2016 trading and drafting (merged thread)

[Auntie.Gerald]

"The Tigers have pick 27 and pick 46 in the draft, with a late second-round or early third-round pick expected to be about right for Nankervis."

would be nice if we can end up with picks

14,17,27 as a minimum

[waswan]

Irrespective of what X has said, the COLA removal is starting to hit on our ability to retain players.

Not many grand final sides get 3 players requesting out straight afterwards: Mitchel, Nanker and X.

Bulldogs
Hamling, Adams, Stevens, Hrovat,

[Auntie.Gerald]

i wonder what we will receive in return for X ?

id prefer to keep him at the Swans as I feel we are a little short still on falls 22/23 yrs of age ready to play a whole season if need be thru injury

[Primmy]

Looks like X can't afford to stay. COL gone etc. I am disappointed, but can understand why the younger players are opting out of Sydney.

[caj23]

Bad time to move clubs for X I think, would've been a better move once he was more established in the seniors. I think he's had some bad advice


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would have thought he's never going to get a better time. With a full list he's not in our best 22 and could've been back in the NEAFL for the bulk of next season

[longmile]

Real shame about Nankervis

Would prefer to keep him and offload tippett and free up some cap space.

Tippett seems to be burning a real hole in our team list

[Crusty]

Re X and Nank:
Is it that they want to leave, or are other clubs prepared to pay more than us?
It's all about relative value, methinks.
So, to us, the player is worth $Swansvalue per year, whatever that is.
Other clubs see:
1. A Grand Final club/player;
2. The Swans have superb player development;
3. They're 23;
4. They're improved.

Add to the mix that this year we blooded a number of young players, a large number of whom have been in the Swans system for some time: thus confirming the reputation as good developers.
Add in the the player knows the Swans system, and the new club can benefit from that knowledge.

So the new club e.g. Richmond for Nankervis, values the player at $greaterthanSwansvalue.
Player is on fringe for selection, so it becomes something of a no brainer for the player.

[ernie koala]

Real shame about Nankervis

Would prefer to keep him and offload tippett and free up some cap space.

Tippett seems to be burning a real hole in our team list

I agree, Tippo has yet to be listed in our best in a final, let alone dominate one.

He's not worth the coin he is reputedly on.

Nanka looks to have plenty of upside and would be on a relatively modest wage.

If we had offloaded him, GC were rumoured to be interested, we could of kept Mitchell and picked up a top 10 draft pick.

[Ludwig]

Real shame about Nankervis

Would prefer to keep him and offload tippett and free up some cap space.

Tippett seems to be burning a real hole in our team list

It was too difficult to offload either Tippett or Sinclair because of their big contracts, so unfortunately it has to be Nankervis to depart.

I think Nankervis' value should increase from his pick 35 three years ago. An alternative suggestion for a trade would be to exchange our 2017 3rd round pick for Richmond's 2017 2nd rounder, plus exchange our current pick 52 for 46.

Richards could have some value and draw a pick in the early 30s. NM should need another forward with Petrie gone and Waite in his final year. They have picks 32 and 33.

[Cosmic Wizard]

I'd rather we kept Nankervis, but I respectfully disagree with a lot of the rest of your post:
1) We have to have a squad that is much larger than the first 22. Unless we have a disastrous run with injuries, some of the depth players are not going to get a game. I suspect its tougher than them that it is on the fans. BJ (and Towers) could still fill a place when required at AFL level and its essential that we have players like that.
2) Geelong moved on a bunch of old stars and when we played them they still looked like a few good men surrounded by slow average players. I'd wait and see on Hawthorn.
3) Yet again we made the finals. In fact we were minor premiers and made the grand final. Yet again we must be doing something right.

A depth player should be more like Newman; young, eager and ready to step up when call upon.

I just feel with both Brandon and Towers that they have been given plenty of opportunities to nail down a spot in the seniors and failed.

If Tom did leave due to money, and there now appears to quite a few other players also leaving due to money, we must regroup and concentrate our resources on players who could be here for the next ten years.

McVeigh doesn't fit the bill; yes let him get to 300, but after that we need to resign him on a rookie contract.

Making finals is what we are good at; wining premiership not so.

Let change that around!

[caj23]

It was too difficult to offload either Tippett or Sinclair because of their big contracts, so unfortunately it has to be Nankervis to depart.

I think Nankervis' value should increase from his pick 35 three years ago. An alternative suggestion for a trade would be to exchange our 2017 3rd round pick for Richmond's 2017 2nd rounder, plus exchange our current pick 52 for 46.

Richards could have some value and draw a pick in the early 30s. NM should need another forward with Petrie gone and Waite in his final year. They have picks 32 and 33.

I think you're pretty optimistic

We'll either end up with 46 from Richmond or next year's 3rd round, X has very little trade value, I'd expect a pick in the 50's or a crappy pick upgrade

[Ludwig]

I think you're pretty optimistic

We'll either end up with 46 from Richmond or next year's 3rd round, X has very little trade value, I'd expect a pick in the 50's or a crappy pick upgrade

You're probably right. Only other clubs seem to get good value for traded players.

[liz]

Re X and Nank:
Is it that they want to leave, or are other clubs prepared to pay more than us?
It's all about relative value, methinks.
So, to us, the player is worth $Swansvalue per year, whatever that is.
Other clubs see:
1. A Grand Final club/player;
2. The Swans have superb player development;
3. They're 23;
4. They're improved.

Add to the mix that this year we blooded a number of young players, a large number of whom have been in the Swans system for some time: thus confirming the reputation as good developers.
Add in the the player knows the Swans system, and the new club can benefit from that knowledge.

So the new club e.g. Richmond for Nankervis, values the player at $greaterthanSwansvalue.
Player is on fringe for selection, so it becomes something of a no brainer for the player.

More clubs should look to the fringe players at strong clubs for value. Bear in mind that this is how we identified JPK and Mumford, offering them greater opportunities to pay senior footy.

[waswan]

Lennon and 46 for Nank and 52 ?

[Dosser]

Lennon and 46 for Nank and 52 ?

Punt Rd would get burned to the ground!