Trade/Draft room

[H_T 3,043]

Im not sure I understand why some want to get rid of Green..

Who said that?

We can't get rid of him, he just signed on last year and is a terrific leader for the club. Why would anyone want to get rid of Green at this stage??

edit: No need to answer, I just read some more posts and found the culprit.

Edited August 9, 2009 by High Tower

[beelzebub 23,313]

Who said that?

We can't get rid of him, he just signed on last year and is a terrific leader for the club. Why would anyone want to get rid of Green at this stage??

edit: No need to answer, I just read some more posts and found the culprit.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Bell could be traded but youre really looking at some sort of 3rd round deal. Valenti might get a look in from somewhere if he was a 'required' MFC player., but he'll go for nought.

If we are trading it might be as a combo of someone+3rd round for 'something'.. I do get the suspicion that trade week will be different this year.. a lot more action by middle order teams looking to bolster depth .

While I agree that this years draft may be different, I just cant see a player who has not been able to garner a place in one of the worst teams of recent memory having any trade value even as a showbag filler on a deal. If middle order teams wish to bolster their lists then there must be better choices around than Bell.

[beelzebub 23,313]

While I agree that this years draft may be different, I just cant see a player who has not been able to garner a place in one of the worst teams of recent memory having any trade value even as a showbag filler on a deal. If middle order teams wish to bolster their lists then there must be better choices around than Bell.

all in all I tend to agree.. Im simply putting it that any trading involving picks is likely re us to be at or around the 3rd round, if it happens at all. In teh same way a team saw something in Johnson when for the most part many here had him written off then so too might possibly Bell have some fans elsewhere in the league. Might go out as far as a 4th or 5th round pick in some sort of merry-goround

I dont particularly rate Bell but he often has some followers in the footy world..so who knows.

[beelzebub 23,313]

A possible call is at present:

1) Scully

2) Trengove

so who or what ( position ) at 18 ?

who's likely to still be there worth looking at ?

Some will undoubtedly suggest using this pick in some sort of trade. .

Any trading must still retain some early rather than later 2nd round pick.

Going to be rather interesting

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

all in all I tend to agree.. Im simply putting it that any trading involving picks is likely re us to be at or around the 3rd round, if it happens at all. In teh same way a team saw something in Johnson when for the most part many here had him written off then so too might possibly Bell have some fans elsewhere in the league. Might go out as far as a 4th or 5th round pick in some sort of merry-goround

I dont particularly rate Bell but he often has some followers in the footy world..so who knows.

I will gladly trade PJ and Bell for a first rounder. Is that fair? B)

[Strawbsodwyer 0]

Had Dangerfield said he wants to come home ? or are we talking Hypotheticals here?

his best mate from home reckons he is homesick, and ripe for the picking from a melbourne club, the only thing that will keep him in SA is that he is a loyal bloke. I am sure the crows would jump at trading pick 2 for him, but trengrove might be a beauty.

[furious d 463]

If any clubs show interest in Bell, Newton or PJ we should happily unload them for a 5th/6th round pick (i.e-nothing) and be glad for the space on our list.

I'd rather keep pick 2 than trade for Dangerfield. Can't see any reason to do that other than being scared of the go home factor and I'd rather back the club in. I think Melbourne will be a very exciting place for a 20, 21 yo to be in 2 years time.

[e25 5]

A possible call is at present:

1) Scully

2) Trengove

so who or what ( position ) at 18 ?

who's likely to still be there worth looking at ?

Some will undoubtedly suggest using this pick in some sort of trade. .

Any trading must still retain some early rather than later 2nd round pick.

Going to be rather interesting

Hopefully a combination of Talia, Tapscott, Vardy or Carlisle. I'd say its a certainty Fitzpatrick will be there, but I think its too high to take him.

Could be a player like Duncan, Stevens, Gysberts or Martin hanging around too, but I'd like one of the bigger bodied boys.

[beelzebub 23,313]

Without doubt some room is needed in order to aqccomodate the draftees etc. Some natural attrition to occur..and some pruning. Whom ever goes , if anyone , ought to indicate how we'll go about drafting from 2 down.

Unless an absolute steal offers itself I would have to think our longer term interests are better served by using pick 2 rather than trading. I just cant see too much being offered in terms of young raw talent being allowed to leave a club prematurely.

[beelzebub 23,313]

would we pick up Vardy is still there to furhter the depth of rucks.. or look for an all rounder ? ( non KPP that is )

[Guest Rojik of the Arctic]

Get a late first rounder for Bell...

What a win/win outcome. We get a first round pick, they get a dud. Definitely on the cards.

Ah, it was late. What I meant to post was we get Dangermouse and pick 13 (?). They get pick 2, 18 and Bell.

That gives us picks 1,13 and a quality player. It also frees up a space on the list and gives Bell a second chance.

[beelzebub 23,313]

I just cant see uws giving up the double of 1 and 2. Yes many will say there is enough talent to fill out the first round but as they say...we wont be in this position again. The PP is all but dead. You can bet AD will leave it fallow even after GC and WS are in. So we are probably the last to benefit from it. After all the turmoil, angst and other assoc crap we've endured to get these .. why give them up?

For mine there are really only two scenarions

1) Scully Trengove and best avail at 18

or

2) Scully Butcher and best avail at 18

Possibly pick 18 is used in some contrived trade.. but surely common sense says we..and we alone use the first two picks.. and we choose who WE want/need.

[CarnTheDees 52]

Im not sure I understand why some want to get rid of Green..

Not because he isn't an outstanding contributor and possibly future captain, but he and Bruce are the only two players currently on our list who hold some trade currency AND won't be around for our next serious finals tilt. People suggesting that we trade Bell, PJ, Newton etc are dreaming - we won't get squat for guys who can't get a game at the 16th best team.

We can't have everyone here praising the almighty DB for his ruthless tanking (sorry HT: "experimenting") while at the same time take the soft (sentimental?) option with regards to trading our valuable players.

We shouldn't be throwing these guys away for bargain basement prices, but considering our rebuilding position, and the compromised drafts to come, we shouldn't necessarily ignore the possibility of letting these guys go for the right price. Consider them like Hay and Thompson were at Hawthorn. Still good players with a few more years to give to the Hawks, but the tough call was made and it paid off down the track. Obviously the Hawks got very good value in the picks they received, and we wouldn't expect equivalent value, but Green and Bruce aren't as good as Hay and Thompson were at the time.

If a club came along and offered pick 15-20 for Green and/or someone offered 20-30 for Bruce we should seriously consider it. Plus you would think that those two might be open to the idea of moving to a top-8 side that could be playing finals footy for the next 3-4 years, compared to more thrashings and playing with a team full of toddlers for the rest of their careers...

[Redleg 40,817]

Ah, it was late. What I meant to post was we get Dangermouse and pick 13 (?). They get pick 2, 18 and Bell.

That gives us picks 1,13 and a quality player. It also frees up a space on the list and gives Bell a second chance.

At the risk of getting howled down I am concerned at Dangerfield's body shape. He looks heavy and dumpy and could struggle for pace in a few years.

I also am not convinced he will be a better player than say Trengove.

[Rogue 585]

I would be more keen to have a go at David Hale from North. A couple of years younger than Sandilands and can play both in the ruck and as a key forward. Has been pretty ordinary this year but is a very good player.

Assuming we get the priority pick, our second round pick (18-20?) may be enough. Sandilands would take a much higher pick or pick plus player.

Agreed.

North probably has one too many talls.

[beelzebub 23,313]

why is Hale so out of favour at North. ??. once a golder Roo...now seems for them to smell of poo !!

[Redleg 40,817]

Agreed.

North probably has one too many talls.

If we finish bottom as seems likely we get first pick in the PSD. Given that I wouldn't be using pick 18 on Hale who can't get into the North side.

If interested we should be able to offer a lower pick and a player under the threat of taking him for nothing if he is uncontracted and willing to cross to us.

[Guest Rojik of the Arctic]

At the risk of getting howled down I am concerned at Dangerfield's body shape. He looks heavy and dumpy and could struggle for pace in a few years.

I also am not convinced he will be a better player than say Trengove.

Ahh, but this is the pointless joy of doing meaningless intellectual exercises like this. If the recruiting dept is taking my unqualified advice on this the club is in big trouble. I think I can safely say they won't.

[beelzebub 23,313]

What is the nature of Dangerfileds back injury ?? is this a re-occurence of some sort of persistant injury or somethig new and arguably shortlived when attended to ?

[e25 5]

If we finish bottom as seems likely we get first pick in the PSD. Given that I wouldn't be using pick 18 on Hale who can't get into the North side.

If interested we should be able to offer a lower pick and a player under the threat of taking him for nothing if he is uncontracted and willing to cross to us.

I thought the general consensus was that North signed him up cos he's a Gold Coast boy and they wanted to be able to trade him to GC17 next year, rather than lose him for little or no compensation.

This is why they seem to have too many talls on their list.

[beelzebub 23,313]

Hale..warehoused ??

[e25 5]

Hale..warehoused ??

So I've heard.

After 8 goals against the cats late last season he was expected to have a stellar 2009, only further increasing his market value before the Roos could get something shiny in return.

Signing him to a long contract may have backfired.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Ah, it was late. What I meant to post was we get Dangermouse and pick 13 (?). They get pick 2, 18 and Bell.

That gives us picks 1,13 and a quality player. It also frees up a space on the list and gives Bell a second chance.

Interesting proposal.

It means Adelaide have to clear another player off their list to accommodate Bell. Given the spoken quality of the draft I dont think there is too much difference between pick 13 and 18. I dont think Dangerfield justifies pick 2 ATM.

I wonder if Bell did not come from SA, would he be continually put up for trade to AC or PP without any sign that he offers them any thing?

If Trengrove is going to be as good as they say he is then I would take Trengove.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

If we finish bottom as seems likely we get first pick in the PSD. Given that I wouldn't be using pick 18 on Hale who can't get into the North side.

If interested we should be able to offer a lower pick and a player under the threat of taking him for nothing if he is uncontracted and willing to cross to us.

Ah the beauty of the PSD#1. B)