Ordeal over: Swans finally re-sign gun midfielder after drawn-out process

Adelaide seem to think that they can get away without giving up pick 4. How about Adelaide getting Dawson and Sydney's picks 12 & 31 for Adelaide's picks 4 & 23? If Port Adelaide get Dawson, I guess it is likely to be in exchange for pick 16. Alternatively Port may wish to exchange him for another player, such as young ruckman, Sam Hayes, whom they would not exchange for Aliir in a trade last year. I agree that Sydney could do with a high quality tall big-bodied defender, but they take years to mature if taken in the draft. I have read some some good things about the Sudanese-Australian boys you suggested, Mac Andrew and Leek Aleer. Mac Andrew is expected by some experts to be selected late in the top 10. I am not sure about Aleer's likely position in the draft and whether they have a pick around that likely place.

Brand, Clarke, Gray, Reid, Ronke & O'Riordan definitely must be moved on. All deadwood list cloggers ... Don't think Bell is good enough or quick enough. Doesn't get enough ball. Fox had a good season and was stiff to be dropped for the final for O'Riordan who is just not good enough. Wicks just needs to tidy his goal kicking up and Gould needs to be given a good run at it, as does Stephens ...

Since you wrote this Dawson will be gone, so Adelaide's #4 pick is a good swap. Bloods need to recruit more height into the Club, a key defender and tall utility to replace Dawson. Tall, athletic Sudenese lads Mac Andrew and Leek Alleer should definitely be on the Club's radar ...

The Bloods need a good list clean out to free up $$$ and create more space for more kids as they come into Premiership contention in the near future. Brand, Clarke, Gray, Sinclair, Reid, Ronke and O'Riordan should be traded/delisted with Dawson & Hewett traded out for currency. We desperately need a big defender (Armartey should be played there in 2022 to see how he goes), key forward, another ruckman and more height around the ground. Will Gould needs to be given a go in 2022 at half back ...

Betts, Murphy and Casboult is less a loss of experience and more a freedom from list cloggers. SPS has a future with proper coaching and correct deployment. There is no place at AFL level for Mitch McGovern. He has had the easiest pay check in AFL history.

Oh no! Freo are good enough.

I think it was mainly Freo not being good enough to play finals that ruined that tip mate :silly: but good call on the other one, Melbourne look the goods.

Working on it. I hope the AFL Commission meet in the bye week before the GF rather than after the GF. Then we'll know everything we need to know about this year's draft. What the dates are for trading and the draft itself. Will they introduce future draft pick swaps for two seasons in advance? If the Suns can pre-list Academy players there are two picks they'll be eyeing off immediately are the Bulldogs' first rounder (15 to 18) and Collingwood's second rounder (33). The Suns have 3 - 2234 DVI points, 19 - 948, 22 - 845, 43 - 378, 55 - 207, 58 - 170, 66 - 80 The Dogs need points and the Suns need high picks. Both clubs have opposite and therefore compatible strategies. Say the Dogs lose and get pick 15 which is worth 1112 DVI points. They are around 600 to 1200 points short of matching a bid in the top 3. The Magpies also need points and they have 4 picks between 33, 39, 41, 45 worth 1768. If the Suns gave up their junk picks for Collingwood's 33, then traded that with their 22 for the Dogs' 15, it gives the Suns a third pick in the first 20 and both other teams will be better off for points. Hawthorn and Brisbane are two other teams well situated to trade favourably for higher picks, which would just about get the Dogs and Pies to their desired points, after which they can use future picks to get back into the draft as necessary. If the Suns really thought their best strategy lay in moving up, they could offer North something ridiculous for pick 1. I think this is unlikely, but if it was ever going to happen then with 2 father-sons in the top 2 places it would be more affordable and give the Suns some bargaining power, while getting North some extra picks. Then there's the AFL's requirement that club use 3 draft picks, but it is unclear how that relates to the Suns.

That response is worth an article in itself.

No. The turnover is all part of the rebuild. Many players in that number were brought into the club in 2017/18 to replace the experience that left the building and set training standards for the young draftees. Guys like George Horlin-Smith, Anthony Miles, Jordan Murdoch, Jack Hombsch, Corey Ellis, who were really place holders so that the recruits from the Dew years could grow up and earn their place in the best 22. Obviously, with Gary Ablett, Tom Lynch and Steven May leaving within a year of Dew taking over, there was a leadership void and team identity was still unformed. The game plan that Rocket Eade had instilled revolved around the players that had left or retired, so to a degree the replacements were because of wantaways, but what must be understood is that nowhere near all of the players that left wanted to leave as in many cases it was due to the club reducing almost everybody's contract size. Right now the Suns have 46 players (38 primary listed - all under contract, 6 category A and 2 Category B rookies) with rumours that Irish recruit Luke Towey has returned home to Ireland and will almost definitely be delisted. That leaves 3 A rookie spots open and 1 B spots, so now the club awaits the AFL Commission's decision on whether or not the club can continue to prelist Academy players before the draft and put them straight onto the rookie list or if the club must go through the draft and somehow create enough primary list spots. I expect this decision may come should the AFL Commission sit during the bye week. It is crucial that they let the Suns have this one final concession because it will be used to do what it was intended = draft Academy players and develop them.

Thanks Don, I am now certain he will be at the blues

That is a huge turnover Thom, has trading forced on Gold Coast been a significant factor in that?

The thing to take into consideration here is that the list management people have changed and when that happens a couple of predictable things follow. First, they look to bring in talent who will make them look to have immediately boosted the team's performance, as they did with Adam Saad, Zac Williams and Lachie Fogarty. Conversely, they will sweep clean the players that were brought in by the previous list manager without any attachment or feeling that they have to protect their own previous decisions. A great example is the Gold Coast, who transitioned away from their inaugural list manager, Scott Clayton, at his 8th draft in 2017. 42 players have retired, been delisted or traded since then and there will be more to go this season. Only 10 players remain from the Clayton years.

Surely Carlton have had enough high draft picks over a number of years to get enough top grade players without trading on a large scale. A club in a premiership window can pay overs for one or two players who meet specific needs.

Jack Martin's deal was front ended, so you've got one average priced player, but he does have incentives in the next 3 years that will affect the TPP. Adam Saad is on big money, Zac Williams is on big money, Paddy Cripps is on big money, Mitch McGovern is on big money, then you've only got $10 million left to pay 40 players. Charlie Curnow, Harry McKay and Sam Walsh are going to want to get paid. Sure, bring Cerra in and shrink the pie for the middle of the list. Get Hewett too. Betts, Murphy and Casboult out the door frees up some money, but it also sees 800+ games of experience leaving the club. I don't think the trade market is Carlton's solution here unless they are selling too. Sam Petrevski-Seton and Mitch McGovern could both be sent back to WA. One player who the Blues would really be able to use to full advantage is Will Brodie, whose uncle Paul Brodie is in the List Management team. The problem is that Carlton already sacked SOS over a conflict of interest with his sons on the list and Paul Brodie was demoted in the fallout. Yet another example of Carlton shooting themselves on the foot.

Sam Edmund is hot on players to Carlton. The thing is he is often correct because Carlton have been in the market for just about every player on the market.

If you're comparing AFL to NFL, a few considerations need to be made. For a start, in AFL players are required to turn 18 by the end of their draft year, whereas, NFL draftees must have completed high school 3 years before they are drafted. For example, Aaron Rodgers is an elite Quarterback, drafted in the first round of 2005 at age 21, did not play until 2008 when he was 24/25. He'll turn 38 this season, but only Kickers, QBs and Wide Receivers ever play that many years - only 50 players have played 250+ games ever. The reason I point this out is that the AFL draft and free agency are based on the NFL, except these huge differences caused by the college system make free agency harder to implement in the AFL as a result. NFL free agency kicks in after 4 years, although certain high draftees can have free agency pushed back by an extra year. Those players have already come through high school football and 3 to 4 years of college, so they want to get paid when they are in their most productive years at 25 to 27. AFL free agency is 8 years after the draft, or longer if the player agrees to a long term contact taking them past free agency. But what if this was just for first round players and the rest could hit free agency earlier? I think a standard 4 year contract out of the draft, as they do in the NFL, would be ideal - I mean, clubs already try to do it, so making it standard gives clubs more security and they'd be more likely to accept changes to free agency. The one thing that will never happen is players being traded without their consent. The Americans have a college system that prepares players for being sent all over the country, but Australian players have shown time and again across multiple sports that they simply aren't equipped for that kind of system. However, trading players during live draft trading would be a real innovation worth consideration. For example, say North Melbourne pick Jason Horne-Francis, step-son of Port Adelaide Magpies SANFL flag winner and Port Power player, Fabian Francis, goes at number one. Port get on the phone and say we'll pay anything to get this kid, and agree to hand over pick 17 plus their first round picks for the next 2 years. North give Adelaide the courtesy of matching, and they say we'll give you pick 4 and our 2022 first round pick. JHF gets to stay in SA and North gets fair value for being the first ever club to trade out of pick 1.

Sam Edmund is pretty strong on it. The thing with Restricted Free Agency is that the cub signing him has to pay what he has been earning and he's been in Sydney's top 25% of earners. The Blues will have to pay overs, as will any team. Sydney are going through a cap squeeze at the worst time, not just for 2022, but for the length of Buddy's career because if he plays in 2023 they have to pay him Buddy money as a restricted free agent.

I fully understand and agree there needs to be restrictions on player movement between clubs for the health of the competition. But the very low numbers of players changing clubs indicates that it’s more restrictive then it needs to be.

You won’t buy success paying top dollar for a number of players from other clubs. The trick is to develop your own and keep them at under market rates. No doubt Parker could have got more elsewhere, it is not all about money. Paying overs for players must cause discontent.