Snuffaluphagus
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 10, 2015
- 25,438
- 88,148
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Thanks for making this an awesome trade period peeps. Will be locking this thread later tonight
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.
PLUS Your club board comp is now up!
Feels good to have future picks for onceJust for reference here is the currents state of 2023 draft picks based on 2022 standings
After listening to Walls on trade radio I have formed a firm belief that Freo are shat off at Lobb and WB for doing a deal while Lobb is still under contract and are well aware they will get a first rounder for him on the trade deadline if they treat the process and everyone involved with the contempt the situation deserves.
Yeah it’s a bit like the Weller to GC situation on a much smaller scale. The Bulldogs have committed to Lobb it would seem, and will have to make trade happen with a decent pick
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Do we reckon the Jackson trade should be done by Tuesday? So many following trades depend on it happening early.And we should only do that trade after Jackson is done
Picks… bring more talent in. He doesn’t want to be at freoWhat do we get out of trading Lobb? I've yet to hear one convincing argument for trading him.
The club loves meek. Reckon he is one of the hardest trainers, and a real club man. The kind of person you want to keep around. If lobb goes, he is imperative. If we get the right pick lobb will go, which I think will happen. It’s a shame he plays such an important position, he would have been gone a while ago.Doesn't make any sense to me unless we are worried about Darcy in the future
If Darcy is injured then Jackson rucks and Treacy does fwd/ruck
If Jackson is injured then Darcy rucks and Treacy does fwd/ruck
if both injured then sure we need Meek but surely that won't
Thats all well and good but realistically he can't and shouldn't get a game when we have Darcy and JacksonThe club loves meek. Reckon he is one of the hardest trainers, and a real club man. The kind of person you want to keep around. If lobb goes, he is imperative. If we get the right pick lobb will go, which I think will happen. It’s a shame he plays such an important position, he would have been gone a while ago.
Why? How does that benefit us? Unless the right pick is a straight first rounder then he needs to stay.The club loves meek. Reckon he is one of the hardest trainers, and a real club man. The kind of person you want to keep around. If lobb goes, he is imperative. If we get the right pick lobb will go, which I think will happen. It’s a shame he plays such an important position, he would have been gone a while ago.
If we are playing Meek and Darcy together then we are going backwardsIt entirely depends on what Jackson is to us. A not quite 2m tall player, maybe ruck, maybe midfielder.
Lol I don’t condone or condemn either way mate but I thought I better let you know what you were potentially getting yourself into!
You could be right, but he will. Otherwise we will lose him.Thats all well and good but realistically he can't and shouldn't get a game when we have Darcy and Jackson
I think that’s what the club wants tooI'm looking at Jackson in neither of the ruck or forward roles.
Actually really embarrassing for the club do straight up declare that Lobb is going nowhere, then to spiel on about why we need to keep him (essentially saying look how *ed we'll be without him), only for us to let him go for a pick in the 20s.
Nothing embarrassing about it at all. It's the way we get the best possible pick for him. Wednesday night, he's either staying or we've received maximum value for him.Actually really embarrassing for the club do straight up declare that Lobb is going nowhere, then to spiel on about why we need to keep him (essentially saying look how *ed we'll be without him), only for us to let him go for a pick in the 20s.
Treacy in Lobbs role thenI'm looking at Jackson in neither of the ruck or forward roles.
I agree mate. The words have seemed adamant. Not your typical ‘He’s important to us, but out of respect we’ll see if something can be done there’ type comment.
They’ve been staunch in the no trade line. To backtrack and go ‘we’ll Dogs offer was substantial blah blah’ would really piss me off.
Dogs would need to literally offer us 11 or a future first, because it’s then not about his value as such but provide us the flexibility in future years due to the restraints in trading too many first rounders over 4 year periods.
I’d keep Lobb regardless. I’m big on when you say something you mean it.
The club has said that you can say your house isn't for sale but everything does have a price.
I think Freo want #11