Jack Gunston - Hawthorn bound

[CaptainHodgey]

I wish the Gunston deal can just be finished so we can all move on with our lives.

Btw I think the North/Adelaide/Hawks deal proposed seems very fair even though I personally don't want Campbell at Hawthorn.

 

[Thewlis Dish]

Btw I think the North/Adelaide/Hawks deal proposed seems very fair even though I personally don't want Campbell at Hawthorn.

Fair for who? We downgrade our first rounder for what? It's a horrible deal for North and if Adelaide were going to accept Gunston for pick 18, we may as well just offer it ourselves and make Hawthorn come to the party with an offer. Not lose Campbell and six places in the draft to get Lisle.

 

[CaptainHodgey]

Fair for who? We downgrade our first rounder for what? It's a horrible deal for North and if Adelaide were going to accept Gunston for pick 18, we may as well just offer it ourselves and make Hawthorn come to the party with an offer. Not lose Campbell and six places in the draft to get Lisle.

Well you can keep campbell and just lose 6 spots for Lisle? Quite happy to dredge the VFL for a small forward.

 

[apollo_creed]

Fair for who? We downgrade our first rounder for what? It's a horrible deal for North and if Adelaide were going to accept Gunston for pick 18, we may as well just offer it ourselves and make Hawthorn come to the party with an offer. Not lose Campbell and six places in the draft to get Lisle.

Robbery for Hawthorn = fair. I suppose.

 

[Thewlis Dish]

Well you can keep campbell and just lose 6 spots for Lisle? Quite happy to dredge the VFL for a small forward.

We have no need for Lisle so I don't see why we'd downgrade 18 to 24 for him, especially given we have a chance at Docherty or McKenzie with 18.

I also don't see why we'd weaken our draft position to help Hawthorn get a player we are/were interested in, unless we're getting someone like Suckling back.

 

[Turly]

We have no need for Lisle so I don't see why we'd downgrade 18 to 24 for him, especially given we have a chance at Docherty or McKenzie with 18.

I also don't see why we'd weaken our draft position to help Hawthorn get a player we are/were interested in, unless we're getting someone like Suckling back.

You have no idea what your needs are (your club will decide this), nor do you have any say in what North will trade/draft. North will decide what they believe Lisles worth is not bf posters (if they are interested) and discussions will go forward.

Fact is we can speculate all we want, but we have no idea what is going on behind closed doors.

 

[Thewlis Dish]

Okay, in my opinion that deal is a horrible one for North, as I don't see Lisle as a player worth downgrading our first round selection six spots for, especially as there are several prospects which I believe suit our needs projected to go around the 15-18 mark.

I also don't believe it would be beneficial for us to do this deal as it would get a player we have apparently shown interest in to another club.

Is that better?

 

[CaptainHodgey]

Okay, in my opinion that deal is a horrible one for North, as I don't see Lisle as a player worth downgrading our first round selection six spots for, especially as there are several prospects which I believe suit our needs projected to go around the 15-18 mark.

I also don't believe it would be beneficial for us to do this deal as it would get a player we have apparently shown interest in to another club.

Is that better?

Well whether Lisle fits a need for your club is the question here and since Petrie is the only player capable of taking a contested mark in the forward 50 then its possible you might be wrong that you don't need him.

All of that is not for us to decide but if North indeed feel Lisle is a required type of player then moving 6 spots down doesn't seem a heavy price to pay at all.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

We have no need for Lisle so I don't see why we'd downgrade 18 to 24 for him, especially given we have a chance at Docherty or McKenzie with 18.

I also don't see why we'd weaken our draft position to help Hawthorn get a player we are/were interested in, unless we're getting someone like Suckling back.

This post is full of common sense.

I rate Lisle highly but North have a shit load of young, developing KPPs. Unless they see Lisle as a dramatic improvement on the players already on their list then the whole thing is a waste of time. Otherwise they're just adding to the pile. If I was looking at North's list I'd be trying to fill it with more outside pace or more skill and run off the HB line - hence the more astute North posters asking Suckling's price.

Been saying it since day one - Lisle is not someone that they will be breaking their neck over. The clubs in dire need of marking forwards are Melbourne and Bulldogs, perhaps Carlton considering that there is word of Waite looking at options.

 

[Thewlis Dish]

Of course Adelaide are going to take a hardline stance on day one, but come Thursday or Friday he'll end up at Hawthorn for pick 24 or pick 24 and a fringe player.

Other teams that are interested in Gunston aren't going to get in on the trade unless there's something significant in it for them.

Plus there's no point even having this board if every second post is met with "you wouldn't know what your club is interested in", which happens every year as supporters get cut that other posters don't rate their fringe players.

 

[Kimbo]

You have no idea what your needs are (your club will decide this), nor do you have any say in what North will trade/draft. North will decide what they believe Lisles worth is not bf posters (if they are interested) and discussions will go forward.

Fact is we can speculate all we want, but we have no idea what is going on behind closed doors.

No shit, Sherlock. If this attitude is the also basis of people hating trade week, then I think [sic] some of us might need lessons in the nature of interweb forums.

Okay, in my opinion that deal is a horrible one for North, as I don't see Lisle as a player worth downgrading our first round selection six spots for, especially as there are several prospects which I believe suit our needs projected to go around the 15-18 mark.

I also don't believe it would be beneficial for us to do this deal as it would get a player we have apparently shown interest in to another club.

Is that better?

I commend your restraint.

 

[Thewlis Dish]

I commend your restraint.

You wouldn't know what my restraint is.

 

[Kimbo]

You wouldn't know what my restraint is.

I commend what I imagine your restraint to have been.

 

[The Lone Latic]

This post is full of common sense.

I rate Lisle highly but North have a shit load of young, developing KPPs. Unless they see Lisle as a dramatic improvement on the players already on their list then the whole thing is a waste of time. Otherwise they're just adding to the pile. If I was looking at North's list I'd be trying to fill it with more outside pace or more skill and run off the HB line - hence the more astute North posters asking Suckling's price.

Been saying it since day one - Lisle is not someone that they will be breaking their neck over. The clubs in dire need of marking forwards are Melbourne and Bulldogs, perhaps Carlton considering that there is word of Waite looking at options.

Thank god, finally a hawthorn supporter speakiong some sense

 

[King Elvis]

Lisle
Howard
Gunston


Menage out of that somehow?

 

[Neville Bartos]

Any idea what the possible counter offers would be?

If we're hesitant to part with a first round pick then the teams who are closer to the bottom of the ladder are going to be even more coy about giving theirs up.

Bulldogs and North need a focal point forward, not a 3rd tall like Gunston is apparently very good at playing. Melbourne might be an interesting one as Liam Jurrah needs a shitload more pressure on his spot but they also probably need a BIG key forward. Added to that is the fact that they all have picks lower than 20 and surely wouldn't be willing to trade them for Gunston.

Personally, it looks like Trigg is doing his best to drive Hawthorn's offer up for Gunston by talking about other clubs with possibly better offers but there's probably only 1 maybe 2 other clubs serious about Gunston and most of them aren't going to make better offers than their first pick + a fringe player.

You'd guess and say this trade won't be done early but considering the other trades Adelaide have to organise, they'll try and get this one done early so maybe by Wednesday?

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Thank god, finally a hawthorn supporter speakiong some sense

Cheers, TLL.

And the fact that Matt Campbell is staying at North - do we even need to talk to each other anymore? (North + Hawk supporters?)

Or are our clubs so determined to trade with each other every single off season that we'll find a trade, even if it's pick 99 for pick 100, or similar?

 

[Jars458]

Lisle
Howard
Gunston


Menage out of that somehow?

Lisle and pick 24 to Dogs
Howard to Crows
Gunston and Dogs third round pick to Hawks

 

[SHAKESPEARE]

Deal. Sign it

 

[King Elvis]

Looks like a pretty sweet deal for the Dogs..

 

[Hawkinspired]

I'm hearing Lilse plus another Hawk for Norths first rounder, to then be on traded to the Crows for Gunston.

 

[WALL-e]

Hmm, North and Doggies also keen on Gunna....they wouldn't be all over helping facilitate a trade with another team too early in proceedings.

 

[Daz]

Lisle and pick 24 to Dogs
Howard to Crows
Gunston and Dogs third round pick to Hawks

Seems like a pretty fair deal to me.

 

[Daz]

I'm hearing Lilse plus another Hawk for Norths first rounder, to then be on traded to the Crows for Gunston.

It would have to be a pretty good Hawk player, not Ellis/Young/Ladson types.


I'd absolutely love Gunston at North. The Crows fans are not overrating him one bit in my opinion. Everything he does (on field) is super impressive. He's a natural.

Lisle, on the other hand, is anything but impressive. I watched his highlights vs Collingwood last night and he still wasn't that good. He can take a contested mark, that's it. He's slow and struggles under pressure.

 

[Leezorr]

We would be stupid to trade Howard, He is a good kick with good pace two things we really cant afford to lose. We drafted him as a replacement for Gilbee and he looks like he will fill that role well.

I really don't want Lisle id much rather Howard, even with the pick as a sweetener.