2019 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Auntie.Gerald]

I think it’s the media that has had the most influence on the narrative

The narrative I think is only important to those of us who want to know the future and are worried

I don’t think the narrative is much of a concern for Kinnear Beatson

JD is only part of the puzzle and I’m super confident we can capitalise on this trade period and drafting

I love how we push each other on this forum with different ideas and different perspectives on what we think is fair and or ideal

We are in completely new cycle re trades and draft picks due to our squad having 4 retirees and a couple kids homesick in 2019 and a big fish wanting to re locate from the vfl

It’s a fascinating time to be a swans supporter

[bloodspirit]

Hi All,

I am a new poster... but have read all the talk re trading.

For what its worth, our humble CEO needs to take a course in negotiating. He is constantly allowing the narrative surrounding Papely, Jones, and dare I say it Daniher, be skewed against the Swans by letting the likes of Essendon and Carlton dictate terms. He isn't forthright enough to say that Paps as 4 years to run on his contract in his discussions with Carlton, and thus the paradigm surrounding his move is completely different to that of Daniher (who has a further one). I feel he has backed himself into a corner that he will not be able to get out of, and may want to save face in doing a deal for Daniher almost at any cost. I understand the discussion about Daniher's potential, but if you look at the stance that Dodoro has adopted for Essendon, we should be doing the same and more with Papley. As much as I think that Dodoro is harsh in his approach, I wish that he was our chief negotiator, and not Harley.

Having said all this, the way you approach a negotiation is by setting a high value from which you can only come down. Harley appears to have set too low a bar, and in all my experience he will not be able to trade up.

Welcome Syd76! It's great to have a new poster. And I'm impressed you have read all the 3700 odd posts about trading!

I agree with AB that we have no idea what's going on and reserve judgment. Like liz, I like that we do our talking privately. Also, as Mw points out, we may be more ruthless than we are giving ourselves credit for. But what I really want to add is that I think we are mistaken to focus on Tom Harley. Kinnear Beatson and Charlie Gardiner are our lead negotiators. TH isn't even in Melbourne. He's getting on with business in Sydney and letting the cobblers do the cobbling - for the most part. I'm sure TH, and even the board to some extent, are having some oversight role with a bit of input from the coaches and other recruiters. So I'm not sheeting the outcomes home to Harley. It would be much fairer to hold KB to account but mostly we just think of him as a bit of a sacred cow here. I feel like if there is any blame to be laid at anyone's feet (and, as yet, I don't think there is) then we would all be too ready to lay it at the feet of relative newcomer Harley (and I'm sure Charlie Gardiner) instead of fan fave KB, but actually Kin is the guy with the most say on what happens here.

In other thoughts, I commend the Saints for getting on with life after Freo were totally unreasonable to deal with. They made what they (and I) think was a fair offer (pick 6 + 3rd rounder I read) and when Freo was nowhere in the ball park, and after fair warning, they have moved on. Saints have nothing to complain about. Their alternative is not to deal and that is the option they have chosen. If they were bluffing then that's their problem. And it will be up to them to find a path back to the negotiating table. I would also mention that Freo have gotten away with a lot of hardball in recent times and it's time that someone kept them honest and stood their ground with them. Pick 2 for Weller? Highway robbery. Also got a good deal for Neale without knowing what a year he would have and then traded brilliantly last year to get in Hogan, Lobb and someone else I can't remember.

Likewise, I have no problem with the Giants being "greedy". That's what every club is trying to do - improve their lists as much as possible. The question is whether they are being wise? Are they being too short-sighted? I can't see that they are going wrong with strategising to get two top 10 picks. We'd do the same. I hope we would. What's the problem for them in getting two top 10 picks and going into a bit of a points deficit next year if that's what it takes? If they really need more picks next year, then they can always trade future picks or sell one of the many talented players they have warehoused (e.g. Bonar, Hately, Caldwell etc etc etc etc). Where I do wonder what the Giants are doing, is trading up to pick 6 because I can't see how it achieves their strategy of getting a bid before Green unless they are going to trade further up the draft which is what I assume they are going to try. The other thing that's interesting about that trade is that they surely would have offered us the same deal (or possibly even better) but we chose not to take it. Is this because we have pick 5 is earmarked for the Daniher deal, or because we have someone we want to draft at #5?

Unfortunate to hear that Sier is gone but I think he had flagged he was staying with the Woods a while back.

Still want to see the Swans reel in some good mids!

[AnnieH]

Hi All,

I am a new poster... but have read all the talk re trading.

For what its worth, our humble CEO needs to take a course in negotiating. He is constantly allowing the narrative surrounding Papely, Jones, and dare I say it Daniher, be skewed against the Swans by letting the likes of Essendon and Carlton dictate terms. He isn't forthright enough to say that Paps as 4 years to run on his contract in his discussions with Carlton, and thus the paradigm surrounding his move is completely different to that of Daniher (who has a further one). I feel he has backed himself into a corner that he will not be able to get out of, and may want to save face in doing a deal for Daniher almost at any cost. I understand the discussion about Daniher's potential, but if you look at the stance that Dodoro has adopted for Essendon, we should be doing the same and more with Papley. As much as I think that Dodoro is harsh in his approach, I wish that he was our chief negotiator, and not Harley.

Having said all this, the way you approach a negotiation is by setting a high value from which you can only come down. Harley appears to have set too low a bar, and in all my experience he will not be able to trade up.

Welcome Syd
I'm not a big fan of Harley - never have been. I feel everything is does is all about him and not so much about the club.

[Markwebbos]

Interesting thoughts BS. The Giants move intrigues me and as I said in an earlier post, may mean they are interested in a player instead of Green.

I know Sier has signed at the Pies, there's talk that Rupert Wills may be "available". As is Bonar. Thoughts on these two?

[Auntie.Gerald]

Sam Frost to hawks confirmed

Pretty good deal for the hawks and just keep striving ahead via trades to rebuild their list year after year

——

HAWTHORN has secured defender Sam Frost from Melbourne after the two sides agreed to a trade on Friday morning.

The Hawks traded pick No.50 and next year's second-round pick in exchange for Frost, picks No.42, No.61 and next year's fourth-rounder.

[Aprilbr]

I know what everyone will say, but I'll still ask the questions.

*Should the Swans do the Papley deal without knowing we are trading in Daniher (i.e. independently of having an in principle agreement with the Dodo)?
*Will they?

Do we think the two are tied in the Swans minds or only in the minds of journos?

I was just thinking the same thing when I saw this post. The short answer is "No they should not trade Papley unless they are sure they need the pick for Daniher and that latter deal is highly likely to be done".

But it's clearly uncertain now whether the Daniher deal will be done and if it is done it looks like it will go down to the wire which means the Papley one may also go down to the wire. No problem for me on that front.

The Daniher deal/no deal is looking like one of those rare ones where supporters of both clubs seem to be hoping for it NOT to be done!

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Blood Fever]

Sam Frost to hawks confirmed

Pretty good deal for the hawks and just keep striving ahead via trades to rebuild their list year after year

——

HAWTHORN has secured defender Sam Frost from Melbourne after the two sides agreed to a trade on Friday morning.

The Hawks traded pick No.50 and next year's second-round pick in exchange for Frost, picks No.42, No.61 and next year's fourth-rounder.

No world beater

[Aprilbr]

It looks like Lewis could be on the way to us which probably means Papley is going?

lions-expect-taylor-cutler-to-find-new-homes

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Ludwig]

The fact that Joe's management requested a contract extension and no offer has come from Essendon in that regard is a clear indication that Essendon do not have confidence that Joe can get his body right. At least they are wary enough not to commit anything until he can prove himself. One would think that Essendon know Joe's situation best. As they say: Money Talks. And money is silent at Essendon.

We would be remiss not to take the cues from Essendon's actions. It would be arrogant of us to think that we know more about Joe's ability to play than Essendon do. They need Joe more than we do. Their forward line looks feeble without him. We have plenty of ammo, both experienced and young talent.

Making a big commitment to JD, in both what we give for him to Essendon, as well as a salary package, is a big risk for us and one that needn't be made this year. It could turn out well, but if it doesn't, it could derail all the good work done by the list management team to get us to this stage where we can make a relaunch toward another premiership.

In 2016 we were going gangbusters through round 11. Tippett was on tap to be an AA ruckman. He was injured the next game. We lost the GF. He was never able to get his body right again, His ridiculous contract with all its trigger clauses and extensions continued to haunt the Swans even into 2019, where he had to be rookie listed. It's not the only reason, but that was the start of the current fall of the club down to 15th on the ladder this year.

We look to finally be recovering from the Tippett era. At his best, Tippo was worth his paycheck. But we have to learn some lessons from this episode. The oft used phrase about not putting all your eggs in one basket applies here. Caution is advised about putting too much hope in a savior to take the club forward. We don't need to do this. Especially this year.

[i'm-uninformed2]

I'm happy to wait on the outcome before judging. But one test for me is how smart we are at using any trades to add points for next year given the two Academy kids.

So, I'd like Papley to stay. I also think if he's going it's pick 9. But if there is to be trading of other picks, I'd want something for next year. So if Carlton want our pick 25 in return, we get a 2020 rd3 pick in return, for example.

Or with Jones. I like him more than others on here but it's clear he is off. So whatever deal we do with St Kilda, also attach their 2020 4th round to it, for example.

Or even with our picks 62 and 63 this year, throw them at someone needing picks for a FS or Academy kid this year in exchange for some extra late picks next year.

Now, I'm not for sacrificing the farm this year and would gladly keep Papley and wait till Daniher becomes an RFA. But in any deals we do, be smart about what's ahead. I know with all the bulldust NGA picks ahead next year, we're not going to be alone in this. But it'll be a test for how well we've played the whole period.

[Ludwig]

Sam Frost to hawks confirmed

Pretty good deal for the hawks and just keep striving ahead via trades to rebuild their list year after year

——

HAWTHORN has secured defender Sam Frost from Melbourne after the two sides agreed to a trade on Friday morning.

The Hawks traded pick No.50 and next year's second-round pick in exchange for Frost, picks No.42, No.61 and next year's fourth-rounder.

A good value trade by the Hawks. I'm sure Clarko will make him a star. Another reason that we have to be very shrewd in our trading just to be competitive. The Melbourne clubs have a big advantage in their access to the AFL player pool, while the northern clubs have to make the most of few opportunities, while not being hypnotized into entering bad value trades.

[liz]

I was just thinking the same thing when I saw this post. The short answer is "No they should not trade Papley unless they are sure they need the pick for Daniher and that latter deal is highly likely to be done".

I reckon they should be viewed as completely separate from each other. If the club is set on getting Daniher in, a deal structured around pick 5 should be possible (with more or less going or coming, depending on who wants what more). There is no way pick 9 is "needed" for a trade for a player who has barely played in two seasons.

The decision on whether to trade Papley should be based around information the club has (ignoring the fluff in the media, though I don't think that the rubbish about his living arrangements being unsuitable helped Papley's credibility) - ie how sympathetic are they to his real reasons for wanting a move to Melbourne, and how easy/hard will it be for him to reintegrate into the club is he isn't traded. He is contracted, not just for next season but well beyond, so there is no pressure to trade him or lose him for nothing.

The above is based on

- while we have a valuable pick in the draft (pick 5 - and one I personally would rather the club used at the draft rather than spent on Daniher), the top end of this draft doesn't seem particularly strong. If we were having these conversations a year ago, my view might be different.
- we don't especially need to bring in young talent. Not that more young talent is a bad thing, but we already have a young list and have invested heavily in the draft in recent seasons. So using that pick on a valuable player who fills a list need would be a perfectly reasonable thing to do in my book. (The big problem/question here, is - as we have all identified - that Daniher doesn't seem to address the most obvious list needs we have.)

[Legs Akimbo]

Hi All,

I am a new poster... but have read all the talk re trading.

For what its worth, our humble CEO needs to take a course in negotiating. He is constantly allowing the narrative surrounding Papely, Jones, and dare I say it Daniher, be skewed against the Swans by letting the likes of Essendon and Carlton dictate terms. He isn't forthright enough to say that Paps as 4 years to run on his contract in his discussions with Carlton, and thus the paradigm surrounding his move is completely different to that of Daniher (who has a further one). I feel he has backed himself into a corner that he will not be able to get out of, and may want to save face in doing a deal for Daniher almost at any cost. I understand the discussion about Daniher's potential, but if you look at the stance that Dodoro has adopted for Essendon, we should be doing the same and more with Papley. As much as I think that Dodoro is harsh in his approach, I wish that he was our chief negotiator, and not Harley.

Having said all this, the way you approach a negotiation is by setting a high value from which you can only come down. Harley appears to have set too low a bar, and in all my experience he will not be able to trade up.

Welcome aboard. Actually, the secret to negotiating is your best alternative to a negotiated agreement (batna). That sets your floor price and willingness to trade.

I wonder if our brains trust have a clear one for papley and Daniher?

[Aprilbr]

The fact that Joe's management requested a contract extension and no offer has come from Essendon in that regard is a clear indication that Essendon do not have confidence that Joe can get his body right. At least they are wary enough not to commit anything until he can prove himself. One would think that Essendon know Joe's situation best. As they say: Money Talks. And money is silent at Essendon.

We would be remiss not to take the cues from Essendon's actions. It would be arrogant of us to think that we know more about Joe's ability to play than Essendon do. They need Joe more than we do. Their forward line looks feeble without him. We have plenty of ammo, both experienced and young talent.

Making a big commitment to JD, in both what we give for him to Essendon, as well as a salary package, is a big risk for us and one that needn't be made this year. It could turn out well, but if it doesn't, it could derail all the good work done by the list management team to get us to this stage where we can make a relaunch toward another premiership.

In 2016 we were going gangbusters through round 11. Tippett was on tap to be an AA ruckman. He was injured the next game. We lost the GF. He was never able to get his body right again, His ridiculous contract with all its trigger clauses and extensions continued to haunt the Swans even into 2019, where he had to be rookie listed. It's not the only reason, but that was the start of the current fall of the club down to 15th on the ladder this year.

We look to finally be recovering from the Tippett era. At his best, Tippo was worth his paycheck. But we have to learn some lessons from this episode. The oft used phrase about not putting all your eggs in one basket applies here. Caution is advised about putting too much hope in a savior to take the club forward. We don't need to do this. Especially this year.

While I agree with your logic there, Ludwig, it was reported that Essendon tried to negotiate with Daniher to extend his contract earlier this season but he suddenly backed out in the latter part of the season. This was when they started to be concerned that something else was afoot. A copy of the said report is attached for your interest. Taken from The Age last Sunday. If this report is true then we cannot definitively say that the Bombers were so worried about his body that they would not offer a new contract.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Ludwig]

The Ed Langdon deal to Melbourne looks to net out at a trade for a pick in the low 20s. I think Langdon's value is a bit higher than Jones', so this trade may push Jones' value into the mid 20s if comparisons are valid.


Dedoro was recently asked if a new contract was presented to JD's management and he said no.