oh ok I guess then his mother is a liar is she. He actually had a meeting with Neil Balme and asked to be traded. They refused to put him on the table FACT.

went to school with brent and spoke to him a few times on the off season.

told me he was happy at the cats and would stay there this year.

If we trade, it should be for a player that will fill a specific hole in our team.

So, if we trade it should be for a key forward, or a fast midfielder.

We should not even consider trades for Sylvia or Pettard, they are young with lots of promise.

Trades i'd consider would be:

Cam Bruce + pick 18 to Hawthorn---- Mitch Thorp + Hawthorn's Third round pick to Melbourne.

My rationale is that Hawthorn are close to a premiership and Bruce would be great icing on the cake for them. Thorp is 2 years away from making their starting 22, and with Boyle,Buddy,Roughead and Williams ahead of him, he is expendible.

Thorp is a budding key forward star and is exactly the type of young talent we need when we start our climb up the ladder in 2009/2010.

Green or Bruce for a first round draft pick would be awesome, but with the new teams coming in i doubt other clubs would part with them, espcialy in a strong draft.

Also, if Robbie Warnock demands to be traded to MFC (and we have pick 1 in PSD), then perhaps we can manufacture a trade like

Jamar + pick 34 to Freo for Warnock...

Sure, we're ripping them off here, but otherwise we can get him for free in the PSD so they will be forced to do the trade. Plus, atleast they get a back up ruckman.

I wouldn't mind Mundy either. he's a good young player.

If we trade, it should be for a player that will fill a specific hole in our team.

So, if we trade it should be for a key forward, or a fast midfielder.

We should not even consider trades for Sylvia or Pettard, they are young with lots of promise.

Trades i'd consider would be:

Cam Bruce + pick 18 to Hawthorn---- Mitch Thorp + Hawthorn's Third round pick to Melbourne.

My rationale is that Hawthorn are close to a premiership and Bruce would be great icing on the cake for them. Thorp is 2 years away from making their starting 22, and with Boyle,Buddy,Roughead and Williams ahead of him, he is expendible.

Thorp is a budding key forward star and is exactly the type of young talent we need when we start our climb up the ladder in 2009/2010.

Green or Bruce for a first round draft pick would be awesome, but with the new teams coming in i doubt other clubs would part with them, espcialy in a strong draft.

Also, if Robbie Warnock demands to be traded to MFC (and we have pick 1 in PSD), then perhaps we can manufacture a trade like

Jamar + pick 34 to Freo for Warnock...

Sure, we're ripping them off here, but otherwise we can get him for free in the PSD so they will be forced to do the trade. Plus, atleast they get a back up ruckman.

I wouldn't mind Mundy either. he's a good young player.

CJ CAN be delisted..

Contract dont mean you cant be delisted..

Plus, "out of favour" does not mean you wont get a game.. it means they are not happy with your performance, as they feel you can do better, i mean seriously, Bruce is out of form, but he's still playing..

Mundy would be handy, thought that friday, looks good, but would need 2 lift..

Thorp from hawks would be ideal, but they rate him even higher than Crows rate Tippett, however the differance is they have alot of Key forward options so you never know..

Ok,

Its surely now completely obvious what our team needs..

Lots of folks need to take a chill pill. Fact is, if a player is contracted and doesn't want to move, he doesn't have to - witness Ferguson. Actually, I wish we still had him!

CJ CAN be delisted..

If Melbourne delist CJ at the end of the season I will buy 10 Melbourne memberships next season.

CJ can be delisted legally, but he won't be. If a club signs a 2 year contract with a player, generally it means they are prepared to stick with him for that period of time, especially when he is earning peanuts and is more than handy depth.

Frankly I'd rather we look to the top end of our list and remove some serious list and salary-cap cloggers. We have more than enough players to delist in order to utilize all of our draft picks.

With Neita gone, Yze, Holland and White likely to follow, plus Carroll, Weetra and maybe Junior that's already seven possible outs. If we promote Aussie, which I'm 100% certain we will, but leave Valenti on the rookie list, we are still looking at 6 spots to fill. That makes 5 draft picks and 1 PSD pick... and that's before we've even looked at trading... and no, we can't trade Jamar for Jonathan Brown. I've asked, but Matthews is insisting we throw in pick 87 too

I think there'll be maybe one trade, but i can't see anyone getting it.

Even club people wouldn't have much of an idea until trade week i would've thought

I think there'll be maybe one trade, but i can't see anyone getting it.

Even club people wouldn't have much of an idea until trade week i would've thought

Heard Chris Connnolly on the radio today state that the club is only looking at trading for players who are 22 or younger. That automatically reduces our ability to trade significantly, as most clubs are usually very hesitant to part with their young players.

I think the most likely trades we'll see will involve offloading players in return for draft picks. It will work best both for us, and for clubs who are on the verge and looking for some experience to add to their list (think Bruce, Wheatley, maybe White).

Agreed. Get something for them while we still can!!

Agreed. Get something for them while we still can!!

Draft picks wont be easy to trade for, as the new teams come in.. We'd be hard pressed to trade any player for decent picks as they have now become so valuable..

Thats why our mid-picks will be rated higher, thus we can try and cash in on their value!

Im not trying to predict trades!! thats not what this ideas! its an example of what we need: Key Forward, Pace!!

Well Nudge..youre a brave soul and I commend you for it..its more about the procerss rather than teh detail in many respects isnt it.. but hey..not everyone will cotton.

Rhino is absolutely correct in my thinking that we ( collectively ) often overate our Dees, or more the point specific players. Jaded's correct in her hinting to the dilemma that the numbers game present.. that is to say we have to fit it all in a framework of who ( meaning how many ) can be rid of and how many can be coerced etc etc.

Sylv'r I think wealways trying to fill specific needs as opposed to a warehouse of potentials.. its just getting that to work ...devil in the detail as always.

trade week seems to offer up surprises every other year or theraqbouts. The catalyst for a player moving from Melbourne may not even originate from Melbourne. It might be part of a three way deal etc where a silly ( to us ) idea suddenly gains momentum as bits start to fall into place. Many a time its particulars about a player we as spectators are not conversant with that provide the impetus.

Why might you not get rid of anyone ..if the price is right?..and a siutation or need warrants. People..never say never.

id definitely consider ttrades for Rivers and Moloney etc. to me they have a certain currency that may erode in an instant if theiir fitness cant solidify. We must learn to stop hoarding and hanging on to things past their prime.

Carroll may prove very tradeable. Some teams may have differing needs at this years end and considering the draft going forward as compared to last years. Its a different ball game.

Id think Peterd may take over from Wheels.. but instead of hanging the 'shop is closed " shingle id prefer to leave teh door open and see what wanders in.

Id definitely consider trades for Bruce..Jamar. Millers stock may have risen now he realises he can kick.

Im not sure we wil leven need to offer up anything for R Warnock.. but depending on the depth of the PSD we may be wise to do a done deal prior.

We ned to remeber that often when contracts are signed they are not necessarily for perfectly watertight reasons, sometimes as insurance. That and thte times and requirements ot now can often differ from then ( when contract done )

Is now to oearly for thinking about all this...hardly.. leaving it to later wil have you at a disadvantage. Thats why footy departments have people doing it even as we speak

Well Nudge..youre a brave soul and I commend you for it..its more about the procerss rather than teh detail in many respects isnt it.. but hey..not everyone will cotton.

Rhino is absolutely correct in my thinking that we ( collectively ) often overate our Dees, or more the point specific players. Jaded's correct in her hinting to the dilemma that the numbers game present.. that is to say we have to fit it all in a framework of who ( meaning how many ) can be rid of and how many can be coerced etc etc.

Sylv'r I think wealways trying to fill specific needs as opposed to a warehouse of potentials.. its just getting that to work ...devil in the detail as always.

THANKYOU!!

This is my exact point!!

The devil IS in the details, plus 3 way deals also can change things..

You never know what other clubs want/need.. Also you dont know which PLAYERS seek trade!!

I mean, who would ever think Ferguson was to be traded for SEWELL only 4 FERGIE to not want the deal!!!

Aker was traded for pick 39, yet Mcmahon managed to pull 19..

I mean its a very complicated business, which is why mock tardes are so hard, you cant please every1!

Thank you for making some sense!

He has OP DD for the past 2 years. That kills his market value....period.

Well that's not true at all. Plenty of players have had OP and returned. It diminishes his value sure, but doesn't kill it.

While a wonderful reader of the play, Rivers lacks pace and cannot play effectively on larger forwards. He is limited to the type of players he can take.

These are limitations he had back when he won the Rising star and had when he played his best footy. Whatever weaknesses he is perceived as having don't hurt his footy... if they did he wouldn't have EVER been rated highly.

FFS, potential their best player Luke Ball is crippled by OP so why would they hunt another?

Who said anything about hunting? I'm talking about making offers, moving things around, wheeling and dealing. You're attempting to predict what THE SAINTS are going to think about our offers!

And given the rotten history of soft tissue injuries and major injuries to Maguire it beggars belief they would punt Kosi. If Ross Lyons is going to save his job he wont be trading for NQRs from bottom clubs.

Well that's a simple disagreement then. I think you CRIMINALLY under-rate Riv by saying he's a NQR... He's a lot better than that. Besides... the point I was trying to make is that Kosi himself is a NQR anyway. You swap a NQR defender for a NQR attacking tall and what have you lost? You could argue they have more need of a good tallish defender, and reader of the play with Lyon's gameplan.

Just got some of the guys ?@ SEn's thoughts on the green and Sylvia trades,

all i asked was what they thought...

And

"I really like those especially the Jericho one, works well for both, good one that"..

"The Green for Boyle does make a lot of sense, especially now I know Greens only turning 27, He raelly could use a change, Hawks seem perfect fit, Boyle could really straighten up dees, hawks could afford to deal him too.."

So at least i did my research on these ones..

Hope they demonstrate my point better!!

Remember, im not saying these will happen, just that IMO they would really benefit our list, and they are at least viable enough to make a little sense!

Trading Green would be a bad move. He bleeds for that jumper more than anyone else currently on the list.

Trade talk is rubbish we have wish lists of players we would like to trade for but if no deals can be done no trades will be done. The goal of trading is to strenghten your list, we will be in a good position to target a 21-23 yo this year to fit into the MFC recruiting policy at the moment. Names thrown up Warnock, Mundy, Prismol and co are no stars and will not be a stars so do we trade for a re-cycled footballer with the possibility of lossing draft picks or do we us all our picks and hopefully draft a star. IMO we should used the pre-season draft which we will have pick 1-3 to get the best available 21-23 yo and use our full 4-5 draft picks which will include 3 in the top 20 what order we will find out in 9 weeks plus a mid 30 and 50 pick to get another 5 18-19 yo and hopefully 3-4 will be good 10 year players for the MFC.

Talk of trading Bruce, Sylvia and Green you would only do this if by trading them will strenghten our list, to me this would have to be a late first round early second or a player of equal ability with a better upside to even consider, would clubs give this up for these three who knows.

Also talk of trading players that have little to no impact on a game or can't secure a spot in the bottom teams starting 18 is wishful thinking.

We'd be hard pressed to trade any player for decent picks as they have now become so valuable..

Thats why our mid-picks will be rated higher, thus we can try and cash in on their value!

Im not trying to predict trades!! thats not what this ideas! its an example of what we need: Key Forward, Pace!!

Your first sentence holds.

Why you have put such naive and silly trade suggestions is beyond comprehension and only magnifies your limitations rather than MFC's list.

If you really wanted to discuss MFC deficiencies then why would you distract any discussion of this by repititively demonstrating how little you know about the whole trade process.

This has got to be one of the most content light threads put forward in some time. A wiser author would have withdrawn from the discussion and realised the folly of his flawed arguments. You my friend went back and revised your orginal thread and repeated the same silly errors that only confirmed and illuminated your lack of substance in the debate.

I guess when you have shot yourself in the foot so often such farce may bring forward humor of the thread ...at your expense.

Well that's not true at all. Plenty of players have had OP and returned. It diminishes his value sure, but doesn't kill it.

Sorry it is. OP is not the same as doing ACL. There is no set course or certainty of recovery. Its not how he recovers. Its the fact he has it and has not played for two years. If his value is diminished then we may as well get some value out of him here.

IMO, trades are hard enough to do...period. OP kills value....period.

These are limitations he had back when he won the Rising star and had when he played his best footy. Whatever weaknesses he is perceived as having don't hurt his footy... if they did he wouldn't have EVER been rated highly.

Firstly, he was not playing the key defender roles that would be expected of him now. Secondly he has struggled on bigger forwards and does lack pace so it limits the types of forwards he can match up on. And thirdly and most importantly, the game has changed significantly in the last 3 years since he won the rising star. Its faster more punishing than before. For both forwards and backs the need for pace has never been greater with the mobilty demanded of players. Rivers lacks the pace and its compounded by not have played for two years. BTW, OP does not make you quicker in absence.

Who said anything about hunting? I'm talking about making offers, moving things around, wheeling and dealing. You're attempting to predict what THE SAINTS are going to think about our offers!

I can just imagine the wheeling dealing with a player that is limited up back and has OP for two years. I notice you had not addressed my concerns about the Saints interest. No wonder.

Well that's a simple disagreement then. I think you CRIMINALLY under-rate Riv by saying he's a NQR... He's a lot better than that. Besides... the point I was trying to make is that Kosi himself is a NQR anyway. You swap a NQR defender for a NQR attacking tall and what have you lost?

Psssst! Rivers is NQR primarily because he has OP. He is also limited in certain areas. I wish you were the negotiating party on the other side. MFC could do with winning a couple of absolute patsy deals. St K will want a 1st rounder for Kosi. I am not sure he is worth it and Rivers with his ailment wont deliver near it.

You could argue they have more need of a good tallish defender, and reader of the play with Lyon's gameplan.

You would be a fool. St Kilda amongst other things are S-L-O-W. I am sure they would be interested in a player that compliments their own pace style and his OP woulde be good to keep Luke Ball company!

The last couple of posts that spoke about this 'what we need' was so silly it was funny!!! (especially the names being bandied about.)

NO CLUB WANTS TO HELP ANOTHER CLUB WIN A PREMIERSHIP.

The trades that have taken place lately have had no significance to that club whatsoever. I'm sure someone will correct me for this, but seriously, think about it.

As Rhino says, trades are all about the NQR's being moved on. Medhurst, you say? Crap! If Collingwood are up, he's up, not a matchwinner.

TJ you say? Crap, I say - even his own coach hates him and Power and Black have no time for him.

We need to rely on solid list management, pick the BEST player in the draft and build a team - we're all steeling ourselves for the cull that will eventuate and we look forward to

Picks #1 and #17.

Have a good week.

The amount of trades that have actually been completed in the last couple of years is testament to your post. Clubs like to develop their own players!!!

Did this really need it's own thread? Why couldn't you have just said this in the other one?

Seriously, perhaps a thread should be appoved by a moderator before it goes up.

I agree. Unless it's a superstar for superstar trade, trades are silly.

As Rhino says, trades are all about the NQR's being moved on.

Most trades but not all trades.

Trading is not the sole or major source of build a list. Drafting and developing players is going to do that. Trading can assist list management where for example a Club believes it is in the window of seriously challenging in finals and may seek the services of certain types of player who could address a list weakness for 2 or 3 years. Port Adelaide are perfect example of this with Pickett and Hardwick.

But generally, trading is overrated and some of the posts on this thread particularly from the original author highlights how little grasp of the aspects of trading there is out there.

Sausageboy, how many superstar for superstar trades go on and in most cases what would be the point for either Club doing such?

NO CLUB WANTS TO HELP ANOTHER CLUB WIN A PREMIERSHIP.

This is kind of a funny comment to make because it displays the seeds of an ability to think from another club's perspective (sorely lacking around here) but it stops just short of rationality.

Of course clubs are only looking to help themselves win a premiership. However, if, through trading, a club boosts its chances and that of another club, this is still a good result because 14 other clubs are missing out.

Realistically, all trades should be expected to boost the chances of both teams winning the premiership (eventually) because if the list managers at both teams didn't think that this was the case, then they wouldn't go ahead with the trade.,

This underlying WIN-WIN priciple seems to be seriously lacking in some of the above proposed trades.

Some examples of good trading:

Team A has a shot at the Premiership in the next 2 years.

Team B is rebuilding.

Team A trades a draft pick or promising rookie for an experienced match winner from team B (which isn't going to win any matches any time soon anyway).

Team C has a glut of promising midfielders

Team D has 5 contenders for Key Forward positions

etc.

Cheers

This is kind of a funny comment to make because it displays the seeds of an ability to think from another club's perspective (sorely lacking around here) but it stops just short of rationality.

Of course clubs are only looking to help themselves win a premiership. However, if, through trading, a club boosts its chances and that of another club, this is still a good result because 14 other clubs are missing out.

Realistically, all trades should be expected to boost the chances of both teams winning the premiership (eventually) because if the list managers at both teams didn't think that this was the case, then they wouldn't go ahead with the trade.,

This underlying WIN-WIN priciple seems to be seriously lacking in some of the above proposed trades.

Some examples of good trading:

Team A has a shot at the Premiership in the next 2 years.

Team B is rebuilding.

Team A trades a draft pick or promising rookie for an experienced match winner from team B (which isn't going to win any matches any time soon anyway).

Team C has a glut of promising midfielders

Team D has 5 contenders for Key Forward positions

etc.

Cheers

Exactly! This post should be framed and Grinter given a medal.

Your first sentence holds.

Why you have put such naive and silly trade suggestions is beyond comprehension and only magnifies your limitations rather than MFC's list.

If you really wanted to discuss MFC deficiencies then why would you distract any discussion of this by repititively demonstrating how little you know about the whole trade process.

This has got to be one of the most content light threads put forward in some time. A wiser author would have withdrawn from the discussion and realised the folly of his flawed arguments. You my friend went back and revised your orginal thread and repeated the same silly errors that only confirmed and illuminated your lack of substance in the debate.

I guess when you have shot yourself in the foot so often such farce may bring forward humor of the thread ...at your expense.

Oh, your like the, BIG BOY are you..mr RHIno..

Big moderator man!!

So im getting told off, is that it??? because I actually have an opinion, and have the knackers to actually put it out there?

Your a joke!

Seriously, who do u think you are, its MY OPINION, and since I added these MOCK DEALS im actually getting alot of validation from supporters of other clubs!

I mean, Ive been a member of this bulletion board since 98, when it first started, in 1 form or another, and I rarely actually post, its not like im filling this place with junk every 5 mins, its quite the opposite..

Every1 is entitled to their opinion mate, and not all opinions are safe..

Sorry for trying to illustrate my point...

Get over yourself, sit back, and maybe try and realise the true purpose of boards like thjese, its to share and articulate points of differance, not come down on anyone who actually has a bold idea..

you should be ashamed of yourself, its a message board, not a sect..

everyone needs to relax..

We all love this club, thats the main thing..

<_<