-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Trade Week - Richmond Only
- Thread starter Smoking Aces
- Start date
Incorrect.
Outside when clubs are obtaining points for academy/father sons etc - It is actually no benchmark at all. It actually leads to an incorrect value of picks in the real world.
It is why it is being overhauled.
Last edited:
Sorry points are still used as clubs try and come up with even deals or deals where they think it's a win win situation. They are a measuring standard and until something replaces them clubs will use them as guides
I would hazard a guess that clubs don't use the points index at all. Its irrelevant when the clubs involved have differing reasons for sliding and rising in the order. You are obssessed and willing to die on a hill that doesn't make sense.
Yes exactly, clubs are purely looking at what players are available at a certain pick and what that club requires to part with that pick. Points are meaningless now unless your are matching academy or father son bids.
Can you prove that they are not or it;'s just you making stories up? Of course they do and it may only be in a small percentage of deals, but they do? So incorrect again
No they are not. There is zero argument for what you are saying. Not sure how clear others need to be with you.
Points have a single purpose - F/S and NGA academy bidding. The points system you are trying to use is being used entirely incorrectly. There is absolutely zero points consideration for those clubs being discussed as trades.
None. Nada. Zilch. Zero. Zip.
THEY do to a certain extent as it's a benchmark or guide. You are being obtuse.
For instance if we go to North and say we'll trade you PICK 2 and F2=28 for 10 and 18 North can come back at us and say no as we are out by 814 points which is pick 24. How about we do the deal without a F2 . Then we may as for a F3 and negotiate a deal. You're being narrow minded on the matter and out of your depth i believe. Are you Blair? lol
Show us a single pick trade between two non NGA or F/S clubs where the club manager came out and said they were happy at the points surplus they accumulated in the trade.
Points will be very interesting next year. The overhaul was very significant. Getting points for FS/Academy players is going to get a lot harder.
BTW we did profit from the old system remaining in play for this year but nowhere as much as Brisbane did. Had it been just us whingeing about a change in 2024 the AFL would have poured it to us. Instead they had the darling Brisbane to snuggle up to.
BTW we did profit from the old system remaining in play for this year but nowhere as much as Brisbane did. Had it been just us whingeing about a change in 2024 the AFL would have poured it to us. Instead they had the darling Brisbane to snuggle up to.
Good news. GWS have offered us 16 & 21 for pick 6. we win the deal by about 200 points so i expect we will take it in a flash.
There is no way, that Blair rings up Thursfield, offers a deal, and Thursfield goes, "hang on mate, I've got to check the points calculation".
You are calling others obtuse, when you can't look in the rear view mirror and see that its actually you that are barking up the completely wrong tree.
Maybe change your name back, it probably suited you better
see my example ok as they are used and cut your obstinance out in the process .
Don't stop there. I hear those picks in the 40;s have some pretty juicy values.
As i said they would use them as a guide as they're industry standards. Thursfield wouldn't even make a deal over the phone before investigating into it as that would be nonsense. As i said they are used in negotiating some deals , but not all. THEY ARE THERE IN THE INDUSTRY AND WHEN IT COMES TO DEALS INVOLVING PICKS ONLY THEY CAN BE USED. Stop being argumentative and narrow minded.
Last edited:
Here are some live pick swaps last year:
Adelaide #8 (Curtin - 7 games) + #17 (#21 - Edwards - 0 games)
GWS #11 (#12 - Gothard - 0 games) + #15 (#18 - Wilson - 23 games) + #2024R2 (Adelaide) (-)
Essendon #10 (Caddy - 10 games)
Geelong #11 (O'Sullivan - 1 games) + #31 (#36 - Mannagh - 12 games)
GWS #17 (Leake - 0 games)
St Kilda #18 (Wilson - 23 games) + #2024R2 (Adelaide) (-)
Essendon gave up pick 36 to gain 1 spot, and the Saints gave up an F2 for the same.
Later we twice gained an F3 to move about 4 down around pick 40.
Adelaide #8 (Curtin - 7 games) + #17 (#21 - Edwards - 0 games)
GWS #11 (#12 - Gothard - 0 games) + #15 (#18 - Wilson - 23 games) + #2024R2 (Adelaide) (-)
Essendon #10 (Caddy - 10 games)
Geelong #11 (O'Sullivan - 1 games) + #31 (#36 - Mannagh - 12 games)
GWS #17 (Leake - 0 games)
St Kilda #18 (Wilson - 23 games) + #2024R2 (Adelaide) (-)
Essendon gave up pick 36 to gain 1 spot, and the Saints gave up an F2 for the same.
Later we twice gained an F3 to move about 4 down around pick 40.
That's what we were basically arguing over and i said it would never happen as it's *smile*.
F2 and 2 for iour 10 and 18. which was a proposal some poster made earlier. I said North would tell us to *smile* off . Thanks for making my point valid. Now @mrposhman is agreeing with you after he originally gave reasons for it. FMD people are like the Melbourne weather on here. lol
