2020 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Nico]

If we fall for Daniher then I'll cut up my season's ticket. Of course back in the day when they were cardboard, you tore them up. But I'll keep the barcode in case I change my mind.

[707]

Findlayson's gone. Just signed for 3 years at GWS.
Giants have read the riot act to departing players. Looks like they might be gaining a spine.

Odd re-signing at this point in time, wonder if Jeremy Cameron is on the move?

[Nico]

Odd re-signing at this point in time, wonder if Jeremy Cameron is on the move?

Didn't he re-sign recently, before he lost form. Coniglio did the same.

[Melbourne_Blood]

Agree 100%. He comes to us on our terms, nothing more. I still think we would be better served by getting a tall forward who is durable (ie play a whole season) and can play for the team. Lions show you don't need a dominant tall forward to kick goals and I'm confident Paps, Heeney, Parker, Hayward, Squiz and Wicks can kick plenty if given the opportunity (along with a fit Buddy of course).

I’m not sure the lions are the best example of kicking goals. Kicking Points they are good at.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Thunder Shaker]

For every pick you have, you have to have a corresponding vacancy on your list. So if we're going to use say 5-6 later picks to pay for Campbell and Gulden, we have to have that many vacant list positions as well as the two for them.

Once you've used all these picks to pay the matching points, where do you get the players to fill those vacancies?

Clubs have gone to the draft in previous years holding a lot of picks that they don't intend to use. I remember GWS going to a previous draft holding a boatload of later picks, and spent them on matching bids on Academy players. Have the rules changed?

I think we go best available with pick 4, match Campbell and Gulden and walk away satisfied with three what should be very good best 22 players in one draft.

I would be satisfied with this, though "best available" should be qualified to mean "best available that fills a current need". In our case this year, that would be tall KP-type players or rucks. It also depends on who we've recruited via trades so it's speculative.

[Markwebbos]

Didn't he re-sign recently, before he lost form. Coniglio did the same.

Leon Cameron too! Seems to be a Giants thing.

[Colin Hounsell]

I agree this is a good strategy. In reality, our pick 4 is actually pick once the bulldogs take Jamarra. Then even lower once GWS or others get compo picks ending up pretty close to when clubs may pick Campbell.

Not sure why port or tigers would trade though. I don’t remember what peter is like.

- - - Updated - - -

I mean. What Ludwig said is good thinking

[Ludwig]

What Ludwig said is good thinking

Post of the Year!

[AB Swannie]

For every pick you have, you have to have a corresponding vacancy on your list. So if we're going to use say 5-6 later picks to pay for Campbell and Gulden, we have to have that many vacant list positions.

Once you've used all these picks to pay the matching points, where do you get the players to fill those vacancies?

I think we go best available with pick 4, match Campbell and Gulden and walk away satisfied with three that should be very good best 22 players in one draft.

100% agree with this.

[Melbourne_Blood]

I think we should take all our picks in the draft, pick the best mid with our first, or the best KP. Either or is good. In terms of trade a solid ruck will do ( Preuss et.al) and an underrated Big mid ( Sier or other options). Joey to transition to a big half forward with stints in the middle. He’s one of our best kicks inside F50, can mark it, can kick a goal.

Future picks used for trades. We’ve drafted well, we get a good draft again. Trade away next years picks and try to jump back in the 8 next year. I don’t think that will hurt us much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Auntie.Gerald]

"It may sound impossible at first, but the more you think about it, the more you come up with ways that it can be done. Just start chipping away at it, and with enough time and patience you’ll see that it becomes manageable."

maybe Dr Suess can work his magic

[707]

Clubs have gone to the draft in previous years holding a lot of picks that they don't intend to use. I remember GWS going to a previous draft holding a boatload of later picks, and spent them on matching bids on Academy players. Have the rules changed?

That very draft you mention where GWS used a stack of picks in the 50s and 60s to match for a first rounder caused the "never think things through properly" AFL to introduce a rule to prevent this. Clubs now must have a vacant place on their list for very live pick they take to the draft.

If we pick up late picks to use for matching then a main list player has to be delisted/traded out/retire to make that pick live and usable.

[Ludwig]

That very draft you mention where GWS used a stack of picks in the 50s and 60s to match for a first rounder caused the "never think things through properly" AFL to introduce a rule to prevent this. Clubs now must have a vacant place on their list for very live pick they take to the draft.

If we pick up late picks to use for matching then a main list player has to be delisted/traded out/retire to make that pick live and usable.

It appears that this is the rule, but I've seen a slew of late picks used in recent drafts. I'm not sure of the details, but it seems that clubs can get around this somehow, or the rule is not applied in the way we think it's applied. Collingwood traded down to a bunch of low draft picks to match a bid at pick 13 for Isaac Quaynor a couple of years back. We've done it too. Maybe you can trade down on draft night.

[Markwebbos]

I think with live trading as long as you can find a trading partner to swap picks, there’s a get out of sorts.

[707]

It appears that this is the rule, but I've seen a slew of late picks used in recent drafts. I'm not sure of the details, but it seems that clubs can get around this somehow, or the rule is not applied in the way we think it's applied. Collingwood traded down to a bunch of low draft picks to match a bid at pick 13 for Isaac Quaynor a couple of years back. We've done it too. Maybe you can trade down on draft night.

The new "GWS" rule is not stopping you using multiple low picks for the points but each one of them has to have a vacant list spot BEFORE the final draft order is set in the preceding days. That's why some clubs only have two or three picks and other clubs have six or seven, the new 2020 picks are created by giving clubs a pick for each vacancy below the 40 maximum

On the night/day, you can't trade for picks that would give you more than 40 places on your list but you can end the ND without your minimum 38 senior spots filled, you just need a plan to fill them after the ND which would be with recycled players of some sort, like Joe Daniher through the PSD or Billy Spud delisted by Norf etc.

You can't go to the draft with say 35 senior listed players and 5 live picks but then trade one of those picks for three late picks as you would be over the 40 maximum limit, There is no "getting around" it, the rules are black and white. On the night if you pick up a late pick that would give you more than 40 players and picks, it will get extinguished before you can use it.

I doubt we'll be doing anything with picks unless Campbell gets bid on before our pick 4 in which case we would already have a pick swap worked out and planned for numbers wise.

Our plan would be use pick 4 on a player, match Campbell and Gulden using this years picks, taking a points hit in 2021 if we don't have enough points this year. If Gulden is bid on in the second round, the deficit comes off our second rounder next year. Or we could trade our third next year for a third this year to cover the deficit if we've made list space.