2022 List management, trading, drafting

[barry]

Rucks!. Last year after Melbourne won the flag, big lumbering ruckman were all the rage.
One year later, Geelong won the flag with no ruckman, therefore ruckmen are bad.

[Aprilbr]

It’s all a bit boring isn’t it? 3 gun kids in the draft seems the right approach for this year.

Boring but probably the correct thing to do, SCG. Of course, if an opportunity arises in the remaining trade period to bring in someone who will be a starter and fill an important gap then, subject to salary, this may be worth pursuing. Plenty of others scrambling - no need to panic - and we need to carefully manage our Cap.

[Smith]

Looks like Geelong might end up with pick 7 from Suns and 25 from Brisbane. If 25 isn’t deemed enough for them to pass on for Henry, would you trade 14 and 17 for 7 and 25? We move up, and still have 2 picks in top 25 and Geelong can take use 17 for Henry and keep 14.

[Auntie.Gerald]

I'm guessing it depends a little on who we are keen on and where they think they will fall in the draft

[Ludwig]

Geelong are probably expecting to get Henry for pick 25 and perhaps 58. Collingwood may be able to use their several picks in the 50s to trade with Brisbane to get a pick in he 30s.

Moving up from pick 14 to 7 probably brings Matt Jefferson into play, if we do in fact want a KPP with our 1st pick. I'm not sure if that's enough for us to do that deal, and Geelong are probably inclined to keep pick 7.

I think 14 + 17 is a good place for us in the draft. Maybe something like 12 + 20 would be slightly better, but probably won't make a big difference. Cadman will go early and most of other top players are midfielders, which we really don't need.

[liz]

Moving up from pick 14 to 7 probably brings Matt Jefferson into play, if we do in fact want a KPP with our 1st pick. I'm not sure if that's enough for us to do that deal, and Geelong are probably inclined to keep pick 7.

Might bring Busslinger into play - if he is of interest to the club.

But I doubt the Cats will trade 7 unless they have no choice. And if they do, GSW (with picks 12, 15, 18 and 19) are probably better placed (and more motivated) to trade for pick 7.

I can't see Brisbane further diluting their picks. I am sure they have a strategy but it's not entirely clear yet. They've managed to accumulate 3621 points to this stage. One of those (pick 48? = 302 points; 55? = 207 points) they'll probably have to send to Hawthorn for Gunston. And all this is before they've put together something to prise Dunkley out of the Bulldogs.

But that points total comes from nine point-bearing picks. To use them all they will need seven available spots on a 36-strong senior list (or nine on a 38-strong senior list). Maybe they have a rookie or two to promote to occupy a couple of that spots, and the last of those point-bearing picks is worth only nine points so they can afford to ignore that one. But it does seem they'll need to make a fair few picks at the very end of the draft.

[Ludwig]

But that points total comes from nine point-bearing picks. To use them all they will need seven available spots on a 36-strong senior list (or nine on a 38-strong senior list). Maybe they have a rookie or two to promote to occupy a couple of that spots, and the last of those point-bearing picks is worth only nine points so they can afford to ignore that one. But it does seem they'll need to make a fair few picks at the very end of the draft.

No Worries. They'll just get an exemption from the AFL.

[Aprilbr]

I note that the free agency period has now closed but no word yet on Harry? He is obviously underwhelmed by the Swans offer. Will be interested to see what happens there in coming days.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Rucks!. Last year after Melbourne won the flag, big lumbering ruckman were all the rage.
One year later, Geelong won the flag with no ruckman, therefore ruckmen are bad.

Yep and both positions are both nonsensical and based on false premises.
Fads are inherently stupid.
Neither of the D's rucks are lumbering. And as for the Cat's ruck free combinations triumph, the Hickey/Reid ruck combination was non competitive (the absolute antithesis of what a GF ruck should be. They should have been admitted to hospital rather than the MCG on GF day.

[Bloods05]

Yep and both positions are both nonsensical and based on false premises.
Fads are inherently stupid.
Neither of the D's rucks are lumbering. And as for the Cat's ruck free combinations triumph, the Hickey/Reid ruck combination was non competitive (the absolute antithesis of what a GF ruck should be. They should have been admitted to hospital rather than the MCG on GF day.

Amen to that. I love this forum, but jeez I get tired of silly thought bubbles being passed off as deep philosophical ponderings.

[707]

Amen to that. I love this forum, but jeez I get tired of silly thought bubbles being passed off as deep philosophical ponderings.

It's what happens in government!

[Melbourne_Blood]

Should we have a crack at Dunkley ? Apparently the deal with Brisbane is stalling. Two first rounders gets it done. I know we have some very good young midfield talent ( and Parker too ) but geez he would add some serious depth in there. Chad, Dunkley , Rowy and Mills in the rotation. That’s a serious midfield.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mark26]

Should we have a crack at Dunkley ? Apparently the deal with Brisbane is stalling. Two first rounders gets it done. I know we have some very good young midfield talent ( and Parker too ) but geez he would add some serious depth in there. Chad, Dunkley , Rowy and Mills in the rotation. That’s a serious midfield.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It would hurt giving up two first rounders for someone we could have drafted and not allowed him to slip through to the Dogs in the first place. I'd rather back our midfield evolution to come through with the likes of Sheldrick, Roberts and Campbell.

[liz]

a) We probably don't have the salary cap space
b) We have no idea whether he has any interest in living in Sydney
c) We really need to use our draft capital to address areas of the list that need bolstering, not for 2023 but for a couple of years down the track. Which means taller players (at either end), not creating an excess of midfield depth.

[Kafka's Ghost]

a) We probably don't have the salary cap space
b) We have no idea whether he has any interest in living in Sydney
c) We really need to use our draft capital to address areas of the list that need bolstering, not for 2023 but for a couple of years down the track. Which means taller players (at either end), not creating an excess of midfield depth.

Totally agree. His father has never forgiven the Swans for telling him it’s time hang up the boots, either.


Gesendet von iPad mit Tapatalk