On 13/11/2019 at 10:08, Moonshadow said:

And up... if GWS use up 6 for Green our 8 effectively moves up one spot

I think GWS can trade it out after the nomination and #8 will actually drop to #9. 

I’d be really happy too see us pick up Green & Kemp.

  On 13/11/2019 at 10:58, Fat Tony said:

I think GWS can trade it out after the nomination and #8 will actually drop to #9. 

I thought the AFL changed that so that it could no longer happen????

  On 13/11/2019 at 23:34, Moonshadow said:

I thought the AFL changed that so that it could no longer happen????

We nominate Green. GWS trade pick 6 to say GC for 15 and 20.  GWS get Green at pick 3 using points from pick 15 plus other picks. We now effectively have pick 4 and 9. 

  On 14/11/2019 at 00:34, Watson11 said:

We nominate Green. GWS trade pick 6 to say GC for 15 and 20.  GWS get Green at pick 3 using points from pick 15 plus other picks. We now effectively have pick 4 and 9. 

So can you or anyone confirm that this year clubs can use the 5 mins after academy bids to swap picks? Someone got a recent link to this?

I thought I read the AFL sent out a memo to clubs saying this would not longer be permitted. Can no longer find where.

That was my original enquiry. 

  On 14/11/2019 at 00:45, Moonshadow said:

So can you or anyone confirm that this year clubs can use the 5 mins after academy bids to swap picks? Someone got a recent link to this?

I thought I read the AFL sent out a memo to clubs saying this would not longer be permitted. Can no longer find where.

That was my original enquiry. 

https://m.afl.com.au/news/2019-11-07/get-set-for-draft-night-drama-why-clubs-are-holding-fire-on-pick-swaps
 

Did the memo go out after the above article?

Right on cue:  Live Trading Rules Released 20 minutes ago! 

Re GWS, it says: 

"The Giants could move on their first selection (Pick 6) in return for later selections, which would aid their second selection (Pick 40) in matching a bid. They could then look to leapfrog back into the top 15 after completing a deal with another club, following the closure of the loophole with the same club.

Another option would be to wait until the player has been bidded on, with teams able to make a live trade to downgrade while on the clock, allowing for lower selections to be used to match bids".

Fortunately, it doesn't prohibit swapping back in a pick traded to a club during the trade period.  This means we can pick swap with Freo and North if we wanted to.

Not sure what it will mean for our pick 8 yet, but net result for us at pick 3 is we will bid on Green, have it matched by GWS, then draft Young.

It's looking less likely we'll split pick 8 now. GWS missed their opportunity for a pick split when they refused to trade picks AND a player during trade period. They don't have pick currency alone to warrant a beneficial trade for us.

We may have looked at a pick swap wth Freo to trade 8 for 10+22, but we're not allowed to trade in Freos pick 22, as we originally traded it to them in the Langdon deal and rules say they cannot trade it back. I said at the time that the 2nd round pick shuffle in the Langdon trade was weak and pointless and purely to appease Bell, and it's now going to cost both clubs the ability to perform the more important higher-value pick trade. 

  On 14/11/2019 at 01:54, Lord Travis said:

Not sure what it will mean for our pick 8 yet, but net result for us at pick 3 is we will bid on Green, have it matched by GWS, then draft Young.

It's looking less likely we'll split pick 8 now. GWS missed their opportunity for a pick split when they refused to trade picks AND a player during trade period. They don't have pick currency alone to warrant a beneficial trade for us.

We may have looked at a pick swap wth Freo to trade 8 for 10+22, but we're not allowed to trade in Freos pick 22, as we originally traded it to them in the Langdon deal and rules say they cannot trade it back. I said at the time that the 2nd round pick shuffle in the Langdon trade was weak and pointless and purely to appease Bell, and it's now going to cost both clubs the ability to perform the more important higher-value pick trade. 

Couldn't Freo swap 22 and a later pick, for say 21 and a drop on that later pick, making it attractive to the other club?

Then they would have another pick in 21 to swap with us.

 

  On 14/11/2019 at 01:58, Redleg said:

Couldn't Freo swap 22 and a later pick, for say 21 and a drop on that later pick, making it attractive to the other club?

Then they would have another pick in 21 to swap with us.

 

They could in theory, but it becomes increasingly less likely in such small time frames now. The clubs are basically starting to outsmart themselves.

GWS traded up to pick 6 intended to use that to get our pick 3, and then they [censored] it up. They've outsmarted themselves and potentially buggered up a whole bunch of other clubs discussed trades now too.

  On 14/11/2019 at 02:01, Lord Travis said:

They could in theory, but it becomes increasingly less likely in such small time frames now. The clubs are basically starting to outsmart themselves.

GWS traded up to pick 6 intended to use that to get our pick 3, and then they [censored] it up. They've outsmarted themselves and potentially buggered up a whole bunch of other clubs discussed trades now too.

Well could this happen, I mean be allowed?

GWS offer to delist say Caldwell and he goes in the PSD, nominating terms that GC can't match and we swap 6 for 3 and maybe a later pick thrown in for us as well.

They would get Green and whoever they wanted at 3 and lose Caldwell and a later pick.

Essentially they would be swapping say Caldwell to get say Jackson and still get Green. That is a monster deal for them.

Edited November 14, 20195 yr by Redleg

  On 14/11/2019 at 01:54, Lord Travis said:

 

We may have looked at a pick swap wth Freo to trade 8 for 10+22, but we're not allowed to trade in Freos pick 22, as we originally traded it to them in the Langdon deal and rules say they cannot trade it back. I said at the time that the 2nd round pick shuffle in the Langdon trade was weak and pointless and purely to appease Bell, and it's now going to cost both clubs the ability to perform the more important higher-value pick trade. 

I dont think that's certain. See Lucifer's Hero post earlier.

I also don't think it's certain GWS would match a bid on Green at 3. They might have traded up to 6 for Jackson.

What a pr!ck of a rule.

Completely against the spirit of the bid/bid match principle and borderline draft tampering

Pretty sure MFC bid on Green at 3.

If GWS down trade for 2 x 2019 picks all the value will go on the match. Their best strategy is to trade 6 for a pick in the teens and a future first. That way only the teens pick and later picks get swallowed by the match for Green, the future 1st is quarantined.

Possible clubs are Geelong, Port and GC (2020 mid 1st round compo)

  On 17/11/2019 at 03:25, Fifty-5 said:

Pretty sure MFC bid on Green at 3.

Is this simply an opinion? They might not even match if we bid.

  On 14/11/2019 at 00:34, Watson11 said:

We nominate Green. GWS trade pick 6 to say GC for 15 and 20.  GWS get Green at pick 3 using points from pick 15 plus other picks. We now effectively have pick 4 and 9. 

Yes that’s a possibility. If I was Giants, I would DEFINITELY MATCH ANY BID FOR GREEN. He will be a star. 

Could be interesting if GCS bid on Green with 1 or 2.

Would the Giants match? 

The points value differential between #3 and #4 is equivalent of #6 to #8. We could promise not to bid on Green so long as if Adelaide or Sydney bid GWS would then trade #6 for #8 and a late future pick. They could then trade #8 with a third party. 

Could come into serious calculations for us now after GWS and Adelaide have swapped picks.  We place a bid and GWS no certainty to match with Jackson then becoming available to them. Will be interesting to see who we go for.

I suspect we won't bid and claim Jackson, meaning GWS will be successful in securing Green + top 4 pick. Will be an interesting draft.

I say bid on Green... Screw GWS! 

Unless we trade Pick 3 for Freo’s 7 & 10.

  On 19/11/2019 at 04:46, Nascent said:

Could come into serious calculations for us now after GWS and Adelaide have swapped picks.  We place a bid and GWS no certainty to match with Jackson then becoming available to them. Will be interesting to see who we go for.

I suspect we won't bid and claim Jackson, meaning GWS will be successful in securing Green + top 4 pick. Will be an interesting draft.

I would be doing a deal for a player next year with GWS, to stop us bidding on Green and making them have wasted their upgrade.

  On 19/11/2019 at 04:53, Redleg said:

I would be doing a deal for a player next year with GWS, to stop us bidding on Green and making them have wasted their upgrade.

Interesting thought. Have a gentleman's agreement to not bid on Green to allow them to have two top 5 players on the proviso they trade us a player on the cheap next year. I like it, surely they have a surplus of mids if they take Green as well.

  On 19/11/2019 at 04:53, Redleg said:

I would be doing a deal for a player next year with GWS, to stop us bidding on Green and making them have wasted their upgrade.

sort of like an east-west link agreement, red?

I wonder if there could potentially be a situation in play where the handshake deal effectively would be. we take Jackson 3 and don't bid on Green if they don't take Young and he potentially slides to 8 

Crows are keen on Stephens at 6, Swans keen on Flanders and i suspect Dockers will grab Robertson. 

we may potentially get our 2 highest preferences out of this. Giants did have interest in Serong at one stage so surely they'd see him and Green as a great result. 

https://coupler.foxsports.com.au/api/v1/article/amp/afl/afl-draft-2020-afl-trade-gws-giants-and-adelaide-crows-trade-draft-picks-tom-green/news-story/01c1693e22a6985cc16bbcec853680fb?__twitter_impression=true

Foxfooty.com.au understands Melbourne is not expected to bid on the Patrick Cripps clone, favouring West Australian Luke Jackson with their Pick 3.