel to be with us next year.

 

[ant555]

Will be glad when the new rules come in and all this pick strade shuffle is gone. Make sides pay with their first round pick if that is the case and take out the scenario of getting a free kick with a pick before the bid. Pay the price and work out a formula for when the points exceed the draft pick the club holds.
Someone bids on you F/S or academy player then it costs you the pick in whatever round it is and your pick in the next round goes to the end of the line if the points exceed the points of the first round pick used to match. Or something.
Just get rid of the play where clubs are doing an end run to gain an extra first round player.