old55

Hawthorn did get dudded. I think all the other compo was about right and fair. Having a scale based on finishing position is a very good idea and very fair. There probably needs to be a special category for marquee players at the AFL discretion, it's very hard to write rules for all situations. What do posters think would have been fair compo for Franklin? Ablett-style mid first round and pick after 1st round would be OK IMO. The other realistic alternative is a top 3 pick.

Has some Hodge similarities. Maybe running and kicking style.

despite Roos arrival and our trading so far there's a fair chance we'll have pick 2 again.

Equating Judd and Tyson is any way also means you're also equating: Kennedy with pick 72 and pick 9 with pick 36 (53 and 54 cancel each other out)

leave pick 55 alone

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.

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.

Mitchie 185/85 Vince 186/87 Lyons 184/78 Myers 191/92 Cross 187/87 Shiel 180/84 Bugg 185/76 Buntine 189/86 Some big bodies there ...

A big factor in that analysis is our relative draft positions across those years - some years we had a lot of early picks and some we didn't, it's nice data but it's meaningless without that factored in.

3 draft changes - in ND and PSD Trades don't count Rookie upgrades do count As WJ suggested Hogan upgrade may also count

Where have they shown "how much they want Scharenberg" ? Please provide a link.

Is this the article you are referring to? ASADA ready with lifetime sport bans

Sylvia compo pick. Myers has the potential to be our Josh Kennedy trade - big-bodied under-used mid. But Essendon's notorious trading difficulties - see their refusal to trade Crameri for 22 - and WJ's warning about Essendon's players are obstacles.

That's over-cooking it IMO - 22 + 40 + 58 for Vince + Lyons + 48 ought to be a deal, with 48 on-traded to Freo for Michie.

My impression is that Essendon will want that pick in the draft. Don't forget that their 1st pick is currently around 50.

Do we really need live early draft picks if we can trade them for equally good players with AFL experience? I realise we have to use 3 picks but one can b a rookie upgrade e.g. Clisby, and if we have to delist some uncontracted players to make room for these picks then we could re-draft them. With our list age profile I don't think it maters if we don't pick up any 18 yos. As some have posted, if we used our first 5 picks including the Sylvia compo (2, 22, 23, 40, 58) on say Shiel, Vince, Myers, Lyons, Michie and picked up Cross as a delisted FA, it wouldn't matter if our remaining draft picks were 70, 80 and 90.

The FA compo formula is secret like the PP formula. It wasn't politic for the AFL to give us a PP even though it would appear that we should have met any reasonable formula. I'm more confident of Sylvia compensation being on the generous side - it's a way the AFL can help us with less controversy. I think Port was perceived to be a basket case at the end of 2012 and needed help and got generous FA compo. Unfortunately I don't think they'll be as generous as Band 1 - pick 3 wouldn't fly when Buddy delivers pick 19, but I reckon we'll get Band 3 pick 23 or maybe even Band 2 pick 20 if we're lucky.

Bombers not giving enough and we're not getting enough - they'r not giving 22, just Myers and Crameri, they need to add another decent player (and not Jetta) because they can't add a decent pick with their first pick around 50.. Melbourne - in - Vince, Myers, Hocking Out - pick 2 Essendon - in - pick 2 Out - Crameri, Myers, Hocking Adelaide - in - pick 22 Out - Vince Bulldogs - in - Crameri Out - pick 22

they have to use 3 picks - its likely theyll trade for earlier ones but its not the crazy option you make out

right now our 5th rounder would be essendons 3rd live pick

The problem with that is that we're not really required: St Kilda give a number of senior players/pick to GWS. GWS gives St Kilda Shiel

Suggest one?

Just like us eh?

The problem is GWS needs players, not more picks.

Agree. I can see that pick 1 >> pick 2 because of Boyd. Hard to see that pick 2 >> pick 3 unless Scharenberg is very highly rated by the Giants and they fear MFC may pick him. That trade is effectively 3 + Steven for 2.