McGovern: 1 yr @ start of 2016, 3 years at the end of 2017 - confirmed legend

[dogs105]

He was in last years AA squad, so he's considered in the best dozen or so mids in the game. He av 27 poss per game. We don't have any mids at that level.

How many more levels do you need?

More, to give up a first and McGovern

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Do we actually have a first or second rounder this year? Which one was it we traded away?

second, I would be more than a little annoyed if we had traded a first rounder Hampton at his current output, band the board would have gone into full meltdown.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

He was in last years AA squad, so he's considered in the best dozen or so mids in the game. He av 27 poss per game. We don't have any mids at that level.

How many more levels do you need?

Like the equalization debate at the Oscars ......the AFL also has to have the token midget in the AA squad

 

[Tex200]

More, to give up a first and McGovern

So... AA first 22, Brownlow , B&f?

That enough?

 

[dogs105]

So... AA first 22, Brownlow , B&f?

That enough?

Probably.

 

[Tex200]

Probably.

And then you think you'll get him for a first + a player unlikely to have played a game ?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

He was in last years AA squad, so he's considered in the best dozen or so mids in the game. He av 27 poss per game. We don't have any mids at that level.

How many more levels do you need?

Another level if we are trading our 1st rounder & McGovern... Particularly if you look at what has been given up for recent trades & we are already missing our 2nd rounder... Or I would want a pick back.

 

[DD#23]

second, I would be more than a little annoyed if we had traded a first rounder Hampton at his current output, band the board would have gone into full meltdown.

GWS will come out of the Hampton deal worse than the Davis compo, a pick in the 30's will be good value for Hampton

 

[mistylake]

And then you think you'll get him for a first + a player unlikely to have played a game ?

So what did we get for Danger (RFA). 1st + 28? And a player yet to play a game.

 

[Iron]

Fair enough. That doesn't look good for me.

I was wrong. Sorry

You... what

 

[Tex200]

Another level if we are trading our 1st rounder & McGovern... Particularly if you look at what has been given up for recent trades & we are already missing our 2nd rounder... Or I would want a pick back.

I think realistically a first should be enough, provided he doesn't jump through the stratosphere this year.

Especially given Freo will likely be in need of currency

 

[Sanders]

I think realistically a first should be enough, provided he doesn't jump through the stratosphere this year.

Especially given Freo will likely be in need of currency

A first will be miles away from what's needed. As well you know

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

So what did we get for Danger (RFA). 1st + 28? And a player yet to play a game.

Don't forget we gave them back a 3rd rounder.

 

[mistylake]

Don't forget we gave them back a 3rd rounder.

Did forget.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Did forget.

Which gave them zac Clarke & I think was used by gold coast towards points on the player we lost the bid on before doedee.

 

[mistylake]

Which gave them zac Clarke & I think was used by gold coast towards points on the player we lost the bid on before doedee.

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when we trade a player who's forced to leave.

 

[Tex200]

A first will be miles away from what's needed. As well you know

Probably right

The lack of appreciation here for Neale is yet another wall to bash against in here.

 

[Glenno23]

Reckon I would prefer to keep our 1st rounder & McGovern.

Too steep, unless neale goes up another level.

Anyone who can get 43 and kick 3 in a derby must be at a decent level

 

[Glenno23]

Probably right

The lack of appreciation here for Neale is yet another wall to bash against in here.

Lachie is a gun and anyone who can't see that.... well i just don't know

If Freo would accept a first and McGov, i'd sign quicker than Superman on autograph day

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Probably right

The lack of appreciation here for Neale is yet another wall to bash against in here.

You see Peter, once again you miss the context of posts ......no-one is saying Neale has not developed into a good player

My position is actually thinking about the structure and mix of our midfield i don't believe Neale adds to the dynamics of the midfield for the Crows .......he's perfect in the mix at Freo

Remember when flavor of the month here was team structure ......well guess what, that still exists when deciding which players to target for trade

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Lachie is a gun and anyone who can't see that.... well i just don't know

If Freo would accept a first and McGov, i'd sign quicker than Superman on autograph day

No-one on this board has denied Neales ability!!

The deal you're proposing is a silly deal that simply won't happen ......bookmark it if you like

 

[Bacon8]

Which gave them zac Clarke & I think was used by gold coast towards points on the player we lost the bid on before doedee.

Zac Smith.

 

[dogs105]

And then you think you'll get him for a first + a player unlikely to have played a game ?

No, but I'd give that up for him, which was the question you asked. At the moment I wouldn't trade McGovern and first for Neale, he'd need to do a bit more. You're the one who over-egged the pudding with "more".

 

[Tex200]

No, but I'd give that up for him, which was the question you asked. At the moment I wouldn't trade McGovern and first for Neale, he'd need to do a bit more. You're the one who over-egged the pudding with "more".

The purpose of "over egging" was to work out what point you would do that trade. As I thought, the point you would do that deal is the point it would unlikely be on the table

 

[Sanders]

No-one on this board has denied Neales ability!!

The deal you're proposing is a silly deal that simply won't happen ......bookmark it if you like

You weren't concerned by his contested marking?