Ultimate Glory 2023 Trade speculation and Shinbeggars discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
weren't u the guy who was harping on about trading Tom Mitchell for whatever we could get majority of 21-22??

how can u say we got bent over when u advocated moving on Tom, Jaeger for literally whatever we were offered.
BurnaHawks said:

We are in no position to be aggressive with trading picks. Trading players yes, but we got bent over during those trades. We have no trade capital. All we have is the picks we get allocated. We just need to nail the picks. Or turn 1 pick into 2 or 3.

If you read my post (above) it was regarding aggressive with trading picks. Not players. Your comment is absolute rubbish. I advocated moving on Tom & Jaeger on years before it was popular!

I advocated moving them on because they we’re our only players with real trade value, never was it ‘whatever we were offered’.

Blokes like you literally, spat your dummies out of your prams when I suggested aggressive trading players and when we finally did it was far too late!
 
Last edited:
BurnaHawks said:

We are in no position to be aggressive with trading picks. Trading players yes, but we got bent over during those trades. We have no trade capital. All we have is the picks we get allocated. We just need to nail the picks. Or turn 1 pick into 2 or 3.

If you read my post (above) it was regarding aggressive with trading picks. Not players. Your comment is absolute rubbish. I advocated moving on Tom & Jaeger on years before it was popular!

I advocated moving them on because they we’re our only players with real trade value, never was it ‘whatever we were offered’.

Blokes like you literally, spat your dummies out of your prams when I suggested aggressive trading players and when we finally did it was far too late!

"trading players yes, but we got bent over during those trades"
 
BurnaHawks said:

We are in no position to be aggressive with trading picks. Trading players yes, but we got bent over during those trades. We have no trade capital. All we have is the picks we get allocated. We just need to nail the picks. Or turn 1 pick into 2 or 3.

If you read my post (above) it was regarding aggressive with trading picks. Not players. Your comment is absolute rubbish. I advocated moving on Tom & Jaeger on years before it was popular!

I advocated moving them on because they we’re our only players with real trade value, never was it ‘whatever we were offered’.

Blokes like you literally, spat your dummies out of your prams when I suggested aggressive trading players and when we finally did it was far too late!
anyway, to address the rest of your post

not sure why it got personal when i was just asking a question lol. i just remember you saying we should move on Tom, Jaeger, Chad, Breust, Gunston and possibly someone else? for whatever we could get. In particular I recall a suggestion of accepting a trade for Tom for picks in the 40-50s. Now, I might be misremembering you, but surely you would agree if that WAS you, it's a bit rich to suggest we got bent over in that particular trade when you advocated for it anyway? And if it wasn't you, then no problem!

At the time, I disagreed with trading out that much experience. Ultimately, we never actually did – we wanted to hold onto at least a few of them. I was also against trading both Tom and Jaeger last year, but when it happened I thought about the club's logic and it made sense, even if the returns weren't as great as we would've hoped. It wasn't really about the returns by moving on those players, and we ended up with a solid young ruck (who I think will quickly overtake Reeves as #1) and an ex-first rounder in a position we desperately need depth (inside mid).

So I supported the decision because what good is being mad and complaining abt something I have no control over?

Which brings me to your assertation we cannot be aggressive trading picks. Now that is a rubbish claim. We should be doing whatever we can in our power to improve our list. In your opinion, what we did is not improving it, but in the opinion of our entire list management team, our coach (the same one that executed your strategy of removing multiple senior midfielders) it was. So naturally, I'm going to trust the people in charge with experience in this area.

This does not mean that they can't be wrong, or that your opinion is invalid bc you are not a professional. Otherwise what would the point be of using this forum lol. But I also think you should have a bit more nuance in your outlook on our list management rather than barreling toward the idea that we have mismanaged the Weddle trade barely three months after it has been settled. Wait until Weddle's career finishes, or ****, wait until the end of the season so we know where our pick and the WB picks end up
 

Log in to remove this ad.

anyway, to address the rest of your post

not sure why it got personal when i was just asking a question lol. i just remember you saying we should move on Tom, Jaeger, Chad, Breust, Gunston and possibly someone else? for whatever we could get. In particular I recall a suggestion of accepting a trade for Tom for picks in the 40-50s. Now, I might be misremembering you, but surely you would agree if that WAS you, it's a bit rich to suggest we got bent over in that particular trade when you advocated for it anyway? And if it wasn't you, then no problem!

At the time, I disagreed with trading out that much experience. Ultimately, we never actually did – we wanted to hold onto at least a few of them. I was also against trading both Tom and Jaeger last year, but when it happened I thought about the club's logic and it made sense, even if the returns weren't as great as we would've hoped. It wasn't really about the returns by moving on those players, and we ended up with a solid young ruck (who I think will quickly overtake Reeves as #1) and an ex-first rounder in a position we desperately need depth (inside mid).

So I supported the decision because what good is being mad and complaining abt something I have no control over?

Which brings me to your assertation we cannot be aggressive trading picks. Now that is a rubbish claim. We should be doing whatever we can in our power to improve our list. In your opinion, what we did is not improving it, but in the opinion of our entire list management team, our coach (the same one that executed your strategy of removing multiple senior midfielders) it was. So naturally, I'm going to trust the people in charge with experience in this area.

This does not mean that they can't be wrong, or that your opinion is invalid bc you are not a professional. Otherwise what would the point be of using this forum lol. But I also think you should have a bit more nuance in your outlook on our list management rather than barreling toward the idea that we have mismanaged the Weddle trade barely three months after it has been settled. Wait until Weddle's career finishes, or *, wait until the end of the season so we know where our pick and the WB picks end up

anyway, to address the rest of your post

not sure why it got personal when i was just asking a question lol. i just remember you saying we should move on Tom, Jaeger, Chad, Breust, Gunston and possibly someone else? for whatever we could get. In particular I recall a suggestion of accepting a trade for Tom for picks in the 40-50s. Now, I might be misremembering you, but surely you would agree if that WAS you, it's a bit rich to suggest we got bent over in that particular trade when you advocated for it anyway? And if it wasn't you, then no problem!

At the time, I disagreed with trading out that much experience. Ultimately, we never actually did – we wanted to hold onto at least a few of them. I was also against trading both Tom and Jaeger last year, but when it happened I thought about the club's logic and it made sense, even if the returns weren't as great as we would've hoped. It wasn't really about the returns by moving on those players, and we ended up with a solid young ruck (who I think will quickly overtake Reeves as #1) and an ex-first rounder in a position we desperately need depth (inside mid).

So I supported the decision because what good is being mad and complaining abt something I have no control over?

Which brings me to your assertation we cannot be aggressive trading picks. Now that is a rubbish claim. We should be doing whatever we can in our power to improve our list. In your opinion, what we did is not improving it, but in the opinion of our entire list management team, our coach (the same one that executed your strategy of removing multiple senior midfielders) it was. So naturally, I'm going to trust the people in charge with experience in this area.

This does not mean that they can't be wrong, or that your opinion is invalid bc you are not a professional. Otherwise what would the point be of using this forum lol. But I also think you should have a bit more nuance in your outlook on our list management rather than barreling toward the idea that we have mismanaged the Weddle trade barely three months after it has been settled. Wait until Weddle's career finishes, or *, wait until the end of the season so we know where our pick and the WB picks end up
It got personal because in 2020 and 2021, I suggested a full rebuild and trading players while they had value.

The BigFooty fanboys mobbed me. BTW, I never suggested trading player for nothing.

The only thing i got wrong in this post in Wingard & Breust. I loved your replay to this post! LOL

The strategy the club used was exactly what I was suggesting.


1680222198746.png
 
Last edited:
It got personal because in 2020 and 2021, I suggested a full rebuild and trading players while they had value.

The BigFooty fanboys mobbed me. BTW, I never suggested trading player for nothing. The only thing i got wrong in this post in Wingard & Breust.

The only thing i got wrong in this post in Wingard & Breust. I loved your replay to this post! LOL

The strategy the club used was exactly what I was suggesting.


View attachment 1644997
EDIT: actually there's nothing to be gained from this discussion. I already said that I was against the strategy of trading Tom and JOM in my previous post. Let's just move on and talk about the footy
 
Last edited:
Heard a rumour of DGB to Port for Georgiades. Not sure how I feel about this, I rate Georgiades but we also need KPDs… (yes I know it’s a baseless rumour but humour me)
By rumour do you just mean the Kane tweet?

But to answer it nah, selling low on DGB isn’t the answer. I’m happy to play the long game with him, success or bust I hope it’s in Hawthorn colours
 
Heard a rumour of DGB to Port for Georgiades. Not sure how I feel about this, I rate Georgiades but we also need KPDs… (yes I know it’s a baseless rumour but humour me)

Yeah, they may be confused and think DGB is the bloke in the photo

Screenshot_20230331-144751~2.png
 
By rumour do you just mean the Kane tweet?

But to answer it nah, selling low on DGB isn’t the answer. I’m happy to play the long game with him, success or bust I hope it’s in Hawthorn colours
yeah doesn't make much sense for us. Does a little for Port but I think we could target Georgiades independently of anything DGB decides to do
 
By rumour do you just mean the Kane tweet?

But to answer it nah, selling low on DGB isn’t the answer. I’m happy to play the long game with him, success or bust I hope it’s in Hawthorn colours

If Will McCabe looks like a gun centre half back then you consider this trade every day of the week.

Notice I said CONSIDER, not pull the trigger.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Our future 1st round pick and something else for lukocious, take a few of their other top round draft picks toiling away in the vfl to, reckon their is plenty of value their
Only if he shows up for the rest of the season. The game on the wknd was a huge outlier for him.
 
No trading DGB.

Curtain or however you spell it will hopefully dominate all season and give WCE a choice of a WA KPP talent (which they need), or a potential flight risk in Reid.
Would be interesting to see if JHF has spooked them…imagine getting Harley at pick 2! Yep only trade DGB if he wants to go home, but he must start playing seniors or I fear that is more likely.
 
Frosty has one more year left.

Then we will be needing a KPD with a few years development in the system.

So it's good that we have one.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top