For a change, I agree with you, to a degree. For mine, 16 is about Green's value... probably more. I don't know if we'd be laughing; once again we'd be inundated with gumbies saying how disillusioned they are with the club for trading another fan favourite, and there is surely a point where you have to stop trading senior players, unless you want to field a TAC cup team.

If we got more than 16, I'd be stoked. If we got less than, say, 20 I'd probably be a bit miffed. As it stands, 16 is about the mark and I wouldn't really give a fat rat's clacker whether the deal was done or not.

a) what do you mean 'for a change'? the only thing we have ever argued about is whether or not YM is a goose

B) I disagree Green is worth 16 or better, he is worth about 25-30 and this is what people at OTHER clubs will tell you, which is what matters

c) 'disillusioned they are with the club for trading another fan favourite' what are you talking about? Who have we traded apart from TJ (which was a magnificent trade) you have to back as far as Woey/Powell for that call? What about the excitement generated by kids like Morton coming into the side? Doesn't this more than compensate for any supporter pain for seeing these seniors go? Apparently this Vickery kid is just ready to go and I can think of nothing better for the supporter group than to have him, Morton, Maric, Grimes, Watts etc being the ones on the field doing the damage - especially after a disappointing Daniher era and the changing over to the Bailey gaurd - why should we be watching the same old blokes leftover from that time out there?

d) please explain why we are required to keep a certain amount of senior players. Neitz, White, Yze, Holland and Robbo weren't even on the park all year what difference did their experience make? Why can't we field a TAC side that is pretty much what we did this year, but every year the group is going to get a bit better from all the exposure they are getting. Wheatley, McDonald, Green, Bruce these are all just good ordinary players who happen to be a bit older... they are not Robert Harveys or Nathan Buckleys. I really don't see what we are missing out on by these blokes not being around. This contention (we need senior blokes around) is the ONLY argument anyone can make for not trading for more picks this year, and for me, that contention doesn't hold nearly enough water

e) how could you possibly 'not care either way' this is big business for this club... a top5 player for a first round pick... doesn't get much bigger than that

f) I can't understand why I am the only one here who sees the opportunity to get one of the greatest 3-year draft hauls of all-time (seriously) and what it would very probably mean for our future. If only half of these kids end up being any good we will have an a-grade core of players coming up through the ranks together with a bunch of b-graders backing them. I mean, Morton is maybe our most valuable player, what if we get another one of that quality by getting number 4 again, you can't tell me that keeping Brad Green is a better move for the future of this club.

I'm not being deliberately contrary I'm just generally perplexed by the amount of people who lack the enthusiasm to just go for broke for picks. We have some serious gaps to fill in this side (Ruck, 2/3 mids, 2/3 KPP) that's 5-7 top quality players we need and the ONLY way we will get them is to get these picks. Perhaps we have some of them already in development but you have to say it doesn't look all that good. I just can't see any other way of us becoming a force again but to go down this road and if that means losing Davey and Green or whoever it's just what we have to do

Who's with me? Anyone?

If greeny wants to leave, we could do a hell of a lot worse than pick 16.

If greeny wants to stay, i would prefer to keep him to help develop the kids (kids need old heads around the place to help them settle).

If he wants out, pick 16 is a good deal for both parties.

That sums it up for me beautifully......

If we can get it and he wants out then it is a no brainer, but, and it is a huge but, he has to want out cause I still want him there for the kids.

The other thing is here is that O'Keefe seems to want too much cash for Hawthorn, so this could all be wishing for nothing anyway.

O'Keefe price too rich for Hawks

Why can't we field a TAC side

Then if we finish 1-21 next year, I won't be expecting any criticism of the team from you, right?

Would rather Green stay but if we were to trade him that's a pretty good deal I reckon.

Then I would trade Davey and Pick 17 to Port for Pick 4.

Would you Cinderella?

from realfooty.com:

One scenario raised last night would see Green head to Sydney, O'Keefe to Hawthorn and ruckman Simon Taylor and the Hawks' pick 16 going to Melbourne. While it is unclear how interested Green is in moving interstate, Sydney — without O'Keefe's $450,000 salary — would have the room to make a move attractive.

Green for 16 - yes or no ?

I know we have another thread I just want to know what the concensus is via the use of a poll. Cheers.

Absolutely not..our cupboard is already bare...and history will tell you there are no guarantees with draftees, particularly as you hit the second round...or are you expecting some magic wand...we are currently the worst performed club by a mile..we have to retain some senior players of worth to build a team around as HAWTHORN DID...

16 Matthew Lobbe Port Adelaide 2007 ?

16 Mitchell Brown West Coast Eagles 2006 5 games

16 Richard Douglas Adelaide 2005 38 games

16 Adam Pattison Richmond 2004 47 games

16 Josh Willoughby Sydney Swans 2003 o games

average talent there at number 16 recently

That is irrelevant.

Yes, yes, I like, I like... that'd make it 11 top-20 picks including 1,1,2,4,4 over three years

I don't care who we would have to trade to make that happen, except McLean and Morton (Need a lot more than just Davey for pick 4 though, would need Sylvia or someone also)

I would hate to see Davey or Green go, but come on people, we can set up an absolute class list for years to come here... let go of your sentimentality please!!!

Leave it to Melbourne. 23 hours to go.

from realfooty.com:

One scenario raised last night would see Green head to Sydney, O'Keefe to Hawthorn and ruckman Simon Taylor and the Hawks' pick 16 going to Melbourne. While it is unclear how interested Green is in moving interstate, Sydney — without O'Keefe's $450,000 salary — would have the room to make a move attractive.

Simon Taylor HAHHAHAAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHA

Hack of the highest order.

16 is not enough for Green. We should push for 16 and a player, just not Taylor.

Remember that our picks in the teens have been about the average - Bate, Jones, Dunn, Frawley, Smith, throw in Molan (and obviously still wait and see with Grimes).

Use that as a fair base for your guess at what the next pick from that range might be like.

Compare that expectation with what we might expect from Green over the remainder of his career.

Now you have your own answer.

My answer is - Green came 5th, 4th and 3rd in the last three best and fairests (or was it 5,5,3), is not injury prone, not particularly old, and is versatile enough to slot into a range of positions where needed.

Just three full seasons from Green, continuing to perform consistently in the top-ten of the B&F, would surpass the career results from three quarters of mid-teen draft picks.

An extra two servicable seasons, taking him to 32 before retiring, would consolidate that margin in his favour.

And there is no count-down clock - what if he's still there at 34? Neitz copped four seasons worth of heavy injury in the second half of his career, still made it to 33. McDonald just signed up for another year at 32, and he's in a high wear and tear environment.

Personally, I think Brad Green will be the one player on the Demons list still there from the 2000 Grand Final when we make it to our next one.

Personally, I think Brad Green will be the one player on the Demons list still there from the 2000 Grand Final when we make it to our next one.

Really? So, you're the one.

Use that as a fair base for your guess at what the next pick from that range might be like.

Compare that expectation with what we might expect from Green over the remainder of his career.

Now you have your own answer.

I think the comparisons are:

Woey v Bell

Jolly v Dunn

Johnstone v Grimes

Yep, Green for 16.

Then we can start discussing that number 6 draft pick of Carlton's along with 17/19/35/players. Perhaps if Melbourne's approach for Warnock fails, we can weasel 6 over our way with the right combination of those picks and other players, since we can offer Carlton another pick in it's place juuuust outside the first round, instead of leaving them with Pick 24 if they trade 6 for Warnock (which they won't do), and we know that Freo won't take 24.

I think the melbourne crew would accept pick 16 in a heartbeat

But the latest news is that Hawthorn wont budge on pick 16 for O'Keefe so basically no chance of Green going without us adding something of value.

I said NO because I believe we can get MORE than just pick 16 for Brad Green.

Perhaps I'm overrating him..but if 3 or 4 AFL clubs are keen on Brad Green then the MFC should be able to choose the best deal possible.

If Brad Green stays it will be good...and if he goes and we get a first round draft pick it will be good. Either way I hope it will be a win-win situation for the MFC.

i hope this davey deal is true as well- pick 4 is a bloody ripper

imagine pics 1,4,16,17,19 and perhaps trade for prismall for pick 35

Oh my.....

and not to mention 09 draft picks.

looks like your hope went down the toilet on pick 4 fancy anyone thinking that one up not even april fools day

I think the comparisons are:

Woey v Bell

Jolly v Dunn

Johnstone v Grimes

Exactly.

Each of those is very different, but a fair indication of what will be gained from a mid-teens draft pick.

Of course, there were other structural, cultural or salary motivations for trading Woey, Johnstone and even Jolly.

I guess that's the key factor - if Green didn't want to be at Melbourne then 16 is fantastic, if he recommitted properly then 16 becomes a quite debatable return (even if it's considered a fair 'price', there is a difference between price and real value)

No, because I think he's leadership will be just as valuable to our up-and-comings than having an extra player, although if pick 16 is supposed to be a good pick given the draft I guess I wouldn't be too disappointed...