2020 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[i'm-uninformed2]

There a lot of people rating Campbell 3-5. I wouldn’t give up 3 for anything bar an elite, elite player

[Ludwig]

Pick 3 should get us either Thilthorpe or Hollands. Beyond that, the open draft doesn't look that interesting for the Swans. Getting picks 5 and 24 for pick 3 solves the points deficit problem, in that adding pick 24 should suffice to cover Campbell and Gulden. But we would have to trade pick 5 for a player and perhaps future picks. I wouldn't be taking pick 5 into the draft.

BTW, I think someone posted that Gulden was now listed at 176 cm. That's taller than Dion Prestia and Dane Zorko.

[Thunder Shaker]

interesting TS

if the hawks bid on campbell at pick4 that might hurt in that we miss out on a pick3 before Campbell?

Suppose Hawthorn had pick 4, we had pick 5 and they bid on Campbell. We would use up our first round pick, which would slide down the draft to pick 52 (250.8 points being replaced by a pick worth 246 points).

However, in practice it won't play out like that due to the Bulldogs getting JUH before then. In that scenario, Hawthorn would have pick 5 and we would have pick 6. In that scenario, we would also end up with pick 52 (248.6 points).

A third scenario ... we keep our pick before Hawthorn but again they bid on Campbell. That would make the rest of our draft harder because that would wipe out a lot of our remaining draft points.

Clubs can be annoying at the draft. Last year, Carlton bid on Liam Henry (Fremantle) with pick 9, then Tom Green (GWS) at pick 10, then immediately traded down the draft ... oh, and did the AFL put in any rules to stop these shenanigans? No. Was Carlton penalised? No. The AFL should have put in place rules that ensured that once a club has used their bid, they should not be allowed to trade it in live pick trading if that bid is matched.

[The Big Cat]

There a lot of people rating Campbell 3-5.

Who's rating that high? Pick 3 would put him above any three of the following: the kid going to Footscray, the two key forwards, the much touted defender and the midfielder who did his ACL and was regarded as a top two pick before his injury. Every phantom draft from followers of potential draftees have him at 6 or later. Also in our favour is that often other clubs don't bid on players they know they won't get until the situation becomes too embarrassing to ignore. Remember, Blakey fell through to 10 and Green from GWS went later than anticipated last year. The exception was when Paul Roos made us cough up 2 for Mills (coached him at the academy of course.)

[Ludwig]

Last year, Carlton bid on Liam Henry (Fremantle) with pick 9, then Tom Green (GWS) at pick 10, then immediately traded down the draft ... oh, and did the AFL put in any rules to stop these shenanigans? No. Was Carlton penalised? No. The AFL should have put in place rules that ensured that once a club has used their bid, they should not be allowed to trade it in live pick trading if that bid is matched.

I don't see anything wrong with what Carlton did. They bid on 2 players they valued at that point in the draft, then having not been able to secure them, went on to trade out of that portion of the draft. Sounds logical to me.

[wolftone57]

Nobody is going to bid on Campbell at 3,4,5. He might be top 10 but the bidding process does not allow for stupidity anymore. If a player is bid on under his worth then the rules might just be changed. Roos bidding on Mills at 2 was @@@@ing stupid in my opinion. There was no way the Swans were not going to match the bid. If a club will match your bid why @@@@ing bother.

Sent from my JAT-L29 using Tapatalk

[Auntie.Gerald]

Do we have any players in the same situation?

I wonder if we are looking this opportunity also?

_____

North Melbourne is set to sign young Western Bulldogs defender Lachie Young under an obscure rule regarding rookie contracts, reports AFL Media.

Young was offered a deal to stay on the Dogs’ rookie list for a third season, but instead will walk for free to the Kangaroos.

If a player is offered a third year as a rookie, they are allowed to reject the contract and instead become an unrestricted free agent - which is otherwise not possible for a 21-year-old like Young.

Therefore North Melbourne will sign the backman without having to make a trade, and the Bulldogs won’t receive anything in compensation.

[dejavoodoo44]

Have collated the attendees from the photos:

Charlie Byrne
Pierce Roseby
Joshua Green
Samuel Frost
Jack Driscoll
Lachlan McAndrew
Godfrey Okerenyang
Marc Sheather
Harry Grant
Sam Thorne
Nick Brewer
Reed Van Huisstede
Errol Gulden
Kye Pfrengle
Marco Rossman
Braeden Campbell

Ta. Of those, the players from our academy are: Roseby, McAndrew, Sheather, Thorne, Brewer, Van Huisstede, Gulden, Pfrengle, Rossman and Campbell.
Although he's not named, I think Sam Gaden is also there. In picture 48, it looks like him standing in the middle, with his arms folded across his number. Actually, that photo gives a pretty good idea of how big McAndrew is. Both Gaden and Van Huisstede (122) are listed as 195cm; although Gaden looks a touch taller. McAndrew towers over both of them.

While I haven't seen much of McAndrew he did look dominant in the ruck and actually had a bit of pace. Wouldn't mind seeing him getting a rookie list spot as a project ruckman.

[gloveski]

Suns are supposedly only looking to use one pick . Potentially we could trade our pick 3 for the Suns pick 5 and 24 . Especially if the player we want at pick 3 is gone . Potentially would give us the points needed to match any bids on Campbell and Gulden . Live trading of picks might happen in this case


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Captain]

Clubs can be annoying at the draft. Last year, Carlton bid on Liam Henry (Fremantle) with pick 9, then Tom Green (GWS) at pick 10, then immediately traded down the draft ... oh, and did the AFL put in any rules to stop these shenanigans? No. Was Carlton penalised? No. The AFL should have put in place rules that ensured that once a club has used their bid, they should not be allowed to trade it in live pick trading if that bid is matched.

I think what Carlton did was fine. They clearly wanted Henry and Green, then when they couldn't get them, they moved back in the draft.

[Cosmic Wizard]

interesting TS

if the hawks bid on campbell at pick4 that might hurt in that we miss out on a pick3 before Campbell?

Why would we miss out on pick 3??

Our pick 3 is before hawthorn pick 4.

We pick the best player and then wait for a bid on Campbell.

This could occur way down the draft so no need to worry.

[Scottee]

Ta. Of those, the players from our academy are: Roseby, McAndrew, Sheather, Thorne, Brewer, Van Huisstede, Gulden, Pfrengle, Rossman and Campbell.
Although he's not named, I think Sam Gaden is also there. In picture 48, it looks like him standing in the middle, with his arms folded across his number. Actually, that photo gives a pretty good idea of how big McAndrew is. Both Gaden and Van Huisstede (122) are listed as 195cm; although Gaden looks a touch taller. McAndrew towers over both of them.

While I haven't seen much of McAndrew he did look dominant in the ruck and actually had a bit of pace. Wouldn't mind seeing him getting a rookie list spot as a project ruckman.

I read somewhere recently McAndrew is around the 205cm mark.

[AB Swannie]

I don't agree with moving pick 3 back to pick 5. However, it does have some benefit IF the following conditions are met:

1. We are sure that Campbell will be bid on after this point.

2. The player we rate is likely to still be available at pick 5 (eg Denver Grainger-Barrass).

I hate Hawthorn as much as anyone but there is no evidence that we have a poor working relationship with them to an extent that they would bid on Campbell out of spite. The last trade with them, for example, was completed quickly between the two teams. The only reason they would bid on Campbell at their pick would be if they rated him at that point.

For me, there are six clear players rated at the top of the draft (Ugle-Hagen, McDonald, Thilthorpe, Hollands, Phillips, Grainger-Barrass). If we stay at 3, we will have the choice of three of those. If we drop to 5, we take whatever is left. My preference is to stay at 3.

[Scottee]

Ta. Of those, the players from our academy are: Roseby, McAndrew, Sheather, Thorne, Brewer, Van Huisstede, Gulden, Pfrengle, Rossman and Campbell.
Although he's not named, I think Sam Gaden is also there. In picture 48, it looks like him standing in the middle, with his arms folded across his number. Actually, that photo gives a pretty good idea of how big McAndrew is. Both Gaden and Van Huisstede (122) are listed as 195cm; although Gaden looks a touch taller. McAndrew towers over both of them.

While I haven't seen much of McAndrew he did look dominant in the ruck and actually had a bit of pace. Wouldn't mind seeing him getting a rookie list spot as a project ruckman.

Good pickup re Gaden. Definitely him. Puzzling that he was not included in the featured photos.

[Markwebbos]

I don't agree with moving pick 3 back to pick 5. However, it does have some benefit IF the following conditions are met:

1. We are sure that Campbell will be bid on after this point.

2. The player we rate is likely to still be available at pick 5 (eg Denver Grainger-Barrass).

I hate Hawthorn as much as anyone but there is no evidence that we have a poor working relationship with them to an extent that they would bid on Campbell out of spite. The last trade with them, for example, was completed quickly between the two teams. The only reason they would bid on Campbell at their pick would be if they rated him at that point.

For me, there are six clear players rated at the top of the draft (Ugle-Hagen, McDonald, Thilthorpe, Hollands, Phillips, Grainger-Barrass). If we stay at 3, we will have the choice of three of those. If we drop to 5, we take whatever is left. My preference is to stay at 3.

I agree. How would we know when a bid is going to come?