Re: Blues Seek Everitt for pick 27
Everitt for pick 27 and Fisher, sound fair?
Everitt for pick 27 and Fisher, sound fair?
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.
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Not according to most Dogs supporters.Everitt for pick 27 and Fisher, sound fair?
Where are the doggies supporters? Wouldn't mind hearing from them on this...
Oh we know all about finals ...They are playing a prelim this week. You know....The finals......No?...Still nothing?
Greg Swann is giving off far too many quotes for there to be nothing in this story.
They are seriously mounting a bid for Everitt.
Will need to better than pick 27 though to move him because he is contracted.
Something like Carlton's 1st, 2nd round pick + a sweetener (i.e. Fisher/Grigg etc.) for Bulldogs 1st and Everitt.
Pick 27 and a player alone won't entice the Dogs enough IMO.
So Greg Swann is interested in Everitt, does not mean he is out of favour or no longer required. (After just signing a new contract).
Denham has asked Swann if they're interested and what they would give up. From that he has written this half baked speculative article.
So Greg Swann is interested in Everitt, does not mean he is out of favour or no longer required. (After just signing a new contract).
Denham has asked Swann if they're interested and what they would give up. From that he has written this half baked speculative article.
Greg Swann is giving off far too many quotes for there to be nothing in this story.
They are seriously mounting a bid for Everitt.
Will need to better than pick 27 though to move him because he is contracted.
Something like Carlton's 1st, 2nd round pick + a sweetener (i.e. Fisher/Grigg etc.) for Bulldogs 1st and Everitt.
Pick 27 and a player alone won't entice the Dogs enough IMO.
Being out of favour has no bearing on the situation.So Greg Swann is interested in Everitt, does not mean he is out of favour or no longer required. (After just signing a new contract).
Denham has asked Swann if they're interested and what they would give up. From that he has written this half baked speculative article.
You mean like how Josh Kennedy was a required player - who signed mid season with Carlton?Article is speculative nonsense, notice there is nothing from the Dogs camp?
Oh and Farren Ray was a required player who requested a trade, he is not "out of favour".
Oh we know all about finals ...
remind us of how many you've lost to us?
Being out of favour has no bearing on the situation.
What if put forth a deal that the Bulldogs thought was too good to refuse?
It would be a Josh Kennedy all over again:
"thanks for signing, by the way - we're trading you"
That's an idiotic suggestion, giving up a 1st, 2nd rnd pick and a sweetner is paying way over the odds for someone like Everitt.
Would at least like the worst deal to be Fisher and your first pick, for everitt and our first pick...
It would have to be someone other than Fisher.We'd have to look at that. Fisher for Everitt and lose 4-6 places in the first round. That represents serious value for Carlton.