Blueboy74 wrote:
We tried Bootsma and Lucas for example last season for no takers. Unofficially West Coast having 'slight' interest in regards to a late pick or a trade for an Ash Smith type was as far as we got.
Getting value for Bootsma was never on the cards. Lucas remains a player that I would have opted to keep and continue working with, especially with those kinds of offers.
Quote:
I'd agree that in previous year we have been risk adverse. There was offers in picks for Russell, Thornton and Whitnall that we knocked back that would have been handy. Then there is of course the 'Kreuzer/Boyd' pick 1 deal, that may or may not have happened.....
You'd have been silly to entertain trading Kreuzer at that point in time. Still would IMO.
Thornton would be a prime example of extracting value. Lance and Russell deals depend on when they were offered and what was offered of course.
Quote:
Not many clubs now are willing to throw picks now at average players. The ability to pick up players for 'nothing' in free agency, the reality of how strong GC and GWS should be in a few years, the elite standard of Hawthorn, Sydney, Geelong etc means most teams aren't looking to top up and would rather go to draft to rebuild and use last picks or the rookie draft to acquire recycled types.
Which is why you trade a year before contract expiration at the minimum.

A frank discussion with the player about their prospects vs the team prospects for the likely remainder of their career and then you make the move. Pragmatism usually works.
Quote:
Most clubs are reluctant to put names on the trade table to try and improve their draft or list position.
Most of the big deals done this year revolved around players who were wanting to leave for reasons beyond the clubs doing. Boyd, Griffen, Beams, Ryder, Christensen, Jaksch, Ryder, Frost, Patfull, Jones, O'Rourke.
Probably only Stanley and Cooney trades came out of the blue in regards to movements that seemed to be more orchestrated by the club than the player.
Conversely clubs didn't seem to want to be parting with top 40 picks too often.
Naturally GWS were going to be looking to upgrade their draft position, but so did Geelong, while Hawthorn moved out of pick 19 for a pick 2 bust that would probably go 5-25 in this draft. Two of the best drafting clubs in recent memory and they don't want to be in this allegedly even spread... hmmm.
Quote:
Fringe players at a club that has not finished better than 5th in nearly 15 years aren't highly sort after....
The next 5-8 at any football club are worth looking at, as evidenced by the bulk of the trades made this year. We're set to secure a total of 4 of such players by the time the PSD is finished, and we've likely lost 3 of our own to other clubs.
The pick downgrades for players are keeping the list alive at the moment. Or is everyone else comfortable with culling a third of the list in one off-season?
Blueboy74 wrote:
As an example Hawthorn were premiers, yet could only get picks in the late 40's for Hallahan, and slight pick upgrades for Cheney and Lowden.
Hawthorn picked Cheney as he was getting delisted from Melbourne, Hawthorn just moved him on the same way. Like I said, top 40 picks were not given up easily and Hallahan is a foot soldier for Hawthorn, not part of the core squad; value trade.
Lowden had potential but had no real currency outside of Hawthorn. Still got value out of him.
Quote:
Another is Sydney who got nothing for Biggs this year, and a slight pick upgrade for a guy who played 20 games in 2013 in Everitt.
Biggs is a mature age player who was shuffled onto the Swans senior list as slowly as possible. Everitt was the result of signing Buddy on a shit ton, and he wasn't the only fallout.
These aren't examples of situations where you can swing value. Hawthorns are, and they did. It wasn't much, but it's more than we managed with players of lesser overall value.