With Heeney in the mix we can't do a swap of draft picks like the Tyson deal. I think a deal to send Mitchell and pick 17 to Melbourne for pick 5 would have been a likely outcome.
Liz pointed out that Academy and Father/Son bidding occurs before the draft and the Swans would likely pledge pick 17 for Heeney.
Maybe then Melbourne can provide a player to the Swans in a straight swap. That's why I suggested young key defender Tom McDonald.
Maybe another club wants Mitchell more and will provide a better deal.
Time will tell. This will be a Tom Mitchell led discussion as much as anything.
How did Tom Mitchell's name get raised? He elected to come to the Swans when he could have gone into the draft. Is this the way to repay him? Even if he, for example, was traded, what would be the chance of the player you pick up being better? Highly unlikely I would have thought. This completely goes against the Swans ethos.
Another thing some of you are forgetting is that players are no longer categorized as backs, mids and forwards and that speed is very important. Players need to be versatile and mid-fielders are now playing in all three areas. Therefore, the more mid-fielders we have the better (within reason of course). I'm sure, for example, that you will find Rohan playing off the half-back line next year where, after a good pre-season, he can use his run. You will always need your key-position players but that is a separate issue.
Last edited by Melb Blood Bro; 20th June 2014 at 06:00 PM.
Short answer is yes, we would be wasting our time in improving our draft position. Lets say we trade someone for say pick 11 and we end up with picks 11 and say 17 we will need to trade our highest available pick to better the best offer. For example, if we had picks 11 and 17 and GWS bids pick 14 for Heeney then we would only need to use our pick 17. However, if they used pick 10 to bid for Heeney then we would have to use our pick 11. We would be stupid to trade anyone for draft picks over the next two years with Heeney, Davis, Mills and Dunkley coming through. Infact, the higher up the ladder we get, the less we are required to give away. The father-son pick is treated in the same way as the academy selection. On curren t form, there would be a good chance that Heeney, Mills and Dunkley would all be top 10 selections if they were on the open market. I hope this answers your question?
Probably giving too much away.
Tom Mitchell for Tom McDonald would be a fair trade. It all depends on whether Melbourne can re sign Danny Frawley and get Jesse Hogan back to lead their forward line. If Frawley is back in key defence then Tom McDonald would be more likely to be considered for trade.
Bookmarks