Mega Thread Delist/Trade/Draft Supermegaultrathread - Trade Period Edition

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'd say we are going for a player but i would very keen to try and package picks for a better one.

Pick 31 + 43 to Essendon for 26

Pick 31 + 43 + 49 to Adelaide for pick 23.

I would be trying the clubs that need picks first and see if anything sticks.

neither of these clubs will want to trade lower. They both want higher picks.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

So, with the this meant to be a 'weak' draft is there a chance that some of the 2nd and 3rd round picks will actually be higher as other clubs might exit the draft earlier?

e.g. We have 43 which is the 7th (?) pick in round 3, but if 3-4 clubs don't use their second or third rounders, isn't this effectively be pick 40?

Might not seem like a bit difference, but on the other hand - how many clubs are likely to exit midway through round 1 or round 2?
 
I can't help but feel we have made another stupid trade.
Did we just give our 3rd round compo pick away for no reason? When we could have used it in the stronger draft next year?
We essentially got a 6 pick upgrade in a weak draft. Why didn't we just retain 44?
This is so bizarre everything we do just makes me think we have some master plan. It makes no sense. I guess if we have some players we are set on at every pick it makes sense. And if we are using 49.
 
I think anyone, regardless of their level of knowledge, should share their thoughts and opinions on whatever football related matter they wish. If folks bought into what you're saying here, this place would become even more cliquier and uppity than it at times displays.

You've lost the plot. Of course you can post whatever you like. If you think that we should have offered Naitanui to get the Bootsma deal over the line, then be my guest. But I reserve the right to then label you a complete belter, and disregard everything else you say.

If you genuinely believe that us getting a great young player for pick 28 rather than 31 is a complete disaster, symptomatic of some inferiority complex we have at the trade table then you are quickly heading into belter territory.

There's enough wrong with the club that you don't have to manufacture things to moan about. Just wait for more Bootsma news, and then I'll be right there with you.
 
Cox for PM, post: 30749876, member: 50432"]why not what would we get for 43 that would be so much better?

We don't need another tall-ish project player clogging our list. We have plenty of talls & injury prone players that for midfield depth we can't handle another.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I'd say we are going for a player but i would very keen to try and package picks for a better one.

Pick 31 + 43 to Essendon for 26

This is a pretty good suggestion - Essendon drop 5 spots in the 2nd but get an extra third round pick in a year that they're desperately short for picks.

We could also offer 49 for Gumbleton to keep Ellis, waters and Butler company and mess with Freo like they did to us with Yeo:cool:
 
What about Sydney they have lost a few players maybe they might do a 2 for 1 sort of deal

Sent from my GT-I9082 using Tapatalk
 
He's absolutely correct. Has been a solid trade period.

Wouldn't you say that it's been good but could have been better though?

Yeo for 28 was a steal, but we could/should have lost 31.

Should have got 10 instead of 11.

Should have kept 44 and then kept our 3rd rd compo.

Happy with where we are right now but can't help but feel we were on the losing end of all the 50/50 decisions.
 
This is a pretty good suggestion - Essendon drop 5 spots in the 2nd but get an extra third round pick in a year that they're desperately short for picks.

We could also offer 49 for Gumbleton to keep Ellis, waters and Butler company and mess with Freo like they did to us with Yeo:cool:

bombers activity
out: 5 players if we include gumbleton (and one rookie)
In: 2 from gws, chappy

so they only need two picks in the draft atm.

reports suggest they're about to get 55 for gumbleton.

So 26 and 55 or 31 and 43.
I Reckon they would prefer they would prefer the chance to nab a better talent at 26.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top