List changes and trade bait

[churry]

Biggs linked to the Dogs and Essendon. We 'expect' to receive compensation for him but could lose him as a delisted free agent as we can't promote him to the senior list (out of cap space?!) or keep him on the rookie list for a fourth year.

Wouldn't surprise me if membrey and Biggs end up being delisted due to the trade ban. If a worthwhile deal can't be done (which is very likely) in time then there isn't much point in doing one apart from graningt the players' wishes. I still hope Biggs somehow stays...

[liz]

A particular FB trade rumours page is running that JPK will be announced as a demon tomorrow in exchange for their picks 2&3. There normally wrong on everything so I wouldn't be too concerned

It would be a bizarre trade by any account:
- he's contracted
- he's arguably our best player (certainly if the measure is consistency over a number of years)
- he's the cornerstone of our midfield
- he has a girlfriend who, presumably, is settled in Sydney
- he stood at the B&F count just a few weeks ago and told everyone how he wouldn't want to play anywhere else and was already looking forward to next year
- the Swans have never been a club to trade for youth for the sake of it
- the Swans have already recruited one of the most highly rated players in this year's draft pool, so aren't starved of draft access to high level talent (for the first time since 2009)
- the Swans are in a premiership window and recruited big (and riskily) last year to get into this position
- if the Swans needed to obtain salary cap relief (and I suspect they don't particularly), they would trade out a Mitchell or a Reid in a flash before letting go of Kennedy.
- the Swans aren't allowed to ontrade any high draft picks for other experienced players to replace someone like Kennedy

The only possible reason why a trade like that might occur is if there are compelling personal reasons why Kennedy wanted to return to Melbourne. At his age and with a mature persona, plus a family steeped in football who understand how the industry operates, it would have to be a significant reason for him to want to do so.

[Melbourne_Blood]

I agree it would be stupid for a team in a premiership window to trade it's best player for draft picks, however high they might be. It's just strange this rumour has popped up at all, but apparently it started on a demons forum.

[bondy]

Wrong Josh Kennedy?

[Melbourne_Blood]

Nope the rumour definitely refers to our JPK.

[MattW]

A particular FB trade rumours page is running that JPK will be announced as a demon tomorrow in exchange for their picks 2&3. There normally wrong on everything so I wouldn't be too concerned

We are not allowed to trade, no matter how disadvantageous it would be.

[ernie koala]

We are not allowed to trade, no matter how disadvantageous it would be.

We can trade for picks...Not players.

[Matt80]

It would be a bizarre trade by any account:
- he's contracted
- he's arguably our best player (certainly if the measure is consistency over a number of years)
- he's the cornerstone of our midfield
- he has a girlfriend who, presumably, is settled in Sydney
- he stood at the B&F count just a few weeks ago and told everyone how he wouldn't want to play anywhere else and was already looking forward to next year
- the Swans have never been a club to trade for youth for the sake of it
- the Swans have already recruited one of the most highly rated players in this year's draft pool, so aren't starved of draft access to high level talent (for the first time since 2009)
- the Swans are in a premiership window and recruited big (and riskily) last year to get into this position
- if the Swans needed to obtain salary cap relief (and I suspect they don't particularly), they would trade out a Mitchell or a Reid in a flash before letting go of Kennedy.
- the Swans aren't allowed to ontrade any high draft picks for other experienced players to replace someone like Kennedy

The only possible reason why a trade like that might occur is if there are compelling personal reasons why Kennedy wanted to return to Melbourne. At his age and with a mature persona, plus a family steeped in football who understand how the industry operates, it would have to be a significant reason for him to want to do so.

I would not want it to happen, but picks 2 and 3 are pretty good value. You would get one of Patracca or Peter Wright or both.

[ernie koala]

On a side issue...

It's interesting to read that the Dogs have apparently offered Boyd a 6 year, $1m pa, contract..

He's played less than 10, pretty ordinary, games so far...

He may well end up a star forward, but that's a huge offer for a player who hasn't delivered anything of note to date.

Yet there has been no media outcry, not even so much as a raised eyebrow....As opposed to the carry on Re: Buddy

It makes our contract with Buddy look like an absolute bargain.

[Ludwig]

Biggs linked to the Dogs and Essendon. We 'expect' to receive compensation for him but could lose him as a delisted free agent as we can't promote him to the senior list (out of cap space?!) or keep him on the rookie list for a fourth year.

I found that a very strange part of the AFL article regarding the salary cap. If we don't have enough cap space to upgrade Biggs to the 38ths spot on our primary list, we must indeed be in dire straits, because the alternatives couldn't cost much less. It would also mean that we couldn't have had enough caps space to sign Malceski if he decided to stay with us.

I would not want it to happen, but picks 2 and 3 are pretty good value. You would get one of Patracca or Peter Wright or both.

I thought you were going to a dinner party.

[Meg]

On a side issue...

It's interesting to read that the Dogs have apparently offered Boyd a 6 year, $1m pa, contract..

Compared with approx. $70,000 as a second year player at GWS. No wonder he suddenly got 'homesick'!

[Meg]

I thought you were going to a dinner party.

Matt furtively logs on to his phone while down on the floor looking for the serviette that he 'accidently' dropped under the table ........!

[ernie koala]

I found that a very strange part of the AFL article regarding the salary cap. If we don't have enough cap space to upgrade Biggs to the 38ths spot on our primary list, we must indeed be in dire straits, because the alternatives couldn't cost much less. It would also mean that we couldn't have had enough caps space to sign Malceski if he decided to stay with us.

I thought you were going to a dinner party.

Given we apparently offered Mal between $400k and $500k pa, I think it can be safely assumed we can accommodate Biggs if we want to keep him.

As for Matt80...He's just firing off a few posts in between the foie gras and the souffl?.

[Matt80]

Matt furtively logs on to his phone while down on the floor looking for the serviette that he 'accidently' dropped under the table ........!

I'm big on mobile phone etiquette. I never read or answer my phone in the company of people or at a dinner table. Sometimes at a function, a toilet break is great to get a Swans score.

[Ludwig]

Compared with approx. $70,000 as a second year player at GWS. No wonder he suddenly got 'homesick'!

Except there's an AFL rule I believe that says he can't get more in his 2nd year than he would get at GWS.

During the RWO Buddy debate there were plenty of us that said that these high priced long-term deals would become increasingly more common. And that seems to be coming true. How else can you keep your best players?

Free agency leads to a more uncontrolled 'free market' type system, which will mirror other similar ostensibly open systems. It doesn't matter if you are talking about walrus societies or free market economies, there will a tendency to concentrate the benefits of the social structure in an elite class and leave the scraps to fought over by the rest. These outcomes are well understood. (NOTE: This is not a political statement, but follows a well known scientific principle known as a normal or Gaussian distribution, or the bell curve).