Trade target discussion (merged thread)

[Auntie.Gerald]

the reported contract offer by the Swans for Sinclair is over $1mill for 4 years

i was surprised it would be only between $250k and $300k pa ?

[mcs]

Might just be me, but I think Parker is fairly over rated - not as critical as Kennedy or Hanners.

If we had to cut someone loose for trade currency he'd be my pick.

Not that I want him gone by any means, just think the Melbourne mafioso over value his contributions.

I reckon it might be just you industrial - he is such a good player already, and I think many simply forget to think he is still only 22 (turns 23 in a couple of weeks), with his best footy well in front of him.

He is well on track to play 300+ games, and I'd be so disappointed if some of them (or if he was traded now - most of them) were in any colours other than red and white. He will only get better from here, especially with Kirk back in the fold at the club as well.

[waswan]

Port would want a first round pick for Lobbe we would only be able to offer a second round in the 30's

Might snooker them a bit though, he is Surplus and asking for a 1st Rounder for Lobbe is stupid when your trying with a straight face to get Dixon with Pick 10 or thereabouts
West Coast 2nd Rounder and Sydney 3rd Rounder for a Surplus Ruckmen and a club trying to save money could work

[YvonneH]

So nothing to report from today?

[Mug Punter]

Might just be me, but I think Parker is fairly over rated - not as critical as Kennedy or Hanners.

If we had to cut someone loose for trade currency he'd be my pick.

Not that I want him gone by any means, just think the Melbourne mafioso over value his contributions.

Reckon you won't too many "likes" to this comment, I just love the way he plays footy, being voted by your peers as the most courageous player in the comp is good enough for me

[Industrial Fan]

Reckon you won't too many "likes" to this comment, I just love the way he plays footy, being voted by your peers as the most courageous player in the comp is good enough for me

Not saying he's not a top flight player, and I dont expect people to agree with me - just think he's the type of player clubs would pay overs for in a trade scenario.

More than happy if he remains a one club player, but doesnt overly concern me if clubs are hunting around.

[Levii3]

Just saw this http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/static...ning%20Map.pdf seems we're getting the narrow end with GWS getting the more traditional NSW footy areas like wagga broken hill

- - - Updated - - -

Not saying he's not a top flight player, and I dont expect people to agree with me - just think he's the type of player clubs would pay overs for in a trade scenario.

More than happy if he remains a one club player, but doesnt overly concern me if clubs are hunting around.

Would rather lose Mitchell than Parker

[Steve]

You'd have to think we'd be going after someone else of note after fighting so hard to get the restriction lifted to $450K per year.

I'd be happy with Sinclair, he had a poor GF but was good in their other finals and seems to take a lot of contested marks around the ground. Definitely prefer him well ahead of Lycett.

He is 26 with only 29 games - probably not ideal in terms of remaining longevity or experience, although we do need someone ready-to-go, and seem confident about Naismith longer-term.

Feels a bit like the Mumford situation in 2009, although he was only 23 and had played 21 games at that point.

Something seems off with that report re: $1 million over 4 years though, apparently being double what West Coast were offering in dollars and duration. Makes no sense they would be offering $125K p.a. for 2 years to someone in their best 22.

If he has been for a medical then at least he seems willing to consider a move, which didn't seem the case by his comments after the GF.

[Jimitron5000]

How about, instead of their 2nd round pick, we take their 1st round pick from next year when the draft is said to be deeper?

Good idea, but I think that depends on whether Josh Dunkley nominates for father son. If he does we will need all the points we can this year. Otherwise why not store another first round pick for next year

[Melbourne_Blood]

You'd have to think we'd be going after someone else of note after fighting so hard to get the restriction lifted to $450K per year.

I'd be happy with Sinclair, he had a poor GF but was good in their other finals and seems to take a lot of contested marks around the ground. Definitely prefer him well ahead of Lycett.

He is 26 with only 29 games - probably not ideal in terms of remaining longevity or experience, although we do need someone ready-to-go, and seem confident about Naismith longer-term.

Feels a bit like the Mumford situation in 2009, although he was only 23 and had played 21 games at that point.

Something seems off with that report re: $1 million over 4 years though, apparently being double what West Coast were offering in dollars and duration. Makes no sense they would be offering $125K p.a. for 2 years to someone in their best 22.

If he has been for a medical then at least he seems willing to consider a move, which didn't seem the case by his comments after the GF.

There may be some confusion here, as I'm positive I saw a report that was 400k over 4 years. On the AFL website perhaps. 1 million over 4 years is chicken feed for an AFL player, particularly when your trying to lure them away from their current side. 400k a season seems about right.

[Levii3]

There may be some confusion here, as I'm positive I saw a report that was 400k over 4 years. On the AFL website perhaps. 1 million over 4 years is chicken feed for an AFL player, particularly when your trying to lure them away from their current side. 400k a season seems about right.

Link please

[Melbourne_Blood]

I can't find it now! I definitely read it somehwere though, I'm not going bonkers. It makes a lot more sense than 250k a year too

[Doctor]

The best thing that could happen to us is not to get a ruckman. It will force us to play a better brand of football.
Jetta should let his wife go home. He can stay another 2 years then go where he wants as a free agent .
There is no point in matching a top 8 bid for Mills. We just get him for one first rounder in a year or two. Isn't that what everyone does these days. Why play this silly Eddie McGuire bidding game.

I'd have laughed at this once but it now makes so much sense that it just leaves me flat. This trade period is already shaping up as a pillaging of the "have nots" by the "haves". This "club of choice" mullarkey is a joke. Lots of things set up to stop us getting Academy kids at unders, but not much done about supporting Brisbane et al from getting plundered every year. You can already see GWS and Gold Coast going the same way.

[bennyfabulous]

I'd have laughed at this once but it now makes so much sense that it just leaves me flat. This trade period is already shaping up as a pillaging of the "have nots" by the "haves". This "club of choice" mullarkey is a joke. Lots of things set up to stop us getting Academy kids at unders, but not much done about supporting Brisbane et al from getting plundered every year. You can already see GWS and Gold Coast going the same way.

This whole trading period is exactly what "the haves" want. Eddie bleeting about fairness (academies are unfair to victorian sides), but these clubs " the haves" will never admit they have an advantage with such intangibles such as being a club with the biggest membership & tv exposure or being one of the big 4, they will endlessly cry foul @ anything that is considered to level the playing field for teams that are disadvantaged by location or any other means. Its standard hypocrisy really.

[Mug Punter]

I think we will definitely pick up a Ruckman, in fact we absolutely have to if Pyke is on his last legs.

Lobbe or SinclairI won't bore you with the stats but whether we give up a pick 14 (seems too high for a ruckman), picks 36 and 38 (from a Jetta trade) or do a straight Jetta/Sinclair swap the end game is we'll be able to recruit Mills and Dunks with no carry over deficit provided Dunks goes at about 258 or later. This is assuming we get about 300 points for Bird and Robbo. If we ant another defender we'll need to dip into our third rounder next year for Talia

Giles - Pick him up for our third rounder and a pack and assume we settle for Eagles Picks 36 and 38. We get Picks 14, 33, 36, 38, 48. This gives us 2,993 points. We trade Pick 48 for Talia and that leaves us with 2,691 points. Mills goes at 4 which costs us 1,627 points - we lose Pick 14 and Pick 33 moves back to approx Pick 65. We get Dunks at 28 which costs us 480 points - we get him with our Pick 36 (502 Points)

We still have pick 38 which we can use to draft an additional player - Sam Skinner was mentioned as a KPD in the Draft Combine show last night that could go at about 40 and be good value.

Jetta Stays We get picks 14,33,48 and 54 or 2,267 points. We get Mills and need to decide on the competing priorities of Dunkley, a Ruckman and a defender. My gut feeling is we'd go with Dunks as he'd cost us two late third rounders and we'd trade in one of the other two with a pick from next year.

My verdict - If the club really believes Sam and Nankervis will be long term first grade ruckmen then getting a journeyman to plug a gap for a year must appeal.

I can also see the Weagles being very difficult re a deal if they decide Sinclair is required - nothing less than Picks 36 and 38 (or equivalent points) will do because I suspect that Lewis will would re-sign rather than have the upheaval of a Melbourne move because I am absolutely sure the Saints or Dees would pick him up. And that would not be a bad result for us.

Also wondering of we could have a surprise trade out to fund these changes, just cannot think of who and there has been no real trade talk re this....