2019 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Ralph Dawg]

Swannette, I don't think anyone has the right to say what a "real fan" would or wouldn't say. I also don't appreciate being called "arrogant", or "troll like"

Do you not think an All-Australian, who's won the Anzac medal, club B&F and kicked 65 goals in a season might be considered a reasonable swap for Papley? Particularly if it were a matter of when not if Papley leaves (that part is speculative).

IMO as long as it never becomes personal or crosses the lines of good taste and what is socially acceptable, anything is fair game.
Part of being passionate fans is having an outlet to discuss our innermost thoughts re the team we love.
Btw Webbos, if it was an out and out swap between Daniher and Papley, Papley wins hands down. I'm pretty happy with our tall options at present and we are a bit short on smalls.
However, if Paps is a significant flight risk (and only he, his people and the club to some extent really know), and this trade becomes an option, then we would have to consider it.

[Mark26]

I believe that Papley is a key part of our future and is contracted. No way do we let him go. If he is desperate to return to Vic, we either take the hard line and refuse or get a key part of his destination club's future. If the Blues were keen to land him, I'd only swap Papley for Cripps or Walsh. Draft picks won't do it. Draft picks can end up being a bust. I'd bet on a known quantity and ensure that if a gun player is leaving, a gun player enters via the revolving door. The beauty I believe about this scenario (even if is one) is that we hold the cards.

[The Big Cat]

Harley has come out in the media to call out the AFL to acknowledge that the Swans have an unfair fight to retain the likes of Papley and Jones.

I can only read the teaser, but given the timing of Harley's comments, it says to me we might be losing at least one of these battles.

Haven't been able to read it either, however my son has, and he said Harley said of the 76 players who have returned to their own states in the last few years, only two have been to the Northern States. (One was Charlie Cameron, can't remember the other.)

[MattW]

Haven't been able to read it either, however my son has, and he said Harley said of the 76 players who have returned to their own states in the last few years, only two have been to the Northern States. (One was Charlie Cameron, can't remember the other.)

Lachie Weller?

[giant]

Haven't been able to read it either, however my son has, and he said Harley said of the 76 players who have returned to their own states in the last few years, only two have been to the Northern States. (One was Charlie Cameron, can't remember the other.)

Actually the article said Cameron was the only one. I think the stats are of the 40 odd players over the last couple of years traded back to their own states, 80% of them were 1st or 2nd round picks and of them, Cameron was the only one that benefited a northern state.

[Mel_C]

I just saw this article on the SEN website: [B]HAWKS FIRST PICK TRADE RESTRICTION LIKELY TO BE WAIVED: WHATELEY

So I asked myself: Why does Hawthorn deserve a rule waiver?



I guess the statement It's there for the clubs who might recklessly do it refers to the Swans. No doubt the swans would incur a trade ban just for requesting the waiver.

It's comical how some clubs are exempt from the rules, while othesr are penalized for non-existent rules or rules not broken. Someone should make a list of the new rules implemented specifically to restrict the Swans.

Talk about a fair competition. What a joke!

Another example of the AFL changing rules when it suits them. It really is an unprofessional organisation.

[barry]

It is a kinda dumb rule anyway.

[Blood Fever]

It is a kinda dumb rule anyway.

Agree

[Beerman]

707 what were your recollections of what Ryan said about that period when he talked to the supporter group? He was pretty forthright IIRC

My impression at the time was that the handling of O'Keefe's situation was quintessential Swans, on both sides. O'Keefe clearly wasn't happy with the situation, but both sides spoke very respectfully of the other. I remember thinking how professional it all was.

But I'm not surprised O'Keefe hasn't come back to Swans in an off-field role.

[AB Swannie]

Within the context that “everyone has a price”, what return would you be comfortable with in a trade involving Papley?

I’ll use Carlton assets with the options as they seem to be the club most involved in this rumour.

A) Pick 8
B) Pick 8 + 2020 2nd round
C) Pick 8 + 2020 1st round
D) Pick 8 + player

Obviously, some people will hope for Cripps but let’s be a bit realistic.

[stellation]

It is a kinda dumb rule anyway.

I agree that it's a dumb rule as far protecting clubs from themselves, but I wouldn't mind it being applied to Hawthorn to stop them from constantly being able to trade for top tier talent from other clubs seemingly every year.

[stellation]

Within the context that “everyone has a price”, what return would you be comfortable with in a trade involving Papley?

I’ll use Carlton assets with the options as they seem to be the club most involved in this rumour.

A) Pick 8
B) Pick 8 + 2020 2nd round
C) Pick 8 + 2020 1st round
D) Pick 8 + player

Obviously, some people will hope for Cripps but let’s be a bit realistic.

I'd say B- he's coming off an excellent season and is the best possible option in an area of need for them. If it's correct that he's wrapped up for a few more seasons then we're in a good position to be over the top in our demands.

[AB Swannie]

I'd say B- he's coming off an excellent season and is the best possible option in an area of need for them. If it's correct that he's wrapped up for a few more seasons then we're in a good position to be over the top in our demands.

Totally agree. I’d rather keep him but if he were to go, we should be asking for premium overs. In a similar situation, Carlton demanded two first rounds for Bryce Gibbs. They ended up getting (basically) 10 & 16 for Gibbs and a future 3rd.

I’d be fairly comfortable with Papley & pick 40 for Pick 8 and 2020 first.

[Thunder Shaker]

I just saw this article on the SEN website: [B]HAWKS FIRST PICK TRADE RESTRICTION LIKELY TO BE WAIVED: WHATELEY

So I asked myself: Why does Hawthorn deserve a rule waiver?

I guess the statement It's there for the clubs who might recklessly do it refers to the Swans. No doubt the swans would incur a trade ban just for requesting the waiver.

It's comical how some clubs are exempt from the rules, while othesr are penalized for non-existent rules or rules not broken. Someone should make a list of the new rules implemented specifically to restrict the Swans.

Talk about a fair competition. What a joke!

I agree. What a joke.

If any other club was treated like the Swans, they would scream murder.

[Kafka's Ghost]

I agree. What a joke.

If any other club was treated like the Swans, they would scream murder.

Murder? If it was Collingwood there’d be a coup at the AFL!