Dagless
Hall of Famer
No one offering for sure QB dud JA? He’s worth two fourths fo sho.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
David Johnson and Andrew Luck for your 4ths bro.No one offering for sure QB dud JA? He’s worth two fourths fo sho.
Those two broken down old hacks? Not worth even thatDavid Johnson and Andrew Luck for your 4ths bro.
Our very own Stepien Rule, only harsher!Lets put a ban on GG trading his first pick again.
Something has to change if this is ruining the league and people are feeling the way they do (manu too).Nah bs.
I’m one of the few who benefits from GGs continuous piss taking and think it’s better for people not to be so blatantly crap about the whole thing.
We’ve made a precedent on vetoing better trades than that and I thought it was shit BEFORE gg corrected it.
There is no system that justifies a trade like that. In all other shitty trades at least there’s some semblance of sense (ie for QBs, for at least a friggin early third in the existing draft when the third round is happening). We’re still drafting the first round and GG is trading for 4th 5th and 6th picks...
Anyway, whatever, pretend to enjoy winning on the back of crap like that.
GG.exe I was planning on offering you 1.11 and 2.02 for your future first pending the pick coming up, but nothing like dem sweet 4th round picks.
Jusr dont let him trade. Solves the problemPerhaps the rule should be you must utilise one of your first round picks every 3 years???
It not a serious league obviously and I would like to think that most of us here are here for fun with the occasional roughie har har pick/win.This is a serious league???
Damn. How’d I get invited then?
Legit, it would be a shot trade, but if it was dspeeds second THIS year it would be different. Legit that would make sense to me knowing you.
But we aren’t out of the first round and you’re trading a future first for a 4th pick. That’s how Cass got the shitty trade through last time. There were immediate benefits to it.
If this was anyone else, we would be calling collusion probably because there’s no other way to justify it. And no way to prove it other than your word.
Not saying you aren’t allowed to trade your first, but if this is the type of crap you’re trading, I would suggest we introduce a majority rule veto for blatantly bad trades that look like nothing else but collusion to the outside world.
At the time I said it was a shit trade and sighed.I misread Dspeed's PM originally thinking he said his 2.03. So i jumped on it. A future 1st for a current 2nd is how it works. A future 3rd = a current 2nd. Etc. That's how it works. And he threw in a 4th, 5th, 6th, which was what I was after too, some more late round picks. I posted the trade, and then later, after everyone already saw it and complained --- which NOW you're saying that original trade was ok, tho you cried veto at the time --- then later Dspeed corrected me in the PM that it was a future 2nd. Not to say I was OBLIGED to honor the trade still....but I was still ok with it, because a future 2nd is still ok. At the time I would've had TWO 2nds in 2019. Could've easily moved back into the 1st trading those two 2nds, or using my higher 2nd and a 4th say to move up into say 1.09.
But then I decided, seeing as I stuffed up misreading Dspeed's future 2nd for a current 2nd. I still wanted some "high" picks this year. So hence the TGBB trade....which is fine too.....my future 2nd and 4th, for his two current 3rds. That trade was very legit.
Really, when you look at the two trades I made....i simply misread Dspeed's future 2nd for a current one when I accepted....and if it was a current 2nd, I wouldn't have done the TGBB trade. But on the heels of my clerical error. The FOLLOWING trade was very legit and win:win for us both. A good even trade. So my two trades this year were actually decent this time (if you ignore the clerical error).