List Mgmt. Our Trade/FA, Suburban & Country Town Thread

[Mick F]

Simply ludicrous to suggest you wouldn’t trade McCreery for Butters. Butters is a top 10 mid in the league. McCreery isn’t a top 100 forward

Port Adelaide don’t want McCreery, let alone be clearing room for him by giving Butters away for a mid first round pick.

 

[adammania9]

agree with no spin, too small and injured. Don’t want another midget mid. Rozee on the other hand

If Butters was too small for anything he wouldn’t have taken out the Coaches POTY last year. He’s also played 49 games in a row and counting. He’s a much better player than Rozee

 

[sr36]

If Butters was too small for anything he wouldn’t have taken out the Coaches POTY last year. He’s also played 49 games in a row and counting. He’s a much better player than Rozee

Either would be fine with me.

 

[Mollythedolly]

I wouldn't give up McCreery even if it got Butters.

Risk losing his mum, Port don't deserve her.

 

[Fat Jesus]

I wouldn't give up McCreery even if it got Butters.

I'd drive McCreery to SA if it means getting Butters.

 

[Carlthetruth]

I swear this is said every year. The year after the current draft is always apparently better.

No it's not, last year's draft wasn't good, this year is excellent and next year will be really poor, just so you know.

 

[Jen2310]

I'd drive McCreery to SA if it means getting Butters.

Carpool with manicpie

 

[Fat Jesus]

Carpool with manicpie

We can sing to hard rock along the way.
Video it for a lazy 2 million views after 9 hours.

 

[sr36]

Carpool with manicpie

This roadtrip is a threat to force Beau to re-sign with us.

 

[NMBB]

This roadtrip is a threat to force Beau to re-sign with us.

Thought you were going to say threat to democracy but it's probably that too

 

[Go Woods]

Time we start thinking about trading out some decent players.

Got to give up something to get something.

McCreery back to Adelaide as part of a trade?

It would take a McCreery and a 1st, minimum.

 

[Go Woods]

You are quite correct, given the quality players nearing retirement. We need to identify players that are worth more to the ‘receiving’ club, than to Collingwood.

I'm open to the Pies putting most of our list up for trade if it means getting quality in to help us remain at the top.
Only the Daicos's, Hill, Maynard and Moore for me are untouchable.

 

[Bussie]

If we get Butters, i'd drive McCreery to adelaide. We would be crazy to turn that down. Nick and Butters would set up our midfield for the next decade.

That'd be a long awkward drive.

 

[sr36]

That'd be a long awkward drive.

You'd just have to lie. Hey Beau, we're just heading over to pick up some cases of Shiraz for GW and Fly

 

[The Phantom]

These suggestions have moved from hypothetical to pathetical.

 

[Tadpole]

These suggestions have moved from hypothetical to pathetical.

And they could shortly move to hyper-pathetical.

 

[Harry O]

I swear this is said every year. The year after the current draft is always apparently better.

You do realise it is 2024 now?

 

[partypie]

Looks like Keane is going to thumb his nose at us. Another opportunity lost, albeit one that should have been seized upon a couple of years ago (or earlier).

 

[BuildEmUp]

No it's not, last year's draft wasn't good, this year is excellent and next year will be really poor, just so you know.

How do u know next year will be poor? IIRC all BF was saying (last year) that 2024 drft will be poor and shallow .. and now?

 

[Jen2310]

How do u know next year will be poor? IIRC all BF was saying (last year) that 2024 drft will be poor and shallow .. and now?

It changes very quickly when the year comes. This year was supposed to be a mid draft, but now key position players have risen.

You just never know. Lets wait til mid year 2025 to see what next years pool looks like. But agree, 2024 they are now saying has more depth than most years.
You can have players outside the top 50 that would be inside the top 30 most drafts.

 

[TradeDraft]

Looks like Keane is going to thumb his nose at us. Another opportunity lost, albeit one that should have been seized upon a couple of years ago (or earlier).

He be no Big Loss

 

[JLC]

Given Beau's from SA, I can understand why his name is being thrown up, although we have a number of other SA players on the list.

Do Port need his type, or would they benefit from someone else? Rumours are circulating around Houston which, if he were to leave, would create a hole in their backline. Would Noble be an option as someone who offers them some run out of the backline?

I'd be loathe to lose Beau, even if it were for someone like Butters, as his skillset is quite unique in our team. If Port were to ask for a small forward, Harrison may be another alternative.

In any scenario, we're almost certainly giving up draft picks; before committing I'd look to close the loop on LDU, as he wouldn't cost a draft pick and would allow us to keep assets like Beau and Harrison.

So we give up Beau and get Butters. Wowsers. Make that happen.

In terms of negotiations our main advantage is surely with a club like Kangaroos. Give us Sheezel for say a first rounder and a player. You can then have the takings from our fixture for the next 5 years.

That was an example but that's the strategy I would be going with.

 

[brysie]

So we give up Beau and get Butters. Wowsers. Make that happen.

In terms of negotiations our main advantage is surely with a club like Kangaroos. Give us Sheezel for say a first rounder and a player. You can then have the takings from our fixture for the next 5 years.

That was an example but that's the strategy I would be going with.

It's hardly a straight swap between Beau and Butters, nor has anyone suggested it is.

Sheezel is unlikely to be on the table to any club while contracted, much like Naicos for us.

Financial incentives are unlikely to be of any consequence when the AFL distributes revenue according to their perceived need across the competition.

 

[JLC]

It's hardly a straight swap between Beau and Butters, nor has anyone suggested it is.

Sheezel is unlikely to be on the table to any club while contracted, much like Naicos for us.

Financial incentives are unlikely to be of any consequence when the AFL distributes revenue according to their perceived need across the competition.

There is a big difference in the situation of Nick Daicos and Sheezel.

Nick Daicos chose to play for Collingwood and has a long history with the club. Sheezel has no such affiliation with the Roos and ended up their not through his own valition. It could well be that he is happy there but wow if we can't even tempt someone away from the kangaroos well maybe we just call it a day and don't bother anymore.

 

[Roverjg]

“I'm hearing he is keen to go home”: SEN SA host adds to Houston trade reports

“I made a few calls last night and I think Dan would be happy to get back to Victoria.”

www.sen.com.au