I really rated Setterfield and am disappointed.

However, lists and SC are tight and we have a starting midfield of Cripps Walsh Cerra Hewett Kennedy & Docherty. Carroll is coming through and maybe Kemp. Williams is also an option. Dow may stay

Fisher Martin Durdin Motlop Cottrell can also do midfield minutes

We will also most likley pick up another 1 or 2 mids in the draft

Whilst I'm disappointed we are in a good spot

I know what you mean but couldn’t we have achieved that through a straight swap for their future 4th rounder?

_________________
It's never as good as it looks and it's never as bad as it seems.

In short, no.
We now have two 4th rounders next season, more points for a FS if there is one.
Plus we have already traded our future 3rd for Blake to Freo leaving us with a 1st, 2nd and 2 x 4ths next season.
And we now have more leverage to trade next years 1st and second pick if required this trade (not sure what for as we are not linked to anyone).
That's the only possible reason I can think of.
Which also begs the question, if we are only using our first 4 picks (10, 29, 49 & 66) this season, how are we replacing all the players that have left the club.

I'm really hoping Austin is up to something because it's been a pretty bleak trading period and we have only managed to weaken the depth of an already injury prone midfield IMO instead of adding to it as required.

This article could suggest he is trying but if that eventuates or not will be a test to how good he is/isn't.

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2022/10/05/carltons-draft-picks-are-on-the-table-says-list-manager/

I’m saying I think we could have got Essendon*’s future 4th rounder in a straight swap for Setterfield without also having to throw in pick #68.

Even that would have been slightly weighted in Essendon*’s favour.

_________________
It's never as good as it looks and it's never as bad as it seems.

Oh....yeah, that I agree with or at least a future 5th as a nothing gesture at minimum.
It really makes you think.

Pick 68 is superfluous to our needs. We were never going to use it.
Gaining a future pick gives us greater flexibility to trade earlier future picks. We probably have little interest in their future 4th in isolation.
I like Setterfield but he could have easily walked to the PSD. We got something out of it that may come in handy.
Let's see how the trade period/draft pans out.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

Assuming Essendon* finish in about the same spot next year, their 2023 fourth rounder will be about #62 (123 points). We gave them our 2022 #68 (which is worth 59 points).

123 minus 59 = 64 points (the equivalent of pick #68).

So we have effectively traded Setterfield for #68.

But if Essendon* finish higher next year than they did this year, obviously we get less points in the deal.

In fact, if they finish higher next year than we did this year (ie. if they make the eight), then we go into the red in the trade.

Sorry, there’s no sugarcoating this one - it is a bad deal for us. You don’t even have to rate Setterfield to see that.

_________________
It's never as good as it looks and it's never as bad as it seems.

But the bonus is that they got a deal done, and saved themselves a couple of days having to talk to Dodo.
Less dodo time?
#priceless

What would you all like the club to do?
Handcuff him? Pull a gun on Dodoro?
He's out of contract. They offered him a far better deal than we did and they could have easily walked him to the PSD.
FFS. He's a fringe player who couldn't get a game. Anyone would think we traded Patrick Cripps.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

If Austin is up to something, its news to me. That article you linked was published 5 or so days ago. Not even a whisper since to suggest a pending or possible deal to improve this year's draft hand.

Future third for Blake is reasonable, but as you say we have weakened our midfield depth with trading out Setters (and yes I know he isnt a BIG loss, but it reduces our depth nonetheless).

No rhyme or reason to be giving pick 68 as well as Setters for a future fourth, with the overall result likely to give us a nett loss on "points" if that is was what it was meant to achieve. It just makes no sense......

_________________
Cripps is the man

Not sure anyone has said he is Cripps....

FWIW, its clear he was offered something better and good luck to him taking it. From what Im reading from others here, and also my own thoughts, is that there is valid questioning around why we had to add a pick as well only to gain a future 4th which basically adds little or no value to us.

_________________
Cripps is the man

The 2021 premiers traded a 22 year old who played 16 games this year for pick 44. A player they had offered a 3 year deal to. That's the current value this trade period.
We traded a 25 year old who cant get a regular game in a team that missed the 8. We wanted a future pick because it allows us to trade our future first if the right deal comes along. Throwing in a pick we were never going to use is irrelevant IMHO.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

If we are any good then pick 10 should be able to get plenty of midfield minutes also. Cripps Hewett Kennedy Cerra can cover a first year, a la Geelong with Selwood all those years ago.

_________________
#DonTheStash

I would have walked him to the PSD. At least that burns their pick

Yeah, pretty strange deal for me.

Maybe it might be as simple that Austen doesn't want to lower himself to Dogdoro's level . Lye down with Dogs and you get up with Fleas . Keeps himself nice for future deals and establish a good name for himself .

_________________
All my dangerous friends

It’s Dodo, I reckon most people would have been ok with it

Fair point.
But I would've preferred to have their future 4th and have kept ours for more points.
But like you said, let's see how it pans out.
Who knows, he could be a crafty little bugger and has a plan in place already.

To be fair, we are Carlton and I'm unsure as to why haven't and don't use this tactic more often.

If it’s part of the trade, it’s relevant.

Nobody is saying Setterfield is Cripps. Nobody is saying we should make a selection at #68.

It’s interesting you mention Bedford because the situations are comparable…..yes, Bedford was in the squad for 16 games in 2022 - but he was medical sub 10 times (unused 8 times!). He played 0 in 2021. And 2 in 2020 and 0 in 2019. 0 career finals. Selected pick #75 in the 2018 ND.

I would argue that Setterfield and Bedford were both fringe players at their clubs in 2022. Both out of contract. Reportedly both were offered contracts to stay with their club but both elected to seek a trade elsewhere.

What’s the difference between the clubs? The Dees gained 362 points by trading Bedford. Whereas we will gain something in the range of 64 to 31 points (depending where Essendon* finish next year) from the Setterfield trade.

A straight swap for Essendon*’s future 4th rounder (ie. without throwing in #68) would have netted us a return between 170-123 points, which is closer to the mark IMO.

In the grand scheme of things, I know we’re not talking sheep stations. But it’s a close competition and I would rather have had those points in our pocket than Essendon*’s pocket when the live trading kicks off on draft night.

_________________
It's never as good as it looks and it's never as bad as it seems.