Trade target discussion (merged thread)

[Mug Punter]

AFL trade period 2015: Sydney Swans step into Jake Carlisle trade talks

Finally some talk of turning our first round pick into multiple lower picks with a net gain of points.

Are Brisbane completely and utterly insane in letting Aish move to the Pies for a second round pick? And of all the clubs they gift him too it is the one whose President has damaged them the most

So any top 10 pick will happily go to the Lions now knowing that once they have finished their two year finishing school that they can nominate in the press who they want to go to (arrogant and disrespectful as that is) and rest assured that whatever the Lions say publicly that all their declared club needs to do is call their bluff and part with their second rounder.

If they let him go for that I will never ever feel an ounce of sympathy when their inter-state players want to go home. I just can't see how this is about to happen with Leigh Matthews up there...

[Doctor]

Thanks Doctor. This is a thread on player movement and my posts relate to player movement.

I have said all along that JPK is needed for the 2016 season, but things may be looked at going into the 2017 season.

When it comes to the trade game it's all about timing. Do we want to keep a 28 - 30 year old in the team and use them up to when they retire at 32 - 34 years old? Will the amazing standard that they set from ages 22 - 29 be replicated from 30 - 34? If you could get a mega trade deal for them at 28, why not take it. They may give their new club two great years, but the probabilities show that they will not be as effective from 30 - 34.

Chris Judd was the shadow of a player at 30 compared to five years before.

Adam Goodes legendary years ended at the end of 2011. From 2012 - 2015 he struggled with injury and was not able to hit the highs of his younger years. If someone had come to the Swans at the end of 2009 and said that we will offer you the world for Goodes (two early first round draft picks), why should that offer not be up for discussion.

Why are we so afraid to discuss the possibilities of trading our best players? Why can the timing of a deal not be a major consideration.

Just remember that we get nothing for a player when he retires.

Why can we not see that we have brilliant young players in a certain position and that losing one older player may open the way for the younger player to hit the elite standard more quickly. The young 20 year old has 9 great years in them while the older player may have 1-2 more great years.

The best thing that happened to the Hawks was Buddy leaving. Other forwards stepped up and kicked the goals, they used the extra money to fill weaknesses in their list and they found an attacking strategy that was better than "let's just kick it to Lance".

On pure cold, hard economics that may make sense, but there are obviously other factors to consider. Clubs and supporters need "legends" and familiar faces. Players that add to the reason we support them. That of course does have an economic flow on because it adds to sponsorship, media spots and memberships. The key is working out which players fall into that and which don't, and whether some can, and should, leave. There is no way you move your club's games record holder on, for any reason (other than criminal) for example. Sometimes it's not as simple as what you can get for them.

[The Big Cat]

AFL trade period 2015: Sydney Swans step into Jake Carlisle trade talks

Finally some talk of turning our first round pick into multiple lower picks with a net gain of points.

I'm not too keen on trading pick 14 (a very special number for the red and white). It is possible that clubs have already resigned themselves to the fact that Mills will go to the Swans and are more interested in looking after their own nest, rather than trying to soil ours. What happens if we get to pick 14 and still no-one has named Mills. This would be a free hit, as we could get a top 15 player and still have the points to pick Mills and Dunkley later on.

[Mug Punter]

On pure cold, hard economics that may make sense, but there are obviously other factors to consider. Clubs and supporters need "legends" and familiar faces. Players that add to the reason we support them. That of course does have an economic flow on because it adds to sponsorship, media spots and memberships. The key is working out which players fall into that and which don't, and whether some can, and should, leave. There is no way you move your club's games record holder on, for any reason (other than criminal) for example. Sometimes it's not as simple as what you can get for them.

Of course the biggest point that Matt misses in his analysis is the fact that at the age of 26 players can go as a restricted free agent. It's made his concept of wealth maximisation rather redundant - use Luke Parker for example, do we sell him now or re-sign him? I reckon 99.9% of swans fans say re-sign him but if we do he will be a free agent when he is next out of contract

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not too keen on trading pick 14 (a very special number for the red and white). It is possible that clubs have already resigned themselves to the fact that Mills will go to the Swans and are more interested in looking after their own nest, rather than trying to soil ours. What happens if we get to pick 14 and still no-one has named Mills. This would be a free hit, as we could get a top 15 player and still have the points to pick Mills and Dunkley later on.

If Mills is still available I would be quite amazed given he is almost universally rated top 5

[707]

I'm not too keen on trading pick 14 ..................................... What happens if we get to pick 14 and still no-one has named Mills. This would be a free hit, as we could get a top 15 player and still have the points to pick Mills and Dunkley later on.

Ha, dream on! You can bet that upstanding club Essendon will bid on Mills at pick 4, and then Hopper before selecting who they really want. Our best hope is that Essendon and St.Kilda can't be bothered and that Paul Roos bids at pick 6. Pick 6 will be as far as Mills goes. Hopefully Hopper is bid on before Mills.

Here's my trade

St.Kilda receive Pick 14 (Swans 1161 pts) & Carlisle

Essendon receive Pick 5 (St.Kilda) & pick 33 (Swans 563 pts) Total given up by us 1724 pts

Swans receive pick 24 (St.Kilda 785 pts), pick 25 (Essendon 756 pts), pick 44 (St.Kilda 362 pts) Total received by us 1903 pts.

Mills at pick 4 = 1502 pts, 401 pts left + pick 54 = 220, total 621 pts, enough for Dunkley at pick 23.

[Auntie.Gerald]

like it 707 !!!!

[The Big Cat]

If Mills is still available I would be quite amazed given he is almost universally rated top 5

I know he's top 5, probably top 3. But you'd wonder whether the clubs with the early picks would stuff around naming Mills when they've already picked out their realistic choice. And as you get closer to 14, the number of points that a club would force the Swans to use becomes less and less and makes it counterproductive to make a p****k of your club when you are only forcing the Swans to pay small overs. Remember the Swans don't play funny buggers at trade time and clubs reckon they are great to deal with. Why create tensions? (unless there is collusion among the other clubs to take it in turns naming good academy kids in future years)

[Dosser]

Actually not bad

[barry]

Hopefully if we help out dons and 'aints they a also privately agree not to bid on mills

[liz]

If Mills is still available I would be quite amazed given he is almost universally rated top 5

I wonder if he is really rated top 5, or rather, would he be if he weren't tied to an academy. I realise that he showed what he could do last year, and won AA selection. But he's missed practically the whole of 2015 to injury. And not a collision injury either. He's had a series of structural / overwork injuries.

Lever was rated as a probable top 3 pick for 2014 off the back of his 2013, as an under aged player. But he then missed the whole of 2014 with an ACL and landed up being picked at around pick 14.

Clem Smith's name was also being thrown around as a possible number 1 pick last year a year out from his draft, on the back of earning AA selection as an under aged player. But he didn't repeat this the following year. Reading Quayle's latest book gives a fascinating insight into the challenges he had to deal with, both from a fitness perspective and off-field. I don't know a huge amount about Mills' background but the fact he hails from Sydney's lower north shore and was friends with Pridham's son certainly suggest he's grown up in a far more privileged environment than someone like Smith. But as with Lever, there's a huge amount of guesswork involved evaluating a player who's not played all year. If he were truly to be drafted in an open draft, I suspect he would fall to somewhere between 6 and 12, just based on the risk attached to him (and his body). But of course, he won't be evaluated in the same way as every other player because clubs will be anxious to ensure no academy club gets too big a bargain. Heeney's not helped matters by having such a good debut season. They won't want the Swans to get two good-uns at heavy discounts in consecutive years.

I doubt the Brisbane academy players will receive inflated bids. Clubs will bid for them where they are worth. Even while other clubs are raiding the Lions for their unsettled younger players, they are almost certainly feeling a little guilty about it. We have to hope that other clubs are more fearful about the long term consequences of the Giants' academy zone and decide to make GWS pay for Hopper before they make us pay for Mills, even if it is just one pick. I doubt they feel so guilty about raiding the Giants' list than the Lions because of the sheer number of high draft picks the Giants were given.

[Ludwig]

Ha, dream on! You can bet that upstanding club Essendon will bid on Mills at pick 4, and then Hopper before selecting who they really want. Our best hope is that Essendon and St.Kilda can't be bothered and that Paul Roos bids at pick 6. Pick 6 will be as far as Mills goes. Hopefully Hopper is bid on before Mills.

Here's my trade

St.Kilda receive Pick 14 (Swans 1161 pts) & Carlisle

Essendon receive Pick 5 (St.Kilda) & pick 33 (Swans 563 pts) Total given up by us 1724 pts

Swans receive pick 24 (St.Kilda 785 pts), pick 25 (Essendon 756 pts), pick 44 (St.Kilda 362 pts) Total received by us 1903 pts.

Mills at pick 4 = 1502 pts, 401 pts left + pick 54 = 220, total 621 pts, enough for Dunkley at pick 23.

I think that's a pretty fair deal, especially if we are certain that we will take both Mills and Dunks. I was trying to come up with a value for exchanging pick 14 for lower picks and thought around 250 points would be fair, especially given that this draft is not considered very deep. That equates to a pick 52, which is really not worth much.

I had another calculation where we gave up pick 14 in exchange for picks 25, 44 and 45 (I won't go through all the details with pick swaps between the Saints and the Dons). That comes to a gain of 304 points, equivalent of a pick 48. What is the value of doing a trade facilitation trade? Is it worth a pick 48 in a shallow draft?

There are other variations, including taking the Saints 2nd rounder for next year, and another one exchanging second round picks next year, also allowing them to keep this year's pick 24. I think Essendon would like to keep their picks 23 and 25, but would gladly part with 44 and perhaps do swaps involving next year. Scenarios involving next year would mean that we might not match a first round bid on Dunkley unless we had enough points to cover this year, so that has to be taken into consideration as well.

There's another way to get value points in this trade facilitation involving Carlisle as Essendon would be sitting with picks 4 and 5. If the academy clubs stick together, then GC wouldn't bid on an academy player with their pick 3 (they may not anyway). It involves a conversation that goes like this:

Beatson: "Adrian, what do you think about this new bidding this year?"
Dodoro (giving the right answer): "It's all too complicated for me. I can't see getting caught up in bidding for these academy players. You wouldn't want to get stuck with a player that didn't want to come to your club."
Beatson: "I think we've got a deal."

It's not quite draft tampering, just casual conversation between list managers. They could still bid on GWS players. In any case, Mills would drop to 6-8 and that's really worth something.

[Auntie.Gerald]

Treloar and Mills are fairly similar players for mine at the same age but a few years separates them........

So does Mills present good value at say pick 6 (Melbs pick)....... or it appears Treloars price will be pick No.7 in this year's NAB AFL Draft and a 2016 first-round selection.

[Ludwig]

I wonder if he is really rated top 5, or rather, would he be if he weren't tied to an academy. I realise that he showed what he could do last year, and won AA selection. But he's missed practically the whole of 2015 to injury. And not a collision injury either. He's had a series of structural / overwork injuries.

Lever was rated as a probable top 3 pick for 2014 off the back of his 2013, as an under aged player. But he then missed the whole of 2014 with an ACL and landed up being picked at around pick 14.

Clem Smith's name was also being thrown around as a possible number 1 pick last year a year out from his draft, on the back of earning AA selection as an under aged player. But he didn't repeat this the following year. Reading Quayle's latest book gives a fascinating insight into the challenges he had to deal with, both from a fitness perspective and off-field. I don't know a huge amount about Mills' background but the fact he hails from Sydney's lower north shore and was friends with Pridham's son certainly suggest he's grown up in a far more privileged environment than someone like Smith. But as with Lever, there's a huge amount of guesswork involved evaluating a player who's not played all year. If he were truly to be drafted in an open draft, I suspect he would fall to somewhere between 6 and 12, just based on the risk attached to him (and his body). But of course, he won't be evaluated in the same way as every other player because clubs will be anxious to ensure no academy club gets too big a bargain. Heeney's not helped matters by having such a good debut season. They won't want the Swans to get two good-uns at heavy discounts in consecutive years.

I doubt the Brisbane academy players will receive inflated bids. Clubs will bid for them where they are worth. Even while other clubs are raiding the Lions for their unsettled younger players, they are almost certainly feeling a little guilty about it. We have to hope that other clubs are more fearful about the long term consequences of the Giants' academy zone and decide to make GWS pay for Hopper before they make us pay for Mills, even if it is just one pick. I doubt they feel so guilty about raiding the Giants' list than the Lions because of the sheer number of high draft picks the Giants were given.

I heard Derek Hine, Collingwood's list manager, on radio. He sounded like he hadn't even given any thought to the new bidding system and sounded quite sincere about it. These guys are so focused on the trade period that they probably won't get serious about what they will do in the draft until November.

The most prominent of the ratings is Twomey's and he rates Mills a pick 3. He is a Collingwood supporter, I believe. Most of the others don't come out until just before the draft.

You are right in that other clubs have an interest in getting the academy clubs to use a many of their picks as possible. All very sensible. The only real weapon we have, and I know I've said this before, is the threat of not matching. But of course this only works if you are willing to go through with it. It's not quite as bad as the Doomsday Machine in Dr. Strangelove, as Mills could get homesick (there's like an epidemic of it going around at the moment). The threat is achieved by convenient leaks (let's get in touch with Assange) that we won't be matching any bids higher that 'x' and Mills only wants to play for the Swans and he loves his mother so so very much. Nothing official, of course. But if someone is willing to take the chance and bid anyway, then we have to be prepared to follow through. Making a statement in this first year of the bidding system may be worth more than any one player.

Treloar and Mills are fairly similar players for mine at the same age but a few years separates them........

So does Mills present good value at say pick 6 (Melbs pick)....... or it appears Treloars price will be pick No.7 in this year's NAB AFL Draft and a 2016 first-round selection.

Treloar has proven himself as a top level AFL player. He's ready to go now. That's worth a lot.

[707]

You raise good points Liz about Mills and his REAL ranking.

I think there are a number of players that have had very good U18 years who in all normal circumstances would have pushed in front of Mills. The worry for me is that clubs can put in a vexatious bid without any fear that it won't be matched thus pushing the academy player up the order and damaging the academy clubs later points.

By any stretch of the imagination, particularly given the weakness of this years draft (weak Vic Metro & WA sides), Mills for pick 14 and 33 is an absolute bargain, we won't be passing but may have to pay more than if it was an open draft.

Be interesting to see the tactics of other clubs in bidding. Will it be a blanket approach or will they target specific clubs.

Given the problems Brisbane are having with retention, be nice to see clubs let their two possible top ten picks slide down the order.

Are we the big ogre of 12 months ago given the trade ban and Buddy problems?

GWS is one they should be hammering given the overly generous start up concessions that will continue to provide a flow of serious Riverina talent and additional high picks as the go home factor continues to play out, like the mooted two first rounders for Treloar. GWS is a juggernaught starting to roll.

Not that it has any influence but I wish Callum Twomey would stop putting Mills at pick 3, how about moving Hopper and Parish up? Just hope that Mills slips a few places on draft night.

[Conor_Dillon]

Ha, dream on! You can bet that upstanding club Essendon will bid on Mills at pick 4, and then Hopper before selecting who they really want. Our best hope is that Essendon and St.Kilda can't be bothered and that Paul Roos bids at pick 6. Pick 6 will be as far as Mills goes. Hopefully Hopper is bid on before Mills.

Here's my trade

St.Kilda receive Pick 14 (Swans 1161 pts) & Carlisle

Essendon receive Pick 5 (St.Kilda) & pick 33 (Swans 563 pts) Total given up by us 1724 pts

Swans receive pick 24 (St.Kilda 785 pts), pick 25 (Essendon 756 pts), pick 44 (St.Kilda 362 pts) Total received by us 1903 pts.

Mills at pick 4 = 1502 pts, 401 pts left + pick 54 = 220, total 621 pts, enough for Dunkley at pick 23.

The AFL have already come out and said that this type of trading won't be allowed. They basically said that if the points you were receiving for your early pick/s was more than 200 higher than your original pick/s that it wouldn't be allowed to go through.