2017 trading, drafting, list management

[Boddo]

I think your trade proposal is realistic as far as value, but Hanners and Rohan are both contracted and I would be surprised if Aliir got to the end of next season without a new contract. I can't see why they would go from a perennial finals side to a GC or NM.

I don't doubt the quality of Lukosius, but it seems a lot to give up for one draft pick, however good. We also will be in line to get a good forward prospect in Blakey, although I would agree that Lukosius looks better at this stage. Nonetheless, Blakey still looks a quality forward prospect, so I don't see the need sell the farm to get a shot at Lukosius.

I do like the way the 2018 draft is shaping up and we should have a fair number of open spots on our list. I wouldn't mind doing something this year to get another top 30 pick for 2018.

I'm looking forward to the under 18 all star game to get a look at the top players at the same time.

Contracts only mean so much. If the club wants another player desperately enough they will trade for them using players who are contracted or not. Players know this, they know it's a business there not like supporters. If Aliir puts in another year like this year I wouldn't guarantee him a contract. I will say though I'd be surprised if he put in a year the same as this year. They go for the same reason Lockett went to Sydney & Judd to Carlton, money or because they are moved on by the club. Sport is a business. Trading Hannebery, Rohan or Aliir is not selling the farm it's enhancing your kingdom. Blakey will be good but like I said Lukosious is the real deal. Would I rather draft a game breaking key forward or a good forward who plays a role? I'd take a a game breaking forward in Lukosious every day every month of every year. But I'm not choosing one or the other I'm talking about getting a game breaking match winning forward and also having a player that would be even better as a 2nd key forward. If you have the time watch the under 18 championship games as they give you a better indication as players in the all star game are encouraged to show more flair so it's a lot less pressure. It's why I liked Florent in that game he still played his game without trying to go overboard.

Agree we should try n move up the order for next year.

[0918330512]

Contracts only mean so much. If the club wants another player desperately enough they will trade for them using players who are contracted or not. Players know this, they know it's a business there not like supporters. If Aliir puts in another year like this year I wouldn't guarantee him a contract. I will say though I'd be surprised if he put in a year the same as this year. They go for the same reason Lockett went to Sydney & Judd to Carlton, money or because they are moved on by the club. Sport is a business. Trading Hannebery, Rohan or Aliir is not selling the farm it's enhancing your kingdom. Blakey will be good but like I said Lukosious is the real deal. Would I rather draft a game breaking key forward or a good forward who plays a role? I'd take a a game breaking forward in Lukosious every day every month of every year. But I'm not choosing one or the other I'm talking about getting a game breaking match winning forward and also having a player that would be even better as a 2nd key forward. If you have the time watch the under 18 championship games as they give you a better indication as players in the all star game are encouraged to show more flair so it's a lot less pressure. It's why I liked Florent in that game he still played his game without trying to go overboard.

Agree we should try n move up the order for next year.

I'm fairly certain a player cannot be traded against his will if he is under contract. If a player is told he is unwanted he may choose to go while under contract, but he cannot be forced to go. Bare minimum, the player has to actually sign a new contract with the new club. He can simply refuse to sign with the reassurance that he has the remainder of his contract left.

As for Lockett, sure there was money but he was also lured by the anonymity of playing in rugby league heartland, the lack of media scrutiny and the opportunity to work under the coaching genius Ron Barassi.

[Boddo]

I'm fairly certain a player cannot be traded against his will if he is under contract. If a player is told he is unwanted he may choose to go while under contract, but he cannot be forced to go. Bare minimum, the player has to actually sign a new contract with the new club. He can simply refuse to sign with the reassurance that he has the remainder of his contract left.

Of course they can't be forced but it's not that hard to move on a contracted player. Once their told they are not in the clubs plans going forward along the lines "we're unsure what role we have for you next year as we are making a few structural changes" they realise very quickly it's time to move on n are happy to go to a club that sees them as part of that clubs future. no1 goes up to them n says " hey your out m8 nice knowing ya" it's all done in a professional manner. As an example some players had to go through this when Collingwood got Buckley.

Lockett wanted to go to Richmond it was money that got him to Sydney. Ron Joseph said it in his interview on open mike. He turned around n drove back to his house n upped his offer a lot more.

As supporters we get very romantic about the game but sport is not much different to our work life. If we get offered a lot more than where we are working ATM to move to the competition down the road we will even though we have good relationships where we work atm. If it wasn't about money why would players have managers to negotiate their contract n advise. Whether we want to admit it or not the game is about money.

[0918330512]

Lockett wanted to go to Richmond it was money that got him to Sydney. Ron Joseph said it in his interview on open mike. He turned around n drove back to his house n upped his offer a lot more.

I'm sure you've got your opinion & won't be swayed, & Ron Joseph has his understanding of events.

I do believe I said money was involved with Lockett but according to Pluggers' autobiography:

Collingwood was his first choice. According to Plugger they withdrew their offer.

Richmond was his second choice. According to Plugger they couldn't work a trade with StKilda.

Sydney and Brisbane were also in the mix but as wooden spooner Sydney had the first pick in the pre-season draft, so could have got Lockett for free (but they wanted to use this on Roos). So the Swans traded picks 5, 13 & Robbie Neill to the Saints (the Hawks were involved too).

Pluggers autobiography then said that the anonymity of Sydney had big appeal as did playing under Barassi. The tenaciousness of Joseph helped as Plugger changed his mind on a number of occasions. And his former StKilda (& future Sydney) teammate, Jayson Daniels, also convinced him that the move to Sydney would be good.

So while I'm sure you'll come back with Ron J said it in an interview, I don't think it was as clear cut as Plugger was a mercenary who only (or primarily) went for the $. I don't write this to convince you, more so that others here get a balanced version of events.

[stevoswan]

Dumbass Victorian. Go follow Richmond.

You make some good points at times barry, then you let yourself down with shiit like that......

[Boddo]

I'm sure you've got your opinion & won't be swayed, & Ron Joseph has his understanding of events.

I do believe I said money was involved with Lockett but according to Pluggers' autobiography:

Collingwood was his first choice. According to Plugger they withdrew their offer.

Richmond was his second choice. According to Plugger they couldn't work a trade with StKilda.

Sydney and Brisbane were also in the mix but as wooden spooner Sydney had the first pick in the pre-season draft, so could have got Lockett for free (but they wanted to use this on Roos). So the Swans traded picks 5, 13 & Robbie Neill to the Saints (the Hawks were involved too).

Pluggers autobiography then said that the anonymity of Sydney had big appeal as did playing under Barassi. The tenaciousness of Joseph helped as Plugger changed his mind on a number of occasions. And his former StKilda (& future Sydney) teammate, Jayson Daniels, also convinced him that the move to Sydney would be good.

So while I'm sure you'll come back with Ron J said it in an interview, I don't think it was as clear cut as Plugger was a mercenary who only (or primarily) went for the $. I don't write this to convince you, more so that others here get a balanced version of events.

I'll completely change my mind on anything if anyone can show me differently. I'm not for one minute trying to say he's a mercenary because I don't believe he is because he was already leaving St Kilda. But money had a massive difference n the clincher was the extra money offered by Sydney via Joseph. Imo the anonymity would've had a very small part to play but it wouldn't have been a determining factor. He wanted to go to Collingwood or Richmond so it cancels it our as far as I'm concerned. He wanted to go Richmond n agreed but they just couldn't get the trade done n Collingwood had already vetoed it via their board. It's not a crime to want more money because I'm pretty sure the majority of the population thinks like that. For all the reasons Lockett came to Sydney the main one is money n then all the other things are built around It & it paints a nice picture. At the time I remember reading the back page of the HS with Lockett to Richmond n it sounded like the deal was done n then it fell apart. We jumped in upped the offer n he's a Sydney legend for ever. On the trade it looks like we got a steal but at the time Robbie Neill was a very very highly rated junior n walked out on the club a few years earlier cause he was made to crawl around on an oval on his hands n knees by our coach n lost a lot of skin off his knees. His parents were horrified. It took a lot to talk him to come back. So Carlton tried get him a few times during all this. So that 5 & 13 is also a player at the time who would have got us a first round pick also. So effectively it was 3 first round picks. But the main reason Lockett came was money but then as a true professional he bought into the club n played his guts out. I'm not trying to denigrate Lockett in any way shape or form.

[AB Swannie]

After reading phantom drafts and watching some video today, I can now see why this year's draft is seen as a bit different to other years. There is a fair it of discrepancy between the phantom drafters from positions 6 or 7 through to 20. For that reason, I am now excited by pick 14 (I know, I know... I've changed pretty quick). At pick 14, it is highly likely that someone would've slipped to this point like Balta, Coffield, or Foggarty. If not, I like the look of Lochie O'Brien - he has a nice penetrating left kick with good outside speed and apparently elite endurance.

[Boddo]

After reading phantom drafts and watching some video today, I can now see why this year's draft is seen as a bit different to other years. There is a fair it of discrepancy between the phantom drafters from positions 6 or 7 through to 20. For that reason, I am now excited by pick 14 (I know, I know... I've changed pretty quick). At pick 14, it is highly likely that someone would've slipped to this point like Balta, Coffield, or Foggarty. If not, I like the look of Lochie O'Brien - he has a nice penetrating left kick with good outside speed and apparently elite endurance.

Yeh it's going to be a draft where some clubs might rate someone top 10 n others that same player at pick 20. And they'll be a few like that. It's why it's so hard to pick who we'll end up with ATM.

[Captain]

I'm sure this won't be popular but I would consider trading Parker if the right deal could be done.

I think having him and JPK and Hanners makes us too slow + he has gone missing in some big games.

Parker is a fine player and has trade currency so we would obviously get something decent for him. A fast outside mid is something we are lacking and would compliment our contested ball midfield well.

[Blood Fever]

I'm sure this won't be popular but I would consider trading Parker if the right deal could be done.

I think having him and JPK and Hanners makes us too slow + he has gone missing in some big games.

Parker is a fine player and has trade currency so we would obviously get something decent for him. A fast outside mid is something we are lacking and would compliment our contested ball midfield well.

Understand your point but because we struggled for energy on Friday, things can appear worse than they are. We didn't look slow late in the year against GWS and Crows etc and he was among our best every week.

[goswannies]

I'm sure this won't be popular but I would consider trading Parker if the right deal could be done.

I think having him and JPK and Hanners makes us too slow + he has gone missing in some big games.

Parker is a fine player and has trade currency so we would obviously get something decent for him. A fast outside mid is something we are lacking and would compliment our contested ball midfield well.

I could see Parker playing a forward role like Danger did. He's a great mark for his size.

[crackedactor]

I'm sure this won't be popular but I would consider trading Parker if the right deal could be done.

I think having him and JPK and Hanners makes us too slow + he has gone missing in some big games.

Parker is a fine player and has trade currency so we would obviously get something decent for him. A fast outside mid is something we are lacking and would compliment our contested ball midfield well.

Exactly the same thought came to me. Parker's finals record is poor and he is a bit slow and similar to JK and DH. Trading him should get us something worthwhile and maybe time for Mills to have a go in the midfield.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk