Jay clarke report of three 2nd rounders for 13 makes more sense, giving 9 and 2 second rounders for future swaps makes now sense, only for future picks, and if you dont name them, dont report the trade scenario.
Sounds pretty familiar to one David Myers
1 Like
They are right to an extent, with the right management angle, unfortunately the Dogs are not the right management, as they have amply demonstrated with this player over the last month.
For their information - it is spelt Cloke, not Cloak, as in NOT one of those things Batman wears.
1 Like
So pretty much deal could be
Essendon
In Stringer
Out Pick 25 and Pick 30
Dogs
In Pick 13 and 2018 2nd round Pick
Out Stringer and Pick 9
West Coast
In Pick 25 and Pick 30 and Pick 9
Out Pick 13 and 2018 2nd Round Pick
Stand firm. Be confident.
I’m a bit dumb.
But how is picks 13 and 2018 2nd round better than 9 and two second round picks (25 and 30) for the WB?
11 Likes
I think the more likely trade will be
Essendon
In: Stringer
Out: 25,30
Dogs
In: 13
Out: Stringer, 28
WC
In: 25,28,30
Out: 13
Probably a swap of future picks between the Dogs and Eagles in there somewhere aswell
8 Likes
So they wouldn’t trade a second rounder to us, when they didn’t need it anyway, to do the deal and get pick 11 but they are prepared to give up a first rounder and end up with two worse picks overall in the draft…riiiighhhhtt!!!
To borrow a well worn phrase, “this club is farked!”
7 Likes
It’s going to be like spitting in their face hahahahaha
2 Likes
Not as much of a choice now, since pick # 11 was used.
Lucky they found wet toast.
Seriously it was in the dogs best interest to trade string asap first day of period when it came out he was a problem.
His value has not increased over the trade period.
just give me the string maaaaaaaaaaaan
WCE make out like bandits in these trade scenarios but hey not our problem.
2 Likes
They can smell the Doggie’s desperation. I’m honestly kind of surprised that more clubs aren’t circling.
8 Likes
You know how important this club is to you when all focus is gone. Can’t perform daily tasks, streaming trade news non stop waiting for the Stringer deal to get locked in.
I was less stressed when we were “hard to deal with”.
3 Likes
So, definitely going to pass 10,000 comments before the deal is done.
1 Like
I think the confusion arose from the following:
AFL general counsel Andrew Dillon said the following rules would govern trading of future draft picks:
-
Clubs can trade one year in the future only. -
Clubs must make at least two first-round selections in each four-year period. If they don't, they will face restrictions from trading any further first-round draft picks. -
If a club trades a future first-round selection, it may not trade any other future selection from that same draft. But if a club keeps its future first-round selection, it can trade any of its future selections from other rounds.
In other words, by trading any future selections from other rounds (first up), it is assumed that the Club is intending to retain its future first-round selection. There was no mention in the original trading rules about replacing lost (traded) picks with picks from other Clubs, hence the origin of the confusion.
Rules. lol
7 Likes
Yep. And didn’t the AFL clarify (change?) the rules to suit the Cats? They constantly make ■■■■ up on the fly.
1 Like
We already traded our 2nd pick in the 2018 draft so we can’t touch our first rounder in 2018[quote=“Ants, post:9703, topic:11304, full:true”]
I’d still consider offering them our 2018 first for Stringer and their 2018 second. Sure, we lose a first round pick in a SUPERdraft. But compared to our current offer of #25 and #30, we’re three second rounders better. We get two shots at the 2017 draft (even if it is a bit weak) in the thirties instead of two late picks, and an additional 2018 second.
Of course, maybe the Doggies won’t go for it.
[/quote]