AXVS: OFFICIAL TRADE THREAD (2013/2014)

[Jroo]

Trade Period 1
Tigers give: Rook 71
Bears give: Rook 48

Trade Period 2
Tigers give: Aaron Sandilands, Colin Sylvia, Shane Edwards
Bears give: Mark Hutchings, Mitch Robinson

Adamant to confirm.
Also Colli/BB do I only use 2 list movements out as I traded in Edwards in trade period 1?

[Adamant]

Confirmed. :)

Cheers JRoo.

[Memphistopheles]

After quite a bit of negotiating and going back and forward.

KATHMANDU GIVE: Trent Cotchin

BANGKOK GIVE: Harry O'Brien + Jared Polec + Rook 3

Nost to confirm.

Wow, just wow.

Maybe if if was NAT 3 perhaps but like other's I'm really not sure about this one. Cotchin is a gun and still young.

Not sure it's a good trade for someone rebuilding either. Cotchin is who you build your team around not the older O'Brien.

I definitely would have offered more than that for him if given the chance. It's worth shopping your players around I think so you can get a good deal and an idea of how others value them.

As for the Harper+Motlop trade from the past - Motlop is a gun and showed it this season and averaged higher than Blair so that part of a trade is a win. He should continue to improve and IMO will be better than Blair by far.

I and Koop also expected Harper to take Boomers spot and while he hasn't shown it yet I've heard Harper likened to Stevie J before who as we all know is a jet.

Though that's only if he can get his shower together, something which obviously didn't happen last season. But, on the other side it took Masten longer to get his stuff sorted so if Harper still does then it's not the worst trade.

[Justin Bieber]

After quite a bit of negotiating and going back and forward.

KATHMANDU GIVE: Trent Cotchin

BANGKOK GIVE: Harry O'Brien + Jared Polec + Rook 3

Nost to confirm.

Wow, just wow.

Maybe if if was NAT 3 perhaps but like other's I'm really not sure about this one. Cotchin is a gun and still young.

Not sure it's a good trade for someone rebuilding either. Cotchin is who you build your team around not the older O'Brien.

I definitely would have offered more than that for him if given the chance. It's worth shopping your players around I think so you can get a good deal and an idea of how others value them.

As for the Harper+Motlop trade from the past - Motlop is a gun and showed it this season and averaged higher than Blair so that part of a trade is a win. He should continue to improve and IMO will be better than Blair by far.

I and Koop also expected Harper to take Boomers spot and while he hasn't shown it yet I've heard Harper likened to Stevie J before who as we all know is a jet.

Though that's only if he can get his shower together, something which obviously didn't happen last season. But, on the other side it took Masten longer to get his stuff sorted so if Harper still does then it's not the worst trade.

Only problem is that he traded Motlop out soon afterwoods, ironically with Nost lol.

[BB67th]

Ales give: Shane Edwards + Rook 24
Tigers give: Thomas Bugg + Rook 58
JB to confirm

APPROVED

Reasoning: Fairly easy trade to pass here, a couple of depth players balanced with a pick swap.

Colli to process

[BB67th]

Sad to see this guy go, but think it's for the best, as I felt that my midfield depth was a bit shaky. Here we go:

MONGOLIAN LAMBS give: Jack Riewoldt + Jack Newnes

UAE TIGERS give: Hamish Hartlett + Chris Knights

JROO8 to confirm.

I know Hartlett will be mid only this year but he will slot nicely into a utility position, while the loss of Jack Roo is (slightly) softened by adding Knights to our forward line if he's fit. I think our forwards are a strength of ours however and think that we will be able to cope with the loss of Riewoldt as Charlie Dixon will be moving from our defense to the forward line this season.

**EDIT: Due to JROO's list movement situation I think we have to process this trade in the second trade period...

APPROVED FOR SECOND TRADE PERIOD

Reasoning: Riewoldt and Hartlett are both worth quite a bit in this game for the roles that they play. Knights will score better short term, but Newnes will be better long term.

Colli to process

Just want to make sure that both of you are ok with this being in the second trade period as JROO doesn't have the list movements this period. If you don't want to commit to it being in the next period, I can reverse it.

[Jroo]

Sad to see this guy go, but think it's for the best, as I felt that my midfield depth was a bit shaky. Here we go:

MONGOLIAN LAMBS give: Jack Riewoldt + Jack Newnes

UAE TIGERS give: Hamish Hartlett + Chris Knights

JROO8 to confirm.

I know Hartlett will be mid only this year but he will slot nicely into a utility position, while the loss of Jack Roo is (slightly) softened by adding Knights to our forward line if he's fit. I think our forwards are a strength of ours however and think that we will be able to cope with the loss of Riewoldt as Charlie Dixon will be moving from our defense to the forward line this season.

**EDIT: Due to JROO's list movement situation I think we have to process this trade in the second trade period...

APPROVED FOR SECOND TRADE PERIOD

Reasoning: Riewoldt and Hartlett are both worth quite a bit in this game for the roles that they play. Knights will score better short term, but Newnes will be better long term.

Colli to process

Just want to make sure that both of you are ok with this being in the second trade period as JROO doesn't have the list movements this period. If you don't want to commit to it being in the next period, I can reverse it.

Yep we should be fine with it, I told Toga this before he accepted it.

[BB67th]

Trade Period 1
Tigers give: Rook 71
Bears give: Rook 48

Trade Period 2
Tigers give: Aaron Sandilands, Colin Sylvia, Shane Edwards
Bears give: Mark Hutchings, Mitch Robinson

Adamant to confirm.
Also Colli/BB do I only use 2 list movements out as I traded in Edwards in trade period 1?

APPROVED

Reasoning: Again pretty even here, Sandi and Sylvia should do better next year, but Hutchings looks like he will become a very good player.

Colli to process

I'm not too sure on the list movement situation there. I would say that it would still count as 3 as the two list movement groups are separate groups of 5, not a collective of 10 in the way I interpret it. But will have to confer with Colli on that one.


As for the Cotchin trade, there has been a bit of debate about it, and Colli has received several protests via pm about the trade. If there is anyone else that thinks the trade is largely uneven and benefits one team over another too much then please send a pm to both me and Colli and we can address your concerns.

Let me again stress that the rule is not all trades have to be 100% equal. It is that a trade will not be allowed through if it is largely uneven and provides an advantage to one club that hurts the rest of the competition. The rule is not that a coach could have gotten a better deal or that my deal was better, therefore this one should not go through. Not saying that is the case with what anyone has already said here, but please consider that before lodging a complaint.

[Jroo]

Trade Period 1
Tigers give: Rook 71
Bears give: Rook 48

Trade Period 2
Tigers give: Aaron Sandilands, Colin Sylvia, Shane Edwards
Bears give: Mark Hutchings, Mitch Robinson

Adamant to confirm.
Also Colli/BB do I only use 2 list movements out as I traded in Edwards in trade period 1?

APPROVED

Reasoning: Again pretty even here, Sandi and Sylvia should do better next year, but Hutchings looks like he will become a very good player.

Colli to process

I'm not too sure on the list movement situation there. I would say that it would still count as 3 as the two list movement groups are separate groups of 5, not a collective of 10 in the way I interpret it. But will have to confer with Colli on that one.


As for the Cotchin trade, there has been a bit of debate about it, and Colli has received several protests via pm about the trade. If there is anyone else that thinks the trade is largely uneven and benefits one team over another too much then please send a pm to both me and Colli and we can address your concerns.

Let me again stress that the rule is not all trades have to be 100% equal. It is that a trade will not be allowed through if it is largely uneven and provides an advantage to one club that hurts the rest of the competition. The rule is not that a coach could have gotten a better deal or that my deal was better, therefore this one should not go through. Not saying that is the case with what anyone has already said here, but please consider that before lodging a complaint.

Okay, but last year we were allowed to on-trade players who we traded in from trade period one without it using a list movement.

[BB67th]

Trade Period 1
Tigers give: Rook 71
Bears give: Rook 48

Trade Period 2
Tigers give: Aaron Sandilands, Colin Sylvia, Shane Edwards
Bears give: Mark Hutchings, Mitch Robinson

Adamant to confirm.
Also Colli/BB do I only use 2 list movements out as I traded in Edwards in trade period 1?

APPROVED

Reasoning: Again pretty even here, Sandi and Sylvia should do better next year, but Hutchings looks like he will become a very good player.

Colli to process

I'm not too sure on the list movement situation there. I would say that it would still count as 3 as the two list movement groups are separate groups of 5, not a collective of 10 in the way I interpret it. But will have to confer with Colli on that one.


As for the Cotchin trade, there has been a bit of debate about it, and Colli has received several protests via pm about the trade. If there is anyone else that thinks the trade is largely uneven and benefits one team over another too much then please send a pm to both me and Colli and we can address your concerns.

Let me again stress that the rule is not all trades have to be 100% equal. It is that a trade will not be allowed through if it is largely uneven and provides an advantage to one club that hurts the rest of the competition. The rule is not that a coach could have gotten a better deal or that my deal was better, therefore this one should not go through. Not saying that is the case with what anyone has already said here, but please consider that before lodging a complaint.

Okay, but last year we were allowed to on-trade players who we traded in from trade period one without it using a list movement.

Ah, alright, maybe that is the case then. As I said I'm not too sure, so it will probably be the same as it was last year.

[Jroo]

Trade Period 1
Tigers give: Rook 71
Bears give: Rook 48

Trade Period 2
Tigers give: Aaron Sandilands, Colin Sylvia, Shane Edwards
Bears give: Mark Hutchings, Mitch Robinson

Adamant to confirm.
Also Colli/BB do I only use 2 list movements out as I traded in Edwards in trade period 1?

APPROVED

Reasoning: Again pretty even here, Sandi and Sylvia should do better next year, but Hutchings looks like he will become a very good player.

Colli to process

I'm not too sure on the list movement situation there. I would say that it would still count as 3 as the two list movement groups are separate groups of 5, not a collective of 10 in the way I interpret it. But will have to confer with Colli on that one.


As for the Cotchin trade, there has been a bit of debate about it, and Colli has received several protests via pm about the trade. If there is anyone else that thinks the trade is largely uneven and benefits one team over another too much then please send a pm to both me and Colli and we can address your concerns.

Let me again stress that the rule is not all trades have to be 100% equal. It is that a trade will not be allowed through if it is largely uneven and provides an advantage to one club that hurts the rest of the competition. The rule is not that a coach could have gotten a better deal or that my deal was better, therefore this one should not go through. Not saying that is the case with what anyone has already said here, but please consider that before lodging a complaint.

Okay, but last year we were allowed to on-trade players who we traded in from trade period one without it using a list movement.

Ah, alright, maybe that is the case then. As I said I'm not too sure, so it will probably be the same as it was last year.

Okay cheers, it is a little confusing. We'll see what Colli has to say.

[Colliwobblers]

i will have to check last seasons trade lists, i cannot remember, but the rule has not been changed during this end of season review so whatever happened last season will happen the same way again this season.

I will advise as soon as I check but I have a feeling JROO may be correct.

[Colliwobblers]

i will have to check last seasons trade lists, i cannot remember, but the rule has not been changed during this end of season review so whatever happened last season will happen the same way again this season.

I will advise as soon as I check but I have a feeling JROO may be correct.

JROO is correct - on trading players traded in does not count over both periods.

for the purpose of trading players in and out that you have already traded for , both trade periods are considered one.

if this makes , sense, if it doesn't JROO can explain it :)

[BB67th]

Alright everyone, here is an update on how things are looking with the Cotchin trade. The trade being:


KATHMANDU GIVE: Trent Cotchin

BANGKOK GIVE: Harry O'Brien + Jared Polec + Rook 3


Now me and Colli have discussed the trade at length and looked at whether we would allow it through barring any protests. We both arrived at yes, it would be approved for these reasons:

A few people have voiced concerns that this trade will make the Eskimos uncompetitive. I actually believe it makes the team a slightly better and more competitive. He still has two solid captaincy options in Ebert and Hannebery so there is no loss there. His best XV goes from

DEF: Michael Hibberd | Jack Hombsch | Taylor Duryea | Liam Picken
MID: Trent Cotchin | Brad Ebert | Daniel Hannebery | Andrew Gaff
RUC: Jarrad Redden
FWD: Paddy Ryder | Luke Breust | Lachie Hendersen | Lewis Jetta
UTL: Tendai Mzungu | Ben Howlett

to

DEF: Hibberd | O'Brien | Hombsch | Duryea |
MID: Ebert (c) | Hannebery (vc) | Gaff | Mzungu |
RUC: Redden
FWD: Breust | Ryder | Hendersen | A.Edwards |
UTL: Howlett | Polec

And I'm sure rookie 3 will be in the best XVIII at least, if not XV.

And then let's look at averages. Cotchin averaged 122.48, while Harry averaged 114.44. Harry was the 7th highest averaging defender I believe, which makes him D1 or D2 in every single team in the competition. Now people might say that their scoring will change next year, but no one really knows that. The best indicator for scores in the future is the most recent scores, and these are the most recent available. I also think that O'Brien is practically no chance of losing his Defender status as he still spent a lot of the time in the backline this year. Personally I think he will be given DPP status.


Based on those above reasons, we both felt that the trade could go through. Now I am aware that Koop probably could have gotten a better offer for Cotchin if he shopped around more, but that should have absolutely no affect on the trade being approved or not. There is no rule about that, the rule is that a trade will not be approved if it a) advantages one team over another greatly or b) disadvantages the competition as a whole. I believe I have addressed those 2 concerns above. Remember that it is Koop's team and he has the right to accept which trade he feels is best for his team, and if this is the one he decides to go with, we should respect that decision.

Now Colli and I have received several protests against the trade to this point. Now that Colli and I have had a chance to go through it and we both believe it should go through, I urge those that have protested to consider the above points, and if they still think the trade should not go through, pm us again with a specific reason why it should not go through. I am willing to leave this open for some time as not all coaches have been online recently, and on a topic that has been so contentious so far, I'd like others to have their say as well.

I am not a strong believer in disapproving trades unless there is either a very valid reason for it or enough coaches provide their own reason for it, so we will see what happens from here.

And sorry that this post is so long :P

[KoopKicka]

So its been approved?