
HoneyBadger35
They're not going to pick him, Mitch.
- Aug 11, 2011
- 28,595
- 81,241
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Moderator
- #1,669
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.
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Round 1
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
It gives a much clearer picture to show the value paid in a trade vs things like first or second or third rounders given there is such a large spread of picks in a draft round.Exactly.
People need to stop referring to points value outside of the context of bidding on players.
No you are right, would not accept that for pick 2. But highlights the draft capital handed overOn points value yes
In actuality, probably not. I don’t think any club holding pick 1 would trade it for that collection of picks
Would you take those picks for pick 2 this year?
The other thing to consider with Kelly is where those picks actually landed after free agency and academy bids. From memory, at least one of the first rounders ended up at pick 18. Have a look at the players selected by the team that ended up with them (GWS from memory) - they don't appear to be anything special.No you are right, would not accept that for pick 2. But highlights the draft capital handed over
Seriously guys?
If he gets to the PSD, he’s going to Port.
North are enough of a s**t show as it is without drafting Rioli against his will.
They won’t match his contract from Port and they won’t take the risk that he stays in the NT and never reports for training.
Long story short - outside of the ‘moral high ground’ the PSD is the worst case scenario. Easily.
Our best case scenario is that Port are willing to deal that Pick 27 or their future 2nd.
My guess is that at the very least North will want 27 in addition to 8 and next years First - so that’s pretty much clears that off the table.
Maybe Port might manage to get next years 3rd off North coming back the other way?
We could get that for Rioli - if Port get their s**t together in 2023 it won’t be too much different than Port’s 2nd anyway.
You'd believe him?I'm not a huge fan of keeping a player who doesn't want to be here - especially if we are not making finals in 2023. I can't think of a scenario where keeping him helps West Coast in the long term. The only long shot is if Junior changes his mind and (we believe genuinely) fully commits to WC.
That ship has long sailed I would've thought.Aren't there restrictions on how many picks you can trade out? If the JHF deal goes through we will definately get seriously low balled. They might double down on trying to force a package of their fringe players on us.
I think had they know JHF would be available a month ago they never would have chased Rioli and would have kept their powder dry for the bigger deal.
Would we take Rioli back if it all falls through?
You'd believe him?
So what you are essentially saying is that we should just trade Junior ( a best 22 player ), for a hypothetical pick that Port don’t even hold, that even if that pick did become available, there is no guarantee that we will even use the pick next year.
Nice one.
Just wondering if you are getting a commission from the PAFC ?
Come on pal, you know you’re stuff.
What I’m saying is we are in a bit of a pickle when it comes to being able to extract true value for Rioli departing.
Which I don’t think is that far fetched to suggest.
He has to leave, there is a belief the 19-year-old's exit plea comes off the back of the uncertainty surrounding North and Clarkson's future.It seems that Port and North have already been talking for a couple of weeks - at a minimum, both have known for many days that JHF would nominate for Port. Given the storyline of JHF this year, North are not surprised, nor see any benefit of keeping him an extra year, so saying they would not let him leave is not really an option.
He has to leave, there is a belief the 19-year-old's exit plea comes off the back of the uncertainty surrounding North and Clarkson's future.
If they keep him they will get less next year when he is out of contract
They will only offer a Round-Three pick + player Fredericks.Basically if they offer us anything less than a R2 pick then they are offering us nothing we can use... i.e nothing.
Therefore, anything less than a R2 pick, let him walk. All the risk then falls on Port. They get him, we've lost nothing we could use. Someone else gets him, they lose as well.
They will only offer a Round-Three pick + player Fredericks.
If he goes to the preseason draft his contract must match or be greater than the Port offer.
A third round pick and a player: fast FreddySo what you are essentially saying is that we should just trade Junior ( a best 22 player ), for a hypothetical pick that Port don’t even hold, that even if that pick did become available, there is no guarantee that we will even use the pick next year.
Nice one.
Just wondering if you are getting a commission from the PAFC ?
No room in the Crow Inn: they are Rankine it the moneyYeah I thought so - Tugga must've misunderstood.
It's a nice thought, but I get the feeling the Crows don't wanna touch Junior with all his bullshit.
With his history, no Cub will select him and take the risk of him going walkabout in DarwinNot how it works mate. He can get picked by anyone, and if he refuses to play for who he gets picked by then he sits out a season. Doesn't get to pick and choose where he goes based on Port's contract offer.
The deal is done; they are just arguing about what player both sides will agree to.I want the deal done, but at such a price that it makes the Kelly deal look cheap, ruins Ports draft hand for years and then the player turns out to be a spud (unlikely, but I can dream).
Port trade 27….
What a deal for Port, sadly for us it’ll be 33 for Rioli now though
Someone who knows the points system better than I care to learn it - is this some gambit to get a 15 or some such off Brisbane? Surely they’re all worth less points even combined than a 27.