2016 trading and drafting (merged thread)

[707]

Can't understand the disappointment at the Tom Mitchell trade. On face value it appears unders but look at what it allowed us to do over the entirety of the trade period.

We got the deal done quickly given us time and space to plan further moves carefully and most importantly it meant we didn't get caught up as the sideshow/sidewash in the protracted O'Meara trade.

We started with picks 17, 39, 57 and for losing our fourth inside mid and fourth ruckman we now have pick 9 which we obviously have someone specific targeted, a two pick slip from 17 to 19 is no big deal and converted 39 to 43 & 46 so a much better position.

Well worked by Kinnear and team, I'm happy.

[dejavoodoo44]

So what "little known rule" did we break in order to get a trade ban? Pathetic article. We were banned for not breaking ANY rules. Using our trade ban as an analogy is pure ignorance.

It may have been the, 'don't piss off Mike FitzPatrick' rule? It's probably still little known, but I think a few more people are becoming aware of its existence.

[dejavoodoo44]

Can't understand the disappointment at the Tom Mitchell trade. On face value it appears unders but look at what it allowed us to do over the entirety of the trade period.

We got the deal done quickly given us time and space to plan further moves carefully and most importantly it meant we didn't get caught up as the sideshow/sidewash in the protracted O'Meara trade.

We started with picks 17, 39, 57 and for losing our fourth inside mid and fourth ruckman we now have pick 9 which we obviously have someone specific targeted, a two pick slip from 17 to 19 is no big deal and converted 39 to 43 & 46 so a much better position.

Well worked by Kinnear and team, I'm happy.

Yes, I'm quite pleased with our trade period. While I would have liked to have gotten a little bit more for Nankervis, I'm entirely comfortable with the Mitchell trade. A want away midfielder, whose absence should see more midfield time for Heeney, Mills & Jones.
Also, it is rare that we get a top ten pick, so I'm sorta keen to see who we bring in.

[Ludwig]

In Cal Twomey's latest article on the AFL website, he has us taking Griffin Logue.

In the gun: every club's top draft target - AFL.com.au

Pick 9: The Swans have moved up the draft order with a player clearly in mind. Who is it? We'll have to wait and see. It could be Griffin Logue, the key defender who pushed himself right up the ranks late in the season. Sydney could do with an up-and-coming young tall back, and Logue might be the best one in this year's pool. The athletic big man ran 15.1 in the beep test at the NAB AFL Draft Combine and came in the top-five for the 3km time trial ? traits he used to move into the midfield late in the year. He's ready to play.


Around the mark: Tim Taranto, Will Brodie, Oliver Florent

It would be nice if Tim Taranto were also available at pick 9. It would make it a pretty difficult choice. Florent wouldn't be bad either, nor would Jarrod Berry. It's hard to lose at pick 9 in this year's draft.



And here's what he says for the Bulldogs pick at #18, which is just before our 2nd:

Pick 18: South Australian Will Hayward shot up the draft board late in the year with some great performances at under-18 level. The exciting half-forward kicked nine goals in a preliminary final and four goals the Grand Final, and is likely to be the first player from his state to be picked. The Dogs like natural footballers ? their flag team was built on them ? and Hayward has shown his instincts as a great overhead mark and a prospect with good goal sense.


Around the mark: Jy Simpkin, Jordan Gallucci, Jarrod Berry

The 4 names in this one are pretty good as well.

I think we will get a couple of guns this year that you can just about pencil in to the 2018 starting side.

Jarrod Berry would be a nice pickup at 19. I'm doing my ins an outs for the team now: In: Berry Out: McVeigh (Why does this sound familiar? It's got a ring to it that I seem to have heard before).

[Auntie.Gerald]

Will Brodie v VM (2016 Under 18 Championships) - YouTube

Club: Murray Bushrangers/Vic Country

DOB: 23/08/1998

Height: 189cm

Weight: 82kg

Position: Inside Midfielder



IN SHORT

?Prototype? midfielder
Very strong at stoppages ? clearance machine
Flexibility to pinch hit in a number of roles
Sometimes blindly kicks before fully assessing options

-----------

For me Will Brodie looks like a player that compliments the swans style of hard footy

he also looks like he wouldn't be out place playing Snrs in his first season especially if Mills moves more into the midfield and Brodie looks like he could rotate off the HBF as well as midfield

2016 Draft Profile: Will Brodie - Footy Prophet

[rojo]

If we haven't got Logue in our sights I would go for Taranto if still available at 9.

[Nico]

Article in the Herald Sun today about the deal done between St Kilda and Hawthorn, so Hawthorn could get O'Meara. In essence they swapped picks with the outcome being that St Kilda picked up a nett minimum 854 points based on future picks. Appears any deal that means more than 200 points are relinquished would not be allowed by the AFL, but they let this one sail through. The further Hawthorn drop down the ladder the more points the Saints get. If they miss the 8 the value goes over 100 points. Appears 8 other clubs were bewildered as to how it was allowed. "The AFL brought in the points balance system to give value to picks and regulate trading and they go and let this happen". Clubs also questioned the generosity of Carlton which effectively brokered JOM's trade at the death by giving Hawthorn a future selection.
Hawthorn enters the draft at pick 88 and has already sold its first 2 picks in the 2017 draft. Huge gamble on JOM, if he doesn't come up. Is he really that good?

[CureTheSane]

If losing Mitchell was required to keep one or more of Heeney, Kennedy, Mills etc then I have no problems at all with it
End of story

[Steve]

Article in the Herald Sun today about the deal done between St Kilda and Hawthorn, so Hawthorn could get O'Meara. In essence they swapped picks with the outcome being that St Kilda picked up a nett minimum 854 points based on future picks. Appears any deal that means more than 200 points are relinquished would not be allowed by the AFL, but they let this one sail through.

I don't have any problem with a lopsided trade in that circumstance - ie. where the team on the 'worse side' of the trade are clearly doing so to facilitate another deal that they obviously want to get done.

However the one with Carlton is the one worth review - where Carlton strangely accept a detrimental deal with no obvious benefit to them.

Article also said Ken Wood reviews each trade where picks are involved for integrity purposes, which he did for that St Kilda <> Hawthorn trade - however he wasn't even at ALH House on the final day of the trade period. That's quite inexplicable, given the number of trades that go through on the last day - but explains why the Carlton <> Hawthorn one went through without any review.

[Nico]

Article in the Herald Sun today about the deal done between St Kilda and Hawthorn, so Hawthorn could get O'Meara. In essence they swapped picks with the outcome being that St Kilda picked up a nett minimum 854 points based on future picks. Appears any deal that means more than 200 points are relinquished would not be allowed by the AFL, but they let this one sail through. The further Hawthorn drop down the ladder the more points the Saints get. If they miss the 8 the value goes over 100 points. Appears 8 other clubs were bewildered as to how it was allowed. "The AFL brought in the points balance system to give value to picks and regulate trading and they go and let this happen". Clubs also questioned the generosity of Carlton which effectively brokered JOM's trade at the death by giving Hawthorn a future selection.
Hawthorn enters the draft at pick 88 and has already sold its first 2 picks in the 2017 draft. Huge gamble on JOM, if he doesn't come up. Is he really that good?

That should read over 1000 points.

[Ludwig]

If we haven't got Logue in our sights I would go for Taranto if still available at 9.

I think there's a high probability that both Taranto and Logue will be available at GC's pick 8 and would expect them to take Taranto. But they probably will have already drafted 2 midfielders by then in Brodie and Bowes with plenty others available at pick 10, so they might go for something different, perhaps Scrimshaw as a possible replacement for Malceski, or they may even bid on GWS academy prospect Perryman, and GWS may let him go.

If Taranto is available it will hard to pass him up. There's so little difference between Taranto and probable #1 pick McCluggage.

It's hard to lose in any case.

There's a good chance that our first 2 picks will be
Loganberry.jpg




On Will Brodie, there's no chance that he will get past GC's pick 8 and will probably go earlier. Anyway, we would probably be after more of an outside player.

[dejavoodoo44]

I think there's a high probability that both Taranto and Logue will be available at GC's pick 8 and would expect them to take Taranto. But they probably will have already drafted 2 midfielders by then in Brodie and Bowes with plenty others available at pick 10, so they might go for something different, perhaps Scrimshaw as a possible replacement for Malceski, or they may even bid on GWS academy prospect Perryman, and GWS may let him go.

If Taranto is available it will hard to pass him up. There's so little difference between Taranto and probable #1 pick McCluggage.

It's hard to lose in any case.

There's a good chance that our first 2 picks will be
[ATTACH=CONFIG]1707[/ATTACH]




On Will Brodie, there's no chance that he will get past GC's pick 8 and will probably go earlier. Anyway, we would probably be after more of an outside player.

Farrrkk! It took me ages to get that. Logue n' Berry.

[Velour&Ruffles]

Alternatively, I'm hoping Tony gets drafted by the Demons so they can for a Tony Olango and Gawn ruck partnership.

Magnificent!

[Levii3]

Interesting reading on X club may not want him back.

While Sydney are yet to publicly rule out the prospect of Richards continuing at the club, there is doubt about whether the Swans would welcome Richards back into the fold. It's understood some at the club are miffed by his conduct and expectations.

AFL trades 2016: Xavier Richards to plot next move after being overlooked in trade period

[707]

Interesting reading on X club may not want him back.

X might be the other delisting that we need to use our 4th pick which will be about 46 after GWS burn a few picks on academy players.