2021 Trade Period Talk

[Grantysghost]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

Popcorn.gif

[Bornadog]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

Actually can't be bothered

[Mofra]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

I agree. The bottom line is we just don't know what we attempted to do or who we spoke to during the trade period. Maybe we spoke to Ceglar but he preferred the retirement home they are getting together at Geelong. Maybe we spoke to Ladhams but he wanted to move to Sydney for the sake of his fashion business? Maybe we spoke to any of the other ruckman that transferred clubs but the bottom line is you can't force a player to come and play with your club. Who knows?

It was reported we spoke to Ladhams and ruled ourselves out pretty early.
I just look at Max Lynch going for a downgrade of a future 3rd round pick and think we're missed a cheap way to bolster our ruck division.

[Bornadog]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

It was reported we spoke to Ladhams and ruled ourselves out pretty early.
I just look at Max Lynch going for a downgrade of a future 3rd round pick and think we're missed a cheap way to bolster our ruck division.

From his point of view, why would he come to us, unless we throw some dollars at him.

[Axe Man]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

Moving on up: Clubs eye pick swaps with Pies, Dogs

CLUBS are eyeing Collingwood and the Western Bulldogs' picks in the 20s as ways to move up the draft order via pick swaps.

After the Continental Tyres Trade Period ended on Wednesday night, clubs are able to complete pick swaps until November 15 and then again during the NAB AFL Draft, which is a two-night event.

Both the Magpies and Bulldogs used the trade period to tally more points under the draft value index so they can safely match bids for their respective father-son selections Nick Daicos and Sam Darcy.

The Pies have a plethora of picks – No.27, 36, 46, 48, 55, 58, 78 and 79 – equaling 2215 draft points. If a bid came for young midfield prodigy Daicos at No.1, the Pies would need to pay 2400 points, and if it came at No.2 they would have to match it with 2014 points.

It leaves the Magpies with plenty of options with their first choice No.27, including trading it for a future selection and restoring their place in next year's second round or even creatively trading it before matching the Daicos bid and then coming back into the earlier stages of this year's draft in another deal.

Essendon is among the clubs interested in pushing up the draft board using future picks and had been eyeing the Magpies' pick 27, which was on the table for Giants small forward Bobby Hill before Greater Western Sydney blocked his trade request.

It is almost certain the Magpies will offload pick 27 so that it simply doesn't get eaten up by the matched bid for Daicos.

The Dogs are in a similar position with Darcy, with the 204cm prospect possibly attracting a bid as early as pick No.2 and likely in the first five selections.

In losing Patrick Lipinski to the Pies and Lewis Young to the Blues, the Dogs boosted what shaped as a skinny points count through the trade period as well as moving out their No.17 selection in a four-club pick swap.

It leaves the Dogs with picks No.23, 43, 44, 45, 52, 93 after the trade period, which are worth a total of 2148 points, enough to cover a bid from pick No.2 onwards.

But, like the Pies, rivals still expect the Grand Finalists to move their first live pick – No.23 – for either a bundling of later or future selections or a mix of both, with Geelong having been among the clubs to have been interested during the trade period.

Richmond is another club who could package up come of its selections for another earlier pick, while St Kilda has also been on the lookout for more earlier picks using future selections to pay for its Next Generation Academy pair Marcus Windhager and Mitchito Owens.

After pick No.9, the Saints hold picks 62, 66 and 67 – worth a total of 272 points.

[Bornadog]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

You've had some strong opinions on ruckman but now they're hard to get, cost a lot and what we have is good enough.

I have never once said what we have is good enough, but it is not as bleak as you point out.

[Mofra]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

From his point of view, why would he come to us, unless we throw some dollars at him.

He would have been on base, or close to it.
He was moving for opportunity not dollars.

[1eyedog]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

He would have been on base, or close to it.
He was moving for opportunity not dollars.

Ceglar was earmarked for trade a long way out. The Hawks can provide Lynch far more opportunities than we can he'd be nestled amongst three other ruckmen on our list, an even worse spot than where he was at the Pies. I guess we would have traded Sweet out so the decision came down to Sweet or Lynch.

[1eyedog]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

Man that is an image I just don't want to see for anotther 5 months.

[soupman]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

Ceglar was earmarked for trade a long way out. The Hawks can provide Lynch far more opportunities than we can he'd be nestled amongst three other ruckmen on our list, an even worse spot than where he was at the Pies. I guess we would have traded Sweet out so the decision came down to Sweet or Lynch.

Nestled amongst three other ruckmen on our list, none of which are both good and reliable. Our ruck situation as far as Lynch is concerned is an open field, to get a game he would simply have to beat out a 36 year old who is never fit, an ineffective ruckman who we prefer to play forward anyway, and a 5 gamer who we rate so highly we picked a key defender ahead of him for a finals series.

To even suggest this is a worse spot to be in than stuck behind Brodie Grundy (and Darcy Cameron) at the Pies is lunacy, I think there's even a case that Mason Cox is bigger competition for his spot than Sweet.

[jeemak]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

I guess from Power's comments the expectation is that Sweet will be ready to go after a preseason, which is a big call.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

I guess from Power's comments the expectation is that Sweet will be ready to go after a preseason, which is a big call.

Big call and a strange one at that given we thought a sparsely played defender was a better option at ruck in 2 finals than the very guy they’re putting hope into.

And that defender no longer plays for us. It smells like desperation but it couldn’t be given our lack of movement during the trade period. Just like our midfields performance in the grand final, I’m completely stumped here.

[hujsh]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

Nestled amongst three other ruckmen on our list, none of which are both good and reliable. Our ruck situation as far as Lynch is concerned is an open field, to get a game he would simply have to beat out a 36 year old who is never fit, an ineffective ruckman who we prefer to play forward anyway, and a 5 gamer who we rate so highly we picked a key defender ahead of him for a finals series.

To even suggest this is a worse spot to be in than stuck behind Brodie Grundy (and Darcy Cameron) at the Pies is lunacy, I think there's even a case that Mason Cox is bigger competition for his spot than Sweet.

I was going to say the same thing but re-reading 1eyedogs post I beleive he meant compared to Hawthorn.

Without Ceglar there should be pretty good opportunity there.

Edit: never mind i re-read against and saw it's supposedly a worse position than at the Pies which I do disagree with

[jeemak]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

Big call and a strange one at that given we thought a sparsely played defender was a better option at ruck in 2 finals than the very guy they’re putting hope into.

And that defender no longer plays for us. It smells like desperation but it couldn’t be given our lack of movement during the trade period. Just like our midfields performance in the grand final, I’m completely stumped here.

I think they played Lewis because they thought he was better prepared to cover the running component than Sweet was, which I can understand. However, it just shows the massive strides Sweet will need to take to carry more ruck responsibility.

Honestly it's just something that had to be said when we realised we couldn't find something better and had signed up our contingency option (which Sweet was).

[hujsh]

Re: 2021 Trade Period Talk

I think they played Lewis because they thought he was better prepared to cover the running component than Sweet was, which I can understand. However, it just shows the massive strides Sweet will need to take to carry more ruck responsibility.

Honestly it's just something that had to be said when we realised we couldn't find something better and had signed up our contingency option (which Sweet was).

It's interesting that the consensus is Young was chosen for his ability to cover the ground yet whe Sweet did play IIRC he was the solo ruck and once English came back (a move that would give Sweet cover) he was dropped the next match. I really wonder what the plan is with English this year. Focus on being a first ruck? Cover the loss of Bruce? What % ruck time do we see him playing?

It's kind of confusing to think about