Stringer Trade Worth

[GVGjr]

Sounds good to me. All teams can claim victory, and members happy enough.

Trengove & Rockliff would be great mature bodies and people for kids to come into.

BT, you need to crunch the numbers for me. Are we adequately compensating North? Do we flip flop picks 39 and 44 to make it fairer? Wouldn't that be a twist ?

[comrade]

A deal with North wouldn't likely be straight up, a 3rd club could be involved.

Without a lot of thought, how does Bulldogs trading picks 9 and 26 for picks 15 and 16 from Richmond go? The index points match up OK. Tigers get their father son and have a mid 2nd rounder for a needs based player.

We trade Stringer and our newly acquired pick 16 to North for their picks 4 and 21.
We move up 5 picks from our original first selection, 11 picks from our original 2nd selection and still have an early 2nd rounder.
North have a big name (much needed) and still have a first round pick.

We have picks 4, 15 and 21 plus 39. Say hello to Stephenson, L.Fogarty and Clavarino
We then chase Tom Rockcliff hard.

Seriously, forward this to JMac. I doubt he'd be able to conjure up anything better.

[GVGjr]

Is Lever one too many tall defenders for us, especially with Trengove close?

Possibly, but lets give it a go, I suspect Adelaide will want a first and 2nd rounder for Lever.

[KT31]

Possibly, but lets give it a go, I suspect Adelaide will want a first and 2nd rounder for Lever.

I wouldn't be happy but would a swap of our first rounds and Lever for Stringer get it done ?

[GVGjr]

Seriously, forward this to JMac. I doubt he'd be able to conjure up anything better.

That's a bit harsh on J-Mac. When he did those Hrovat and Stevens trades we had won the flag and we overrated the list and we wanted to project that we were a fair club to deal with as much for our own players. It will be a very different J-Mac this time around.

We have two trade specialists here on WOOF in BT and The Doctor especially when it comes to draft picks manipulations and reading the play. With a bit of work we can get better options.
BT, The Doc, it's time to get to work

[bulldogtragic]

BT, you need to crunch the numbers for me. Are we adequately compensating North? Do we flip flop picks 39 and 44 to make it fairer? Wouldn't that be a twist ?

If we had to, I trust Dal at that range. Then as you allude to, we are effectively we are adding Hrovat/compo to the trade. So it's Stringer, Hrovat & 16 for Picks 4 & 21.

Leaving Hrovat out of it, they go from early to late first rounders (4-16) and a second rounder (21). That seems about fair for Stringer. Much more than a second rounder, but not enough to command a top 5 pick and more alone.

[GVGjr]

According to Fox Sports next years draft is close to a super draft. A lot of high end talent.

That's what they are saying, we have a father son consideration though so that might cancel us out just a fraction. Not many clubs would consider trading a first rounder for next year.

[bulldogtragic]

That's what they are saying, we have a father son consideration though so that might cancel us out just a fraction. Not many clubs would consider trading a first rounder for next year.

So you're saying let's tank, get a young gun before Rhylee comes up, then bank up points and get Rhylee & Khamis on the cheap.

[bornadog]

I don't mind Lever and Trengove as the latter can play ruck.

[GVGjr]

So you're saying let's tank, get a young gun before Rhylee comes up, then bank up points and get Rhylee & Khamis on the cheap.

I'll never say yes to a tank

I think there are a number of trade options available to us with Stringer. I think there would be 5 interested clubs

Essendon could almost be a straight up deal for Stringer for pick 11 and we could throw in Crameri for their pick 46 (3rd round)
They get a dynamic forward plus a favourite son returns. If Essendon trades with us, Crameri can start training with them straight away, if not they can wait until the preseason draft which is another wait he probably can't afford.
Crameri needs to start training asap so there is an incentive for the difficult Essendon to play ball.

We would have picks 9, 11, 26, 39 and 46 in that scenario.

We could potentially involve Brisbane with another team and I've just had a look a trade with StKilda that looks OK and fair to me.

Getting involved with in a complicated 4 way trade that has Lever to Melbourne, Gibbs to Adelaide and Stringer to Carlton is a bit harder.

[GVGjr]

GVGjr - this sounds reasonable for all 3 parties. Would prefer north to have stringer if he comes good rather than sainters or god forbid the bombers. Cannot see how cats get him unless they offer future high draft picks. Hate the risk of future draft picks too. Pity Kelly does not want to come to us as could be some interesting 3 way deals with Stringer on table.

Thanks Josie, I also struggle to see how the Cats get the deal done unless they offer next years first rounder and then we have the issue of projecting where that fits.

I think he suits North and the Saints the most and we know Essendon would be difficult to deal with.

[jeemak]

Possibly, but lets give it a go, I suspect Adelaide will want a first and 2nd rounder for Lever.

This is the thing I have trouble with. Stringer is by far a much more valuable player when on-song than Lever will ever be. He plays taller than he is, smaller than he is and can kick goals.

Lever fits into a system - albeit in a talented way - but essentially plays a much easier role than Jake does.

I get that people view Stringer as a key forward who should be dominating games, but he isn't. Instead he's a player who plays one of the hardest roles you can play in the game, in a team that moves the ball terribly a lot of the time - and when playing "poorly" kicks over 40 goals in a premiership season.

On a like for like basis Stringer is the more valuable commodity than just about any back to play the game. Perhaps the trade for Stringer is being diluted because the things our club knows about Stringer are known externally as well.

[jazzadogs]

This is the thing I have trouble with. Stringer is by far a much more valuable player when on-song than Lever will ever be. He plays taller than he is, smaller than he is and can kick goals.

Lever fits into a system - albeit in a talented way - but essentially plays a much easier role than Jake does.

I get that people view Stringer as a key forward who should be dominating games, but he isn't. Instead he's a player who plays one of the hardest roles you can play in the game, in a team that moves the ball terribly a lot of the time - and when playing "poorly" kicks over 40 goals in a premiership season.

On a like for like basis Stringer is the more valuable commodity than just about any back to play the game. Perhaps the trade for Stringer is being diluted because the things our club knows about Stringer are known externally as well.

It's infuriating me seeing people undervalue Stringer. You are right that his value has dropped because of publicised issues with commitment, but his talent alone is behind only Bont at our club. We must get adequate compensation.

For interests sake, here are some trades involving first round picks in the past few years:
- McCarthy, #7, #34, #32 for #3 (similar to suggestions of Stringer and #9 for #4, similar commitment issues, Stringer's upside arguably higher with potential to run through middle)
- Tom Mitchell + #57 for #14 + #52 (looks like a bit of a steal for the Hawks - undoubtedly has runs on the board. Stringer more mercurial but Mitchell certainly more consistent. Is this his value?)
- Dion Prestia + #24 for #6 and future 2nd round (surely Stringer is a better player than Prestia - we need to get someone to overvalue him like Richmond overvalued Prestia. Has turned into a win for them with their season turning the 2nd round pick into a late pick)
- Jaeger O'Meara for #10 and future second round (Jaeger's talent is well documented but his injury troubles made this a significant risk. Is Stringer's undoubted talent equivalent? How much of a handicap does his commitment add)
- Dangerfield for #9 and #28 (no way are we getting two picks for Stringer, and this was a manipulation to avoid FA compo)
- Jack Redden for #17
- Lachie Henderson for future first round
- Harley Bennell + #22 for #16 and #35 (massive commitment/lifestyle issues affected price of a clearly talented player)
- Jed f'in Anderson + 38 + 40 for #15 + #55 (hope North still has the same guy in charge of trades)
- Jake Carlisle for #5 and #24
- Treloar + 28 for #7 and future first round
- Chris f'in Yarran for #19

I know I've put a lot of info there but there are some decent comparisons from past years, of players with similar talent but injury/commitment issues.

IMO North's #4 is a prime target and I like the look of GVG's proposal but think it's too good to be true. I see no scenario in which we end with #4 and #9.

I hope nobody offers anything good enough, we keep Jake and he picks up his act next year before becoming a life-long Bulldogs legend.

[jeemak]

It's infuriating me seeing people undervalue Stringer. You are right that his value has dropped because of publicised issues with commitment, but his talent alone is behind only Bont at our club. We must get adequate compensation.

For interests sake, here are some trades involving first round picks in the past few years:
- McCarthy, #7, #34, #32 for #3 (similar to suggestions of Stringer and #9 for #4, similar commitment issues, Stringer's upside arguably higher with potential to run through middle)
- Tom Mitchell + #57 for #14 + #52 (looks like a bit of a steal for the Hawks - undoubtedly has runs on the board. Stringer more mercurial but Mitchell certainly more consistent. Is this his value?)
- Dion Prestia + #24 for #6 and future 2nd round (surely Stringer is a better player than Prestia - we need to get someone to overvalue him like Richmond overvalued Prestia. Has turned into a win for them with their season turning the 2nd round pick into a late pick)
- Jaeger O'Meara for #10 and future second round (Jaeger's talent is well documented but his injury troubles made this a significant risk. Is Stringer's undoubted talent equivalent? How much of a handicap does his commitment add)
- Dangerfield for #9 and #28 (no way are we getting two picks for Stringer, and this was a manipulation to avoid FA compo)
- Jack Redden for #17
- Lachie Henderson for future first round
- Harley Bennell + #22 for #16 and #35 (massive commitment/lifestyle issues affected price of a clearly talented player)
- Jed f'in Anderson + 38 + 40 for #15 + #55 (hope North still has the same guy in charge of trades)
- Jake Carlisle for #5 and #24
- Treloar + 28 for #7 and future first round
- Chris f'in Yarran for #19

I know I've put a lot of info there but there are some decent comparisons from past years, of players with similar talent but injury/commitment issues.

IMO North's #4 is a prime target and I like the look of GVG's proposal but think it's too good to be true. I see no scenario in which we end with #4 and #9.

I hope nobody offers anything good enough, we keep Jake and he picks up his act next year before becoming a life-long Bulldogs legend.

We thank you for going to the effort and it's madness jazza, for relaxation click on the link in my signature. 13 minutes of bliss........or find something else to numb the stupidity.

[jazzadogs]

We thank you for going to the effort and it's madness jazza, for relaxation click on the link in my signature. 13 minutes of bliss........or find something else to numb the stupidity.

I didn't click and thought this would be the link. Also calming as long as I skip over a few key highlights.



I mean there are suggestions we'll get a late first round pick. The same as Jed Anderson, Jack Redden or Chris Yarran. I would be unable to accept such a decision.