#17,#11 Dayne Beams

[Pies4shaw]

What is "overs" for Beams in the current trading scenario?

Recruiting him?

[Cam]

For mine, overs is #18 plus next year's first rounder.

[burnsy17]

[melliot]

I think Beams will be a Pie next year. I wish I was as certain of making the finals next year.

In the words of Robbo. "Take it to the Bank"!

[Brown26]

This is a long post - but you can give up half way if you get bored

The gist is, we might be better off trading our first pick 2019 than our second when points deficit is taken into account.

32 and 44 are basically the same points as pick 18. It's a shame it's a good draft year, in a shallow draft Brisbane probably would've given Beams and 32 and 44 for pick 18 and next years first rounder, which for us is the equivalent of Beams for next years first rounder.

I would take the above trade in a heart beat, but I don't think we want a future pick from Brisbane involved. As I understand it, if Quaynor is bid on in the first round, and we have to go into deficit to get him, then it comes off our FIRST round next year - please correct me if I'm wrong anyone who knows better. So if we trade pick 18 this year, and go into deficit, what do we really lose?

It seems that if we go into deficit we will drop our first pick 2019 down quite a bit - on current picks to about pick 55. So we lose our second round pick (39 ish) and downgrade pick 19 to pick 55. That's bad.

If we trade our first round 2019, we would keep our second round 2019 but need to get enough points not to go into too much deficit. The maths are below, there are a few assumptions that I'm not sure are totally accurate BUT it seems to me if we get enough picks back from Brisbane in 2018 NOT to go into deficit for Quaynor and Kelly (which would equal about picks 41 and 44) we'll do better. EVEN IF WE HAVE TO TRADE OUR 2019 FIRST ROUND PICK INSTEAD OF SECOND ROUND.

If you have flashbacks, nightmares or PTSD regarding fifth grade mathematics, stop reading now. Otherwise, pull up a chalk board and lets do some maths people!

First, what will we need to get Quaynor and Kelly. On the most recent phantom draft they were taken picks 14 and 24. That's not the most accurate phantom draft I know but it's a good starting point. Picks 14 and 24 = 1161 and 785 points, but we get a 20% discount, meaning we only pay 80% of that (I assume we get it for both players?)

1161 Plus 785 = 1946 80% of 1946 = 1557 That's how many points (roughly) we'll need to get our two academy / FFS picks.

How many points do we have? If we take pick 18 out of it for a second, we have points from picks 51 (455) and 56 (194). Pick 57 is probably worth no points (I think that's with the umpires at the moment MM?) but if we assume that, then we would trade it for a lower pick worth some points, lets say North Melbourne's pick 58 (170 points). That's a total of 819 points.

Without pick 18, we are 1557 - 819 = 738 points in arrears.

Pick 18 would counter that out (being worth 985 points) and we would not go into deficit. In fact, to get to 1557 points we would use pick 18 (985 points) plus pick 51 (455 points) plus some of pick 56. 985 + 455 = 1440 points. 1557 - 1440 = 117 points of pick 56, meaning pick 56 turns into (190 - 117 = 73 points = ) pick 67.

In that scenario, we use pick 18, 51 and 56 but would keep pick 57 and get generate pick 67 from the left overs.

IF we use pick 18 in the Beams trade and don't get 2018 picks in return, the 738 points in arrears would come off our first draft pick in 2019. We can safely assume that's pick 19 (after winning the flag and GCS getting a compensation pick for losing May to us as a free agent) which is worth 948 points. If we take 738 from 948 we get 210 which is equal to pick 55.

So the proposed trade Beams for pick 18 and next years second rounder, if there's no picks back, is equal to getting Beams, Quaynor and Kelly but we are out of the next two drafts til pick 57 this year and our third round next year (likely 52 ish). We would get another third round 2019 (about pick 55) too. That seems to be a big hit.

Let's assume next years second round pick is 39 and we have the option of trading our 2019 FIRST round pick (assumed 19) instead and getting something back from Brisbane. Any in arrears points would have to come off our second round pick (pick 39) which is worth 446 points instead of our higher first round pick (pick 19) worth 948 points, so if we got (948-446 =) 502 points worth of 2018 picks we'd be BETTER OFF trading our 2019 first round pick than our 2019 second round pick. In reality though we should be able to do much better than that.

Mathematically, we will likely do better using our first round 2019 pick if we get Brisbane's pick 32 this year and slightly worse off getting there pick 41. We would do better using a combination of picks though - if we got their pick 44 and 55 for example, or better yet 41, 44 and 55. In that scenario Brisbane get a higher pick next year (2019 pick 19 instead of 39) AND SO DO WE.

If we use our 2019 second round pick we would have our 2019 first pick being about pick 52. Under the deal above it would be pick 39 (our second round that we keep) minus and points in arrears BUT they would be a lot less because our 2018 picks become 41, 44, 51, 55, 56 and (say) 58 = 1345 points, which leaves 212 points, pick 39 becomes (446 - 212 = 234 = pick) 53! So we would have our 2019 third rounder (pick 52) and a new pick 53, rather than 55 (ish).

So basically, on the AFL points system in our situation next years first round pick roughly equates to 2019 second round pick plus 2018 picks 41, 44 and 55.

I would offer 2018 pick 18 and 2019 pick 39 (ish), for Beams and pick 41 and 44 - that would leave us with pick 19 cause pick 41 and 44 would be worth 774 points which covers our debt to Quaynor and Kelly. If we can't do that (ie. Brisbane reject it) we may be better off using 2019 pick 19 than pick 39 if it meant getting better later draft picks for 2018 (ie. pick 32 plus 44 and 45).

- Ben

[RudeBoy]

Can't get my brain around any of it, but nice work B26.

[MJ23]

^^ great post B26
Makes sense. Looking at this Im much more comfortable trading first pick this year and next IF we can get a pick back this year to not go into deficit.

The only other thing that comes into play is further delistings I think.
I think May will go this year to the Dees

What it will mean though next year, no academy or F/s players and no picks worth any currency for trade. Its either free agents or late kids.

Then again if we win the flag I couldn't care less !!

[MightyMagpie]

This is a long post - but you can give up half way if you get bored

The gist is, we might be better off trading our first pick 2019 than our second when points deficit is taken into account.

32 and 44 are basically the same points as pick 18. It's a shame it's a good draft year, in a shallow draft Brisbane probably would've given Beams and 32 and 44 for pick 18 and next years first rounder, which for us is the equivalent of Beams for next years first rounder.

I would take the above trade in a heart beat, but I don't think we want a future pick from Brisbane involved. As I understand it, if Quaynor is bid on in the first round, and we have to go into deficit to get him, then it comes off our FIRST round next year - please correct me if I'm wrong anyone who knows better. So if we trade pick 18 this year, and go into deficit, what do we really lose?

It seems that if we go into deficit we will drop our first pick 2019 down quite a bit - on current picks to about pick 55. So we lose our second round pick (39 ish) and downgrade pick 19 to pick 55. That's bad.

If we trade our first round 2019, we would keep our second round 2019 but need to get enough points not to go into too much deficit. The maths are below, there are a few assumptions that I'm not sure are totally accurate BUT it seems to me if we get enough picks back from Brisbane in 2018 NOT to go into deficit for Quaynor and Kelly (which would equal about picks 41 and 44) we'll do better. EVEN IF WE HAVE TO TRADE OUR 2019 FIRST ROUND PICK INSTEAD OF SECOND ROUND.

If you have flashbacks, nightmares or PTSD regarding fifth grade mathematics, stop reading now. Otherwise, pull up a chalk board and lets do some maths people!

First, what will we need to get Quaynor and Kelly. On the most recent phantom draft they were taken picks 14 and 24. That's not the most accurate phantom draft I know but it's a good starting point. Picks 14 and 24 = 1161 and 785 points, but we get a 20% discount, meaning we only pay 80% of that (I assume we get it for both players?)

1161 Plus 785 = 1946 80% of 1946 = 1557 That's how many points (roughly) we'll need to get our two academy / FFS picks.

How many points do we have? If we take pick 18 out of it for a second, we have points from picks 51 (455) and 56 (194). Pick 57 is probably worth no points (I think that's with the umpires at the moment MM?) but if we assume that, then we would trade it for a lower pick worth some points, lets say North Melbourne's pick 58 (170 points). That's a total of 819 points.

Without pick 18, we are 1557 - 819 = 738 points in arrears.

Pick 18 would counter that out (being worth 985 points) and we would not go into deficit. In fact, to get to 1557 points we would use pick 18 (985 points) plus pick 51 (455 points) plus some of pick 56. 985 + 455 = 1440 points. 1557 - 1440 = 117 points of pick 56, meaning pick 56 turns into (190 - 117 = 73 points = ) pick 67.

In that scenario, we use pick 18, 51 and 56 but would keep pick 57 and get generate pick 67 from the left overs.

IF we use pick 18 in the Beams trade and don't get 2018 picks in return, the 738 points in arrears would come off our first draft pick in 2019. We can safely assume that's pick 19 (after winning the flag and GCS getting a compensation pick for losing May to us as a free agent) which is worth 948 points. If we take 738 from 948 we get 210 which is equal to pick 55.

So the proposed trade Beams for pick 18 and next years second rounder, if there's no picks back, is equal to getting Beams, Quaynor and Kelly but we are out of the next two drafts til pick 57 this year and our third round next year (likely 52 ish). We would get another third round 2019 (about pick 55) too. That seems to be a big hit.

Let's assume next years second round pick is 39 and we have the option of trading our 2019 FIRST round pick (assumed 19) instead and getting something back from Brisbane. Any in arrears points would have to come off our second round pick (pick 39) which is worth 446 points instead of our higher first round pick (pick 19) worth 948 points, so if we got (948-446 =) 502 points worth of 2018 picks we'd be BETTER OFF trading our 2019 first round pick than our 2019 second round pick. In reality though we should be able to do much better than that.

Mathematically, we will likely do better using our first round 2019 pick if we get Brisbane's pick 32 this year and slightly worse off getting there pick 41. We would do better using a combination of picks though - if we got their pick 44 and 55 for example, or better yet 41, 44 and 55. In that scenario Brisbane get a higher pick next year (2019 pick 19 instead of 39) AND SO DO WE.

If we use our 2019 second round pick we would have our 2019 first pick being about pick 52. Under the deal above it would be pick 39 (our second round that we keep) minus and points in arrears BUT they would be a lot less because our 2018 picks become 41, 44, 51, 55, 56 and (say) 58 = 1345 points, which leaves 212 points, pick 39 becomes (446 - 212 = 234 = pick) 53! So we would have our 2019 third rounder (pick 52) and a new pick 53, rather than 55 (ish).

So basically, on the AFL points system in our situation next years first round pick roughly equates to 2019 second round pick plus 2018 picks 41, 44 and 55.

I would offer 2018 pick 18 and 2019 pick 39 (ish), for Beams and pick 41 and 44 - that would leave us with pick 19 cause pick 41 and 44 would be worth 774 points which covers our debt to Quaynor and Kelly. If we can't do that (ie. Brisbane reject it) we may be better off using 2019 pick 19 than pick 39 if it meant getting better later draft picks for 2018 (ie. pick 32 plus 44 and 45).

- Ben

Excellent post Ben!

The approach (that I raised last Thursday) also allows Bears to have their marketing win by saying 2 first rounders was too good to refuse. I actually think Paul Connors' comments were about setting that up rather than making Pies' life harder in trade talks.

In addition to pick 5 (likely to go for Neale), Brisbane have 32 (584), 41 (412), 44 (362) and 55 (207).

Brisbane (David Noble) has indicated that they are less focussed on going to the draft than previous years.

Our pick 18 is 985 points.


Just spitballing, but we could potentially trade our first and future first, but get back more 2018 points, effectively getting Beams for a 2019 first rounder and placing ourselves in a better position to draft our FS/NGA players.

For example:

OUT: 2018 pick 18 (985), pick 57 (FA comp for Fasolo) and 2019 first rounder.

IN: Beams, picks 41 (412), 44 (362) and 55 (207).

Result: Brisbane lose Beams and end up with 5, 18, 32, 57 and a 2019 future first rounder. We end up with Beams and picks 41 (412), 44 (362), 51 (259), 55 (207) and 56 (194).

[SwansWay]

[swoop42]

What is "overs" for Beams in the current trading scenario?

Overs would be pick 18 and next years first for Beams only.

If it's the above and Beams comes with picks attached from Brisbane that help cover the cost of Quaynor with something still left over for Kelly in regards to our own selections then I'm comfortable with that.

[melliot]

You guys are all assuming we'll be top end of the ladder next year. We could easily fall. The competition is very tight and a finish of 13th or 10th is just as possible as winning the Flag. So giving up next years 1st rounder is fraught with danger IMO.

We thought the same with Treloar deal. The next years pick would be less value. Then had to part with pick 7 twice in a row!

You need to calculate in the worst case scenarios, as well as the best or moderate case scenarios.

[E]

You guys are all assuming we'll be top end of the ladder next year. We could easily fall. The competition is very tight and a finish of 13th or 10th is just as possible as winning the Flag. So giving up next years 1st rounder is fraught with danger IMO.

We thought the same with Treloar deal. The next years pick would be less value. Then had to part with pick 7 twice in a row!

You need to calculate in the worst case scenarios, as well as the best or moderate case scenarios.

can you make the pick conditional (e.g., they get a first rounder if we finish in the top 8 and they get a second rounder if we don't). That way you can make the pick come out in the 11-27 range if that is what makes sense for the deal. You could theoretically add a fourth rounder if it ends up in the 22-27 range for example in the event that a 22-27 pick would be unfair to the buyer. they make these kinds of deals in the US to ensure that they don't end up giving up a pick that is too high for the trade. if you cant do it yet, rest adsured (like everything else), they will follow the USA example eventually.

[melliot]

^ Can you conditionally swap picks???

[MightyMagpie]

[watt price tully]

Hold the wedding.....Stephen May has declared he's open to go to any Victorian team.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrUAxOsneM4