1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

Jon Ralph's "mail":

 

Sounds like a plan. I like it. Split 3 into 6 and GWS 1st round pick in 2020

2 minutes ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

I don't understand how Sydney could even consider two first round picks for a guy who's not made it onto the ground in 2 years

 

Are they seriously PO?  There's been so much Joe junk time on radio/twitter i've switched off.  Someone with cred is reporting this?

An astonishingly bad play from where i sit as well if so.

6 minutes ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

I don't understand how Sydney could even consider two first round picks for a guy who's not made it onto the ground in 2 years

 

Its a fraud page by a little 13 year ols that just takes the Micky out of trade week.

Surely you're not getting sucked in by this?

Just now, dazzledavey36 said:

Its a fraud page by a little 13 year ols that just takes the Micky out of trade week.

Surely you're not getting sucked in by this?

I had heard on trade radio a couple of times it seems Essendon think that's a fair asking price and i find that incredible. 

don't believe for a second we have any interest whatsoever in joe.

42 minutes ago, Vineytime said:

• Previous Page
• Next Page

• Previous Page
• Next Page

 

---

• Previous Page
• Next Page

• Previous Page
• Next Page

There were some whispers coming from plough as early as May that the Dogs were coming for him VT

http://aflnation.com.au/2019/05/31/hawthorn-great-gives-his-view-on-isaac-smith-rumours/

However IF you believe Pickering on SEN this morning he was 'seemingly' adamant that there was interest but no serious offers have ever been presented...from 18:40 here...

https://player.whooshkaa.com/episode?id=446214

Edited October 15, 20195 yr by Rusty Nails

27 minutes ago, dworship said:

Humble pie time, please disregard my comment

You didn't happen to find a link or anything with the actual rules by any chance? Couldn't find one, could only find that Richmond article, but would be keen to have a read up on what the actual rules are as I'm still a bit foggy on it all!

Good on you, btw.

 

21 minutes ago, demoniac said:

We need to have 3 selections at the draft but rookie elevations can count as one of the 3.

I think the point we're all trying to clarify is if an actual pick is needed for that anymore.

Hence the examples of Mayndard and Castagna, where no draft pick was used to elevate a rookie.

 

Thanks LN.

https://www.afl.com.au/policies

Click on AFL rules it will start a PDF download

 

49 minutes ago, binman said:

Bloody happy clappers 

Sounds like one of those happy-go-luckies to me, Binny!

10 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

I think the point we're all trying to clarify is if an actual pick is needed for that anymore.

Hence the examples of Mayndard and Castagna, where no draft pick was used to elevate a rookie.

 

After much education, can say yes we do need a pick but there are ample available at the end of the draft. Unfortunately the way the AFL and the Media report this fact is very confusing. Surprise, surprise, surprise.

Thanks to Fire in the Belly , Macca and Nascent

35 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Sounds like a plan. I like it. Split 3 into 6 and GWS 1st round pick in 2020

GWS first round pick could be pick 30 odd after father son and academy selections next year if GWS finish roughly the same position. If they're getting the benefit of 2 highly rated players from a generous deal from us the least we should get is the same for helping them out.

If we go by what happened last year all rookie elevations happened before the actual draft

No draft pick number attached but a rookie elevation effectively acted as a pick. 

The wiki page with regards to the 2018 draft explains it all.  Of course,  wiki isn't always correct but in this case I believe it is.

On another thread I speculated that our 3 choices could all be rookie elevations.  But there are rules surrounding having to use 1st and 2nd round picks in the mysterious '4 year cycle'

But if we end up dealing with GWS we could end up with more than just 1 pick back our way anyway.  My guess is that we'll somehow end up with 2 picks in the top 10 and another pick in the 20's (from an overall perspective) And maybe a player as well - at what level,  who knows?

As others have stated (notably Axis & WJ)  pick 3 is worth a lot more to GWS because of the academy prospect 'Tom Green' ... if they hold pick 3 no other club can bid on him except the Gold Coast and they (the GCS) are almost certainly going to draft Rowell & Anderson.

So GWS get a free hit at pick 3 and then use another later pick (or picks) on Green (if,  as expected,  another club puts in a bid on Green)

So we could expect a fair bit coming back for pick 3 (especially if the 2 clubs have had dialogue over the scenario previously)

Edited October 15, 20195 yr by Macca

9 minutes ago, Macca said:

If we go by what happened last year all rookie elevations happened before the actual draft

No draft pick number attached but a rookie elevation effectively acted as a pick. 

The wiki page with regards to the 2018 draft explains it all.  Of course,  wiki isn't always correct but in this case I believe it is.

On another thread I speculated that our 3 choices could all be rookie elevations.  But there are rules surrounding having to use 1st and 2nd round picks in the mysterious '4 year cycle'

But if we end up dealing with GWS we could end up with more than just 1 pick back our way anyway.  My guess is that we'll somehow end up with 2 picks in the top 10 and another pick in the 20's.  And maybe a player as well - at what level,  who knows?

As others have stated (notably Axis of Bob)  pick 3 is worth a lot more to GWS because of the academy prospect 'Tom Green' ... if they hold pick 3 no other club can bid on him except the Gold Coast and they are almost certainly going to draft Rowell & Anderson.

So GWS get a free hit at pick 3 and then use another later pick (or picks) on Green (if,  as expected,  another club puts in a bid on Green)

So we could expect a fair bit coming back for pick 3 (especially if the 2 clubs have had dialogue over the scenario previously)

What's a fair bit though Macca?  We already hold the ace in pick 3.

Why give it up unless GWS put a head turning quality player forward?  And that player would also want to deal assuming still under contract and suit our requirements.  All seems a tad late as well unless talks have been under way for some time already.

Even with a first rounder coming back it's probably a late one next year, given GWS are likely to finish quite high.  The academy picks also dilute the draft quite badly as has been mentioned  so often.

Edited October 15, 20195 yr by Rusty Nails

33 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

What's a fair bit though Macca?  We already hold the ace in pick 3.

Why give it up unless it GWD put a head turning quality player forward?  And that player would also want to deal assuming still under contract.  All seems a tad late as well.

Even with a first rounder coming back it's probably a late one next year, given GWS are likely to finish quite high.  The academy picks also dilute the draft quite badly as has been mentioned  so often.

I wouldn't necessarily be buying into the next year's first rounder in the deal.  The deal could be of a more immediate nature. 

My thinking is more so this year and what GWS can give us or what they can find for us (this year) More picks outside of the 1st round and/or a player. 

As for next year,  we've finally got moving with free agency so what's to stop us gaining 2 or 3 more RFA's next year?  All things are possible.

We don't necessarily need nor may we even want a first rounder next year especially if we go to the draft with 2 first rounders this season. And possibly a 2nd rounder this year as well.  And trading in some established talent with one of our first round picks this year can't be ruled out either (even after we possibly trade pick 3)

But I'm just guessing like most others Rusty.  Could be quite a day tomorrow hey?

 

Edited October 15, 20195 yr by Macca

7 hours ago, Macca said:

I wouldn't necessarily be buying into the next year's first rounder in the deal.  The deal could be of a more immediate nature. 

My thinking is more so this year and what GWS can give us or what they can find for us (this year) More picks outside of the 1st round and/or a player. 

As for next year,  we've finally got moving with free agency so what's to stop us gaining 2 or 3 more RFA's next year?  All things are possible.

We don't necessarily need nor may we even want a first rounder next year especially if we go to the draft with 2 first rounders this season. And possibly a 2nd rounder this year as well.  And trading in some established talent with one of our first round picks this year can't be ruled out either (even after we possibly trade pick 3)

But I'm just guessing like most others Rusty.  Could be quite a day tomorrow hey?

 

Can say that again Macca.  Although if nothing eventuates on the trade front (for us) probably a bit of an anti climax as well.

Still, two very good picks to take in to the PSD.

option 1 ... keep 3 & 8. Likely pick #3 Hayden Young and #8 Brodie Kemp or Dylan Stephens 

Giants will want Tom Green and could vslue move to pick 3  

option 2 ... trade 3 to Giants for pick 6 and 2020 1st round GWS pick.  Use pick 6 on who is available from Young, Serong, Ash or Kemp.  Use pick 8 on Stephens 

 

Gunston and Smith for 8?

GWS can't give us more latet picks this year because they'll need them all to match the Green bid.

It has to be 6 + player which has to happen today or 6 + 2020 1st which could happen any time up until pick 3 is due on draft night.

30 minutes ago, AaronDaveyChipsAndGravey said:

Gunston and Smith for 8?

Not for me. 

32 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

GWS can't give us more latet picks this year because they'll need them all to match the Green bid.

It has to be 6 + player which has to happen today or 6 + 2020 1st which could happen any time up until pick 3 is due on draft night.

I dont think it will be aplayer, not this late. It will be Pick 6 and next years First. As i have said, we need a bit more i think, GWS need this more than we need it, so let them pay the price. if we gave up 3 picks for 1 with North, then we need to extract the same from GWS pick 3 for 3 picks (6, 40 & 2020 1st rounder)

3 minutes ago, Demon3 said:

I dont think it will be aplayer, not this late. It will be Pick 6 and next years First. As i have said, we need a bit more i think, GWS need this more than we need it, so let them pay the price. if we gave up 3 picks for 1 with North, then we need to extract the same from GWS pick 3 for 3 picks (6, 40 & 2020 1st rounder)

Wont they need their 2020 first rounder for yet another academy player?

2 minutes ago, Demon3 said:

I dont think it will be aplayer, not this late. It will be Pick 6 and next years First. As i have said, we need a bit more i think, GWS need this more than we need it, so let them pay the price. if we gave up 3 picks for 1 with North, then we need to extract the same from GWS pick 3 for 3 picks (6, 40 & 2020 1st rounder)

I agree we'd like more but tell me how they'll match a bid for Green at say pick 5.  What picks will they use? I think 40 needs to be one of them. 

GWS can get Green without pick 3 and without using pick 6.  They just need to make sure they have enough points after 6 to get him. 

How?  Live pick trading, some fast footwork and trust that another team will honour pre-arranged live pick deals!

It happened last year during 'live pick trade'.  Several clubs (eg Sydney with WCE) traded out their high pick when their academy player was called and used later picks.  As soon as they drafted the acadamy player they live traded back in a high draft pick at around the same level as the one they traded out minutes earlier.  Thereby avoided using a high pick for their player. 

That is powerful stuff and a lot more teams will be using that loophole this year. 

Back to GWS and Green.  Assume he is bid at pick 3.  GWS immediately trade out pick 6 hypothetically to Geelong for 14 and 18 then use their later picks on Green.  As soon as they have Green they can trade 14, 18 or whatever to a team with a pick higher up the order or just keep them if they think their second choice player will fall to 14. 

Note: future picks can also be traded during live trade. 

I reckon there is a lot of jostling to go on pick trading for the next 6 weeks.  Lots of live pick trade scenarios will be negotiated in advance of the draft with other teams.

Edit:  Just realised in this hypotetical GWS would need to use 14 and 18 for Green.  So a poor example but the principle still holds.

Later Edit: Thanks to @titan_uranuspost below highlighting that this loophole was closed.  Puts the pressure on GWS to get a deal done before the draft.

Apologies for red herring.

Edited October 15, 20195 yr by Lucifer's Hero

9 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

I agree we'd like more but tell me how they'll match a bid for Green at say pick 5.  What picks will they use? I think 40 needs to be one of them. 

yes, good point, pick 40 will be pivotal in the bidding for Green. Something else then please.

11 minutes ago, Roger Mellie said:

Wont they need their 2020 first rounder for yet another academy player?

Yep, they may need that, thats exactly why we hold the aces, if they dont want to give  us that then its 3 & 8 for us.