The 2021 Great Big Consolidated Trade & Draft thread

[derkd]

Right so, people say "think big". As I see it the looming disaster is that bringing Diacos in affects our draft hand over two drafts.

Here is a trade idea that might not be popular with all....but as they say you have to give up something of value to get something of value.

I have not fleshed this completely out but here is the nucleus:

Collingwood out to Gold Coast: De Goey + pick 36 (502 points)

Gold Coast Out to Collingwood: Pick 3 and Pick 19 (total points: 3182)

Collingwood hold onto pick 19 to pay for Diacos, pick 3 could be broken down into a few picks in the teens to land Stephens from Sydney, and Lapinski from the Dogs. And Dibb in the draft I am aware Lapinski should only cost maybe a late second rounder at best.

So problems I am aware of.....Obviously De Goey would have to be cool with going to the Suns (unlikely) Gold Coast would have to want to take De Goey. We would also have to find a club interested in taking pick 3 and having the draft picks to exchange.

Firstly, this trade would have some advantages, namely that we would free up more cap space to go after a big free agent fish next year. It would also mean we are chewing into 2023 draft to pay for the now.

Secondly it opens up options for this trade period.

Thoughts and critiquing? All are welcome...I am aware this is a polarising trade hypothitical.

Love a good trade hypothetical but we can secure Lipinski with a third rounder in (2021 or 2022). Stephens for a 2022 second rounder and still keep DeGoey. Hopefully we can scunge enough late draft index points from:

* Cox
* Sier
* Lynch

Especially considering the teams with the most picks have the least spots, namely Gold Coast and the Lions.

If they can achieve this then I will tip my hat to a huge win.

[derkd]

Right so, people say "think big". As I see it the looming disaster is that bringing Diacos in affects our draft hand over two drafts.

Here is a trade idea that might not be popular with all....but as they say you have to give up something of value to get something of value.

I have not fleshed this completely out but here is the nucleus:

Collingwood out to Gold Coast: De Goey + pick 36 (502 points)

Gold Coast Out to Collingwood: Pick 3 and Pick 19 (total points: 3182)

Collingwood hold onto pick 19 to pay for Diacos, pick 3 could be broken down into a few picks in the teens to land Stephens from Sydney, and Lapinski from the Dogs. And Dibb in the draft I am aware Lapinski should only cost maybe a late second rounder at best.

So problems I am aware of.....Obviously De Goey would have to be cool with going to the Suns (unlikely) Gold Coast would have to want to take De Goey. We would also have to find a club interested in taking pick 3 and having the draft picks to exchange.

Firstly, this trade would have some advantages, namely that we would free up more cap space to go after a big free agent fish next year. It would also mean we are chewing into 2023 draft to pay for the now.

Secondly it opens up options for this trade period.

Thoughts and critiquing? All are welcome...I am aware this is a polarising trade hypothitical.

you lost me at DIACOS

you have not heard of Rick Diacos...he is playing in the amateurs in Gippsland...the club thinks he could be a draft steal!!!!

[derkd]

^ ^ ^

Not that I’m in favour of trading DeGoey but all that aside, the last thing you would do is chop up #3 in the draft for scraps to secure Lipinski and Stephens and to avoid a 2022 draft deficit.
I know you want to take #3 out of the equation for obvious reasons but you would either on trade it for another gun player before the draft or you could trade it out for a 2022 first round future and then come back into the 2021 draft after Daicos was picked up.
Lipinski and Stephens ( as per your examples ) could probably both be secured with a future second rounder and via the PSD, while a possible draft deficit ( depending on players we trade out ) of 200 points isnt the end of the world, albeit not preferred.
Pick 3 ( likely pick 5 on the night ) in the draft isnt easy to come by, so you either draft a likely ten year player or you trade it out for a rolled gold quality player down the spine.

This is true

[Magpie Russ]

BEAR WITH ME...

Deficit. Does this mean that a club can continue to match bids if it runs out of points in a draft?

They can, to a point. Clubs that don't have the required number of points to match bids for one or more of their players are able to eat into their points allowance from the following year's draft.

E.G. A club ends up 'owing' 250 points after this year's draft. Those points will be subtracted from their 2022 points balance.

Will the points be subtracted from their first pick?

If that's where the bid they are matching was placed.

Under that scenario, the club's future first pick will be repositioned in the drafted order. Owing 300 points, for instance, would see pick 4 moved to pick 7.

OK THAT MEANS IF WE FINISH LAST NEXT YEAR AND WE HAVE A DEFICIT OF 450 POINTS THEN WE WOULD REMAIN AT PICK 1.

IN THE ALTERNATIVE...

In the event that a club has traded out the future pick they need to pay back any owed points, the points will be subtracted from their next selection.

If they've brought a future pick back in as a replacement - Brisbane in 2015 traded a future third round pick to Geelong but got one back from North Melbourne - any owed points would be taken from the pick traded in.

THEREFORE - IF WE IGNORED THE 700 POINT DEFICIT AND TRADED OUR FUTURE PICK 1 (FOR PLAYERS - OR - 'LIVE TRADE' FOR PICKS AFTER NICK THIS YEAR) - THE DEFICIT COMES OUT OF OUR 2022 2ND ROUND PICK. STAYING WITH THE FINISHING BOTTOM EXAMPLE OUR FIRST 2ND ROUND PICK, 19 BECOMES PICK 50.

I THINK

[Pies2016]

^ ^ ^
Derkd, It’s the off season, what else are we going to spend our time on.
There’s no such thing as free lunch at the trade table but I do remain a bit bullish at the options we have available to us through free agency, possible futures draft trading and the PSD.
I have a hopeful expectation the club will improve our best 22 by trading in two additional ready made players before next season kicks off. Then add in Nick Daicos who will be ready to go as a 19 year old from day one and we’re already in a better space.

[Pies2016]

BEAR WITH ME...

Deficit. Does this mean that a club can continue to match bids if it runs out of points in a draft?

They can, to a point. Clubs that don't have the required number of points to match bids for one or more of their players are able to eat into their points allowance from the following year's draft.

E.G. A club ends up 'owing' 250 points after this year's draft. Those points will be subtracted from their 2022 points balance.

Will the points be subtracted from their first pick?

If that's where the bid they are matching was placed.

Under that scenario, the club's future first pick will be repositioned in the drafted order. Owing 300 points, for instance, would see pick 4 moved to pick 7.

OK THAT MEANS IF WE FINISH LAST NEXT YEAR AND WE HAVE A DEFICIT OF 450 POINTS THEN WE WOULD REMAIN AT PICK 1.

IN THE ALTERNATIVE...

In the event that a club has traded out the future pick they need to pay back any owed points, the points will be subtracted from their next selection.

If they've brought a future pick back in as a replacement - Brisbane in 2015 traded a future third round pick to Geelong but got one back from North Melbourne - any owed points would be taken from the pick traded in.

THEREFORE - IF WE IGNORED THE 700 POINT DEFICIT AND TRADED OUR FUTURE PICK 1 (FOR PLAYERS - OR - 'LIVE TRADE' FOR PICKS AFTER NICK THIS YEAR) - THE DEFICIT COMES OUT OF OUR 2022 2ND ROUND PICK. STAYING WITH THE FINISHING BOTTOM EXAMPLE OUR FIRST 2ND ROUND PICK, 19 BECOMES PICK 50.

I THINK

Your explanation is correct, any deficit is carried over to that clubs first pick ( wherever that may be ) in the next National draft. The aim is to heavily mitigate the deficit without necessarily slitting the wrists because you haven’t wiped all the points off completely.
I’ve said this a couple times but the strategy I like for securing a quality player, is to trade out our future first rounder ( knowing its at the pointy end ) and then receive both the player and that clubs future first rounder in return. Obviously it takes two to tango. That way we still hold a first rounder of some description in the 2022 draft, albeit it would be closer to double digit or the teens.
The beauty of the situation we are in, is that there are no surprises here. Daicos will either be called out 1 or 2 and the club has two months to set up the outcome they are looking to achieve. I would be fairly confident it will all fall into place on the night.

[sherrife]

We can't trade next year's first rounder, because we traded this year's one. Pretty sure the AFL has a rule, you can't trade out future first rounders two years in a row.

[Lazza]

you have not heard of Rick Diacos...he is playing in the amateurs in Gippsland...the club thinks he could be a draft steal!!!!

Ahh he must be Victor Daicos’ son.

[Rd10.1998_11.1#36]

We can't trade next year's first rounder, because we traded this year's one. Pretty sure the AFL has a rule, you can't trade out future first rounders two years in a row.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/140605/trad ... -explained

[Pies2016]

We can't trade next year's first rounder, because we traded this year's one. Pretty sure the AFL has a rule, you can't trade out future first rounders two years in a row.

There is a formula but it’s nowhere near that simplistic. It’s something more akin to a percentage of first round picks that have to be retained over a rolling four year period. I have raised this before on here seeking clarification and the general consensus was that having secured Stephenson, Quaynor ( points accumulation) and Henry as first rounders over last four years, that was enough. We also need to remember Daicos will be a first rounder again this year but obviously his selection won’t be as a direct result of one single pick. That also formed part of the ambiguity on that ruling. I would appreciate absolute clarification but that has proved difficult to date.

[Presti35]

Grundy and future 2nd to North for Pick 1. Then go after CCJ to be #1 ruck.

Draft Horne, match bid on Daicos (after pick 1 = a better second pick). Use second pick to get best tall FF available (Won't be Amiss, but could be one of the other tall WA lads). Match bid on Dib if one comes.

The hypotheticals dont get bigger then that. (It'll never happen).

[gurugeoff]

Horne and Daicos together, good idea

[Pies2016]

We can't trade next year's first rounder, because we traded this year's one. Pretty sure the AFL has a rule, you can't trade out future first rounders two years in a row.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/140605/trad ... -explained

Thanks. I read that as the club being able to trade out its 2022 future first first rounder as an option ( and it being even less of an issue if the trade involved a swap between the two clubs future first rounders because we would still retain their first round pick as part of that trade )

[jackcass]

We can't trade next year's first rounder, because we traded this year's one. Pretty sure the AFL has a rule, you can't trade out future first rounders two years in a row.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/140605/trad ... -explained

Thanks. I read that as the club being able to trade out its 2022 future first first rounder as an option ( and it being even less of an issue if the trade involved a swap between the two clubs future first rounders because we would still retain their first round pick as part of that trade )

We’ve traded our 1st round picks but we’ve still taken 1st round picks which mitigates trading them.

2018 - IQ
2019 -
2020 - Henry, Macrae, McInnes
2021 - Daicos

I think the rule is 2 years in every 4 you take a 1st round pick so we’ve easily met that.

[simon tonna]

Grundy and future 2nd to North for Pick 1. Then go after CCJ to be #1 ruck.

Draft Horne, match bid on Daicos (after pick 1 = a better second pick). Use second pick to get best tall FF available (Won't be Amiss, but could be one of the other tall WA lads). Match bid on Dib if one comes.

The hypotheticals dont get bigger then that. (It'll never happen).

Great hypothetical but north wouldn’t pay top knots wage plus they know he ain’t worth number one pick.
Sorry to everyone but snag isn’t going anywhere.