2021 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Ludwig]

I’ll make a case.

The Swans are more exposed to the go home factor than 15 other teams.

The Swans have also lost COLA so they are at risk of players going home to cheaper states, even when the same contract is on the table.

Every time that happens and we have to accept a substandard deal, we lose 10 or 15 picks in the draft. The difference between getting a pick 10 that is the best winger/KPD/whatever we want and a pick 25 that ‘might’ come off is significant, and will accumulate over time. We will be uncompetitive.

If other players - and I appreciate the argument may be save it for them - understands we’re prepared to pull the PSD trigger if necessary and they won’t automatically get to where they want, then it can be of benefit.

Otherwise we’re stuck in a doom loop of regression.

As I said, I don’t love it, but that’s an argument, it’s what the Swans management dread and I get it.

I think a better read on the situation is that you can play hardball with the Swans and then just pick up the player for nothing in the PSD. So the Swans will go from accepting unders to getting nothing.

[AppleCore]

And what would that point be?

- - - Updated - - -


Can you kindly identify what those losses are?

McDonald, Warner etc

[Ludwig]

Surely a first round pick swap is a good deal for Dawson. Stop posturing crows.
Throw in a few late round pick swaps too if it needs a tweek or two.

Sydney in: pick 4
Sydney out: pick 14 (?) + Dawson.

Freo's pick after bids will be 6, so the swap will be pick 6 for pick 14. That come out to a difference of 590 value points or a pick 32. Are you happy with that?

[Ludwig]

McDonald, Warner etc

Are they being traded as well? I hadn't heard about that.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean. Can we stop the loss of McDonald and Warner by sending Dawson to Adelaide through the PSD, or by not sending Dawson to Adelaide through the PSD?

[Southern Swan15]

How we feel right now, Adelaide have felt for a decade. It sucks, but it's not the first time this has played out like this.

Not sure how ADL have felt this. ADL exodus is due to ADL and ADL's poor mangement alone.

Sent from my SM-A715F using Tapatalk

[AB Swannie]

Surely a first round pick swap is a good deal for Dawson. Stop posturing crows.
Throw in a few late round pick swaps too if it needs a tweek or two.

Sydney in: pick 4
Sydney out: pick 14 (?) + Dawson.

I've never been a fan of this offer which would in effect be something like Dawson & Van Rooyen for Gibcus. If we can get Melb's future 1st and a sweetener (swap of 2nds???), I think we take that and move on.

[barry]

Freo's pick after bids will be 6, so the swap will be pick 6 for pick 14. That come out to a difference of 590 value points or a pick 32. Are you happy with that?

We are getting bent over, so getting a top 4 pick, is a good outcome.
I'd rather that, than next year's first rounder.

[Markwebbos]

And what would that point be?

If JD goes into the PSD and he doesn't make it to the Crows, it will mean we lose him for nothing, but I genuinely believe teams and players won't try the tactic again. We lose that battle but win the war.

[Roadrunner]

If JD goes into the PSD and he doesn't make it to the Crows, it will mean we lose him for nothing, but I genuinely believe teams and players won't try the tactic again. We lose that battle but win the war.

KB and team won’t do that- have they ever done it before? It is just a card to play and not a very strong one at that and everyone knows it. We will get the best deal we can for Jordan, learn our lesson and move on.

[MattW]

As I see it, there are three possible explanations for the Swans 'more than toying with the idea of letting Dawson go for nothing'.

1. As I understand Ludwig's point: it's to create possible circumstances in which Dawson re-signs for two years (to avoid being let go for no return, which he apparently doesn't want).

2. To pressure Adelaide to deal because another team could pick him up.

3. To make some point of principle to show players they are willing to expose them to the risk (even if it doesn't eventuate).

Option 1 has a lot of risk if you don't think another team will/could pick him up and you don't care about the point of principle, but has best possible return if your priority is him staying. And like Ludwig intimated, perhaps they have some insight in this following John's conversation with him.

I tend to favour 2. Just like it's tampering for us to arrange something with North, it's presumably also not permitted for Adelaide to contact North to establish North's position. The thinking is that the risk of not getting him, however small the likelihood, is enough to push them to deal. The situation is different to Hately last year, when Adelaide had pick 1 and were guaranteed to pick him up. (If I was North, I would very seriously consider it. He's a guaranteed significant improvement to your team.)

[Bangalore Swans]

KB and team won’t do that- have they ever done it before? It is just a card to play and not a very strong one at that and everyone knows it. We will get the best deal we can for Jordan, learn our lesson and move on.

Don’t you want this thread to go on and on until the 26th of November when they hold the pre-season draft? We can debate Dawson for another 5 weeks. We can speculate if he’s staying, going or whether he gets to North or the crows.

[Roadrunner]

As I see it, there are three possible explanations for the Swans 'more than toying with the idea of letting Dawson go for nothing'.

1. As I understand Ludwig's point: it's to create possible circumstances in which Dawson re-signs for two years (to avoid being let go for no return, which he apparently doesn't want).

2. To pressure Adelaide to deal because another team could pick him up.

3. To make some point of principle to show players they are willing to expose them to the risk (even if it doesn't eventuate).

Option 1 has a lot of risk if you don't think another team will/could pick him up and you don't care about the point of principle, but has best possible return if your priority is him staying. And like Ludwig intimated, perhaps they have some insight in this following John's conversation with him.

I tend to favour 2. Just like it's tampering for us to arrange something with North, it's presumably also not permitted for Adelaide to contact North to establish North's position. The thinking is that the risk of not getting him, however small the likelihood, is enough to push them to deal. The situation is different to Hately last year, when Adelaide had pick 1 and were guaranteed to pick him up. (If I was North, I would very seriously consider it. He's a guaranteed significant improvement to your team.)

Good points MattW. Personally I don’t think the PSD threat is strong, but hope I’m wrong and it forces either the Crows to up their offer or for Jordan to reconsider. Maybe we will be kept in suspenders as it could go right down to the wire but I’m hoping it will be done tomorrow!

[AB Swannie]

Good points MattW. Personally I don’t think the PSD threat is strong, but hope I’m wrong and it forces either the Crows to up their offer or for Jordan to reconsider. Maybe we will be kept in suspenders as it could go right down to the wire but I’m hoping it will be done tomorrow!

I don’t know about wearing suspenders but if I was a betting man, I’d be gambling that the deal will be done late Wednesday.

[Ludwig]

If JD goes into the PSD and he doesn't make it to the Crows, it will mean we lose him for nothing, but I genuinely believe teams and players won't try the tactic again. We lose that battle but win the war.

Firstly, it's been reasonably well established that the chances of Adelaide not getting Dawson in the PSD are minuscule. So the probability is that it will show that letting a player go to the PSD is a very bad strategy. Hately and Martin going through the PSD to their clubs of choice hasn't discouraged anyone, and only reinforces the notion that a successful recruitment using the PSD is a good strategy and likely to be used more often. If Dawson goes through the PSD to Adelaide it will be yet another example of this and encourage more of the same.

To build a long term strategy on the very small hope that North, who are the only team ahead of Adelaide with cash, would undercut Adelaide in the PSD is a very high risk for a dubious reward. It's always been possible for some team to step in front of the team wanting the player in the PSD, but history shows this almost never happens.

There's a much higher probability that Bangalore Swans will post that everyone should watch the college football games between Alabama v. Texas A&M and Oklahoma v. Texas, than it is that North would step in and swoop on Dawson before Adelaide. Those were 2 great football games btw.

[rb4x]

Why wouldn't North take Dawson in the PSD. They have the cash and it would make them a very competitive team. Do not see Dawson wanting to do a McCarthy and going without a very big pay day. I hope the Swans show some backbone and not accept a nothing trade.