2016 trading and drafting (merged thread)

[WauchopeAnalyst]

I'd seen a bit of him as he's from my area, Murray Border. Considering he's the youngest on the list, never been in an Academy, never played TAC Cup, had one year of Ovens & Murray football and was injured during pre-season I'd think he's shown enough. He's always been a goal kicking midfielder and got away with that sort of stuff previously. On what I saw, maybe 6 or 7 games streamed, he's improved plenty as the year went on. When he tucks the ball under his arm and runs he can be pretty exciting. His skills aren't as silky as Dawson or Leonardis but I can see that improving.

Good call. The NEAFL GF was fierce and Murray showed plenty.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[Blood Tunnel]

Source ?

Mine!

[waswan]

Mitchell for Isaac Smith, id be happy with that. Of even aim higher for Gunston

Hope its not for Bruest, good player but we don't need him.

I suspect that will be the offer though, then they will grab Harvey for a year

[Meg]

Just to clarify all the AFL have done is limit the number of draft picks you can claim points on to the maximum number of live picks at the start of the draft based on your list size. It stops clubs claiming points on picks that they were simply unable to ever use ..

According to Ryan Buckland on 'The Roar' there was a supplementary memo issued by the AFL sent to the media which said (some? all?) clubs "would be able to enter this year?s draft with surplus picks, meaning last year?s rules apply".

He went on to say: "That?s because the Suns, Lions, Giants and Swans (and the other 14 clubs for that matter) made decisions last year on the basis of last year?s rules that affect their position this year".

I tried to get a clarification of which clubs this applied to and whether it was just a one-year exemption but I didn't get a response. So I know no more - other than to say it is a confusing story!

[Mug Punter]

According to Ryan Buckland on 'The Roar' there was a supplementary memo issued by the AFL sent to the media which said (some? all?) clubs "would be able to enter this year?s draft with surplus picks, meaning last year?s rules apply".

He went on to say: "That?s because the Suns, Lions, Giants and Swans (and the other 14 clubs for that matter) made decisions last year on the basis of last year?s rules that affect their position this year".

I tried to get a clarification of which clubs this applied to and whether it was just a one-year exemption but I didn't get a response. So I know no more - other than to say it is a confusing story!

On a practical level it shouldn't affect us, it is just closing a loophole whereby clubs collect picks they could never use and get the benefit of the points from it.

Once GWS' list gets to the standard size then I would think it will cease to be a major issue. But the trading backwards isn't really such an issue for most clubs I think. In many ways I suspect they like it because it provides a secondary market for clubs wishing to collect an additional first round pick

[Mug Punter]

If GWS are having a clean out, then we should be standing at the door having first dibs. Buntine cant seem to get a game, and looks pretty good.

I wonder if its worth shipping Mitchel up to Suns in exchange for a top 10 pick. They'd be desperate for a tough inside mid, and we could use some real quality coming through the draft.
A flag and 2 first round picks would be a nice way to finish off the year.

I believe that the Suns went pretty hard for Mitchell and he wasn't keen but I agree that he would be good for them and they have plenty to trade out.

GWS have an embarrassment of riches but I would think that Buntine would be a required player. Finlayson's name get bandied about a bit here and I reckon we might nab him on the cheap.

In terms of this year, if GWS get an early second rounder for McCarthy then I think the points from their three first rounders and three second rounders should be enough points to secure the five academy kids they want - Perryman and Setterfield seem to be ranked top 10 but not 5 with Macreadie also being touted as a mid to late first rounder. Mutch, Sproule, Lynch and others would seem to be late second rounders at best.

It will be interesting to see how they play it - if they are happy just taking the best 4-5 academy kids then they will probably trade back their pick 7. If they want to get their hands on Todd Marshall who was rightly ruled out as an Academy pick (cue Dave Matthews squealing) then they will want to keep or maybe even upgrade their Pick 7 from the Pies with Pick 5 from Carlton probably securing him.

In any event they can offset any deficit next year so I can see them going hard for future currency. Marchbank (Carlton), Steele (St Kilda) and WHE (TBC) would all be worth Picks 10-15 IMO. And Rory Lobb would be worth a couple of first rounders this year but I suspect they'll make him honour his contract but regardless of that he'll still secure them another first round pick next year.

You can see GWS potentially having another 4-5 first round picks in the 2017 draft which will probably be as AFL Premiers, maybe even as back-to-back premiers. And maybe even more if someone like Patton (has bought a house in Richmond, contract expires in 2017) decides to go home at 24 with two premiership medallions and a couple of million in the bank.

Scary Scary Stuff!!

[Mug Punter]

Mitchell for Isaac Smith, id be happy with that. Of even aim higher for Gunston

Hope its not for Bruest, good player but we don't need him.

I suspect that will be the offer though, then they will grab Harvey for a year

I'd be happy with a first rounder in 2017 and an upgraded pick this year (from the late 30s to mid 20s).

I'd be quite happy to let this list just evolve in 2017 with the emphasis on getting as many games into our debutants this year as possible. Doing so in the knowledge we have some good trade ammunition would allow us to go hard at the 2017 trade period and by then the player market should have calmed down a bit.

OUT (6) Jack, Ted, TomD and Ben out plus Tom and Towers traded.
IN (6) Three upgrades (Papley, Newman and Marsh) with our two ND picks plus one other in. If Nankervis gets traded I'd expect us to go to the draft for the best possible available young ruck.

It would be good if we could bundle our third rounder and whatever we get for Towers. Pick 51 (259 points) and say Pick 40 for Towers (429 points) we should be able to trade with GWS for one of their late 2nd rounders which may give us a KPD in the draft or by trade.

Nankervis is now a player I'd really like to keep. I hope that the club can get in his ear and sell the big picture, that in two years Tippett will be gone and there is the opening to be a long term senior player there. Money will be important too and perhaps the only way we can offer him enough to stay is from the money that might be freed up by Tom leaving.

[waswan]

We cant lose Tom Mitchell at 23yrs old for a Pick upgraded from the 30s to the 20s
If Treloar is 2x Top 10, Mitchel is at least 1

We need a player aged 22-25 to come in, 7 debutants, we have enough youth

[Mug Punter]

We cant lose Tom Mitchell at 23yrs old for a Pick upgraded from the 30s to the 20s
If Treloar is 2x Top 10, Mitchel is at least 1

We need a player aged 22-25 to come in, 7 debutants, we have enough youth

Plus a first round pick as well. That would probably equate to about top 10 which I think is his value too

[waswan]

Plus a first round pick as well. That would probably equate to about top 10 which I think is his value too

Rightto saw that, my bad

Still want a player, Draft is overrated, Academy is where its at

[jono2707]

I wonder when the GWS 'Academy' will produce a player from, say Blacktown, Penrith or Campbelltown......

[Mug Punter]

Rightto saw that, my bad

Still want a player, Draft is overrated, Academy is where its at

2018 will be when our academy really starts to come online, Hardman and Bell look like prospects for 2017 but they're not getting rave reviews but 2018 we'll be fighting for Nick Blakey and have some other really good young kids coming through.

The potential of that academy is enormous. For example the GPS System, and most of the schools and kids are in the Swans zone, will start coming online in about 5 to 6 years time. Shore, a traditional rugby school, now has more Year 7 kids playing AFL than rugby. That's why we have the academy and if it succeeds there won't be any issue about us being able to recruit everyone because there will be an enormous over supply. But, and this is where boneheads like Eddie don't get it, it needs to have some success to survive

[Mug Punter]

I wonder when the GWS 'Academy' will produce a player from, say Blacktown, Penrith or Campbelltown......

It's a fair question and to be honest it's one I cannot understand the Melbourne clubs and media not running with.

To a certain extent the Swans get the best deal in the Sydney carve up. AFL has traditionally been stronger in the middle class areas of the North Shore, Hills District and Eastern Suburbs and it's also very strong in the nation of The Shire.

But GWS does have some growth areas. Penrith has a strong junior league and Baulkham Hills, which is in the GWS catchment, is a junior powerhouse club. Plus there's the huge growth corridors of the North West and South West. So, longer term I'd say that GWS' Sydney zone had just as much if not more potential than ours. Plus they have the ACT which should also be a strong area. The areas of Campbelltown and Parramatta have in the last 20 years supported and grown some very good junior footballers - they may be in decline at the moment but all it takes is a little money but more importantly effort and those areas can indeed start to produce AFL footballers.

My mail is that whilst the Swans spend millions on their Academy the GWS one is pretty much lip service, especially in Sydney. You only need to look at how GWS have sponsored Manly (FFS Dumbest_Decision_Ever) to see how totally out of touch they are in terms of local engagement.

But why should they send all that money and effort on grassroots when they can just cherrypick the talent from Albury on the Victoria border? And they are so goddamn arrogant and entitled (just try and listen to that Liberal Powerbroker Shepherd and not feel the smugness) they don't see the big picture and to be honest they don't care.

I have no doubt the GWS concession will be wound back, quite possibly with a sunset clause, but surely they need to be forced to start developing the region that they represent

[707]

Please note that B Jack is contracted for next year. Will only go off the list if he is traded to ........ say Richmond!

[Mug Punter]

Every year the NSWACTAFL have an event called the Joss State Trials which are held at the end of this month (September 26-29)

They have the following teams

* Riverina (GWS)
* Murray (GWS)
* ACT/South Coast (GWS)
* Sydney West (GWS)
* Sydney North (Swans)
* Sydney South (Swans)
* North Coast (Swans)

One could argue that you just take the Murray zone from GWS and it is all pretty fair.....

Anyway, the results from 2015 make interesting reading U 13/14 Joss State Zone Trials wrap - AFL NSW / ACT

North Coast appear very weak which stands to reason in terms of population and footprint - this zone may well unearth the odd nugget (e.g. Heeney or Luff) but it appears very weak. Western Sydney seem weaker than all the other regions but they did have some surprise results. Probably due to the nature of a round robin format and resting players but they do seem the next weakest with ACT quite strong.

A look at the Western Sydney team for this year's U14s is attached here Joss AFL NSW/ACT State Zone Trials - GWSGIANTS.com.au

I find the player split quite interesting. At Under 14s Kellyville/Rouse Hill seem to be by far the strongest junior club with 8 kids which bodes well for the Baulkham Hills senior club with 3 Baulko juniors, 5 from Emu Plains but only 3 from Camden/Campbelltown and none from Liverpool. Also one from Dubbo, one from Bathurst.

The Under 13s split seems bit more representative - 5 players from either the Parramatta Goannas or Lions who weren't represented at U14s at all. Kellyville still has 4 players but not as dominant. 7 from the Liverpool/Campbelltown corridor and a couple from Orange.

Also interesting that Westbrook are a GWS club whereas Penno are Swans.

Not sure if it is a one off but the U13 team is much more representative.

The NSW-ACT Under 16 Squad for this years national championships contained two GWS boys from Sydney, one from Baulkham Hills and one from Westbrook, both traditional junior Sydney powerhouses. I'm happy for GWS to have access to those kids but I don't really regard those areas as western Sydney but as the Hills District

I guess we do need to cut GWS some slack with their work in Sydney but I'd say that by 2018 we really should be seeing some greater representation