List Mgmt. 2022 Trade, Draft, etc thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
33, 43 and 53 for Grundy looks like a good deal from our end, especially if he is taking a paycut of some description.

Yea, im perfectly fine with that if we dont have to trade something else with 27 again to move up. Very good deal.
 
33, 43 and 53 for Grundy looks like a good deal from our end, especially if he is taking a paycut of some description.

In itself it’s a pretty good deal. Certainly backs up the suggestion we’re not planning to take many selections at the draft though.

Assuming the 27 is for Grundy, what does that leave us with?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I guess if it’s true it’s indicating that we want to take the picks for Jackson to the draft and only use 3.
Whatever pick we get for Bedford will be our last selection.

Smells like MFC Proper Gander to me. Im struggling to wrap my head around not being able to get a better player than Melksham at 43.
 
There's always a chance we split our first rounders we get from Jackson into 6 separate picks so we can splurge on those juicy 18 year old KPFs
What's the limit on pre-season supplement signings? Could nab another 2 or 3 there, plus a mid season draftee or two. We'll be overflowing with KPFs by September 2023
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I wouldn’t be surprised if Harmes to Essendon is still in play. Assuming the 27 is for grundy means we need to pick up a couple more early picks to take the required 3 players.
AFL website actually reporting we’re only intending to take 2 picks. I thought minimum was 3 but they’d know.

Not good news for A11dAtP0w3R, why would we trade Bedford for a pick in the 40s if we’re not gonna use it
 
AFL website actually reporting we’re only intending to take 2 picks. I thought minimum was 3 but they’d know.

Not good news for A11dAtP0w3R, why would we trade Bedford for a pick in the 40s if we’re not gonna use it

I can see us trading our our first next year and Freos first for another top 10 pick this year. Have done this three times already under current footy department.
 
Absolutely agree with that. Doesn’t make any sense to me to keep Melk and not use pick 43

Melk I am ok with but Oscar Baker. Surely there is better available in the draft. Hell, just throw all the names in a hat and pick one out at random and my moneys on that player being better than Baker.
 
If you have danster on ignore youre only hurting yourself. Youre missing some entertaining stuff.
Well I'm ****ed now anyway if I want to read this thread.
 
Last edited:
Why a turnip? Why not a Beetroot? Or Rhubarb and Blueberry.
Apparently it’s bad manners to ask something or someone why they identify that way.

just love me MM.
 
Apparently it’s bad manners to ask something or someone why they identify that way.

just love me MM.

I would but I am beholden to the church of Beetrootology. And I also have a vested interest in the Blueberry stocks.

You're cool in other ways.
 
AFL website actually reporting we’re only intending to take 2 picks. I thought minimum was 3 but they’d know.

Not good news for A11dAtP0w3R, why would we trade Bedford for a pick in the 40s if we’re not gonna use it

Must mean we are actually keeping the majority of our spuds, Melk, Baker, Weid etc :$
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top