Page 157 of 198 FirstFirst ... 57107147153154155156157158159160161167 ... LastLast
Results 1,873 to 1,884 of 2366

Thread: 2022 List management, trading, drafting

  1. #1873
    Veterans List Ludwig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    9,310
    Quote Originally Posted by 111431 View Post
    Brisbane badly need a first round for Dunkley and, unless we have an idea to package our first 2 picks together to go higher up the draft, the difference between the picks is negligible. Supposedly next year is a better draft so to have more options in it makes some sense
    The way I'm looking at this draft is to set a priority for a tall KPP, which we would probably take at our 1st pick. The main candidates are Busslinger at 196 cm, Hayes at 197 cm, and Keeler (who I like the most) at 198 cm. At least 1 should be available at our 1st pick and possibly all 3 will be available.

    After that, I think the draft flattens out until around pick 30, with lots of prospects who could be classified as tall midfielders, tall utilities or key defenders of average height (~193cm). A pick in the early 20s should secure a good prospect.

    I might be willing to trade our 2nd round pick for a 2023 2nd rounder, depending on how the trade period pans out. Maybe something to consider on draft night as well.

    I think this strategy gives us the depth we need to cover impending losses of KPPs like Buddy, Reid and Rampe over the next couple of years. An extra pick in the 2nd round could be useful next year if we have to recruit a ruckman. I'm not worried about midfielders as the queue is long enough to break into the senior side, so we don't need to increase the competition for spots there.
    Last edited by Ludwig; 6th October 2022 at 04:08 PM.

  2. #1874
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Close to the old Lake Oval
    Posts
    3,892
    Quote Originally Posted by 707 View Post
    They can't fit $850k x 2 in their cap so I assume Bowes has agreed to take a little more over more years. The caps that would have to be most dodgy are Geelong and Carlton. Both have out of cap financial opportunities for players so it's reported, property development is big around Geelong but Carlton's is a bit invisyble
    Are we sure about these property deals? Lifestyle is important and down there on the coast is a lot quieter etc. A number of their players are from around there and the western district.

  3. #1875
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,395
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post
    I wonder if we could offer our pick 17 + our 4th rounder to Brisbane for their pick 21 and a future 2nd rounder. That would give them a 1st round pick, albeit a late one, to get the Dunkley trade over the line. I would like to keep our pick 14, but after that pick there are a lot of good choices in the 20 to 30 range so don't feel that trading down will hurt us. Another 2nd rounder could be useful next year.
    Pick 17 isn't going to get Dunkley to the Lions on its own. If the Dogs feel they have few options, they might accept pick 17 and the Lions' first round pick next year. But the Lions can't trade out a future first round pick unless it has all its other future picks in tact (or equivalent round picks traded in from other clubs). I've just had a look at the fantastic resource on BF that tracks current year and future picks traded, which indicates that the Lions hold a single future second round pick at the moment. It's clearly not their own, but I'd have to go digging further to work out whose pick it is and how they got it. But whoever's it is, they can't really trade it if they plan on trading their future first.

    Resource - FUTURE PICKS - 2023 Provisional Draft Order (updated throughout the trade period) | Page 2 | BigFooty Forum

    I wonder if it occurred to anyone at the Lions that, in a season where you finished in the top four (so don't have a high pick) and you're about to recruit the number one draft selection and another player likely in the late first round, it might not be feasible to try and recruit another established, decent quality player who is going to cost you two late first round picks (at least) or one pretty early first round pick. Not unless you're willing to give up something good (or lose something good, willingly or unwillingly), something better than McStay. Though presumably McStay will get them a second round pick (towards the end of the second round) so long as they succeed in manipulating free agency by trading in Gunston.

  4. #1876
    McVeigh for Brownlow Site Admin RogueSwan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Coffs Harbour - home of Swans summer camp
    Posts
    4,587
    Quote Originally Posted by Blood Fever View Post
    Are we sure about these property deals? ...
    Not really but, as I have posted elsewhere, I did hear Ross Lyon one Sunday on MMM allege that property deals can/are done to get players extra cash. I don't remember the specifics but he gave an example along the lines of a player buying a property and getting a "guaranteed" sale a few years later at something like $300,000 more than they bought it for. Some of the commentators on, I think it was the Fox Footy podcast, joke about it like it is an open secret. But I guess without any proof you have treat it like anything else you read on the internet. it could all be true or be completely false.
    "Fortunately, this is the internet, so knowing nothing is no obstacle to having an opinion!." Beerman 18-07-2017

  5. #1877
    that has been happening for 40 years is what i have heard over the decades from family friends / family of ex players / ex team mates

    there are so many ways

    lets play golf for $100k..........sponsor and marque player........marque player wins the $100k game of golf everytime !!!!
    "be tough, only when it gets tough"


  6. #1878
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Close to the old Lake Oval
    Posts
    3,892
    Quote Originally Posted by RogueSwan View Post
    Not really but, as I have posted elsewhere, I did hear Ross Lyon one Sunday on MMM allege that property deals can/are done to get players extra cash. I don't remember the specifics but he gave an example along the lines of a player buying a property and getting a "guaranteed" sale a few years later at something like $300,000 more than they bought it for. Some of the commentators on, I think it was the Fox Footy podcast, joke about it like it is an open secret. But I guess without any proof you have treat it like anything else you read on the internet. it could all be true or be completely false.
    Fair enough. I supppse we'll never be sure.

  7. #1879
    scott names the planets stellation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    peaches eaten, trousers rolled
    Posts
    9,693
    Blog Entries
    2
    A little bit of a guilty pleasure to watch I admit, and I can't see him fitting in our best 22 (and I'm sure someone will reference the "No Dickheads", although apparently he's a nice chap off the field); but after being a little traumatised by our midfield being manhandled by the bigger Geelong mids I'll admit that seeing an article about Rhys Mathieson pondering the chance of a move was a thing that made me (briefly) go "hmmmmm".
    I knew him as a gentle young man, I cannot say for sure the reasons for his decline
    We watched him fade before our very eyes, and years before his time

  8. #1880
    Quote Originally Posted by stellation View Post
    A little bit of a guilty pleasure to watch I admit, and I can't see him fitting in our best 22 (and I'm sure someone will reference the "No Dickheads", although apparently he's a nice chap off the field); but after being a little traumatised by our midfield being manhandled by the bigger Geelong mids I'll admit that seeing an article about Rhys Mathieson pondering the chance of a move was a thing that made me (briefly) go "hmmmmm".
    Can anybody tell me.if we have even considered Matt Crouch? Surly his big body and ball winning experience is something we need, would also be dirt cheap trade

    Sent from my SM-A715F using Tapatalk

  9. #1881
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,395
    Quote Originally Posted by stellation View Post
    A little bit of a guilty pleasure to watch I admit, and I can't see him fitting in our best 22 (and I'm sure someone will reference the "No Dickheads", although apparently he's a nice chap off the field); but after being a little traumatised by our midfield being manhandled by the bigger Geelong mids I'll admit that seeing an article about Rhys Mathieson pondering the chance of a move was a thing that made me (briefly) go "hmmmmm".
    Please no. NO.

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Swan15 View Post
    Can anybody tell me.if we have even considered Matt Crouch? Surly his big body and ball winning experience is something we need, would also be dirt cheap trade
    Please no. NO.

  10. #1882
    Ego alta, ergo ictus Ruck'n'Roll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Over here!
    Posts
    3,856
    Quote Originally Posted by rb4x View Post
    Who does that leave. Cunningham, Ronke, Bell and Naismith. Cunningham has a contract in front of him.
    Cunningham is our best lock down small defender (I remember giving Stengle a bath when we played the cats) and remains Out of contract - and had his place taken by more offensively skilled defenders, Ollie etc.
    Clarke is our best lock down forward, and has a contract - meanwhile more offensively skilled forwards, Ronke etc. are uncontracted.
    There's a weird sort of yang/yang symmetry about it to my eyes.
    FWIW I'm still a bit unsure about having a lockdown/forward line tagger as a permanent fixture on the forward line. Especially if the opposition don't have a Sinclair/Daicos type, whose negation might disrupt their route out of defence.

  11. #1883
    Veterans List Ludwig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    9,310
    Quote Originally Posted by liz View Post
    Pick 17 isn't going to get Dunkley to the Lions on its own. If the Dogs feel they have few options, they might accept pick 17 and the Lions' first round pick next year. But the Lions can't trade out a future first round pick unless it has all its other future picks in tact (or equivalent round picks traded in from other clubs). I've just had a look at the fantastic resource on BF that tracks current year and future picks traded, which indicates that the Lions hold a single future second round pick at the moment. It's clearly not their own, but I'd have to go digging further to work out whose pick it is and how they got it. But whoever's it is, they can't really trade it if they plan on trading their future first.

    Resource - FUTURE PICKS - 2023 Provisional Draft Order (updated throughout the trade period) | Page 2 | BigFooty Forum

    I wonder if it occurred to anyone at the Lions that, in a season where you finished in the top four (so don't have a high pick) and you're about to recruit the number one draft selection and another player likely in the late first round, it might not be feasible to try and recruit another established, decent quality player who is going to cost you two late first round picks (at least) or one pretty early first round pick. Not unless you're willing to give up something good (or lose something good, willingly or unwillingly), something better than McStay. Though presumably McStay will get them a second round pick (towards the end of the second round) so long as they succeed in manipulating free agency by trading in Gunston.
    I assumed that the deal would include the 2023 1st round pick, and so has every commentator. I hadn't checked on the 1st rounder restrictions, because no one else had raised the issue and just assumed it must be okay. Every club that has been in the 1st rounder bind seems to have extracted themselves from the problem. I suppose if they need to use a 1st rounder next year they can trade their 2024 1st rounder as part of a deal to get one.

    And Lore's BF draft resource is really great stuff. I found it a couple of years ago. Very helpful.

  12. #1884
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,395
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post
    I assumed that the deal would include the 2023 1st round pick, and so has every commentator. I hadn't checked on the 1st rounder restrictions, because no one else had raised the issue and just assumed it must be okay. Every club that has been in the 1st rounder bind seems to have extracted themselves from the problem. I suppose if they need to use a 1st rounder next year they can trade their 2024 1st rounder as part of a deal to get one.

    And Lore's BF draft resource is really great stuff. I found it a couple of years ago. Very helpful.
    The rule about having to take a certain number of first round picks to the actual draft over a certain number of years is separate from the restriction on trading all your future picks now. I am not aware of a club that has ever obtained an exemption on the rule that you can't trade your future first now if you don't hold a future second and future third (and maybe future fourth- not sure about that). That's not something the Lions can fix up next year.

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