Trade target discussion (merged thread)

[Ludwig]

My feeling is (and it's only a feeling) that the deal will be:

Bird + picks 14 and 33 for picks 23, 24, 44 and 45 which equals 585 points for Bird. It should be noted that from Essendon's perspective pick 23 and 25 will end up the same since picks 23 and 24 will be used to get Mills, so they don't drop down the order by giving us the points of the higher pick. It may seem a bit overs for Bird, being the equivalent of a late second round pick, but we should get something for the trade facilitation role and leaving both St. Kilda and Essendon with higher picks than they would have otherwise ended up with if they had tried to do the deal themselves.We not only would help get the Carlisle trade done, but also effectively translate picks 44 and 45 into 14 and 33.

We might use pick 45 to get Talia, given the story that he had a medical today with us.

If all this more or less comes to pass, it might turn out that we lose Goodes, Shaw, Jetta, Pyke and Bird and get in Mills, Dunkley, Sinclair and Talia. Jetta would be the only likely starter next year that we lose and we would bring in several younger players with good potential. It seems a reasonably decent upgrade of our list.


I rate Bird highly, but leaving the Swans is for his own benefit. He would struggle to get a senior game next year simply because we will have an excess of inside midfielders. Hewett will be getting game time and both Mills and Dunkley will add to those numbers. I also believe that the we already know that Dunkley will nominate us, but there is only a disadvantage to making it public, since it would devalue Bird in any potential trade knowing that he will be getting forced out by younger players.

I understand that it has been reported that the Carlisle deal has been held up to allow Bird to meet with Essendon. He has the option to nix the deal as he is contracted for next year.

[barry]

I look at it as bird for talia in a round about way. Both fringe players but we talia is the type of player we need

[Levii3]

So if this trade happens which picks will we end up having on draft day?

[Ludwig]

I see that the AFL website is reporting the details of the trade to be:

On Tuesday, a proposed deal emerged in which it is believed:
? St Kilda would receive Carlisle and picks No.14 and 44, and give up picks No.5 and 24.
? Essendon would receive pick No.5 and Bird, and give up Carlisle and picks No.25 and 44.
? The Swans would receive picks No.24 and 25, and give up pick No.14 and Bird.

This trade seems quite skewed in St. Kilda's favour. On a net basis, it rates Carlisle a pick 14. I thought he'd be worth more, which would have meant that we could have gotten Carlisle. I can't see why we wouldn't insist on pick 23 instead of 25 since it's no skin off Essendon's back, as I noted in the previous post that those picks would be going to draft Mills anyway. I'd be okay with the value received from picks 23 and 24, but feel the trade I suggested, which takes a bit away from the Saints and splits it between Essendon and us is a bit fairer, but it seems that the Saints are in a pretty good position with Carlisle nominating them as his preferred team. .

[goswannies]

So we're trading out two 14s?

[ugg]

Of all the clubs that I thought Bird might end up with Essendon were towards the back end of the list. They have enough slow midfielders on their team already, I would have thought they would be chasing some pace

[Ludwig]

Getting picks 23, 44, 45 and 57 also works netting 545 points for Bird, equivalent of a pick 34. It works out to be a trade of Bird for Dunkley if Dunks gets bid at 26 by Collingwood. This may be the fairest as St. Kilda will give up pick 5 for Carlisle and pick 44, which is how most of the experts rated this trade.

If you apply game theory strategy to what Gold Coast should do at pick 3, i.e. should they bid on Mills to make us pay up more, it has been well understood that cooperative strategies work best in the long run. It would be in the interest of all the academy clubs not to bid on other academy players as this would work out to raise the value of their respective draft picks in relation to non-academy clubs. I would also hope that part of the current deal in progress we reach an understanding with Essendon that they do not bid on Mills or Dunkley (I suggested earlier how this can be done). If all this works then Mills moves down to no higher than pick 6.

- - - Updated - - -

Of all the clubs that I thought Bird might end up with Essendon were towards the back end of the list. They have enough slow midfielders on their team already, I would have thought they would be chasing some pace

If they move too fast, people may get suspicious.

[ugg]

Emma Quayle who is usually very accurate is reporting a different deal where the Bombers keep 23 and 25

http://m.theage.com.au/afl/trading-and-drafting/afl-trades-2015-charlie-dixon-lands-at-port-adelaide-20151020-gkduj3.html

[Ludwig]

Emma Quayle who is usually very accurate is reporting a different deal where the Bombers keep 23 and 25

http://m.theage.com.au/afl/trading-a...20-gkduj3.html

This is the deal suggested above with St. Kilda and Essendon Swapping picks 23 and 24 to give the Swans an extra 30 points without any detriment to either club.

[Auntie.Gerald]

but it also frees up cap space by moving on birdy

[Ampersand]

Wow, 30 whole points? Is that all Bird is worth to us? This deal and this Academy points system stinks. If Mills turns out to be an injury prone dud, it's trashed our entire year's draft. No more finding "diamonds in the rough" like Luke Parker with our 2nd and 3rd round picks.

Time to seriously consider abandoning the Academy system I think.

[Meg]

I always get a bit sad at trade time. These young men (some younger than others) are human beings. Craig Bird is a NSW boy and here we are trying to ship him off to Melbourne. Ironic that! I suspect he would much rather stay here. But yes, I know and I'm sure he understands that in the end it is a competitive business. Just one tinged with a bit of sadness as well.

[Ampersand]

but it also frees up cap space by moving on birdy

So what, other teams do it all the time and are still able to extract adequate value for their players. Bird is a quality premiership midfielder still under contract. He's worth more than 30 lousy points.

[ugg]

So what, other teams do it all the time and are still able to extract adequate value for their players. Bird is a quality premiership midfielder still under contract. He's worth more than 30 lousy points.

You've misread Ludwig's post. He's not proposing a trade where Bird is worth only 30 points but rather an altruistic move on the part of the Saints and Dons so we get 30 extra points without any practical effect on their drafting position.

[Ludwig]

Wow, 30 whole points? Is that all Bird is worth to us? This deal and this Academy points system stinks. If Mills turns out to be an injury prone dud, it's trashed our entire year's draft. No more finding "diamonds in the rough" like Luke Parker with our 2nd and 3rd round picks.

Time to seriously consider abandoning the Academy system I think.

It's not 30 points. It's 545 points. The 30 points is just something free to us without hurting Essendon for dropping down one slot in the draft order since we will be using pick 23 as part of what we will cough up for Mills. The 30 points is no big deal, it's just for free, so why not.

Once we do this kind of trade, i.e. give up pick 14, we are fully committed to Mills, unless we see a bid by Carlton using pick 1 as vexatious.