Tomas Bugg & Matt Buntine

[deanox 10,033]

I think this is right.

If we take this deal it would make think that the player or players that we rate as best are not rated as highly by others. I also wonder if our willingness to relinquish pick 2 indicates that we don't rate Aish as highly as others do. Most phantoms have him as a clear pick 2.

Some assumptions there I know but I think they are reasonable.

Not necessarily how we rate them. We might rate Aish the the number 2 pick but may think that a player who will be around at 9 better suits our needs. Ie a genuine mid, stronger body needing less development. In that case we may be just as happy having either and if we can get only the player at pick 2, or the player at pick 9 we are equally happy to have at our club plus a player or two,then the pick 9 option becomes attractive.

[Hannibal 5,814]

If Shiel isn't involved and we trade pick 2 to GWS we're complete flogs.

[old55 23,808]

You make a good point. I guess it depends on what Roos thinks the difference between pick 2 and 9. (thats if we plan to use it as a pick).

Pick 9 would obviously have significantly less value than pick 2 though if we were trading. It can't get in the way of us getting midfielders.

That's a key question. I read in a couple of places that our interviews at the draft combine were very searching and demanding. It could be that we've settled on a player or players that are likely to be still available at 9. Recruiters have a very good idea who will get picked when in the top 10, although that is usually closer to draft day.

[dazzledavey36 55,508]

If Shiel isn't involved and we trade pick 2 to GWS we're complete flogs.

What about if we got Dom Tyson instead?

[deanox 10,033]

...

GWS are looking to add more class to there list ... Shouldn't we want to do the same?

Yes. But the reasoning behind such a trade (and I'm not saying we will or should do it) is that one classy kid (who may not impact for a couple of years) may not be as beneficial to the MFC as another quality, but slightly less classy, kid and one or two other quality kids.

GWS have riches of young players with potential. They can afford to trade out good kids in the hope of adding class.

MFC has a bunch of junk, and may benefit from 3 good players more than it benefits from one classy player.

[Slartibartfast 17,875]

If Shiel isn't involved and we trade pick 2 to GWS we're complete flogs.

Hmmm..... Doubting Roos already.

Interesting. And coming off such a good recent record.

[old55 23,808]

If Shiel isn't involved and we trade pick 2 to GWS we're complete flogs.

Would Geelong have been flogs if they traded 2 for 7 (Selwood) + players in 2006, or Adelaide 2 for 10 (Dangerfield) + players in 2007. I think it depends on what we think is happening at pick 9.

[Machsy 2,858]

GWS see a difference because they want a KP Backman who is available at 2 but wont be at 9, pretty simple....

You sure?

Some sources have said they're after Kelly.

And I've not heard any reputable ones say they are after Scharenberg, so it's a bunch as far as I'm concerned.

Scharenberg is a tallish utility though, not a KPP, as rjay said.

And I think Plowman is a better version anyway.

[P-man 13,366]

Yes. But the reasoning behind such a trade (and I'm not saying we will or should do it) is that one classy kid (who may not impact for a couple of years) may not be as beneficial to the MFC as another quality, but slightly less classy, kid and one or two other quality kids.

GWS have riches of young players with potential. They can afford to trade out good kids in the hope of adding class.

MFC has a bunch of junk, and may benefit from 3 good players more than it benefits from one classy player.

That's great in theory, but Buntine and Bugg just aren't much to write home about. Not every GWS player is automatically quality just because they went high in the draft. And they aren't even addressing our dire need. The more I think about this trade, the less sense it appears to make.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,379]

For a start, Vince is a very good footballer and Michie is an unproven one who may be good enough. The likelihood is there is not the huge variance in talent between pick 2 and 9 in this draft as there has been in some other drafts. That fact is probably the fulcrum upon which the club's desire to trade it swings. Draft pick numbers mean nothing. We have the rights to Kelly (most likely) or Aish and we'll be trading those rights for Buntine (who is a very similar player to Jack Grimes and has been on a similar trajectory), Bugg (who long-term could be our quaterback out of defence and is comfortably a good, albeit extremely homesick player) and for the rights to Kolodjashnij or maybe Freeman if we're lucky. I don't think you can make your argument unless you've got good confidence Kelly is a jet and that those who are in the mix at 9 aren't. Buntine and Bugg will give us one of the deepest and most talented defences in the competition. Michie and Vince will bolster the midfield, along with the move of Watts and organic improvement form our inexperienced players. And we've still got Pick 9, Sylvia compo and 38 to play with. Your playing the Pick 2 will be a guaranteed star card, whereas I think the proposed deal gives us a wider spread of talent, an instant infusion and possibilities to still unearth some stars, of whom I wouldn't write off Buntine or Bugg being very good players.

That's all well & good, but we need midfielders. Granted we could probably do with a small defender as small forwards often tear us up but trading pick 2 for 2 defenders is pretty stupid when the midfield is clearly our most pressing need by a vast way.

[olisik 4,060]

Should offer 2 for pick 9 and Adams

Collingwood can have Buntine and Bugg. We should play hardball and not settle for the sloppy 2nds

[Nasher 33,617]

Should offer 2 for pick 9 and Adams

Collingwood can have Buntine and Bugg. We should play hardball and not settle for the sloppy 2nds

You'd be better off not wasting everyone's time and just offer them nothing, rather than trying to rip them off and having them slam the door in your face.

[Hannibal 5,814]

Hmmm..... Doubting Roos already.

Interesting. And coming off such a good recent record.

He hasn't done it yet and I'll be astonished if he does.

Kelly looks like a future star to me and you don't trade away that possibility for a couple of OK players who aren't midfield guns. Pick 9 would be nice, but it's stars that help elevate footy clubs.

What would Buntine and Bugg be worth in the current market ? I'm guessing anywhere from 15-30. Sound fair ? I wouldn't trade pick 2 for picks 9, 15, 25. I accept the argument that two of these players have a couple of preseasons under their belt, but pick 2 can be club changing.

I'm rapt with Michie, unlike some I'm happy to get Vince for 20, as he's a class mid that will have an immediate impact on the whole midfield, especially Jones, and I look forward to Viney being a year older. Add a (hopefully) rejuvenated Trengove and the midfield starts taking a different shape, especially with the class of Kelly on board.

The mooted trade is utter madness to me.

Edited October 17, 2013 by Ben-Hur

[rjay 25,229]

He hasn't done it yet and I'll be astonished if he does.

Kelly looks like a future star to me and you don't trade away that possibility for a couple of OK players who aren't midfield guns. Pick 9 would be nice, but it's stars that help elevate footy clubs.

What would Buntine and Bugg be worth in the current market ? I'm guessing anywhere from 15-30. Sound fair ? I wouldn't trade pick 2 for picks 9, 15, 25. I accept the argument that two of these players have a couple of preseasons under their belt, but pick 2 can be club changing.

I'm rapt with Michie, unlike some I'm happy to get Vince for 20, as he's a class mid that will have an immediate impact on the whole midfield, especially Jones, and I look forward to Viney being a year older. Add a (hopefully) rejuvenated Trengove and the midfield starts taking a different shape, especially with the class of Kelly on board.

The mooted trade is utter madness to me.

Yeah, it's not going to happen 'Ben', this is an ambit trade from GWS.

[Slartibartfast 17,875]

He hasn't done it yet and I'll be astonished if he does.

Kelly looks like a future star to me and you don't trade away that possibility for a couple of OK players who aren't midfield guns. Pick 9 would be nice, but it's stars that help elevate footy clubs.

What would Buntine and Bugg be worth in the current market ? I'm guessing anywhere from 15-30. Sound fair ? I wouldn't trade pick 2 for picks 9, 15, 25. I accept the argument that two of these players have a couple of preseasons under their belt, but pick 2 can be club changing.

I'm rapt with Michie, unlike some I'm happy to get Vince for 20, as he's a class mid that will have an immediate impact on the whole midfield, especially Jones, and I look forward to Viney being a year older. Add a (hopefully) rejuvenated Trengove and the midfield starts taking a different shape, especially with the class of Kelly on board.

The mooted trade is utter madness to me.

Fair enough. But I think Roos builds teams and doesn't build a team around stars and his history at Swans would support that.

I've got no idea what Buntine or Bugg will be like, hell I've hardly seen them on TV because watching GWS is like watching MFC - not much fun. But if we do it I'll back Roos to know what he's doing and to know the players.

Interesting Emma says we won't go for it and I imagine it's just an opening gambit. And again I've not seen any under age footy this year but from all accounts there isn't much difference between 2 and 10.

Did I read that PA are after 2 and 20? What on earth have they got that would justify that? They aren't going to give us Boak.

Edit: Just as an aside I understand it's very likely we would have taken Kennedy last year if Toumpas wasn't there. This came from two separate sources one inside the footy dept. He ended up going to Collingwood at circa 19. If we know that with pick 2 we will take a player who will most likely be there at 9 then whatever we got from GWS would be a bonus.

Edited October 17, 2013 by Baghdad Bob

[Nasher 33,617]

He hasn't done it yet and I'll be astonished if he does.

Kelly looks like a future star to me and you don't trade away that possibility for a couple of OK players who aren't midfield guns. Pick 9 would be nice, but it's stars that help elevate footy clubs.

Who's to say you won't get your star at 9? In perfect theory pick 2 should be better than pick 9, but I'd be interested to take a really good look back and see where in the draft stars are found. My hypothesis is that you're just as likely to get your star anywhere in the top 10 as you are at #2; I don't see it as a huge gamble if we get two solid players out of it.

[beelzebub 23,389]

Who's to say you won't get your star at 9? In perfect theory pick 2 should be better than pick 9, but I'd be interested to take a really good look back and see where in the draft stars are found. My hypothesis is that you're just as likely to get your star anywhere in the top 10 as you are at #2; I don't see it as a huge gamble if we get two solid players out of it.

And it actually spreads the gamble across more players... Not all eggs in one etc.

[Slartibartfast 17,875]

Who's to say you won't get your star at 9? In perfect theory pick 2 should be better than pick 9, but I'd be interested to take a really good look back and see where in the draft stars are found. My hypothesis is that you're just as likely to get your star anywhere in the top 10 as you are at #2; I don't see it as a huge gamble if we get two solid players out of it.

And Roos is on record as saying draft picks are over rated and players are under rated. I reckon he'd be thrilled to pick up a good mid for two plus a top 10 pick. I don't know GWS list well enough but if we miss on an elite mid and get an A- mid plus pick 9 I think he'd do it in a heartbeat.

[jabberwocky 2,301]

Sydney Swans B: 28 Jared Crouch 21 Leo Barry 30 Lewis Roberts-Thomson HB: 4 Ben Mathews 6 Craig Bolton 17 Tadhg Kennelly C: 26 Sean Dempster 37 Adam Goodes 32 Amon Buchanan HF: 5 Ryan O'Keefe 1 Barry Hall © 24 Jude Bolton F: 10 Paul Williams 19 Michael O'Loughlin 2 Nick Davis Foll: 16 Darren Jolly 31 Brett Kirk 20 Luke Ablett Int: 27 Jason Ball 42 Paul Bevan 13 Adam Schneider 12 Nic Fosdike Coach: Paul Roos

How many stars in the 2005 side?

[Mickey 4,752]

Sydney Swans

B:

28 Jared Crouch

21 Leo Barry

30 Lewis Roberts-Thomson

HB:

4 Ben Mathews

6 Craig Bolton

17 Tadhg Kennelly

C:

26 Sean Dempster

37 Adam Goodes

32 Amon Buchanan

HF:

5 Ryan O'Keefe

1 Barry Hall ©

24 Jude Bolton

F:

10 Paul Williams

19 Michael O'Loughlin

2 Nick Davis

Foll:

16 Darren Jolly

31 Brett Kirk

20 Luke Ablett

Int:

27 Jason Ball

42 Paul Bevan

13 Adam Schneider

12 Nic Fosdike

Coach:

Paul Roos

How many stars in the 2005 side?

Leo Barry, you...?

[Nasher 33,617]

Sydney Swans B: 28 Jared Crouch 21 Leo Barry 30 Lewis Roberts-Thomson HB: 4 Ben Mathews 6 Craig Bolton 17 Tadhg Kennelly C: 26 Sean Dempster 37 Adam Goodes 32 Amon Buchanan HF: 5 Ryan O'Keefe 1 Barry Hall © 24 Jude Bolton F: 10 Paul Williams 19 Michael O'Loughlin 2 Nick Davis Foll: 16 Darren Jolly 31 Brett Kirk 20 Luke Ablett Int: 27 Jason Ball 42 Paul Bevan 13 Adam Schneider 12 Nic Fosdike Coach: Paul Roos

How many stars in the 2005 side?

One. I agree with Ben's assertion that a star is necessary if you want to reach the ultimate, I just disagree that downgrade pick 2 to pick 9 is throwing away the chance at a star.

[P-man 13,366]

Just to emphasise again, the two players in question aren't solid mids. They are defenders that GWS consider to be excess. Neither are ball winners.

Even if there isn't a massive difference between 2 and 9, you'd want your spare change to address what has become an emergency need in the side, surely.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

He hasn't done it yet and I'll be astonished if he does.

Kelly looks like a future star to me and you don't trade away that possibility for a couple of OK players who aren't midfield guns. Pick 9 would be nice, but it's stars that help elevate footy clubs.

What would Buntine and Bugg be worth in the current market ? I'm guessing anywhere from 15-30. Sound fair ? I wouldn't trade pick 2 for picks 9, 15, 25. I accept the argument that two of these players have a couple of preseasons under their belt, but pick 2 can be club changing.

I'm rapt with Michie, unlike some I'm happy to get Vince for 20, as he's a class mid that will have an immediate impact on the whole midfield, especially Jones, and I look forward to Viney being a year older. Add a (hopefully) rejuvenated Trengove and the midfield starts taking a different shape, especially with the class of Kelly on board.

The mooted trade is utter madness to me.

Buntine was a number 5 pick and Bugg is a pretty solid player if you ask me. It ain't like they're offering two fringe players with pick 9 for our pick 2 so I don't know why you see it as madness. Both have the capacity to be very good players, and both can easily be moulded into midfielders.

As for Shiel, I don't share the same love. Yes he's developing well but I don't hold him in the same regard.

If I had a choice between the two, I'd be taking the Bugg, Buntine and pick 9 deal over the Shiel straight swap. There are a plethora of mids in this draft, many rated highly and I'd be confident that pick 9 would net us a great mid who under the tutor-ledge of Roos would be able to develop into a star.

Who's to say you won't get your star at 9? In perfect theory pick 2 should be better than pick 9, but I'd be interested to take a really good look back and see where in the draft stars are found. My hypothesis is that you're just as likely to get your star anywhere in the top 10 as you are at #2; I don't see it as a huge gamble if we get two solid players out of it.

Spot on. Edited October 17, 2013 by stevethemanjordan

[Mickey 4,752]

One. I agree with Ben's assertion that a star is necessary if you want to reach the ultimate, I just disagree that downgrade pick 2 to pick 9 is throwing away the chance at a star.

Who do you consider as the one star? Surely by today's reckoning, Goodes and O'Loughlin?

[Adam The God 30,554]

Who do you consider as the one star? Surely by today's reckoning, Goodes and O'Loughlin?

Goodes was the only star. O'Loughlin was a good, solid player. Not a star though.