2019 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Markwebbos]

Are we really that slow ? And just wondered how much value we should place on the opinion of some one who coached us to 18 straight losses before we sacked him and had a total winning percentage of around 12%. Yes I know we didn’t have a great list at the time but even the Suns boast an overall winning percentage of twice that

He's commenting as a list manager rather than a coach. In this case I think he's probably right. We need explosive players...
Which has got me leaning back toward Serong

[dejavoodoo44]

From those that have watched him - is he really that good - like best three players in the country good.

I haven't seen a huge amount of him, but the one full game that I saw, was the Allies v Vic Metro match. If I remember rightly, he was voted BOG, against a midfield that included Rowell and Anderson. So, on that, he's definitely should be considered at the pointy end of the draft. The one disclaimer that I'd throw in, is that he seems to already have a mature body, so he may have less improvement in him, than others who have more filling out to do.

- - - Updated - - -

He's commenting as a list manager rather than a coach. In this case I think he's probably right. We need explosive players...
Which has got me leaning back toward Serong

Yes, Serong is still my first preference.

[barry]

Barry could you pls explain your thinking behind point 2?

Just my opinion. This year's draft was standout top 2, then next dozen or so quite similar.
Green could be 3 or 13. I suspect 5

[Markwebbos]

This from the Hun. I think Sam L could be accurate

Category: | Herald Sun

“The Demons are unlikely to bid on GWS academy star Tom Green before drafting Jackson, because the Giants would pounce on Jackson at No. 4 instead of matching the bid.“

“The Giants are poised to choose between halfbacks Hayden Young and Lachie Ash at pick No.4.”

“Sydney is desperate to bolster its onball brigade and is eyeing dynamic Sam Flanders as it plans for life after Josh Kennedy. The Swans will bid their No. 5 selection on Green and, when the Giants match that bid, are then expected to welcome Flanders at No.6.”

[Mark26]

They would be crazy to for 2 reasons:
1) green is not the sort of player they are after
2) green is not a pick 3 talent.
3) not a good idea to piss GWS off, as they will have a lot of guns that are poachable over the next 5 years, and you don't want to end up on their no-trade blacklist. (Eg. Hawthorn are NOT on this blacklist).

Ok, that's 3.

So Baz, do you think we're in their good books? We have not pinched any of their top talent since their inception. Swans' players have gone the other way though. If it's in our power to thwart them, and we are happy with the consequences i.e. landing Green, then I'm all for it. By the way, I'm glad they got spanked in the GF.

[barry]

So Baz, do you think we're in their good books? We have not pinched any of their top talent since their inception. Swans' players have gone the other way though. If it's in our power to thwart them, and we are happy with the consequences i.e. landing Green, then I'm all for it. By the way, I'm glad they got spanked in the GF.

There has been an unusually low amount of player transfer between us and the giants over the years which is odd.
Since, in general, the giants lose players, this situation is to our disadvantage. I hope we aren't being petty about this.

- - - Updated - - -

This from the Hun. I think Sam L could be accurate

Category: | Herald Sun

“The Demons are unlikely to bid on GWS academy star Tom Green before drafting Jackson, because the Giants would pounce on Jackson at No. 4 instead of matching the bid.“

“The Giants are poised to choose between halfbacks Hayden Young and Lachie Ash at pick No.4.”

“Sydney is desperate to bolster its onball brigade and is eyeing dynamic Sam Flanders as it plans for life after Josh Kennedy. The Swans will bid their No. 5 selection on Green and, when the Giants match that bid, are then expected to welcome Flanders at No.6.”

This is 99% what is going to happen.
Smart play by GWS, Adelaide and [whovever did the first trade with GWS].

I can't wait for the AFL retributions.

[Ludwig]

There has been an unusually low amount of player transfer between us and the giants over the years which is odd.
Since, in general, the giants lose players, this situation is to our disadvantage. I hope we aren't being petty about this.

- - - Updated - - -



This is 99% what is going to happen.
Smart play by GWS, Adelaide and [whovever did the first trade with GWS].

I can't wait for the AFL retributions.

Retributions against whom? And for what?

The Giants effectively wiped out their entire 2020 draft for either Young or Ash. Is this really worth it?

They're sitting with pick 4 hoping Melbourne don't bid on Green, else everything is lost, and probably don't get the player they really want -Jackson. They got themselves into a position where they will either be small losers or big losers, depending on the whim of the Demons. Great risk management.

It will be interesting to review the totality of the GWS gains and losses for this trade and draft period. When you put the lists side by side, it will be shocking.

Just like with the Saints trade period, when I said they were the big losers when all the journos where calling them big winners, only to start changing their minds when going deeper into what they really paid for the quality of players they received.

[Markwebbos]

The Giants effectively wiped out their entire 2020 draft for either Young or Ash. Is this really worth it?

They're sitting with pick 4 hoping Melbourne don't bid on Green, else everything is lost, and probably don't get the player they really want -Jackson. They got themselves into a position where they will either be small losers or big losers, depending on the whim of the Demons. Great risk management.

Beethoven, you may be right that they did it all for Jackson and are going to miss out on their main target.

It hasn't "effectively wiped out their entire 2020 draft for either Young or Ash." They gave up picks 12 and 18 this year and their first round next year to get up to pick 4, but it will potentially deliver then two top 5 draft picks this year in an allegedly stronger draft than 2020.

If we could turn picks 12, 18 and next years first into picks 4 (and match a bid on pick 5) this year, you know we'd do that deal!

[Ludwig]

Beethoven, you may be right that they did it all for Jackson and are going to miss out on their main target.

It hasn't "effectively wiped out their entire 2020 draft for either Young or Ash." They gave up picks 12 and 18 this year and their first round next year to get up to pick 4, but it will potentially deliver then two top 5 draft picks this year in an allegedly stronger draft than 2020.

If we could turn picks 12, 18 and next years first into picks 4 (and match a bid on pick 5) this year, you know we'd do that deal!

There were other losses, including having to go into a deficit to get Green as they only have around 700 points remaining in this year's draft. That will effectively wipe out next year's second rounder. They also effectively gave up a pick in the 30s this year by losing the leftover points they would have had by using picks 12 and 18 to match the bid for Green. And if they had traded down with those picks, instead of up, they might have moved into a pick in the 20s.

You have to look at the totality of the trades and what could have gone down. They were always going to get Green, so all trading has only been for whoever the get at pick 4. I figure they will get a run and carry player like Lachie Ash, which is all well and good, but giving up a similar player like Jeremy Sharp, who Cal Twomey rates at pick 27, plus their 1st 2 draft picks from 2020.

Let's not forget that the Giants received 2020 3rd and 4th round picks for 2 players they previously drafted with picks 1 and 10. They also lost former 1st round pick Adam Thomlinson.

I figure the totality of what they will do this year will get them Tom Green, their pick 4 and a few 3rd and 4th rounders for next year in exchange for, wait for this ................ 6 past, present and future 1st round draft picks and a 2nd and 3rd rounder in this draft. You don't have to be a mathematician to work this one out.

And should it so happen that Melbourne bids on Green and the Giants don't match, allowing them to pick Luke Jackson, then Jackson will become by far the most expensive player ever, priced out at around 6 1st round draft picks. Could you imagine Kinnear Beatson doing this?

[dejavoodoo44]

There were other losses, including having to go into a deficit to get Green as they only have around 700 points remaining in this year's draft. That will effectively wipe out next year's second rounder. They also effectively gave up a pick in the 30s this year by losing the leftover points they would have had by using picks 12 and 18 to match the bid for Green. And if they had traded down with those picks, instead of up, they might have moved into a pick in the 20s.

You have to look at the totality of the trades and what could have gone down. They were always going to get Green, so all trading has only been for whoever the get at pick 4. I figure they will get a run and carry player like Lachie Ash, which is all well and good, but giving up a similar player like Jeremy Sharp, who Cal Twomey rates at pick 27, plus their 1st 2 draft picks from 2020.

Let's not forget that the Giants received 2020 3rd and 4th round picks for 2 players they previously drafted with picks 1 and 10. They also lost former 1st round pick Adam Thomlinson.

I figure the totality of what they will do this year will get them Tom Green, their pick 4 and a few 3rd and 4th rounders for next year in exchange for, wait for this ................ 6 past, present and future 1st round draft picks and a 2nd and 3rd rounder in this draft. You don't have to be a mathematician to work this one out.

And should it so happen that Melbourne bids on Green and the Giants don't match, allowing them to pick Luke Jackson, then Jackson will become by far the most expensive player ever, priced out at around 6 1st round draft picks. Could you imagine Kinnear Beatson doing this?

And since Jackson is a ruckman, he then has the potential to spend large chunks of his career in rehab.

[barry]

If we could turn picks 12, 18 and next years first into picks 4 (and match a bid on pick 5) this year, you know we'd do that deal!

Next year's first rounder is probably going to be around pick 17, so it's
Pick 12,17 and 18 for picks 4 and 5.
Great deal.

[707]

Next year's first rounder is probably going to be around pick 17, so it's
Pick 12,17 and 18 for picks 4 and 5.
Great deal.

Plus the points deficit to pay for Green.

There will be a fire sale at GWS next year

[liz]

Next year's first rounder is probably going to be around pick 17, so it's
Pick 12,17 and 18 for picks 4 and 5.
Great deal.

Except it's not. They don't have pick 5. They have the right to match a player who may be bid on at pick 5. That right is due to the academy, not anything they've traded for. They still have to cough up the points to match the bid, wherever it comes, and that will likely wipe out all their picks with points attached this year, together with their 2nd and 3rd round picks next year. If they lose a player of quality next year, via trade or FA, it will eat up what they get in return for that player (but maybe leave their later picks next year in tact).

That doesn't make it a bad deal necessarily. But it's inaccurate to suggest they traded picks 12, 17 and 18 (and pick 59) for picks 4 and 5.

[Markwebbos]

I hadn't allowed for the fact they won't have the points to match a bid on Green at 5 (assuming they pick up a player at 4) so will go into deficit in 2020.

[Ralph Dawg]

Except it's not. They don't have pick 5. They have the right to match a player who may be bid on at pick 5. That right is due to the academy, not anything they've traded for. They still have to cough up the points to match the bid, wherever it comes, and that will likely wipe out all their picks with points attached this year, together with their 2nd and 3rd round picks next year. If they lose a player of quality next year, via trade or FA, it will eat up what they get in return for that player (but maybe leave their later picks next year in tact).

That doesn't make it a bad deal necessarily. But it's inaccurate to suggest they traded picks 12, 17 and 18 (and pick 59) for picks 4 and 5.

I don't mind what GWS has done. Clearly it's a targeted strategy where they feel they can really improve their list with this year's draft as opposed to next year.

As I mentioned previously, we can potentially benefit from GWS being strong. They can't squeeze all their talent into 22 and we really should position ourselves to pick up one of their promising young midfielders (Hately or Caldwell in particular) if possible.