Lucifers Hero

It is most unlikely Henry will be bid before pick 7 which Freo hold. Carlton's first pick is 9 so can force Freo to use 10. To stop Carlton in their tracks the answer is for Freo to trade their pick 10 and their next year's first round pick for our pick 8. Back themselves in to rise up the ladder next year. They can use 7 and 8 to before Carlton can bid on Hnery and then they use pick 22 which is what they plan to do anyway etc. This effectively gives them 3 top 10 players this year. Pick 8 is suddenly quite powerful. Bell will want 8 for their 10 and next year's second, which I might do if they give back our 2020 second round pick as well. But I reckon Bell is too focused on winning every trade to see the big picture and the advantages of such deals.

I really like taking 3 and 8 to this draft. We have a looming age/talent gap in our list, not having taken a top 20 draft pick for 3 years and we have very few senior listed players under 21 y.o. So two top 10 players will help fill that gap especially as we don't currently have a top 20 pick in 2020.

GCS aren't interested as they have a few late picks they are unlikely to use and could have offered. If he gets an offer from another club we would delist him to help him get there. We have been very good in delisting players early to help them find another club. So reckon we would accommodate them. If not we could rookie him. It also depends on how many senior list spots we want to use. Final lists aren't due until after the drafts so their spots may depend on who we draft or pick up as free agents in the meantime. Same applies to JKH.

I understand the bluff. I was saying we call the bluff if GWS get 4 (dropping two spots for Adelaide plus an extra 2020 first round may be worth it for them). Even if GWS get 4 they still don't have the currency to get 3 from us. If GWS don't get 4 we don't have to call the bluff as Green won't get to 6.

The clubs who have the currency to do this are Freo (pick 7 and 10) and GCS (15 and 2020 1st round (likely 1-5) and their mid 1st round pp (likely 10-12). Just can't see any benefit for either Freo or GCS needing pick 3. So l also think we will go to the draft with 3 and 8. It will be interesting to see if we bid on Green at 3. Two scenarios: If GWS get 4 from Adelaide, I reckon we will bid on Green at 3 to force them to use it. No reason for us to gift a Grand Finalist a free hit at another top 5 player especially if it is the player we want at 8 (and I'm guessing the quid pro quo of players for GWS to not bid on 3 if they got it would have been discussed in a nudge-nudge, wink-wink manner). If GWS don't get 4 from Adelaide we can pass on Green because Sydney will definitely bid on him at 5 forcing GWS into pick 6. Sydney won't trade GWS 5. As and aside as this comment not related to either post above. For posters concerned about bidding on Green and then 'stuck' with him because we already have too many 'inside mids' we can always trade one of them out next year. And Green may well spend some time at Casey as most first year players do so I have no problem taking him at 3.

While it is unlikely, the club can have 40 senior players, 6 'A' rookies and 2 'B' rookies. We have 37 including Tomlinson and Langford so 3 senior vacancies, 5 if both if JKH and Stretch are delisted. There is a thread pinned at the top of the main forum that tracks our list position. Today it will be updated for our draft position. I wouldn't be surprised if the club has 38/39 at the end of the drafts you mention keeping a spot(s)open for the supplemental draft that ends in March to add a player like we did Lockhardt last year.

The 3 AFL 2019/2020 priority picks allows GCS the luxury of possibly losing Martin for zip. I'm glad they played hardball - it sends a strong message.

So much for Dorodo's big man talk that Essendon would 'hit the trade period hard'. He likes to win the battles but ends up losing the war. They gained Tom Cutler and Andrew Phillips and their first draft pick is #31. Carlton have also come away empty handed (well they have favourite son Eddie back). Big trade fail for both clubs. Hard to see either team improving much next year.

I think we are saying the same thing in that uncontracted = delisted.

Don't know the technicalities but if a player is still on a list how does he go into the PSD? Either way he ends up at GCS so it doesn't make sense to do the 'dancing'.

He would have to get GCS to delist him first and can't see why they would do that nor why Martin would want to be delisted. I reckon the journo didn't think it through before going to print.

I saw that. Martin is already a GCS player so couldn't see why they need to re-draft him at all. He hasn't been delisted so they just give him a new contract and keep the PSD pick.

Apparently Crows have a 2yr low-ball contract available. So I guess he could walk Its a terrible situation for Keath: Crows low-ball his contract but demand high draft picks. Bulldogs offer him big 3+1 contract but only want to offer ho hum draft picks. Keath the meat in the sandwich. We could pick him up but I'd say we have moved on.

That is poor. Bulldogs force him to cancel a holiday to have surgery that Adelaide didn't think he needed then don't get the deal done.

I really hope you are correct!

iirc we are contracted to play 9 Home games at the G. We get 2 Away games at the G as compensation for the NT games. I assume we will lose one of those G 'compensation' games. In the mfc web article, Pert does not say we will get an extra10th game at the G. I believe Vic clubs are required to play 1 or 2 Home games at Marvel Stadium. PJ got us an exemption for 2019 due to the NT games. (Can't recall if that happened in 2018). A side benefit was Alice and Darwin were counted as interstate games so we usually had fewer other Away interstate games. Hopefully the change means there is an extra game in Victoria but it could mean an extra interstate game. Hopefully, it won't mean two trips to WA. Will be interesting to see what the 'fine print' looks like.

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.

.

Maybe 8 for Smith and 11? That also takes the risk of McGuinnes being bid on early for the Hawks And Frosty could be the steak knives! Joking...

Not necessarily. He will a Restricted FA so Ess can match or pretend to match Sydney's offer ala Crows and Dangerfield and force Sydney into a trade. They will play the same hard ball game they are playing now and make Sydney pay big time. So Sydney need to get it done this year. Pay big now or pay more next year. Or not draft him which would hurt their reputation. They may be ruing the catch 22 situation they in.

.

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.

DF, where did you hear this? No need to name sources but an indication would be useful as right now the claim lacks credibility. As 11 is held by Hawks, it set me and others off on a wild goose chase to work out how 11 would get to GWS. Fox is reporting "... It is understood they won’t offer up Pick 42 for Patton, meaning GWS might need to settle for Pick 61". Patton Trade DF, if your claim is correct, how will GWS get 11 from Hawks or was your post trolling...?

Maybe many deals are already done and the AFL is waiting to drip feed them out in the next 48 hours to reach some 'excitement' during their live forecast on Wed evening. Altho 'excitement' and the commentators (Damian Barrett, Terry Wallace, Kane Cornes) seems an oxymoron!! It will be like watching paint dry with a drone in the background!!

Laugh you might but media talk is GWS would let Bonar go for around pick #30 and want 2nd round pick for Patton. Original draft pick status is fairly meaningless. eg HWSNBN was pick 1 and traded last year for 4th round pick. Papley drafted as a rookie just a few years ago now looks to be traded for #9+/- If Hawks do give up 11 they will want more value than those two players.