Take McL. Hope some decent talent slides through to our 2nd round (s).
Clugga
Long shotā¦butā¦if we threatened to take Stewart PSD, would that provide enough incentive for GWS to come back to the trade table and reengage in a package pick swap? Just so they get SOME points for him?
As many people as possible need to call out The Trade Whisperer on twitter. Heās a fake account with NO inside information. Fact.
Toot toot clugga clugga big red sash
At pick one for a mid, I want a bloke sensational on both sides of his body. That SPS or McCluggage.
McGrathās run is great, kicks well on his preferred, but from all (albeit limited) online footage he seems to handball whenever caught on his non preferred.
Is this a fair assessment? Or clueless. Someone reading who knows a lot more?
Pick 1 for Prestia+4
Thoughts?
Pick 1 for Prestia+4Thoughts?
Itād be good for us. Pity Prestia wants Richmond.
Pick 1 for Prestia+4Thoughts?
Itād be good for us. Pity Prestia wants Richmond.
I reckon we are a sneaky chance if the deal falls through.
Get him to have a coffee with Heppell and Worsfold our future is way better then Richmonds.
Pick 1 for Prestia+4Thoughts?
Itād be good for us. Pity Prestia wants Richmond.
I reckon we are a sneaky chance if the deal falls through.
Get him to have a coffee with Heppell and Worsfold our future is way better then Richmonds.
The deal will happen. Iād expect Bitchmond will get a 2nd or early 3rd round back.
Pick 1 for Prestia+4Thoughts?
Itād be good for us. Pity Prestia wants Richmond.
I reckon we are a sneaky chance if the deal falls through.
Get him to have a coffee with Heppell and Worsfold our future is way better then Richmonds.
We dont have Rance.
Side note: Has there ever been confirmation of the rule that picks need to be āwithin 200 ptsā? I know the AFL has to rubber stamp all trades and can/will refuse trades which are manifestly unfair (where thereād be backroom deals) but I never thought there was a specific pt benefit? Seems a bit arbitrary.
There is no official limit, no. It was started by a journo who suggested the AFL were judging points deals with a 200 point differential preference but its not a strict rule. Brett Anderson suggested yesterday that clubs just have to show they arent throwing away their future via a stupid deal. Which is very nebulous and meaningless really.
Probably why you seeing academy clubs handing over so many picks for their high end swaps.
The new rules about having enough picks for list spaces meaning they need to do and seemingly pay overs as per both the Freo and Lions deals.
Both of which are rebuilding big time, whereas GWS needing to reduce list presently and a top 4 club.
Pick #1 for GWS Pick # 2 & 15
Can someone please tell AFLTradewhisper to stop screaming in my ear
Fark I hate all this point ā ā ā ā . Surely thereās an easier way to de-stuff the draft.
Fark I hate all this point ā ā ā ā . Surely there's an easier way to de-stuff the draft.
I agree. We should just split all the draftees between GWS, Hawks and Cats
Has Rocky done a we could trade pick 1 but we also may keep it article?
Has Rocky done a we could trade pick 1 but we also may keep it article?
Its possible that he has, although unclear if he considered it and our understanding from masonic secret sources close to the situation is that such contemplation -if indeed it were to be real , or even if a mere phantomatic suggestion - may lead to an exodus of readers from a certain strife torn site.
So there appears to be a few (hugely unlikely but fun to speculate about) murmurings in the air. i.e. a potential Rocky deal, a potential Motlop possibility (not heard anyone say weāre interested), Kelly and Patton. Iām assuming that only one would be possible due to cap space. Iām also assuming that the GWS deals wouldnāt be too great, or weād have already jumped at them. The two GWS deals are my view of what would be required to get the deal done. So here are five possibilities:
- Do nothing, take Melbourne's 2017 2nd. Take #1, #20 and #41 to the draft. Have a huge crack in 2017 when team is more proven at players, either via FA with lots of cap or using our 1st/2nd and extra 2nd to trade.
- Rockliff trade described by Fogdog as a possibility. Get Rockliff and #19 for #29 and #41. Have picks #1, #19, #20 in the draft + Rockliff. Shuts us out of targeting players for several seasons and we'd be paying heaps to Rocky, but huge ability to set up for the future in picks and one of the best contested players going around. Only area of weakness is talls, which could be targeted in the 2016/2017 drafts.
- GWS1 - Kelly. Trade #1 for Kelly as the base. Go in with #20, #41 as picks + Kelly.
- GWS2 - Patton. Trade #1 & #20 for Patton and #5. Go to draft with #5, #41
- Motlop - very speculative and no rumour around. But could do #20 for Motlop. Then go to draft with #1, #41 + Motlop. Did finish 2nd in the B&F in a pretty crappy 2015 Geelong team, getting when he's cheap. Probably low enough salary if renegotiate years 2-3 that doesn't preclude some targeting of other players in future years.
You can probably also overlay a Stewart for #59 on any of those options, which would help with the tall depth we probably still need.
I would actually turn down trading the pick #1 for the Rockliff deal. Get him AND a āMcā, plus two chances at good talent around the Langford/Laverde/Zerrett picks. Oh yeah, that would be good.
So - for now - Iām off the ātrade #1 pickā bandwagon and onto the āget Rockliff for peanuts + a pick upgradeā bandwagon.
How would others lean?