2019 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Legs Akimbo]

Hey legs

My post above said at the same age

Mills in his first year was serviceable in the backline

Ash appears to be a fair way ahead as HBF at the same age ie 18yrs old

If that is the way we go

Ah, pronoun 'his' was Ash not Mills! I see. Mills did kind of win the rising star though...

[troyjones2525]

Just a theory. We all know GWS have attempted to move up the draft board to pick a player before a bid comes for Green. That makes me think that they likely have a player in mind that they really like.

Let's just for argument sake say it's Luke Jackson, who has become the huge bolter as far as the media is concerned talking him up as a chance for Melbourne picking him at 3 and again us at 5.

What if Melbourne don't pick him and neither does Adelaide and neither of them bid on Green either.

Our pick comes up and we bid on Green to fill a need as expected which also leaves Jackson available with the next pick!

Do you think that GWS will rate Jackson as a bigger need for their list and not match the bid???

Could be a fascinating situation if it plays out like this and could also turn out to be a great result for us as Green is rated as a fantastic inside midfield prospect which is a big need for us going forward!

Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk

[Markwebbos]

Just a theory. We all know GWS have attempted to move up the draft board to pick a player before a bid comes for Green. That makes me think that they likely have a player in mind that they really like.

Let's just for argument sake say it's Luke Jackson, who has become the huge bolter as far as the media is concerned talking him up as a chance for Melbourne picking him at 3 and again us at 5.

What if Melbourne don't pick him and neither does Adelaide and neither of them bid on Green either.

Our pick comes up and we bid on Green to fill a need as expected which also leaves Jackson available with the next pick!

Do you think that GWS will rate Jackson as a bigger need for their list and not match the bid???

Could be a fascinating situation if it plays out like this and could also turn out to be a great result for us as Green is rated as a fantastic inside midfield prospect which is a big need for us going forward!

Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk

I’m definitely hoping GWS will not match a bid for Green.

[dazedjosh]

I agree. I'd be stoked if we landed Green. But at pick 5, it costs GWS nothing extra to match our bid with pick 6 thanks to the 20% discount. So they would have no reason not to match the bid on Green, who is heavily rated as their 3rd best player in this draft.

Not matching a bid on a kid that talented is the sort of thing that comes back to haunt a team.

[Ludwig]

Just a theory. We all know GWS have attempted to move up the draft board to pick a player before a bid comes for Green. That makes me think that they likely have a player in mind that they really like.

Let's just for argument sake say it's Luke Jackson, who has become the huge bolter as far as the media is concerned talking him up as a chance for Melbourne picking him at 3 and again us at 5.

What if Melbourne don't pick him and neither does Adelaide and neither of them bid on Green either.

Our pick comes up and we bid on Green to fill a need as expected which also leaves Jackson available with the next pick!

Do you think that GWS will rate Jackson as a bigger need for their list and not match the bid???

Could be a fascinating situation if it plays out like this and could also turn out to be a great result for us as Green is rated as a fantastic inside midfield prospect which is a big need for us going forward!

Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk

I don't think GWS necessarily have to have a specific player in mind to move further up the draft to secure another top 10 pick in addition to Green.

I've said in an earlier post that if it should happen that we come to pick 5 and no bid has been made on Green, then GWS will try to do a deal to trade with us to move up one position, possibly exchanging pick 6 and a 2020 2nd rounder for pick 5, so they can secure another player with pick 5. We then bid on Green at pick 6 and GWS matches the bid to secure Green as well and we go on to take a selection at pick 6.

GWS get 2 players in the top 6 instead of just 1 and we probably get the player we want anyway plus add to the booty for the 2020 draft.

[Jimitron5000]

What about offering Melbourne picks 5 and 25 for pick 3? It would allow us to get Green (possibly) and not mess up Melbourne's drafting of Jackson (probably)

[Markwebbos]

What about offering Melbourne picks 5 and 25 for pick 3? It would allow us to get Green (possibly) and not mess up Melbourne's drafting of Jackson (probably)

I’d love to find a way to get pick 3 off Melbourne, and i don’t think this wouldn’t stop them getting Jackson, assuming they want to draft him. They may be into Green, Young or someone else.

[Mr Magoo]

I think a Recruiting Manager is in charge of recruitment (new players), so the buck stops with them as far as recruiting goes. BUT they work under the list manager, who is in charge of the bigger picture... So KB says he wants a tall forward, it's SD's job (and responsibility) to find that person.

Michael Agresta, ex Swans is now working at Carlton, so there is a connection there to lure KB. It may be that the Swans brought in SD expecting that KB would want to move on sometime - i.e. he is being groomed as his successor.

- - - Updated - - -



GWS moving up the draft makes no sense if they want to match a bid on Green. It will be a failure unless they get a player before Green or they pass on him.

My point was if they are higher up the draft only a few clubs can match for Green. Lets say they want both Green and Delahunty, if they pick up green at 6, they then can sit and wait if someone else makes a call for Delahunty after that and they can match with enough points from lower order picks they have OR they just let him fall down the order if no one does try and take him.

Whereas, if they had their first pick at say fifteen , then they might find that matching bids for both green and delahunty becomes difficult.

Just me speculating and it might show my naivety at how the points system comes together.

[Markwebbos]

No club is going to bid on their own academy player. If no bid comes before 6 they’ll take someone else.

They didn’t need to move up the draft for Green as they already had the points before they traded up.

It cost them about 500 points to move up, which has weakened their ability to get Green and Delahunty.

[Mr Magoo]

No club is going to bid on their own academy player. If no bid comes before 6 they’ll take someone else.

They didn’t need to move up the draft for Green as they already had the points before they traded up.

It cost them about 500 points to move up, which has weakened their ability to get Green and Delahunty.

Understand your point re not going for green but lets say we bid at 5 , they elect to take him (therefore forgoing another pick 6) , will that put them in any better position to also match for Delahunty should they need to or does it make no difference ?

Say in my example Sydney also then choose to bid for Delahunty at 25 or 32 which comes before GWS Pick 40

[dazedjosh]

Understand your point re not going for green but lets say we bid at 5 , they elect to take him (therefore forgoing another pick 6) , will that put them in any better position to also match for Delahunty should they need to or does it make no difference ?

Say in my example Sydney also then choose to bid for Delahunty at 25 or 32 which comes before GWS Pick 40

Ok so if we bid on Green at 5 they will almost undoubtedly match because it effectively costs them nothing and gains them nothing. To match a bid the team matching gets a 20% discount on the points required. This system is being reviewed for future drafts but is still in place.
So we bid on Green at 5 that means 1878 - 376 (20%) = 1502
Pick 6 is worth 1751 so they can match 1502 and 249 points remaining, meaning they would get Green and pick 52 in return.

So they will definitely match because at that point they might as well. They won't get two top 10 picks like they hope, but not matching would mean that a crosstown rival gets the player that they have developed.

So then let's say we bid on Delahunty at 25. That's where things get interesting. It should be noted I don't think we will bid on Delahunty but let's say we do.
25 is worth 756 points.
So 756 -150 (20%) leaves them with 606 points to make up. That would require 40 (429) and 52 (246) with 69 points remaining meaning they get lose both of those picks and get Delahunty and pick 69 in return.

So the Giants would have Green, Delahunty, 59, 60, 69, 80, and 94 if we bid on both of their players and they matched. Assuming no draft night trading happened.

EDIT - It should also be noted that the reason the Giants traded up was specifically in the hope that they can get two top 10 players. If they had kept their original picks, they would be in a better position to match on Green and still have some 2nd or 3rd round picks left over to use. But doing it this way means they have a genuine chance at two top 10 talents in this draft. So even if they trade out of next year's 1st round, they don't care because they don't have any academy first rounders next year, and it is a draft that has a lot of father/son and academy kids in the first 2 rounds anyway. They may as well get top talent now, then skip the 2020 draft. It's a good tactic on their part but one that I hope backfires for them as they are the Giants.

[Mr Magoo]

Ok so if we bid on Green at 5 they will almost undoubtedly match because it effectively costs them nothing and gains them nothing. To match a bid the team matching gets a 20% discount on the points required. This system is being reviewed for future drafts but is still in place.
So we bid on Green at 5 that means 1878 - 376 (20%) = 1502
Pick 6 is worth 1751 so they can match 1502 and 249 points remaining, meaning they would get Green and pick 52 in return.

So they will definitely match because at that point they might as well. They won't get two top 10 picks like they hope, but not matching would mean that a crosstown rival gets the player that they have developed.

So then let's say we bid on Delahunty at 25. That's where things get interesting. It should be noted I don't think we will bid on Delahunty but let's say we do.
25 is worth 756 points.
So 756 -150 (20%) leaves them with 606 points to make up. That would require 40 (429) and 52 (246) with 69 points remaining meaning they get lose both of those picks and get Delahunty and pick 69 in return.

So the Giants would have Green, Delahunty, 59, 60, 69, 80, and 94 if we bid on both of their players and they matched. Assuming no draft night trading happened.

EDIT - It should also be noted that the reason the Giants traded up was specifically in the hope that they can get two top 10 players. If they had kept their original picks, they would be in a better position to match on Green and still have some 2nd or 3rd round picks left over to use. But doing it this way means they have a genuine chance at two top 10 talents in this draft. So even if they trade out of next year's 1st round, they don't care because they don't have any academy first rounders next year, and it is a draft that has a lot of father/son and academy kids in the first 2 rounds anyway. They may as well get top talent now, then skip the 2020 draft. It's a good tactic on their part but one that I hope backfires for them as they are the Giants.

Right , get it now. See your reasoning around next year as well as GWS dont seem to have anyone at this time that is likely to go top 20 . The other factor is they may also think they can trade back in to next years draft if need be during the trade period when one or more melbourne clubs inevitably decide that one of the local boys needs to come home from GWS.