2016 trading and drafting (merged thread)

[Levii3]

Dont draft ruckmen. Rule 1.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

Tim English looks special at 204cm. He was playing in the midfield a couple of years ago than had a massive growth spurt. Tippet only has two years left. If he's still there at 19 take him.

[iigrover]

Dont draft ruckmen. Rule 1.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

Rule 2. Ignore Rule 1 and use all first round picks to pick up Paul Chamber's kids as a a future ruckman via Father / Son / Academy pick

[barry]

Dont draft ruckmen. Rule 1.

Dont draft defenders with 1st round picks. Rule 2.

[Levii3]

It will be interesting to see who we go for. I like the sound of Berry for Pick 9 but I fear that Galluci may not be available at 19. You'd think we go for a ruckman at 46 and a best available at 49.

Drafting Vic Metro kids always seems a risk they seems to get "home sickness" more than others. Josh Battle wouldn't be bad a 19.

[Mug Punter]

Tim English looks special at 204cm. He was playing in the midfield a couple of years ago than had a massive growth spurt. Tippet only has two years left. If he's still there at 19 take him.

I think every club would take him at 19 tbh, be amazed if he gets past West Coast.

[bloodspirit]

So we've got picks 9, 19, 46 and 49. A pretty good outcome. Basically parlaying Mitchell and Nank into improved early picks.

Our pick 9 could turn into pick 11 if it gets bumped back for academy players Setterfield and Perryman. However, at that point there are a few KPPs that we might be targeting including Marshall, Scrimshaw and Logue. I don't know any more about these guys than Cal Twomey has written in his phantom form guide (I'll link it again for others' convenience: Callum Twomey?s Phantom Form Guide - October edition - AFL.com.au) but I figure good forwards are harder to come by than defenders and it won't be often that we'll have a top 10 pick. Also, Marshall is from Vic/NSW border and plays for the Rams so, if we could get him, there might be less of a go-home factor. That said, Logue sounds brilliant and more of a sure thing whereas Marshall seems a bit more of a gamble. I'll trust Kinnear and co to make a good decision despite their so-so record with high picks. A positive for us is that Gold Coast controls a few of those picks before ours (4,6,8 ahead of our pick 9) and they might be keener to get midfielders because they have such a good spine already and have lost two quality midfielders in JOM and Prestia.

As for pick 19? Best available. Probably one of the many midfielders. I wouldn't complain if we picked two KPPs though (including Josh Battle) because (a) we're a little light on for KPPs especially if X is leaving; and (b) kind of an insurance policy if we pick Marshall and he doesn't work out. Hopefully at least one of them will come good.

Then probably a ruck prospect with one of our picks 46 and 49.

[Levii3]

I think every club would take him at 19 tbh, be amazed if he gets past West Coast.

WA clubs don't seems to draft their own players much they prefer to trade them in after a couple of years.

[MightyBloods]

So we've got picks 9, 19, 46 and 49. A pretty good outcome. Basically parlaying Mitchell and Nank into improved early picks.

Our pick 9 could turn into pick 11 if it gets bumped back for academy players Setterfield and Perryman. However, at that point there are a few KPPs that we might be targeting including Marshall, Scrimshaw and Logue. I don't know any more about these guys than Cal Twomey has written in his phantom form guide (I'll link it again for others' convenience: Callum Twomey?s Phantom Form Guide - October edition - AFL.com.au) but I figure good forwards are harder to come by than defenders and it won't be often that we'll have a top 10 pick. Also, Marshall is from Vic/NSW border and plays for the Rams so, if we could get him, there might be less of a go-home factor. That said, Logue sounds brilliant and more of a sure thing whereas Marshall seems a bit more of a gamble. I'll trust Kinnear and co to make a good decision despite their so-so record with high picks. A positive for us is that Gold Coast controls a few of those picks before ours (4,6,8 ahead of our pick 9) and they might be keener to get midfielders because they have such a good spine already and have lost two quality midfielders in JOM and Prestia.

As for pick 19? Best available. Probably one of the many midfielders. I wouldn't complain if we picked two KPPs though (including Josh Battle) because (a) we're a little light on for KPPs especially if X is leaving; and (b) kind of an insurance policy if we pick Marshall and he doesn't work out. Hopefully at least one of them will come good.

Then probably a ruck prospect with one of our picks 46 and 49.

My policy has always been never draft a ruckman in the first 4 rounds. They are too young and too much of a gamble at 17 or 18yo. Better to trade/draft in when they are more mature and you have a better idea of their AFL talent/work ethic. History tells you that you take the best midfielders available unless a KPP stands out.

[bloodspirit]

Just reflecting on the trade period overall and my feeling is that picks are overvalued. Reviewing the trades I felt that almost every time the club trading in a player got the better deal.

Whereas, generally pick swaps seemed more even. There were a couple of exceptions: Bulldogs handing over picks 35 and 43 for Suns' 26 and 80 looks a win for the Suns to me - except that it is that scenario where the point value of picks matters more to the Suns than to the Dogs who will probably only use pick 80 to upgrade a rookie or not at all. The other exception was where we traded with GWS giving them picks 39 and 52 for pick 31. That was a points loser and didn't seem especially good business to me. That was just about the only trade GWS did where I felt they came out in front (albeit not by very much). I much preferred our trade with Port of 14, 17 and 31 (=39 + 52) for 9 and 19. Obviously both clubs achieved what they wanted (and the deal was pretty even points wise) but I felt happy with us for doing that trade. Actually, if these are the most glaring exceptions I can find, I think this proves the point that in general the pick swaps were pretty fair for both sides.

[bloodspirit]

Incidentally, what do people think about Carlton refusing to trade for Gibbs? I think fair enough. He was a contracted player. Adelaide may have put a "fair" offer but if Gibbs is worth more to Carlton than Adelaide offered AND Gibbs is contracted, then too bad. I feel sorry for Gibbs but not very since he did sign his contract. A rare instance of a player not getting their own way. Which perhaps is a good thing. The pendulum may have swung too far in favour of players.

[Billericay]

Incidentally, what do people think about Carlton refusing to trade for Gibbs? I think fair enough. He was a contracted player. Adelaide may have put a "fair" offer but if Gibbs is worth more to Carlton than Adelaide offered AND Gibbs is contracted, then too bad. I feel sorry for Gibbs but not very since he did sign his contract. A rare instance of a player not getting their own way. Which perhaps is a good thing. The pendulum may have swung too far in favour of players.

I'll be interested to see what happens next. But Gibbs can't walk to either of the drafts and I suspect he'll stay and get on with it. It's not dissimilar to ROK's attempt to get to Hawthorn, although the Swans did agree to ROK's request to move him from FWD to MID as a result.

[bloodspirit]

Surely nothing will happen next except Gibbs will get on with it. He's contracted. He's not going to retire.

[dimelb]

Dont draft defenders with 1st round picks. Rule 2.

Well, we did that last year and it worked out OK!

[Billericay]

Surely nothing will happen next except Gibbs will get on with it. He's contracted. He's not going to retire.

Cam McCarthy took pretty badly to not being traded by GWS last year, but he only had one year to sit out his contract. I guess the question is how upset Gibbs will be by Carlton's refusal to trade him, whether Adelaide will have another crack next year or if that's it? I think he'll get on with it, which is a "victory" of sorts by Carlton. Not sure he's worth 2 first round draft picks so maybe a "win" for Adelaide too, if that's possible. Carlton put such a high price on him that whatever happened they couldn't lose.

[bloodspirit]

I will be interested to see when someone publishes a table showing all of each club's deals to get a read on who the winners and losers are this trade period but early on I think that Carlton and Freo are among the biggest winners and there may be others. I agree with MP (?), I would give us about a C+. Feel like we got unders for our players but we didn't have much choice and we did well to trade up the order a bit. Hopefully we nail the draft. Except for the clubs that have traded out of the draft, any club can make this off-season a winner by drafting well. Especially the Queensland clubs!

As for losers, have already said I feel like GWS came out second best in almost every trade they were a part of - but they had so much to start off with that they still have a strong team and draft position. Hawks have done well with the players they have brought in but seen a lot of talent and experience go out the door. They have given up almost all their presence at the draft and so they really need JOM to be good and neither JOM nor Mitchell to get injured otherwise this could turn out to be a horror trade period for them. The Hawks' future picks are looking more valuable each passing day.