13 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

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.

 

Strategy this year has been excellent. Players early then draft position later.

So if this is true we’ve turned 3, 26 and 50 this year into 6 and 8. Feels like slight overs for mine but happy to see what we do with them before losing my mind

31 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

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.

IIRC this loophole has been closed. 

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-to-make-changes-to-academy-draft-rules-20190710-p525yi.html

3 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

I know we’d probably win points-wise by trading pick 3 to pick 6 and their 1st round next year, however what would we conceivably benefit from getting a pick that is like to be in the 14-18 range next year?  I cant see us taking that to the draft considering we’ve already traded out of it. Only way I see it is we’re keen to package that up with the following years 1st round to go for a decent player.

2 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

IIRC this loophole has been closed. 

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-to-make-changes-to-academy-draft-rules-20190710-p525yi.html

Thank you.  Missed that.  Apologies for the red herring.

Its a significant loophole to close.

Really puts the pressure on GWS (and others) to do the pick swaps before draft night.

Edited October 15, 20195 yr by Lucifer's Hero

5 minutes ago, Murph1524 said:

So if this is true we’ve turned 3, 26 and 50 this year into 6 and 8. Feels like slight overs for mine but happy to see what we do with them before losing my mind

But we still don't have a lively small forward or a KPF which we desperatly need

All so confusing yet exciting. Hoping there’s a forward landing at our doorstep later out of this. 

Whitfield per other thread?

1 hour 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. 

They can use future picks can't they (rollover to next year?)

26 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

They can use future picks can't they (rollover to next year?)

Yes they can but the discussed scenario includes losing their 2020 1st rounder to us so they'd be down to later picks which would wipe out their 2020 draft. If they have academy players then they'd be in trouble paying for them.

I think what we'll find is that it'll be more like:
Pick 3 for Pick 6 and GWS 1st rounder next year.  Maybe even another pick thrown in there by GWS.  

This will allow for GWS to get two top 3 pick players for the equivalent of Pick 6, a future 1st and something else(maybe).
This will allow us to get Pick 6 and Pick 8 for Pick 3.  Still maintain a 1st rounder next year.

Anything after 1st round, I think both teams acknowledge is very speculative and a lottery.  

Now what we do with pick 6 and 8 and maybe GWS 1st next year intrigues me.  I would love to turn these 3 picks into a combination of Papley, Brad Crouch, Daniher etc.  Whether that is possible, I don't know.  But I wouldn't put it past Mahoney.  

please not Daniher

The deal with North yesterday didn’t need to happen this window so would suggest we have plans for it

Why help GWS out anyway when we are potentially competing against them for what we hope is a top 4 spot next year. I'd say, heres pick 3, we want finlayson, pick 6, then take 6 and 8 to the draft.

Tomlinson, Langdon, Finlayson, Pick 6 and pick 8. Not a bad day out for only losing Frost.

A pick in the 20-30 range next year in a shallow draft is useless.

Edited October 15, 20195 yr by SFebes

Pick 3 for pick 6 and a future pick is a horrible trade for us. i would be staggered if we actually made that trade. 

we have GWS bent over a barrel and desperate for that pick. 

we simply have to get a ready made best 22 player who can help us next year or take that pick to the draft.

3 minutes ago, SFebes said:

Why help GWS out anyway when we are potentially competing against them for what we hope is a top 4 spot next year. I'd say, heres pick 3, we want finlayson, pick 6, then take 6 and 8 to the draft.

Tomlinson, Langdon, Finlayson, Pick 6 and pick 8. Not a bad day out for only losing Frost.

A pick in the 20-30 range next year in a shallow draft is useless.

Adding to that could we be chasing Papley with 8, as is being mooted by trade media. Carlton were offering 9 but wanted something back.

We could also seek something back. Carlton were talking Swans 2nd rounder.  Carlton can't do the deal until Bombers agree on Daniher.

8 is better than 9 as part of the Bombers deal.

Papley apparently is not stuck on Carlton, but rather getting back to Victoria.

It could all end with us having Papley, Finlayson/Caldwell or another GWS player and 6 and say a pick in the 20's.

Then again it could be another unforeseen pick swap.

Lastly it could just be us with 3 and 8.

Together with Langdon and Tomlinson that would be an amazing trade period for us.

 

4 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Adding to that could we be chasing Papley with 8, as is being mooted by trade media. Carlton were offering 9 but wanted something back.

We could also seek something back. Carlton were talking Swans 2nd rounder.  Carlton can't do the deal until Bombers agree on Daniher.

8 is better than 9 as part of the Bombers deal.

Papley apparently is not stuck on Carlton, but rather getting back to Victoria.

It could all end with us having Papley, Finlayson/Caldwell or another GWS player and 6 and say a pick in the 20's.

Then again it could be another unforeseen pick swap.

Lastly it could just be us with 3 and 8.

Together with Langdon and Tomlinson that would be an amazing trade period for us.

 

I'd much rather any of those scenarios mentioned than a devalued pick that we can't use for a year. We have the hand at the moment to bully GWS into giving us something we want. It would be stupidity to relent and give in to what they want.

Personally i am very happy with Langdon, Tomlinson (less so) 3 and 8 and if he passes due diligence Sam Murray as a DFA.

Hopefully our best "recruits" will be internal ones who were lost to 2018.

11 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Adding to that could we be chasing Papley with 8, as is being mooted by trade media. Carlton were offering 9 but wanted something back.

We could also seek something back. Carlton were talking Swans 2nd rounder.  Carlton can't do the deal until Bombers agree on Daniher.

8 is better than 9 as part of the Bombers deal.

Papley apparently is not stuck on Carlton, but rather getting back to Victoria.

It could all end with us having Papley, Finlayson/Caldwell or another GWS player and 6 and say a pick in the 20's.

Then again it could be another unforeseen pick swap.

Lastly it could just be us with 3 and 8.

Together with Langdon and Tomlinson that would be an amazing trade period for us.

 

One i'd be seriously looking at is Issac Smith. i think we really lack on field leadership, and he addresses a need as well

 

We should keep pick 3 and split 8 maybe get Josh Bruce and another 2 guns in the draft

Edited October 16, 20195 yr by Rednblueriseing

46 minutes ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

One i'd be seriously looking at is Issac Smith. i think we really lack on field leadership, and he addresses a need as well

 

Issac isn't worth a high pick though.  So unless we are in a split via swap of pick / player deal, and soon, that's not even viable as it stands.  If he was part of a deal that's already been in play and discussions well under way?  Possibly.

Edited October 16, 20195 yr by Rusty Nails

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Adding to that could we be chasing Papley with 8, as is being mooted by trade media. Carlton were offering 9 but wanted something back.

We could also seek something back. Carlton were talking Swans 2nd rounder.  Carlton can't do the deal until Bombers agree on Daniher.

8 is better than 9 as part of the Bombers deal.

Papley apparently is not stuck on Carlton, but rather getting back to Victoria.

It could all end with us having Papley, Finlayson/Caldwell or another GWS player and 6 and say a pick in the 20's.

Then again it could be another unforeseen pick swap.

Lastly it could just be us with 3 and 8.

Together with Langdon and Tomlinson that would be an amazing trade period for us.

 

Maybe I'm on my own here but I don't get the hype on Papley, perhaps I just haven't watched many Swans games either this year. It seems we want Weightman so buggered if I know.

Any deal with GWS shifting our pick 3 back to 6 needs to come with an agreement from GWS that they won't choose who we want at 6. e.g. If we're dropping back to pick 6 because we think pick 3 is too high for Stephens (just guessing a name), but then GWS use pick 3 on Stephens, we lose out on getting the player we wanted.

We don't hold all the cards here, yes we have the good ones, but certainly not all of them.