Trade target discussion (merged thread)

[AnnieH]

Are we allowed to trade this year?

[ernie koala]

I still get narky when I see players who are not free agents nominating their "club of choice". If you want a trade, you want a trade, but you shouldn't get to pick and choose.

I agree. Players that aren't yet free agents, or restricted free agents, and are still contracted to their present club, have not earned the right to dictate to their club.

It leaves their present club at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to negotiating a trade.

The players got free agency only a few years ago and now it seems some want more..ie the ability to chop and change at will.

[snajik]

Couldn't agree more. Otherwise Hawthorn would have to get special consideration to increase their list size to accommodate everyone.

[troyjones2525]

Unfortunately we all have our wish lists for potential trade targets who are available but i get the feeling we will be disappointed and watch these talented players move on to our rivals like Hawthorn, Adelaide, Fremanle and West Coast and improve their already talented lists without us so much as making a whimper in trying to get some of these players! What we need is speed and skill and there are 2 really talented players that are available but I have no doubt that we will chase and probably get Leunberger who will just be another mediocre addition to our top heavy ruck division!

[snajik]

yes we should look at both Leunberger, and Ironmonger.

[bloodspirit]

For mine if Swans want Hampton, then bird is an obvious trade option..

So Hampton and a draft pick or draft pick swap, for Bird....

We get to add depth to our defence and some more draft points.

They get a hardened, premiership player in the age profile they need....mid - late 20's.

I think Hampton for Bird would be fair straight trade. Bird is more experienced but Hampton is younger - neither is their clubs first 22 at the moment. BUT would that work for Bird? I think he is good enough to be in someone's starting 22 and surely he would prefer a trade that sees that happen for him. On the one hand I would imagine it would be great for him to stay in NSW but on the other if he went somewhere like Melbourne, Saints or Carlton (maybe even Brisbane or Suns?) where he would be a good chance of playing first team footy, wouldn't that be the best thing for him?

The good thing about Hampton for us is that he might like to come to us because he wouldn't have to relocate and he there is no 'go home' factor tugging him elsewhere. On the other hand, like with Bird, I would think the main thing is that he will want to go somewhere that he has the best chance of getting a game.

[mcs]

I think Hampton for Bird would be fair straight trade. Bird is more experienced but Hampton is younger - neither is their clubs first 22 at the moment. BUT would that work for Bird? I think he is good enough to be in someone's starting 22 and surely he would prefer a trade that sees that happen for him. On the one hand I would imagine it would be great for him to stay in NSW but on the other if he went somewhere like Melbourne, Saints or Carlton (maybe even Brisbane or Suns?) where he would be a good chance of playing first team footy, wouldn't that be the best thing for him?

The good thing about Hampton for us is that he might like to come to us because he wouldn't have to relocate and he there is no 'go home' factor tugging him elsewhere. On the other hand, like with Bird, I would think the main thing is that he will want to go somewhere that he has the best chance of getting a game.

Hampton has said he wants to go to adelaide....

[ugg]

GWS would not want Bird. They've been chasing a ruckman instead

[bloodspirit]

GWS would not want Bird. They've been chasing a ruckman instead

Why do they need another ruckman? Apart from Mummy they've got Lobb, Phillips and Downie. Isn't that enough? Is it showing a lack of confidence in those guys to step up in future? Otherwise, if they're looking for a topliner, are they going to play two rucks? They can't very well recruit someone good only to play seconds and act as injury cover for Mummy.

[Mug Punter]

GWS would not want Bird. They've been chasing a ruckman instead

It would be hard to see what Bird will bring to the table to GWS as they already have a gun midfield brigade about to be bolstered by two top line academy products.

Players tend to get where they want to go these days and given that Hampton would not be on huge trade currency I could see him being an easy and decent addition by the Crows or Port.

Given we want to draft Mills and Dunks our hands are really tied and a straight player (a good one) for Jetta if he decides to go will probably do us. Maybe one recycled players a la Laidler.

I'd be happy with that and to let the group grow organically. Look at how long it has taken Towers to come on, or BJ. I am really looking forward to hopefully se ethe likes of Hewett, Davis and Marsh take the next step next season and for Towers to become the most damaging mid sized forward in the comp

[RogueSwan]

Why do they need another ruckman? Apart from Mummy they've got Lobb, Phillips and Downie. Isn't that enough? Is it showing a lack of confidence in those guys to step up in future? Otherwise, if they're looking for a topliner, are they going to play two rucks? They can't very well recruit someone good only to play seconds and act as injury cover for Mummy.

When the sub rule first came in wasn't that seen as the death knell for playing two ruckman? Now that the rule has been removed will teams look at going back to using two specialist rucks rather than 1 + fwd/ruck? This could be why we have been ridiculously rumored to be looking at Leuenberger.

[ernie koala]

[QUOTE=Mug Punter;683041]It would be hard to see what Bird will bring to the table to GWS as they already have a gun midfield brigade about to be bolstered by two top line academy products.
/QUOTE]

Bird brings many things to the table for GWS....Many years experience, premiership experience, multiple finals campaigns, tagging ability, Swans disipine and culture, age profile.

GWS are filled with, wet behind the ears, midfield talent, IMO Bird would compliment and balance this well.

Of course, it doesn't mean GWS have the slightest interest, it's just my opinion.

BTW, I hope he plays this weekend.

[churry]

When the sub rule first came in wasn't that seen as the death knell for playing two ruckman? Now that the rule has been removed will teams look at going back to using two specialist rucks rather than 1 + fwd/ruck? This could be why we have been ridiculously rumored to be looking at Leuenberger.

Also capping rotations to 90. Port for example should get Dixon and say they aren't trading lobbe.

[paper_rival]

I'm sorry but can someone explain this 'go home factor' the media spews out about just about everyone who hasn't resigned with their current club by now. Is it a real thing? Is it just material for speculation?

[6'2, 220, 4.53]

I think this years trade period will be about earning points and clearing some space on our list.

It may come down to this:

- Jetta to West Coast for pick 17-20.

- Craig Bird to a club like Melbourne for their 3rd round pick. Roos will probably push for an injury depleted Perris to sweeten the deal.

- With an extra late 1st round and an early 3rd round we should be able to raise the points for Mills and Dunkley without going into deficit for the next season.

I believe our ruck stocks are good for one more season if Naismith and Toby N can take another step along with the revitalised Tippett.

I would keep Marsh going on the list as he has shown some positive signs and is a good athlete.