If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
The trade appears to be that Bird is worthless in terms of trade value but opening a spot and saving money. But 16 points might mean that we dont need points just enough for Mills?
The people applauding the trade because Bird didn't play seniors in the latter half of the year will be the same one bemoaning our lack of depth when injuries hit next year
You don't see the Hawks trading Spanger or Ceglar just because they didn't play a final in 2015
Carlton has traded picks 28, 77, 95 and Geelong's 2016 first-round pick for GWS's pick 8 and Lachie Plowman, Andrew Phillips, Jed Lamb and Liam Sumner.
Pick 8 as well???? That's a great trade for Carlton.
I wonder if that's definitely the trade? I can't make sense of GWS including pick 8? 8=1,551, 28=677 and I can't see a value on 77 and 95?
I knew him as a gentle young man, I cannot say for sure the reasons for his decline
We watched him fade before our very eyes, and years before his time
If Melbourne bid pick 3 on Mills and we match then Melbourne will have had a win because Sydney will slide down the draft order meaning Melbourne will move up one position in each round. They can then use bids on Hopper, Kennedy etc. to further improve their position. That is a serious flaw in this points system.
OMG you are right!
Elevate your own picks with vexatious bids for Academy Players and FS picks.
The AFL have done it again!!! COMPLETE STUFF UP!!!
The points discount Academy and FS picks is worth nothing for the higher picks because the picks are artificially inflated by the incentive for vexatious bids.
It even works against GWS.
They'll have to fix it now won't they.
We have them where we want them, everything is going according to plan!
If there are no gentleman's agreements to do or not do other things then this is one of the worse trades possible. We have given a much needed depth player to Essendon for the equivelant of pick 72.
We are only winners if no one bids on Mills until Melbourne and someone bids on Hopper before Mills. Mills would then drift out to pick 7. Wondering if Dempsey is also in play but if he was they just would have added him to the trade. Or maybe we can get WCE two late 30s for pick 23 for a handful of extra points.
Not happy in a big way. Not happy at all!
I suspect the reasoning is simple
We tried to shop Bird about and nobody was interested in giving anything of value up for a 27 year old.
And if we want to bring in an additional defender in Talia then we cureently have no slaary cap space and need to offload Bird. So we have made a choice based on list management.
I don't share the doom and gloom here re this, it is just a fact of life gioven we decided to invest so much of our cap in two players. I would, however, be very disappointd of we were paying Bird's salary here
- - - Updated - - -
Originally posted by rb4x
If Melbourne bid pick 3 on Mills and we match then Melbourne will have had a win because Sydney will slide down the draft order meaning Melbourne will move up one position in each round. They can then use bids on Hopper, Kennedy etc. to further improve their position. That is a serious flaw in this points system.
Not really as if we match then we go up the order as well so it evens out.
The people applauding the trade because Bird didn't play seniors in the latter half of the year will be the same one bemoaning our lack of depth when injuries hit next year
You don't see the Hawks trading Spanger or Ceglar just because they didn't play a final in 2015
Don't see it as applauding - just being realistic given our midfield depth and apparent salary cap relief - think Bird would be on more than Spanger and Ceglar and not sure that they were looking for opportunities elsewhere as Bird apparently was ?
Surely we could have pointed out that the trade as it stands offers us no benefit AT ALL and insisted on having picks 23 and 24 at the very least? That would have been a much fairer outcome for all parties. We had two desperate clubs over a barrel in the final days of the trading period and somehow we ended up the losers. It's almost spectacular how badly this came out for us.
I simply refuse to accept this was the only way to eliminate Bird's salary from our cap and there was no major evidence until yesterday that Bird was possible trade bait.
Before the trade I assumed Bird was worth something in the open market, but in reality he was considered a liability as we had to carry a salary for an unwanted player. The 16 points means nothing. I would say we actually lost some value in the exchange of picks. If we are to believe the Swans' website, then we are not going to give up any draft pick this year for Talia as they are all listed as what we will take to the draft. I don't know what the Talia medical was about, unless we will pick him up as a DFA. Essendon facilitated the delisting of Bird a year early, rather than us facilitating the Carlisle trade.
I feel bad that we got nothing for Bird, but accept that this is the state of the player market at the moment. Geelong also give away players to clear space on their list and are considered excellent list managers. Sometimes it's hard to access these things because we are not privy to a lot of the information that the list managers are. We will find out more after the draft when we see what happens with Mills and Dunkley.
On the surface it is shaping up as very poor year in player movements for us. It almost seems that our strategy is to improve our draft position next year by dropping down the ladder.
First time since Wallace was going to be coach that I feel disappointed with what the club has done. I don't see the point of that trade for only 16 points.
Comment