- Moderator
- #16,251
1. Bolton100%
Order of priority should be
1. Bolton
2. Pickett
3. Daylight
4. More daylight
5. Baker
2. Pickett
3. Space for Warner
3. Daylight
4. More daylight
5. Baker
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.
LIVE: GWS Giants v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Lions at 65% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
AFLW 2024 - Round 3 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
1. Bolton100%
Order of priority should be
1. Bolton
2. Pickett
3. Daylight
4. More daylight
5. Baker
the odds of pick 3 being better than Pickett is about 1%. what are you on about.There's no way WC give up pick 3 for Pickett.
the odds of pick 3 being better than Pickett is about 1%. what are you on about.
With the new future trading up to 3 years ahead, surely they scrap the 2 in 4 rule, how can anyone predict what will happen 3 years in the future?The AFL should just leave it up to the clubs, there shouldn't be any restrictions on how many picks you need to use etc.
Also means we can trade a f1 for one next year if we need extrasWith the new future trading up to 3 years ahead, surely they scrap the 4 in 4 rule, how can anyone predict what will happen 3 years in the future?
I would Litetally put money on Switta leaving if we get both. Not sure we need to bleed any other players.So, not including the out of contract guys, who could just be cut and wouldn't carry any value anyway. (NOD excluded. He stays)
Potential Collateral
1x of Davies & Murphy: Worth a R3?
1x of Knobel & Reidy: Worth R3-R4
Brodie: Worth R3-R4
Erasmus (Only if Warner an option): Worth R2
1x of Worner & Aish: Worth R4
Switta: Worth Late R1-R2
Voss signing for 2x extra years is good for us as well. If someone wants him now, they have to pay.
The AFL should just leave it up to the clubs, there shouldn't be any restrictions on how many picks you need to use etc.
But when it gets bad enough the AFL just bail teams out with priority picks anyway.I disagree. I am glad the AFL are at least trying to take steps to prevent another blue and yellow situation. They want at least a semblance of parity and having a team destroy themselves for a decade through highly irresponsible trading goes against that.
If we had a complete ****wit in charge of our list management I would hope that someone could step in and stop them before it is too late.
Either way I'm easy. Rules like that one can just mean footy list managers/departments have to get more creative. Usually when people talk up "freeing up player movement..." they leave out the "... to powerful Vic clubs" bit.I disagree. I am glad the AFL are at least trying to take steps to prevent another blue and yellow situation. They want at least a semblance of parity and having a team destroy themselves for a decade through highly irresponsible trading goes against that.
If we had a complete ****wit in charge of our list management I would hope that someone could step in and stop them before it is too late.
"But - exemptions are allowed if a recruiting target is of a certain age and experience, as determined by the AFL.
This would mean that someone like Kozzy, only 23 years old, may be seen as the equivalent of using a first round pick.
It would also mean trading in Luke Jackson two years ago would potentially count as using a 1st.
The 2-in-4 rule was essentially brought in to protect clubs from themselves - sending out high picks for older talent, leaving themselves in a future hole. Trading for high end young talent isn’t that.
This is all to say Fremantle might not run out of first round picks to trade, particularly with extended future pick trading coming in next year."
I think you are right, would be nothing better than getting in Pickett and Bolton, but, more likely we will end up with just Bolton or as planned Bolton and Baker. Surely, Melbourne is going to go all out to stop the bleeding from their team (unlike Richmond who appear to be on the rebuild) and will simply say no to Pickett, they just can’t afford to lose him.
That is objectively falsethe odds of pick 3 being better than Pickett is about 1%. what are you on about.
Speak for yourselfI hope we still land Baker. He is a tenacious little fricker, and we need some mongrel.
From memory a team got off on this technicality a few years ago. Think it was Geelong?
So very false. If there are 100 kids drafted (there aren't) only 1 of those needs to meet Pickett's ability at that rate. Ridiculous comment.That is objectively false
We kinda just roll eyes at Dan, I shouldn't have bitten.So very false. If there are 100 kids drafted (there aren't) only 1 of those needs to meet Pickett's ability at that rate. Ridiculous comment.
I was thinking #10 after Walters retires in 2025. He has that Troy Cook hardness about himI reckon give Pickett the #33 if he comes over.
the odds of pick 3 being better than Pickett is about 1%. what are you on about.
He is funny though. Meanwhile my friend who has contact with Dockers board members and gets told plenty of inside information which I share a bit of only online has said Freo was contacted by Boltons mamager in July not the other way round andhe beleves a deal has already been arranged and Baker comes it would be a seperate deal.We kinda just roll eyes at Dan, I shouldn't have bitten.
You shoulda just rolled out your Mad Max gif.We kinda just roll eyes at Dan, I shouldn't have bitten.
I'm not sure why the AFL decided to slot trade week in between the season and the finals. Crazy scheduling this year.Ok this needs to hurry up and happen now.