Rumour Swan for Pick 1

[morgoth]

Swan would only be part of any deal to get pick one. Given his age they would probably want another good player plus a decent pick or another decent player. A couple of random examples of the sort of cattle that would need to be offered.

Swan, Brown and pick 10.

Swan, Shaw and O'Brein

Swan, Shaw pick 10.

Swan, O'Brein, Witts (assuming we get Mumford or another mature ruck)

I do not really want Swan to go and have been told we want to keep him but for Boyd, yes but it will cost a lot more than Swan. GWS appear to have a bias for some Key backs so likely to be wanting N Brown or Reid.

 

[Jelly Bean]

Swan for pick 1? Where do I sign? I will even drive him up there myself....

There is no way GWS would be silly enough to do this. A player who has maybe 2 years left, and no evidence of a drive to extend his career too far beyond 30, for an 18 year old key position forward who is rated one of the better prospects for a long time in that position...

Does anyone seriously think this is any chance of happening?

 

[RuFiO]

Swan for pick 1? Where do I sign? I will even drive him up there myself....

There is no way GWS would be silly enough to do this. A player who has maybe 2 years left, and no evidence of a drive to extend his career too far beyond 30, for an 18 year old key position forward who is rated one of the better prospects for a long time in that position...

Does anyone seriously think this is any chance of happening?

I don't even see why GWS would be stupid enough to trade pick 1 if Boyd is remotely what he's hyped up to be.

 

[lenny&carl]

In theory, Boyd should cost roughly what Hogan cost, because they're both roughly as awesome as each other, (although Hogan has jumped the gun by a year and got more runs on the board today.) Melb payed pick 3 and pick 13 for Hogan and pick 20, plus some steak knives unknown kid.

So if we were looking to construct a similarly weighted trade, it might go something like Sidey and Witts just for Boyd, or Sidey and pick 11 for Boyd, or Sidey and Brown for Boyd and pick 19. Not too much more, not too much less. Swanny is a better player than Sidey will be, but has less years to go, and so might be worth about the same? A bit more?

 

[lenny&carl]

I don't even see why GWS would be stupid enough to trade pick 1 if Boyd is remotely what he's hyped up to be.

Because they've got Cameron and Patton, and are getting Franklin. It's bad business to have a 4th tall star forward playing in the 2's when your list needs many other things.

 

[Frankie23]

Swan for pick 1? Where do I sign? I will even drive him up there myself....

There is no way GWS would be silly enough to do this. A player who has maybe 2 years left, and no evidence of a drive to extend his career too far beyond 30, for an 18 year old key position forward who is rated one of the better prospects for a long time in that position...

Does anyone seriously think this is any chance of happening?

It's not as far fetched as some are saying.

He doesn't have the drive to continue? Mate, 4 million over 4 years will put an end to the thought of early retirement, whilst GWS unlike the Suns don't have a bonafide star. They are obviously in the market for one (the Franklin advances are evidence).

If you believe the Swan-Buckley feud, and Bucks wanting to re-vamp the culture, all of a sudden Swan out the door to GWS starts growing legs...very small baby legs.....

I don't think it'll happen, Swan has 3-4 good years left, a few in the midfield then finish off his career as a forward where he can easily kick 35+ goals a season. Collingwood know this, and they know he is a favourite son.

It's fun to speculate however.

 

[Lord Wilberforce]

Swan would only be part of any deal to get pick one. Given his age they would probably want another good player plus a decent pick or another decent player. A couple of random examples of the sort of cattle that would need to be offered.

Swan, Brown and pick 10.

Swan, Shaw and O'Brein

Swan, Shaw pick 10.

Swan, O'Brein, Witts (assuming we get Mumford or another mature ruck)

I do not really want Swan to go and have been told we want to keep him but for Boyd, yes but it will cost a lot more than Swan. GWS appear to have a bias for some Key backs so likely to be wanting N Brown or Reid.

Are you on the same drugs as GWS? Your examples are pure crazy talk.

 

[eddiebankbalance]

Trade for pick 1 in a heartbeat and Shaw to Sydney. Love both of them. Time to move forward fast. Bux is not gonna **** around

 

[jmac70]

If GWS are getting Buddy then they may just be prepared to trade pick 1 for Swan. It sounds far fetched but if it were true we would be mad not to go for it. We all love Swan and it would hurt to lose him but this would set us up for our next flag tilt.

 

[the distributer]

If GWS are getting Buddy then they may just be prepared to trade pick 1 for Swan. It sounds far fetched but if it were true we would be mad not to go for it. We all love Swan and it would hurt to lose him but this would set us up for our next flag tilt.

Why wouldn't WS use the ''Swan coin'' and go after a FA and keep the no1 pick?, rumour doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense.

 

[the distributer]

It's not as far fetched as some are saying.

He doesn't have the drive to continue? Mate, 4 million over 4 years will put an end to the thought of early retirement, whilst GWS unlike the Suns don't have a bonafide star. They are obviously in the market for one (the Franklin advances are evidence).

If you believe the Swan-Buckley feud, and Bucks wanting to re-vamp the culture, all of a sudden Swan out the door to GWS starts growing legs...very small baby legs.....

I don't think it'll happen, Swan has 3-4 good years left, a few in the midfield then finish off his career as a forward where he can easily kick 35+ goals a season. Collingwood know this, and they know he is a favourite son.

It's fun to speculate however.

Yes it is.

 

[RuFiO]

Because they've got Cameron and Patton, and are getting Franklin. It's bad business to have a 4th tall star forward playing in the 2's when your list needs many other things.

Well I'm assuming that Boyd's meant to be better than Patton?
If that's the case and our club was in that position, I'd probably want us to trade Patton and keep the pick to get Boyd.

 

[Tbone McGraw]

It is total crap and not because we wouldn't do it. We would easily do it in a heartbeat. Gws would never do it. It is laughable from their perspective.

Look I love swanny as much as anyone but he is 29 and has said this is last contract. Not sure if he has changed his mind there.

We would be getting a supposed gun forward, which we need. We win even if boyd is only 1/5 of the player he is meant to be.

It would take a lot more than swan to get boyd.

 

[Lord Wilberforce]

Why wouldn't WS use the ''Swan'' coin and go after a FA and keep the no1 pick?, rumour doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense.

Because he's a Brownlow Medalist and they are very few and far between.

Plus the WS crowd will love his tats.

 

[RuFiO]

Because he's a Brownlow Medalist and they are very few and far between.

Plus the WS crowd will love his tats.

We got a bargain with Woewodin then.

 

[Frankie23]

Yes it is.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not buying into it for a second, but there are positives for both teams unlike some other trades mooted around here which are that biased/one-sided it's funny..

 

[mattys123]

Because he's a Brownlow Medalist and they are very few and far between.

Plus the WS crowd will love his tats.

Wait, GWS has a crowd, since when?

 

[jmac70]

Why wouldn't WS use the ''Swan coin'' and go after a FA and keep the no1 pick?, rumour doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense.

The rumour sounds like BS. Just saying that if there is something there we should go for it.

 

[Lord Wilberforce]

We got a bargain with Woewodin then.

Different, he was a one hit wonder (Shane Charter anyone?) who left his club because he was rubbish. Swan is still consistently performing and has been for the last 5 (or so) years. He's got currency.

It's marketing 101. GC has their Brownlow Medalist and GWS wants one too. Not many to go around. Let's take a quick look.

Brownlow Medalists Still Playing:

2006 - Adam Goodes - Sydney - Very close to retirement. Plus injuries.
2007 - Jimmy Bartel - Geelong - Unlikely to leave or be traded by Cats.
2008 - Adam Cooney - Western Bulldogs - Shot.
2009 - Gary Ablett Jr - Geelong - At GC.
2010 - Chris Judd - Carlton - Very close to retirement.
2011 - Dane Swan - Collingwood - Still got some good years. Willing to be traded by Collingwood.
2012 - Jobe Watson - Essendon - Captain and resigned with Essendon.

 

[popin]

More like shaw and brown plus our third round pick for gws picks 1 and 9 ;-) start this rumour

 

[popin]

Or shaw to gc for pick 5

 

[the distributer]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not buying into it for a second, but there are positives for both teams unlike some other trades mooted around here which are that biased/one-sided it's funny..

I don't see many positives for WS, if they really wanted a mature age mid they'd just get one via FA and keep the no1 pick.

 

[the distributer]

Because he's a Brownlow Medalist and they are very few and far between.

Plus the WS crowd will love his tats.

Brownlow smorownlow, is Swan worth more than Pendles?

 

[Pera]

Wish people would stop following that stupid and ridiculous FB page.

It's complete drivel. Take anything from there as one person's opinion. There is no contact with clubs. nor is there a hint of credibility.

 

[Lord Wilberforce]

Brownlow smorownlow, is Swan worth more than Pendles?

Yes, in some people's eyes. Especially if you are marketing to a traditionally non-AFL audience. You need to dumb it down and give them something they might recognise to latch on to. Marketing 101.

What sounds better? "Brownlow Medalist Dane Swan" or "Really good player Scott Pendlebury"...

It's the same as they use in movies etc "from/with Academy Award winning director/actor..."

We know who is better, but people are stupid and just look for a recognisable name.