2016 trading and drafting (merged thread)

[Mug Punter]

MP, I'm doubtful that there have been problems with phantom bids to date. The Melbourne bids for Heeney and Mills may have been unfortunate for us but were completely legitimate and I'm sure that the Dees would have been happy to get either of them ahead of Petracca or Oliver. Likewise the bids for GWS' Kennedy and Hopper last year seemed fair enough. Ditto for the Brisbane academy players. Where have the problems been?

I don't think there have been any problems and I think that whilst there was a bit of squealing on here last year about Roos bidding for Mills at three that none of us now would say he wasn't worth it nor Heeney at 2. Quite simply for the system to work then clubs need to bid on academy kids as if they were available and make bids accordingly. And that extends to clubs with academies bidding too, we shouldn't get precious if, Gold Coast for example, bid for Blakey at 6 in 2018. We, of course, always have the option to not match the bid. But complaining that academy kids went too high in the draft when the same clubs complaining had the opportunity to bid for them is just ridiculous.

The issue this year has been the reporting in the press that Essendon, scum of the earth that they are, are looking at bidding for Bowes and Setterfield with Pick 1 to smoke out the points from GWS and the Suns. I have no doubt the likes of Three Chins are egging them on. I don't think there is any pundit that rates either of those kids as close to Number 1 so it would be a purely vexatious bid. Then again it would be fraught with danger because Essendon risk losing a pick 1 and getting a pick rated between 5 and 8 instead.

The clear message of course is that the clubs need to call the bluff if Essendon do call. GWS definitely will I think as they are sick of the posturing and have shown with C-Mac they won't be bullied. GCS with Bowes will be interesting as I think they really need him BUT and he is probably closer to 1 than the others but if they match a #1 bid that will cost them 2400 points which will eat up Pick 4 (around his worth) but give then picks 7 and 11 instead of 6 and 8. It all depends on how highly they value him I guess.

This will pretty much all evaporate as an issue once GWS and the Suns get back to a normal list and draft picks (i.e. less future picks). In the instance of GWS finishing fourth this year they would have only been able to get one of Perryman or Setterfield and one of the others but this year they'll probably draft 5 academy kids.

- - - Updated - - -

Being an AFL player is one of the few careers where you don't have any choice where you live... and having a family seems to be a big element for some in wanting to go home.

It stands to reason kids will want to be around their support network and family and friends. Some will like the independence and some will need it more, and that's fine but calling out the players as sooks just because they want to be near friends and family is pretty poor.

[bloodspirit]

The issue this year has been the reporting in the press that Essendon, scum of the earth that they are, are looking at bidding for Bowes and Setterfield with Pick 1 to smoke out the points from GWS and the Suns. I have no doubt the likes of Three Chins are egging them on. I don't think there is any pundit that rates either of those kids as close to Number 1 so it would be a purely vexatious bid. Then again it would be fraught with danger because Essendon risk losing a pick 1 and getting a pick rated between 5 and 8 instead.

Ah, I misunderstood you. Even still, I can't see Essendon making a phantom bid this year. Far too risky for them. Just a beat up I reckon. And not one that I have heard about before now.

[KTigers]

mmm..... so when you're writing this, you don't get halfway through it and think maybe you're drawing a little bit of long bow here.
Or do the words just keep coming out, and you can't stop them....

0/10 for empathy here, pretty bloody heartless actually. You're probably the sort of person who say people with should just "man up" and to compare AFL players to a refugee's is just horrendous. I have no idea what you do or did for a living but I'd be pretty damn sure you got to pick and choose pretty much where you worked and lived - the AFL workplace would fail any law in terms of restraint of trade and yes it is for the greater commercial good of the league that we get to treat these kids like cattle.

On one hand we support the Academy and the advantage we get for producing our own (amongst other benefits for the game) and on the other side we demean any player who wants to be close to their family a sook, I find that attitude quite disgusting as if these players are just here for our enjoyment and are not allowed to have feelings.

These "soft" draftees are 18, I'm not sure what you were like at 18 but I sure as hell wasn't all grown up then. Being an AFL is a good life, and I'm sure all AFL players agree they are very lucky, but it is also very brutal (have a look on here to how critical we all are) and somewhat harsh environment where kids are put under enormous pressure that their peers don't cop. And for every superstar there are 10 kids that have been delisted having played less than 10 games (maybe more). I think having your family support network around you, people that care about you regardless of how you play, would be incredibly important.

They're human being with feelings like anyone else and they are 18 years old and allowed to miss their families. And if they get an offer similar or larger than their present employer and get to live back with their friends and family then who can blame them.

Yes, living away from home is a reality of life for many draftees but I hope our clubs don't view them as some sort of commodity for their usage like you

[Nico]

Re the go home factor that has been mentioned on this thread a few times.
Seriously, people migrate to Australia after surviving god knows what in the countries they come
from, and young people in the country move into a capital city for work, study and opportunities by the thousands every
year. All without a guaranteed income, somewhere to live and a player welfare manager to make sure their socks
match. Man, some of these aspiring footballers are soft. If they are not prepared to move interstate and stick it out
they shouldn't put themselves into the draft in the first place and waste everyone's time.

Listening to SEN this week I can't help but think that some player managers simply churn their clients for a new commission every time. This business of going for a change of clubs a year before the contract finishes smacks of shenanigans to me, and it brings a new fee from their clients a year before they are due. That is player managers are bringing forward their income by a year, and in the Gibbs case "3 years".

[DA_Swan]

Is Harrison Marsh contracted for next year ? his brother at Collingwood has requested a trade to go home for family reasons - Harrison was finally showing something for us and in hindsight should have played in the GF

[Auntie.Gerald]

Home | Live Scores & Latest News | Fox Sports

Yep said this a last year

He is a player we should put on this list

[troyjones2525]

I really hope we don't trade the 2 picks to move up a couple of spots! It appears fairly even after the first 5 or so picks and none of the clubs who hold those picks will give them up now. One player who I really hope we avoid is Todd Marshall. Yes they say he shows glimpses of high end talent but I reckon he'll be another top end bust like a Jack Watts as who admittedly is not too bad a player these days, I'd rather not have to wait 6 or more years to get our reward. He is very light and kicking for goal needs a lot of work. I'd imagine the club already has ideas of who they want but I hope it's not him!

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

[tlock]

Kinnear Beatson is an astute judge when it comes to scouting talent for the Swans. His record shows.

[ugg]

His record with late draft picks and rookie picks is very good. With Top 20 picks it is less impressive

[barry]

Kinnear Beatson is an astute judge when it comes to scouting talent for the Swans. His record shows.

I dont like this blind faith.
Dunkley was a miss.

[Captain]

Robbo has just tweeted we are a chance for O'Meara!!

[0918330512]

I dont like this blind faith.
Dunkley was a miss.

My impression was Josh wanted to stay in Melbourme. He didn't not want to go to Sydney, but his preference was to remain in Melbourne, closer to family. Our recruiters weighed up the potential eventual go home factor & determined that it wasn't worth forcing him to Sydney. We were willing ensure that if he had to move interstate, via the draft, it would be to a club that he was comfortable with (ie Sydney), but he was going to otherwise be allowed to remain in his city of preference. I think it was an intentional "miss". You never know, 4 years developing on the Dogs list & he might then decide he wants to do a reverse Tom Mitchell ...

[liz]

His record with late draft picks and rookie picks is very good. With Top 20 picks it is less impressive

He's not had that many to play with. I can't recall exactly when he took control of the drafting. I know he was consulting to the club before he became head of recruiting. Veszpremi (2007)wasn't his call (I think that was Maxfield) but he may well have been responsible for Johnston. Rohan and Jetta (2009) were decent picks. Maybe not outstanding but they fitted the need for speed and it's not his fault that Rohan had his leg snapped in two.

Lamb, Mitchell and Towers (2010,11,12) were technically not top 20 picks, though I guess you have to include them as close enough. Mitchell obviously picked himself. And yes, the other two were so-so choices.

Jones (2013) was a solid choice at that pick, while you can't fault his talent spotting at picking up Heeney and Mills in 2014 and 2015.

OK, so maybe it's not such a great record, taking into account the draft distortions. But it's no worse than Barham's record for the bulk of the naughties.

[Bloods05]

My impression was Josh wanted to stay in Melbourme. He didn't not want to go to Sydney, but his preference was to remain in Melbourne, closer to family. Our recruiters weighed up the potential eventual go home factor & determined that it wasn't worth forcing him to Sydney. We were willing ensure that if he had to move interstate, via the draft, it would be to a club that he was comfortable with (ie Sydney), but he was going to otherwise be allowed to remain in his city of preference. I think it was an intentional "miss". You never know, 4 years developing on the Dogs list & he might then decide he wants to do a reverse Tom Mitchell ...

Yes, this is my understanding. He nominated us as a F/S destination, on the understanding that we would pick him up only if he was nominated by another non-Victorian club. When the Bulldogs nominated him, there was no need for us to draft him. This struck me as a very decent thing to do.

[707]

Robbo has just tweeted we are a chance for O'Meara!!

Wow, this could be why we let Mitchell go and agreed to a trade in principle very quickly. Always thought Hawks were pissing into the wind to get Mitchell and O'Meara given the low trade currency they held. But I'll believe it when I see it!

Nankervis is reportedly thinking about our new offer vs the Tiges offer .... watch this space