List Mgmt. 2023 Trade & List Management Thread II - Goldy&Bucket➡️✅/'24 EoFR & #44➡️Stephens&#25✅/#21&#25➡️Fisher&#17✅/'24 EoFR➡️#18✅

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
To be honest I doubt they care who they draft there. For them they are gifted a chance to trade picks they won't use this year and a (likely) high future first into a top 5 talent. I personally think they're hoping Duursma falls out.

Thanks Captain Bringdown
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Fwiw I would surrender pick 3 for Clarry without even hesitating. Would be absolutely invaluable to our team.
Nah, their board is meeting to discuss his future at the club. Its beyond a football decision and now considering reputational risk to sponsorship and commercial reasons. I'd be very disappointed if we paid pick 3 for someone else's problem, especially after what we've just gone through with TT. What we get a pick in the 20s for BBB? That's the sort of deal with them picking up some of his contract $ is the only way I'd be interested in that dogs breakfast.
 
I guess the issue is, as I think the FWiz alluded to above, if we give up 2, we have to be prepared for WC to take Kerch instead of Curtin.

As their supporters keep reminding us, the Eagles need midfielders.



Okay so I'm running on the assumption that GC is also party to the deal. For example:

Step 1) Crows roll their picks together to get pick 4 from GC. Crows trade 4 plus whatever to the Dees for Oliver.

Step 2) Megatrade between Dees, NM and WC (I'm ignoring the steak knives)

NM get 4 and 5, give 2 and 19 (Note: 4 and 5 are really 6 and 7 after Mckay compo and Walter bid)
WC get 2 and 13 and 19
Dees get 1

Would WC agree to something like that? :think: Genuine question.

So I guess the question as far as our interests are concerned could be re-framed as "Are picks 3, 6 and 7, better than picks 2 and 3?"

I'm no underage footy expert, but I remember a post that Souup made in the draft thread a little while back:

If we let the Dees have 1 and WC 2, in the worst possible scenario, WC take Kerch at 2, and we'd still get Watson, Sanders and our favourite out of tier 3.

If so, I'm imagining the draft runs something like this:

1 Reid (Dees)
2 Walter (GC match)
3 Kerch or Curtin (WC)
4 Watson (NM - or maybe Kerch if WC don't take him)
5 Duursma (Hawks)

Then North gets a choice of ANY TWO of these: Sanders, Caddy, O'Sullivan, and whoever is leftover out of Watson and Curtin.

So in that scenario, perhaps 3, 6 and 7 are better than Reid plus Kerch or Watson?

Why do we have to give pick 2 to WC if we feel they will take our preferred player in McKercher? Make a deal for pick 3 instead.
 
Nah, their board is meeting to discuss his future at the club. Its beyond a football decision and now considering reputational risk to sponsorship and commercial reasons. I'd be very disappointed if we paid pick 3 for someone else's problem, especially after what we've just gone through with TT. What we get a pick in the 20s for BBB? That's the sort of deal with them picking up some of his contract $ is the only way I'd be interested in that dogs breakfast.
This,
The first step is getting Oliver to nominate, the next step is hold..
his value will be dropping by the week.

Their best and fairest is on Friday, he doesn’t show or gets wasted, all bets are off. You’ll get him for a FPP1
 
Thanks Captain Bringdown

Sexy Hugh Jackman GIF
 
Can we walk Clayton Oliver to the PSD.
 
Why do we have to give pick 2 to WC if we feel they will take our preferred player in McKercher? Make a deal for pick 3 instead.
I've assumed WC would only trade down from 1 if they can get 2. I dunno for sure that that's the case, but it seems logical.

If we can turn 2 and 3 into McKercher, Watson and O'Sullivan, that's a ripper result as far as I'm concerned.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

If Melbourne wants Oliver gone and he nominates Adelaide, I suspect pick 9 and some change will probably end up getting it done.

They'll demand a player too.
 
They may be willing to gamble on less of a go home with McKercher than Reid.
He wants to move to Melbourne not Hobart on the West Coast.

I think he's more of a flight risk for them myself but I am guessing.
 

Melbourne has hit Clayton Oliver with an ultimatum – shape up or ship off.

Fed-up Demons officials have told their troubled midfielder that they need a commitment from him that he will once again conform to the standards and expectations the club demands.


They have made a series of demands to Oliver that include the need to treat club staff with respect, teammates with respect, prepare the way he should and to turn up to training in the proper condition.

It can be revealed that Melbourne’s reluctance to squash the frenzied trade talk surrounding the 26-year-old is exclusively due to its exasperation with Oliver’s increasingly erratic behaviour.

Oliver is said to have lost his way at times during a campaign interrupted by injury, but his behaviour since the Dees’ straight-sets finals demise has concerned many at club headquarters.

Sources with an intimate knowledge of the rocky Oliver-Demons relationship described this as football’s version of an intervention rather than a push to the exit door.

Equally, Oliver had made clear his dissatisfaction with his club to various sections of the AFL industry.

It’s this ill-will that that has seen rival clubs smell blood in the water and some even confident of pulling off an enormous trade coup.

In recent days, however, Oliver has shown a willingness to return to the fold. He has put his hand up to say that his living arrangements and social lifestyle hasn’t been befitting of an AFL player.

Max Gawn has also opened the door of his home to Oliver, who has recently moved in with the captain and his family.

Insiders said Melbourne was making no apologies for setting the standards they believe are critical to success in professional sport.

Demons officials have been eager to support, nurture and even protect Oliver as he navigated some challenges this year and in many cases they have done so on external advice.

But Oliver’s downward spiral has forced the club to take a harder stance and it’s that stance that has set the trade period alight.

It’s a stance that rekindles memories of Dustin Martin touring the GWS facilities in 2013, Steve Johnson doing the same at Collingwood in 2006 and even Jordan De Goey last year coming close to joining St Kilda.

Melbourne categorically do not want to trade Oliver, a four-time best and fairest winner and a triple All-Australian with a lucrative seven-year contract in place, unless he makes it impossible to be retained.

Oliver has not told Melbourne he wants to be traded.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top