Rumour Bluemour Discussion thread

[Space Cadet]

Was there an actual rumour or just posters trade hypotheticals?
(Are the dual bluemour discussion/bluemour file threads still a thing?)

 

[rog1995]

As others have said, Bailey not being at the Blues is likely more to do with us.

Comments like yours Rog remind me of the ****heads who booed Tom Bell on Sunday.

I think the Tom Bell situation is completely different. I have a heap of respect for him. He was a favorite of mine due to the way he went about it. And no I definitely didn't boo him.

 

[Chalky Blues]

You're dead right - it would be a steal for us which makes the big question why would they do it?

I reckon there's several reasons in favour:
1. We've dealt with GWS in the same way just recently and all parties are happy (it seems anyway).
2. GWS need the list space for their academy players.
3. They need the salary cap space.
4. They don't necessarily need top 10 picks to achieve their drafting requurements and trading several players for what they need kills several birds with one stone.
5. Dealing with one club for all four is easier than a dozen clubs (all up) vying for individuals.

As far as the players are concerned:
1. Some of the four players are fringe at GWS and Carlton provide opportunity.
2. If our club continues on our current trajectory, the players aren't taking a HUGE backward step towards premiership which no doubt drives them to at least some degree.
3. Melbourne city is an attraction for some.
4. Probably most importantly, it seems Bolton and Carlton are attractive. Guys likely want to play for him and with us, though of course we have a long way to go in order to prove any initial feelings of us being 'a place to be' correct.
5. Everyone looks better in navy blue.

Obviously some of those reasons are minor but some are very important depending on the player in question. So basically, if GWS are happy and the players are satisfied - why not?

You forgot to mention our new breeding program

 

[rog1995]

You forgot to mention our new breeding program

Don't forget SOS has built their Empire.

 

[DangerousD]

You're dead right - it would be a steal for us which makes the big question why would they do it?

I reckon there's several reasons in favour:
1. We've dealt with GWS in the same way just recently and all parties are happy (it seems anyway).
2. GWS need the list space for their academy players.
3. They need the salary cap space.
4. They don't necessarily need top 10 picks to achieve their drafting requurements and trading several players for what they need kills several birds with one stone.
5. Dealing with one club for all four is easier than a dozen clubs (all up) vying for individuals.

As far as the players are concerned:
1. Some of the four players are fringe at GWS and Carlton provide opportunity.
2. If our club continues on our current trajectory, the players aren't taking a HUGE backward step towards premiership which no doubt drives them to at least some degree.
3. Melbourne city is an attraction for some.
4. Probably most importantly, it seems Bolton and Carlton are attractive. Guys likely want to play for him and with us, though of course we have a long way to go in order to prove any initial feelings of us being 'a place to be' correct.
5. Everyone looks better in navy blue.

Obviously some of those reasons are minor but some are very important depending on the player in question. So basically, if GWS are happy and the players are satisfied - why not?

Of course, but im trying to think of it from the Giants perspective, and from there i would be happy to deal with us but i think the supposed offer is too low. I understand all the benefits to them but they get all of those things regardless of who they trade to. I hope it happens but just dont think it will be for a 1st and 2nd round pick.

 

[passmark]

I think the Tom Bell situation is completely different. I have a heap of respect for him. He was a favorite of mine due to the way he went about it. And no I definitely didn't boo him.

The situation may be very similar in that it's about the club and the player understanding the circumstances and being comfortable with the decision to go to another club.

Bailey nominating the Saints may well have been after we explained we have 10 half back flanker/back pocket types and his best chance to play top line footy exists elsewhere.

 

[ShanDog]

Of course, but im trying to think of it from the Giants perspective, and from there i would be happy to deal with us but i think the supposed offer is too low. I understand all the benefits to them but they get all of those things regardless of who they trade to. I hope it happens but just dont think it will be for a 1st and 2nd round pick.

We gave up a pittance in the last deal but the four rumoured players this year come with more 'brand name' value no doubt. I don't think it's HEAPS more, though. A first and second rounder isn't a ridiculously undervalued trade I reckon. Particularly if we can jig our draft pick numbers around with trades and end up giving a pick in the low teens and one in the late 20s or something. But **** yeah we would be happy either way lol

 

[F_therest]

Was there an actual rumour or just posters trade hypotheticals?
(Are the dual bluemour discussion/bluemour file threads still a thing?)

There was in the list management thread...

Someone should really copy it into the rumour files thread

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Was there an actual rumour or just posters trade hypotheticals?
(Are the dual bluemour discussion/bluemour file threads still a thing?)

A rumour from an opposition supporter who has been solid in the past.

Our board has approved us trading our 1st and 2nd rounders if needed. We are looking at giving up both of them for Marchbank, Tomlinson, Steele and Stewart from GWS.

 

[Stamos]

A rumour from an opposition supporter who has been solid in the past.

Our board has approved us trading our 1st and 2nd rounders if needed. We are looking at giving up both of them for Marchbank, Tomlinson, Steele and Stewart from GWS.

Post No.# ?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Post No.# ?

Somewhere in the List Management thread.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Forget the draft guys. Expect Steele, marchbank, Tomlinson and Stewart to be in the navy blue next season.

Follow that for subsequent discussion and follow ups.

 

[Big Sim is Back]

A rumour from an opposition supporter who has been solid in the past.

Our board has approved us trading our 1st and 2nd rounders if needed. We are looking at giving up both of them for Marchbank, Tomlinson, Steele and Stewart from GWS.

I like the idea except for Stewart. We'd have Jaksch and Jones, and Tomlinson, and Cas, with Rowe free to move forward as well, and Gorringe...would rather a genuine nippy crumbing small forward than another battling tall.

 

[bigdog43]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...l-blues-reinvention-is-creating-a-new-carlton this article is really interesting saying that carlton has been fielding calls from player managers suggesting that we've become a destination club again. Would love to know who the players are?

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Ok i am a big fan of the proposed GWS 4 trade but i dont see how it will get done for only our 1st and our 2nd round pick. Lets say 8 and 26. Why would GWS except this off us when they could get more elsewhere? I would be willing to offer our third as well or even next years second to get it done. Does anyone else think it is huge unders?

Tomlinson worth less than a third and his contract is probably weighing them down. Stewart is probably a "get him off our list situation" because I doubt he'd be high on our radar so the only reason he is in the conversation is because GWS want him to be.

So id say if anything. Both those players are probably us doing GWS a favour.

So then, it is just Marchbank and Steele, and I think considering we're doing them a favour with Stewart and Tomlinson, a 2017 1st and a 2016 2nd is more than fair.

 

[TCB-1935]

Follow that for subsequent discussion and follow ups.

The post was 5048 from page 202 of the List Management thread. He also posted ( at post 5050) a 'statement' regarding the Club's first and second round picks. Seems very assured about his information. Hope he is right.

 

[SBYM]

Tomlinson worth less than a third and his contract is probably weighing them down. Stewart is probably a "get him off our list situation" because I doubt he'd be high on our radar so the only reason he is in the conversation is because GWS want him to be.

So id say if anything. Both those players are probably us doing GWS a favour.

So then, it is just Marchbank and Steele, and I think considering we're doing them a favour with Stewart and Tomlinson, a 2017 1st and a 2016 2nd is more than fair.

They won't cop our 2017 first rounder (pick 18)...

 

[rog1995]

A rumour from an opposition supporter who has been solid in the past.

Our board has approved us trading our 1st and 2nd rounders if needed. We are looking at giving up both of them for Marchbank, Tomlinson, Steele and Stewart from GWS.

That's a lot to give up. Our first two picks to players who have yet to prove themselves. Giving up future picks can seriously come back to haunt us. Just look at Collingwood.

 

[happydude]

That's a lot to give up. Our first two picks to players who have yet to prove themselves.

Yea we could hold on to them and get 2 players who are yet to prove themselves directly from the draft.

Who knows if we will acquire first and second round picks from other trades

 

[HARKER]

That's a lot to give up. Our first two picks to players who have yet to prove themselves.

Pretty sure that the picks haven't proved themselves either.

The deal....if it goes through as a 1st and 2nd for the four.....and if it doesn't break the bank....seems pretty appealing to me.

Just makes sense on many fronts.

 

[rog1995]

Pretty sure that the picks haven't proved themselves either.

The deal....if it goes through as a 1st and 2nd for the four.....and if it doesn't break the bank....seems pretty appealing to me.

Just makes sense on many fronts.

These are fringe players. Tomlinson could turn out to be another Jaeksh and looking at Steeles numbers in the last few rounds they don't look overly inspiring. Perhaps I'm missing something but to give up a first rounder this needs to an established player that will play 200 games. The cats got Dangerfield for similar picks.

 

[happydude]

These are fringe players. Tomlinson could turn out to be another Jaeksh and looking at Steeles numbers in the last few rounds they don't look overly inspiring. Perhaps I'm missing something but to give up a first rounder this needs to an established player that will play 200 games. The cats got Dangerfield for similar picks.

Context helps, Jacksh is starting to show something (not as much as Tomlinson has already) and bigger guys usually take longer.

Fringe players from a team that has more first rounders than positions and are still young with room to improve are worth more than fringe players from Richmond

 

[HARKER]

These are fringe players. Tomlinson could turn out to be another Jaeksh and looking at Steeles numbers in the last few rounds they don't look overly inspiring. Perhaps I'm missing something but to give up a first rounder this needs to an established player that will play 200 games.

You can't guarantee any player to play 200 games let alone a pick ~#8 and ~#26

Marchbank is very highly rated. He was by GWS, obviously (they took him at #7) and he was by us (~ pick #5)
Why would this years higher end first rounders be better?

Tomlinson is just the 'type' we want. An athletic beast that can cover a lot of ground.
I'm not sure on him as I just haven't watched enough GWS games but we've liked him for a long time.

Steele is a quality mid trying to break into a pretty complete midfield outfit.
Others have seen plenty of him and rate him highly.

Stewart isn't a world-beater at the moment and has been injured for periods of time whilst at GWS.
If we rate him though, then why not?

 

[andyrogers80]

These are fringe players. Tomlinson could turn out to be another Jaeksh and looking at Steeles numbers in the last few rounds they don't look overly inspiring. Perhaps I'm missing something but to give up a first rounder this needs to an established player that will play 200 games. The cats got Dangerfield for similar picks.

You are right Rog, we could end up with another Lucas or Watson if we don't trade away our first pick. Why we would even consider picking up players on the fringe of a currently top 6 team with good upside.

I agree all things must be considered and your opinion is 100% valid. I just think 4 attempts at players that were highly rated in their own draft year is better than 2 attempts at players also unproven.

Plus your don't get Dangerfield types falling from trees for first rounders, particularly not in the salary cap range we want.

 

[rog1995]

If we give up next year's 1st pick and have a bad run with injuries and finish bottom 4?