Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 13 to 24 of 91

Thread: Trade period review

  1. #13
    Can you feel it? Site Admin ugg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chucked into the ruck
    Posts
    15,929
    I'm not referring to list sizes. I'm referring to the fact if we want to bring the picks we have that have draft points assigned to them on draft night, then we need 5 spaces on the night

  2. #14
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Crowland :-(
    Posts
    6,096
    38-40 on senior list, 4-6 rookies plus Cat B rookie. Still got some wriggle room in spots and probably cap as well.

    The club know what they are doing, I trust them to make the right calls with shuffling the rookies on/off. After all is there any delisted player who is playing good enough footy elsewhere to make our best 22? Could still be a DFA on our radar as well to add depth.

    Agree with a previous poster who said we probably didn't expect to draft Hewett when we did and I think Dunkley is a bit the same this year but both too good not to draft at those points in the draft and work it out later. Expect that we will see more of the Rose/Hewett/Newman/Naismith types playing seniors this year, there is after all a few vacancies, particularly as injuries hit.

    I'm liking our regeneration.

  3. #15
    Love the word 'regeneration' instead of 'rebuild'

  4. #16
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Crowland :-(
    Posts
    6,096
    Quote Originally Posted by YvonneH View Post
    Love the word 'regeneration' instead of 'rebuild'
    Rebuild is what bottom clubs do, regeneration is what top clubs like us do!

    Careful replacement of retired warriors with the well schooled in house next generation. We are in a good place if you look at our list closely and the expected sharp increase in Salary Cap from 2017 and no stupid trade ban will assist us in being a destination club for FA from next year.

  5. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by ugg View Post
    I'm not referring to list sizes. I'm referring to the fact if we want to bring the picks we have that have draft points assigned to them on draft night, then we need 5 spaces on the night
    I don't get your logic here, maybe I am missing something

    At the moment have picks 33, 36, 37, 44 , 54, 69 and 72

    Unless Mills goes ridiculously late we'll lose 33,36 and 37 to the back of the draft and we'll get 44 moved back to about 50 by which stage 54 will be moved to about 51 and 69 to about 66

    By the time GWS and the Lions have had their picks dropped to teh back of the draft we should be left with a couple of low 40s picks and mid to low 50s pick. We can then use those points (about 1,000) to draft Dunkley but we will have a decent darft pick left. What possible reason is there why we cannot use that pick to take a third player from the Draft?

  6. #18
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Crowland :-(
    Posts
    6,096
    Just reading this which is official on the clubs website "With a number of Academy and Father-Son prospects on the horizon, the club used the trade period as an opportunity to increase the cumulative value of picks."

    A number of Academy and F/S prospects - think that is unofficially official that Dunks will be in red and white next year. We had no other reason to keep downgrading pick places to increase points unless Dunks was the target.

  7. #19
    Can you feel it? Site Admin ugg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chucked into the ruck
    Posts
    15,929
    Quote Originally Posted by Mug Punter View Post
    I don't get your logic here, maybe I am missing something

    At the moment have picks 33, 36, 37, 44 , 54, 69 and 72

    Unless Mills goes ridiculously late we'll lose 33,36 and 37 to the back of the draft and we'll get 44 moved back to about 50 by which stage 54 will be moved to about 51 and 69 to about 66

    By the time GWS and the Lions have had their picks dropped to teh back of the draft we should be left with a couple of low 40s picks and mid to low 50s pick. We can then use those points (about 1,000) to draft Dunkley but we will have a decent darft pick left. What possible reason is there why we cannot use that pick to take a third player from the Draft?
    Again I re-iterate I'm not talking about how many players we will draft on the night. We have the 7 picks (33, 36, 37, 44, 54, 69 and 72) that you've stated, but we can only bring those 7 picks if we have 7 vacancies on the list

    We have lost Shaw, Goodes, Pyke, Bird and Jetta
    We have gained Sinclair and Talia

    We had 38 on the senior list in 2015, a net loss of 3 takes us to currently 35 on the senior list. We are allowed to have up to 40, so that means we have 5 vacancies as it stands. Having 5 vacancies will result in the AFL only allocating 5 draft picks on the night (33, 36, 37, 44 and 54) and we miss out on 69 and 72.

    So we have to delist TWO players (not 1 as I originally posted) to utilise 69 and 72.

    That's what I'm led to believe any way, I may be wrong due to the intricate and capricious nature of the AFL draft rules and regulations.

  8. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by ugg View Post
    Again I re-iterate I'm not talking about how many players we will draft on the night. We have the 7 picks (33, 36, 37, 44, 54, 69 and 72) that you've stated, but we can only bring those 7 picks if we have 7 vacancies on the list

    We have lost Shaw, Goodes, Pyke, Bird and Jetta
    We have gained Sinclair and Talia

    We had 38 on the senior list in 2015, a net loss of 3 takes us to currently 35 on the senior list. We are allowed to have up to 40, so that means we have 5 vacancies as it stands. Having 5 vacancies will result in the AFL only allocating 5 draft picks on the night (33, 36, 37, 44 and 54) and we miss out on 69 and 72.

    So we have to delist TWO players (not 1 as I originally posted) to utilise 69 and 72.

    That's what I'm led to believe any way, I may be wrong due to the intricate and capricious nature of the AFL draft rules and regulations.
    Thanks for explaining that, makes sense now, so we could draft but it would be from the back of the field, I think we will de-list one player to bring pick 69 into play and offset the risk of any early pick for Mills
    Last edited by Mug Punter; 22nd October 2015 at 03:29 PM.

  9. #21
    Regular in the Side
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    melbourne
    Posts
    834
    Uggg that's what my son says. Don't understand it but there must be something in the rules that says you can only have the picks if you have spaces. By the way can some one explain how we are 235 points in front. I must be missing something
    pick 14 1161
    pick 33 563
    pick 53 233 and pick 71 29 a total of 1986. By my calc the new picks give us 2198 a differenc of 212.

  10. #22
    Veterans List Ludwig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    9,310
    I don't think Ugg can be right about the number of picks we can bring, else the Giants and Lions would be in big trouble. It would make it impossible to plan for the draft since a club that was matching bids on academy and FS players doesn't know how many picks will be used to do so.

    The club website says: The Swans will enter next month�s AFL Draft with picks 33, 36, 37, 44, 54, 69, 72, 90 and 108.

    I think that is probably correct.
    Last edited by Ludwig; 22nd October 2015 at 04:19 PM.

  11. #23
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,393
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post
    I don't think Ugg can be right about the number of picks we can bring, else the Giants and Lions would be in big trouble. It would make it impossible to plan for the draft since a club that was matching bids on academy and FS players doesn't know how many picks will be used to do so.

    The club website says: The Swans will enter next month�s AFL Draft with picks 33, 36, 37, 44, 54, 69, 72, 90 and 108.

    I think that is probably correct.
    I believe that is provisional though, and will be amended once lists are finalised pre-draft.

  12. #24
    Can you feel it? Site Admin ugg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chucked into the ruck
    Posts
    15,929
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post
    I don't think Ugg can be right about the number of picks we can bring, else the Giants and Lions would be in big trouble. It would make it impossible to plan for the draft since a club that was matching bids on academy and FS players doesn't know how many picks will be used to do so.

    The club website says: The Swans will enter next month�s AFL Draft with picks 33, 36, 37, 44, 54, 69, 72, 90 and 108.

    I think that is probably correct.
    It's the way it's worked in previous years. Obviously the bidding system might change this but we won't know until draft night what the AFL decides

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO