2020 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Odysseus]

Shades of no.

Thanks, Annie. I asked because something has been said about player movements that could result in our first round pick being pushed down the order.

[Markwebbos]

Not opposed to trading in a key forward but would prefer someone younger such as Marshall from Port. From our current list McCartin and Blakey could be our key forwards for the next 10 years, granted the coaches might not see them in those positions

Sent from my vivo 1902 using Tapatalk

Don't think either Blakey or Mccartin are going to become KPFs though. We'd have to trade for someone or wait a while for a draftee to develop.

[AB Swannie]

Ludwig, I guess where I'm coming from is that to get everything we need done, we will need to give up something.

Realistically, we only have enough currency in draft picks to use 3 and match for Campbell and Gulden (with likely deficit in 2021). If we want anyone else outside of this, it's either a free agent or trade. If we can use pick 3 on a tall, still leaves us needing to manufacture a trade to get a ruckman. To get a deal done on a promising ruckman, it's likely to be a second rounder or a player.

How would you engineer a trade for a ruckman if we don't trade one of our players? Future pick?

I detailed this previously, a future 2nd is our best bet so that our points deficit is used against 3rd/4th picks in 2021. It is highly possible that we can draft Thilthorpe, Campbell, and Gulden while also trading in a ruck without trading any current best 22 players.

[rb4x]

I have little interest in trading and its rumours, as I've never had the time to understand any of it, other than what I learn from RWO. You may be able to comment as to whether adelaide-players-under-investigation-for-possession-of-illicit-substance has relevance to us, if it's verified.

I would think that it now less likely that Brad Crouch will be offered the dollars that would give the Crows pick 2 as compensation.

[Markwebbos]

I would think that it now less likely that Brad Crouch will be offered the dollars that would give the Crows pick 2 as compensation.

Maybe we can offer him the "Michael Talia" spot on our list?

[snajik]

Could this explain Adelaide's remarkable late season surge?

[Ludwig]

Ludwig, I guess where I'm coming from is that to get everything we need done, we will need to give up something.

Realistically, we only have enough currency in draft picks to use 3 and match for Campbell and Gulden (with likely deficit in 2021). If we want anyone else outside of this, it's either a free agent or trade. If we can use pick 3 on a tall, still leaves us needing to manufacture a trade to get a ruckman. To get a deal done on a promising ruckman, it's likely to be a second rounder or a player.

How would you engineer a trade for a ruckman if we don't trade one of our players? Future pick?

It was the players you chose, Florent, Hayward and Hewett, which I thought was unrealistic. We know these three are among the least likely to be on the trading table.

A ruckman is likely to cost a 2nd or 3rd round pick, probably from next year's draft. The main candidates would be Preuss, Wright, Coleman-Jones, Ladhams and Chol. I'm not sure what price tag PA would have on Ladhams. He might cost us a trade of our pick 3 since they would love to get a 1st round pick ahead of NGA draft pick Lachlan-Jones (around a pick 10). So a trade for Ladhams would likely involve giving up our pick 3 and getting a 2nd rounder back and maybe something else.

I've commented often that the Joe Daniher decision is the first piece in the puzzle that will have to be determined. If he does sign with the Swans, it's not worth arguing about his fitness. We just have to assume the medicos have sorted that out. Daniher obviates the need to try to get a KPF with pick 3, so I would be more inclined to trade it out with Ladhams being my prime target. We would get back enough points to cover the bids on both Campbell and Gulden.

Daniher, Ladhams, Campbell and Gulden, plus keeping our 2021 picks intact, seems a good outcome to me, and one that puts us in finals contention next year.

Daniher coming for nothing gives us an elite KPF and opens more options on the ruckman side of things. No Daniher will likely mean that we have to cut into our 2021 draft and make a couple of other moves as well, but not necessarily anything major.

That's about the best summary I can do at this point. I've been clear that I don't think we should use our pick 3 for anything other than McDonald or Thilthorpe, and there's a question about their availability at pick 3. Keeping pick 3, IMO would mean that we got Daniher and a ruckman other than Ladhams. We then take pick 3 to the draft and take the best available player, which puts Hollands into the mix. Whatever the damage to our 2021 draft, so be it. The 2020 haul would be so big that we can forgo 2021 as an important draft year.

[Odysseus]

I would think that it now less likely that Brad Crouch will be offered the dollars that would give the Crows pick 2 as compensation.

Thanks for that, rbx4. As I mentioned, I don't follow these things with understanding, but I did wonder if it may have ramifications in that sort of way. I gather from your comment that the compensation given to a club losing a player is commensurate with the amount of dollars a destination club is willing to offer - is that right?

[rb4x]

Thanks for that, rbx4. As I mentioned, I don't follow these things with understanding, but I did wonder if it may have ramifications in that sort of way. I gather from your comment that the compensation given to a club losing a player is commensurate with the amount of dollars a destination club is willing to offer - is that right?

Right on. The compensation for an RFA is directly related to the $ they are offered yet the AFL moves in mysterious ways and is not very transparent. Brad Crouch will now be less attractive to potential suitors.

[KSAS]

i heard Sam Edmund on SEN say Pruess has officially requested Melbourne FC he wants to leave for more senior opportunities. Sam thinks GWS is the best fit for him (not discounting us). Mumford announcing he'll go around another year (turning 35) where he'll be used as a backup ruckman and also performing off field development role.

[Markwebbos]

Right on. The compensation for an RFA is directly related to the $ they are offered yet the AFL moves in mysterious ways and is not very transparent. Brad Crouch will now be less attractive to potential suitors.

There is an element of sorcery about how the AFL determines condo picks (as they are now known).

[707]

A BIG thank you to Brad Crouch being caught by police at 5.15am in the city carrying illicit substance/s.

It was a longish shot that a club would offer the injury prone midfield accumulator enough $ and years to get him into Band 1 and therefore pick 2, after Mr.Plod nabbed him I'd say no way he gets enough for pick 2. Crows BF board fuming, they already had pick 2 spent!
Thanks Brad, we owe you :-)

Tyson Stengle also caught with with drugs Brad just six months after blowing .125 driving an unregistered car. Seems the four match club suspension has sorted his priorities - not! Must be exasperating for the AFC.

[Ralph Dawg]

It was the players you chose, Florent, Hayward and Hewett, which I thought was unrealistic. We know these three are among the least likely to be on the trading table.

A ruckman is likely to cost a 2nd or 3rd round pick, probably from next year's draft. The main candidates would be Preuss, Wright, Coleman-Jones, Ladhams and Chol. I'm not sure what price tag PA would have on Ladhams. He might cost us a trade of our pick 3 since they would love to get a 1st round pick ahead of NGA draft pick Lachlan-Jones (around a pick 10). So a trade for Ladhams would likely involve giving up our pick 3 and getting a 2nd rounder back and maybe something else.

I've commented often that the Joe Daniher decision is the first piece in the puzzle that will have to be determined. If he does sign with the Swans, it's not worth arguing about his fitness. We just have to assume the medicos have sorted that out. Daniher obviates the need to try to get a KPF with pick 3, so I would be more inclined to trade it out with Ladhams being my prime target. We would get back enough points to cover the bids on both Campbell and Gulden.

Daniher, Ladhams, Campbell and Gulden, plus keeping our 2021 picks intact, seems a good outcome to me, and one that puts us in finals contention next year.

Daniher coming for nothing gives us an elite KPF and opens more options on the ruckman side of things. No Daniher will likely mean that we have to cut into our 2021 draft and make a couple of other moves as well, but not necessarily anything major.

That's about the best summary I can do at this point. I've been clear that I don't think we should use our pick 3 for anything other than McDonald or Thilthorpe, and there's a question about their availability at pick 3. Keeping pick 3, IMO would mean that we got Daniher and a ruckman other than Ladhams. We then take pick 3 to the draft and take the best available player, which puts Hollands into the mix. Whatever the damage to our 2021 draft, so be it. The 2020 haul would be so big that we can forgo 2021 as an important draft year.

Just to further explain my thinking:

If the club decides they don't want to sacrifice the 2021 draft or future pick round 2/3 is not enough to get a deal done, yet we still need a ruckman (which I think we all agree on) then who can we give up who has value?

Looking at our list, I think one of our midfielders or small / medium forwards are the most logical given we're about to acquire 2 if not 3 highly talented ones. As I said before, can't possibly play them all. So of our existing ones who has currency and can also free up cap space?

It's just a thought but AFL is pretty cut throat these days and being a coach's favourite or having a freshly minted contract is no longer protection.

[Ludwig]

Just to further explain my thinking:

If the club decides they don't want to sacrifice the 2021 draft or future pick round 2/3 is not enough to get a deal done, yet we still need a ruckman (which I think we all agree on) then who can we give up who has value?

Looking at our list, I think one of our midfielders or small / medium forwards are the most logical given we're about to acquire 2 if not 3 highly talented ones. As I said before, can't possibly play them all. So of our existing ones who has currency and can also free up cap space?

It's just a thought but AFL is pretty cut throat these days and being a coach's favourite or having a freshly minted contract is no longer protection.

I understand your thinking on this. We both agree that we will have some good depth in the midfield once Campbell and Gulden come on board. We just have a different approach on how to deal with it. RWO is also split on their evaluations of Florent and Hayward, which will affect decisions on how best to build our midfield.

I'm looking at 2 key points:

1. With few retirements in the coming years, there's going to be some stiff competition for the few spots that open up in the midfield.
2. Now is the time to increase the age demographic on our list and build experience into the playing group. It doesn't pay to turnover the list by replacing players coming into their prime years with more teenagers.

After this year, we can ease up on the draft, give some time for our younger players to develop and get some AFL playing time. In a couple of years we will have a better idea about who we should keep and who should be let go.

From a list management perspective, if we can accomplish adding a key forward and a ruckman this year, we can go into a couple of years of consolidation in the next 2 draft periods. A lot of things can happen in this period, but I don't think going to the draft in a big way is one of them. I see this year as a completion of a 5 year heavy emphasis on the draft. The next couple of years should reveal the success or failure of this strategy and the specific choices that were made.

[Ralph Dawg]

I understand your thinking on this. We both agree that we will have some good depth in the midfield once Campbell and Gulden come on board. We just have a different approach on how to deal with it. RWO is also split on their evaluations of Florent and Hayward, which will affect decisions on how best to build our midfield.

I'm looking at 2 key points:

1. With few retirements in the coming years, there's going to be some stiff competition for the few spots that open up in the midfield.
2. Now is the time to increase the age demographic on our list and build experience into the playing group. It doesn't pay to turnover the list by replacing players coming into their prime years with more teenagers.

After this year, we can ease up on the draft, give some time for our younger players to develop and get some AFL playing time. In a couple of years we will have a better idea about who we should keep and who should be let go.

From a list management perspective, if we can accomplish adding a key forward and a ruckman this year, we can go into a couple of years of consolidation in the next 2 draft periods. A lot of things can happen in this period, but I don't think going to the draft in a big way is one of them. I see this year as a completion of a 5 year heavy emphasis on the draft. The next couple of years should reveal the success or failure of this strategy and the specific choices that were made.

That's all fair enough. I really hope the strategy being pursued by the club pays off in the next few years. It really sucks being at the bottom.