2024 Trade Week Report Cards

[Demonland 71,114]

[whatwhat say what 22,552]

i, too, can throw darts at the wall

[Redleg 40,775]

12 minutes ago, Demonland said:

That is interesting.

Tigers got no one and lost 4 players including 3 of top 5 in B & F but got a lot of good draft picks.

We lost one good player, picked up a younger replacement and a stop gap backup ruckman for nothing and added a top ten draft pick and Tigers are an A- and we are C+. Essendon get rid of their leading goal kicker of the last few years for pick 53 and get no one and get a C.

Cats pick up best young player for 17 and lose no one and only get a B+.

Anyway who cares?

 

[CHF 2,716]

Read the club by club reviews of trading and some pertinent comments about different club's trading were made, However, when it came to MFC, the whole blurb was to do with the rubbish that had been going on the the last month or so. Nothing really about the fact that we have a couple of first round picks in the first 10. 

Also started reporting on what the situation might be in 12 months time with Pickett, Petracca and Oliver. That has very little to do with our performance in this trade period, except to say that we have done very well to retain these three players for next season, added a couple of depth players to cover holes and got two excellent first round picks in a deep draft.

 

[No10 458]

2 hours ago, CHF said:

Read the club by club reviews of trading and some pertinent comments about different club's trading were made, However, when it came to MFC, the whole blurb was to do with the rubbish that had been going on the the last month or so. Nothing really about the fact that we have a couple of first round picks in the first 10. 

Also started reporting on what the situation might be in 12 months time with Pickett, Petracca and Oliver. That has very little to do with our performance in this trade period, except to say that we have done very well to retain these three players for next season, added a couple of depth players to cover holes and got two excellent first round picks in a deep draft.

 

It’s all gossip on the MFC. But the reality is that we kept our two guns.  And another 12 months is a long time in football.

In terms of results: ANB leaving was handled with respect and an adequate result. And Harry Sharp is a nice potential replacement.

The real brilliance is the draft hand. Posters here were suggesting we could get multiple first round picks, I don’t think anyone thought 2 x top 10 was possible.

For our list profile, 2 of the highest rated talents is the perfect outcome. I hope we don’t split p9 and I doubt we will. In this draft p5 is first tier and not a lot less valuable than p1.  And p9 is somewhat a wildcard with so many talented kids in that range.

I have very little love for Houston, overrated, glad we moved on.

I have no idea what the MFC could’ve done better. A+

[darkhorse72 1,901]

Very subjective rating.  Why Houston's kicking would have been great to break the lines from half back.  I think his price would have meant possibly pick 5, though holding out Port caved in their demands in the end to accept less.

Interestingly those that waited ended up with worse deals that those that settled trades early. 

 

 

 

 

 

[John Demonic 5,702]

Those daily Fox Footy trade shows were a Fail. I Fast Forwarded thru to stop if they were discussing anything interesting and spent less than a minute or two watching each night. They need to recruit an interesting panelist or two next year if they want a pass mark.

Edited October 16 by John Demonic

[IRW 1,386]

7 hours ago, CHF said:

Read the club by club reviews of trading and some pertinent comments about different club's trading were made, However, when it came to MFC, the whole blurb was to do with the rubbish that had been going on the the last month or so. Nothing really about the fact that we have a couple of first round picks in the first 10. 

Also started reporting on what the situation might be in 12 months time with Pickett, Petracca and Oliver. That has very little to do with our performance in this trade period, except to say that we have done very well to retain these three players for next season, added a couple of depth players to cover holes and got two excellent first round picks in a deep draft.

 

Well one of those picks wasn't a trade it because of a lousy ladder placement. 

Still two first rounders and a ruck who hopefully  won't get a game along with failing to get any targets to come across really just shows how weak MFC 's appeal is.

This was about as good as could be expected 

 

[Lil_red_fire_engine 11,080]

For anyone wanting to give this some credibility and be disappointed last year they rated Collingwood giving up their first for Schultz and Ginnivan for next to nothing as a B. These periods are best judged in 1-2 years time. Looking at who went where and what our intent was mature low cost ruck, replace some run, add elite draftees it’s hard to argue we didnt meet expectations. I could see Sharp being the bargain buy of this years trade like Massimo last year. 

[Flowergirl 539]

I find giving Collingwood an A- a bit of a stretch. As good as Houston is, they have traded their future for him and have a lack of depth under 23. They have taken a huge gamble, and while it might get them into finals next year, they will pay for it later. I'd much rather have access to this year's draft. Getting pick 9 was a great move.

Given the fact that we scared off potential suitors, I think we did pretty well getting Sharp and Campbell in. I'd at least give us a B. 

The real winners were Fremantle and Gold Coast IMHO.

[DubDee 25,433]

Tigers lost half their senior players and get an A

If this was us it would be Deeaster - no one wants to play for MFC, no leadership, this will set the club back a decade

but agree, who really cares. let’s just get better and screw the media 

[Colm 2,046]

Tigers went all in on their rebuild. Didn’t have to trade players out as they were under contract. Got overs in both the Rioli and Bolton deals. Now have the strongest draft hand ever held by a non expansion team in a draft that’s rated the best in recent history. Pulled the trigger and got aggressive with their rebuild before Tassie team comes in. I think they have done well. 

[BDA 22,691]

10 minutes ago, Colm said:

Tigers went all in on their rebuild. Didn’t have to trade players out as they were under contract. Got overs in both the Rioli and Bolton deals. Now have the strongest draft hand ever held by a non expansion team in a draft that’s rated the best in recent history. Pulled the trigger and got aggressive with their rebuild before Tassie team comes in. I think they have done well. 

I agree as long as they nail their picks

[buck_nekkid 5,839]

The rating seems to be heavy with confirmation bias.  Did we do what the pundits expected?  i wonder if CO13 or CP5 left the building, how we would have been rated. [censored] Morris would have gone into overdrive!

I think we did OK, I would say a B or B+, only didnt get Wade D, from the giants.  2 top 10 picks in this draft will be very nice.

[No10 458]

30 minutes ago, Colm said:

Tigers went all in on their rebuild. Didn’t have to trade players out as they were under contract. Got overs in both the Rioli and Bolton deals. Now have the strongest draft hand ever held by a non expansion team in a draft that’s rated the best in recent history. Pulled the trigger and got aggressive with their rebuild before Tassie team comes in. I think they have done well. 

I actually think the Tigers have gone too far. Too many kids at once. Not enough senior talent to steer them to best results. We’ve been there.

[Colm 2,046]

6 minutes ago, No10 said:

I actually think the Tigers have gone too far. Too many kids at once. Not enough senior talent to steer them to best results. We’ve been there.

I can see why you’d think that and time might prove you right. But the likes of Baker, Bolton and Rioli are unlikely to still be  playing when they next win a flag. Hit the draft hard this year and next and then trade in  mature players like we did with Vince, Lewis, May and Lever. 
Yze is certainly going to have a tough job ahead of him over the next couple of years though. 

[Roost it far 8,104]

11 minutes ago, Colm said:

I can see why you’d think that and time might prove you right. But the likes of Baker, Bolton and Rioli are unlikely to still be  playing when they next win a flag. Hit the draft hard this year and next and then trade in  mature players like we did with Vince, Lewis, May and Lever. 
Yze is certainly going to have a tough job ahead of him over the next couple of years though. 

It’s also the luxury of having won 3 flags in the last 8 years. Club has been bold and snared a third of the first 24 picks. If you were a Tiger fan you’d be feeling pretty good right now. How it plays out is another thing, this draft is all talk atm. I’m guessing they’ll be targeting higher picks before the draft is over. 

[roy11 3,823]

23 minutes ago, buck_nekkid said:

The rating seems to be heavy with confirmation bias.  Did we do what the pundits expected?  i wonder if CO13 or CP5 left the building, how we would have been rated. [censored] Morris would have gone into overdrive!

I think we did OK, I would say a B or B+, only didnt get Wade D, from the giants.  2 top 10 picks in this draft will be very nice.

Another website gave us a B+

It's a little confusing, Fox seems to be focusing on players in/out for us with no mention of us gaining an extra first round pick whilst at the same time giving Richmond an A- for losing several players, not replacing them with players but with high end draft picks.

[Age 485]

Just crystal balling here but Collingwood, by going for the now, may be a masterstroke. If they give Tassie a heap of picks but make them trade a bunch of them for established players, the Pies, after having had their run, then ship off a bunch of these older players for a heap of early picks, letting them rebuild really quickly. It is almost like that would be perfect for the AFL, the pies maybe winning another flag or two but then not really having to bottom out. I would never accuse the AFL of letting the pies know of their plans for Tassie beforehand as we all know that if there is one 100% ethical organisation in the land, it is the AFL!

Just my thoughts. I hope that clubs burns to the ground but I'm never that lucky. 

[Young Blood 2,568]

17 minutes ago, Colm said:

I can see why you’d think that and time might prove you right. But the likes of Baker, Bolton and Rioli are unlikely to still be  playing when they next win a flag. Hit the draft hard this year and next and then trade in  mature players like we did with Vince, Lewis, May and Lever. 
Yze is certainly going to have a tough job ahead of him over the next couple of years though. 

I think Lever was 22 when he came across to us, I suppose he was mature beyond his years though. But I agree with you.

This draft is looking far better than next years and with the Devils looming the Tiges are loading up now for some struggling/development seasons ahead before they top up with mature players again by the time 2028 comes around.

[deelusions from afar 1,768]

I remember when we used to get A / A+ for trade and draft ratings through the 2010s... we know what that amounted to.

Generally the most improvement for teams year on year comes from within which is something that isn't as easy to rate or write about for these "journalists"

[Demon Disciple 11,998]

Looking forward to getting the team ratings an hour after the draft, despite having played 0 AFL games 

[durango 2,000]

Rating the trade week is like trying to pick the winning lotto numbers we will know at the end of 2025 whether the ratings were anywhere near accurate or not.

If the 2 players we pick with 5 and 9 turn out to be Laurie and Rosman clone then we should get a "F" rating but if they turn out to be a Petracca and Oliver clone then we should have got an A+ rating.

Richmond traded very good players for a hope or a disaster with a long rebuild like Melbourne with Bailey as coach, I pity Yze because he may never recover as a senior coach if they don't get it right.

Edited October 16 by durango

[JackWhats? 12]

I think the rating is definitely fair.

Trade period should be a balance of immediate improvement and future strength, with the balance determined by where the team is right now.

I don't think it is unreasonable to say we didn't really made next year's team any stronger. And I think most supporters would think that with a team that includes Petracca, Oliver, May, Lever, Gawn as a our base - that we should be aiming closer to "now" than "5 years from now" when all of those players are gone or beyond their prime.

We also went another year without finding a meaningful solution to our ineffective forward line. To my mind - we enter next year with all of the same deficiencies that we have carried for the past 3 seasons, and outside of Pertracca being back - it's hard to see what it is that will make us better next year - at least from a list management perspective.

And the rating clearly accounts for the off season drama - which we either caused or let happen through poor management - and given it centred on trades - its for to include it in our overall grade.

Overall - an extra first round draft pick doesn't really make up for the negatives or the lack of more immediate positives - so a C+ is more than fair.

[mo64 5,843]

16 minutes ago, JackWhats? said:

I think the rating is definitely fair.

Trade period should be a balance of immediate improvement and future strength, with the balance determined by where the team is right now.

I don't think it is unreasonable to say we didn't really made next year's team any stronger. And I think most supporters would think that with a team that includes Petracca, Oliver, May, Lever, Gawn as a our base - that we should be aiming closer to "now" than "5 years from now" when all of those players are gone or beyond their prime.

We also went another year without finding a meaningful solution to our ineffective forward line. To my mind - we enter next year with all of the same deficiencies that we have carried for the past 3 seasons, and outside of Pertracca being back - it's hard to see what it is that will make us better next year - at least from a list management perspective.

And the rating clearly accounts for the off season drama - which we either caused or let happen through poor management - and given it centred on trades - its for to include it in our overall grade.

Overall - an extra first round draft pick doesn't really make up for the negatives or the lack of more immediate positives - so a C+ is more than fair.

These ratings are purely for media clickbait and Talk Radio discussion.

We probably got an A+ when we picked up Grundy and Hunter on the cheap. Both were busts, and has sent our list backwards.

I am more than happy for us to sit on our hands and target the draft. Just hope that through some pick swaps, we can go deeper into the draft, rather than just 2 top enders.