Search results for query: *

The only way I see TJ getting on our list is if no one bids on him in the Nat draft. Then we can add him as a Cat B. Otherwise he will be taking up a list spot from someone who looks better. We are better off bringing in a higher ranked player and hoping for the best with TJ.

Good point well made haha. As I said, happy to use a future 1st to come back in. I’ve said before I’d love to grab Archer Reid to see if he gets back to the hype he had last year. Same with Moir. End of the day, with those future 1sts we would have plenty of options.

Speaking of going down the rabbit hole with massive trades... Prepare to be... AMAZED! I'll preface this by saying I think what happens with our 1st pick is that we either take Duursma if he's available (and I think there's a chance he might be), or we trade back with the Demons. Because I...

Following on from this post, which if you didn't see the previous posts was about how to get better outcome from the Dee's proposed trade. In a nutshell, Dee's trade (4, 62, 63 for 6, 11, 42) was a thanks but no thanks because of their refusal to trade future picks. Hence I suggested the trade...

Would be easier to give Suns 49 and 62 (410 points), they give us (Dons) F3 and 71. 71 (29) will come in and be worth more by the time we need it to match for Dear. Then we could do the deal with the Demons and get 42 (395 points), that and 71 will be worth more than what we lost anyway. If they...

As far as I know it doesn't matter if the spots are senior or rookie. Just need enough open to cover the picks. But even if that is incorrect, it's only a bit over 90 points they are leaving on the table. Nothing to write home about.

I'm pretty sure I have seen that GWS are interested in O'Sullivan. So I think if we want him, we would have to trade with them or he will be gone. The only reason not to would be if Curtin is still on the board. Unlikely but I can see a scenario with it happening. Then GWS may take Curtin and we...

I didn't see anyone answer this, so I'll jump in. Now he has been nominated by us, if no one bids for him in the National draft he will be automatically added to our senior list. To get to our Rookie list, he would have to have been rookie nominated. Which would have meant that he would...

They both have contracts for next year. Both will be honored, just on the rookie list instead of the seniors. I can't see North taking Reid and Duursma with both playing similar positions. Albeit Reid being better and more versatile. I would think it would be better for them to take Reid then...

Yeah I did say it was a bit light on for the Cats. Hence why I put the F3 upgrade in there. Though after watching them at the trade table with Port, they'll likely want two picks in the 60's as well. Under normal circumstances, 2 and 8 would be enough. But it's not normal with Reid. They want a...

Edit: I just realised that this isn't really draft pool news, though it does affect our draft. Not really sure where else to put it. Basically what this means is the Hawks can now take all six of their picks into the draft. A club has to have enough open list spots available to match the...

Fair enough, I hadn't seen that. Seems weird to me that we would push our best winger to the backline, where we have a need for talls. Anyway, I'll watch with interest as always ha.

Thanks for your continued info sharing, I certainly appreciate it. To clarify: Hawks: Out: 4, F1 In: Pick 1 WC: Out: Pick 1,F1 In: 2, 8, 15, Norths F2 North: Out: Picks 2, 15, and F2 In: Pick 4, Hawks F1 Cats: Out: Pick 8 In: WC F1 Hawks have had 4 and F1 on the table for a while now, so...

I'm not sure what track watchers you are talking about, but pre-season hasn't started yet. Where exactly would the guys be training with a different group when no one is training with coaches atm? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but all I have seen atm are individual players getting/keeping fit...

Reeves hasn't played a full season yet. Not sure we can afford to trade Meek till he does. I can't see the Lions moving on any more futures when they have Levi Ashcroft coming in next year. I really don't get how people think it's fact at all. After viewing for research purposes, and a very...

Not Jack filming. Not McStay. And not his missus. Pay attention when you watch it. The woman in the video has tatts. His missus doesn't in the pic that was passed around with it. It's a video being passed around to cause trouble.

We don't have the future 4th, we traded that to get 51 for Bailey MacDonald. We have our 1st, Dogs 2nd and 3rd.

The deal proposed is for North to give pick 40 for a future 3rd and a later pick this year to help with a bid for Harvey. North are only going to use 2, 3, and 23 live then match a Harvey bid. I think 14 is a little too far off the top 10 for my liking. Saints pick would still be OK, Blues...

Yeah I don't think the Saints will give up their future 1st either. Hence the option with the future second. From what I can tell, the Saints are after either (likely) MacKenzie, or (unlikely) Clark. The danger for them is us taking Mackenzie, and Geelong taking Clark. If they want to be sure...

This is what I proposed earlier in the thread: I agree with you that it's unlikely the Saints would give up their future 1st for a 3 place upgrade, no matter the spare change included in the trade. However i do think that they would be tempted by the second one suggested. 6 and our future 4th...

Yeah I was pretty tired when I saw it. Oh well, win some and lose some!

Player trading has ended for this year. Can only trade picks now. On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

i like your thinking, but there's two things wrong. Saint's can't trade their future 1st without getting a future 4th because they don't have one. We would have to include our future 4th (Lions) to get it done. But I like upgrading the Dogs future 2nd to the Saints future 1st! Also we can't...

Following on from my other post here, I've now thought of some trades we could do to strengthen our hand aside from just trading with the Lions. Right at the start of the draft So to start from the previous post, we can't trade 48 to the Lions as they traded it to us. So to fix that we give the...

Cats have 7, 58, 64, and only have their future 1st. They have no other future picks. And because they have no other future picks, they can't trade their 1st. The only way for there to be a trade with the Cats would be: They trade pick 7 and their future 1st, for the future 2nd we have that's...

I believe so, yes. We are one of the only clubs with the resources to be able to help the Lions out with enough points to get Ashcroft and Fletcher. It’s just a matter of what that trade looks like. The only other club that can really help them is North, who could trade their 40, 43, and 70...

That’s a bit of a slap in the face of Munkara by them. Unless they really think he will last past pick 40. Which is very optimistic. Very close to what I’ve been thinking. The Lions/Bombers/Hawks three way is pretty much identical. For the other I’d be looking at something like: GWS give 19...

OK, so to get this thread back on track... hahahahahahahahaha GWS have 12 and 15 now. We should be making a play for one of them. Our future 2nd can be used as it will be eaten by a bid for McCabe, and we should be getting 27 for Titch. 24 and F2nd for 12 - leaves us with 6, 12, 27, 52, 65 or...

More than that. They confirmed on Trade Radio the other day that it's equal to the last pick in each round added up. So 1650 points deficit. I think.

What exactly is McKenzie doing? If the Lions were going to do a half hearted swap like that for 15, we could have done it with 24 and our later picks, it would have been better for the Lions and we could have had 15! Is he asleep at the wheel there?