My trades:

Bate & Dunn to GWS for their 3rd round pick and a 17 year old pick

That's it so far. Depends on what happens with the 800 pound gorilla in the room as to whether we need to remove a third player from the list or not.

My trades:

Bate & Dunn to GWS for their 3rd round pick and a 17 year old pick

That's it so far. Depends on what happens with the 800 pound gorilla in the room as to whether we need to remove a third player from the list or not.

Bate and Dunn is not what the GWS have in mind for those 17 year old gems they have access to...

If I wrap to bad presents together, it doesn't make it a 'super present' it makes it a bad present, just two lots of bad present.

Bate and Dunn is not what the GWS have in mind for those 17 year old gems they have access to...

If I wrap to bad presents together, it doesn't make it a 'super present' it makes it a bad present, just two lots of bad present.

exactly if pick 4 is what they might get for the first pick Dunn and Bate isnt gonna cut the mustard lol

It will involve lots of first rounders and compo picks and decent players

Bate and Dunn is not what the GWS have in mind for those 17 year old gems they have access to...

If I wrap to bad presents together, it doesn't make it a 'super present' it makes it a bad present, just two lots of bad present.

But wait ... we think Bate & Dunn are guns ... both have contracts so we should demand a higher price for them. B)

Now where have I heard that before ... hehehe. Lets go round in circles.

Edited July 6, 201114 yr by hangon007

Bate and Dunn is not what the GWS have in mind for those 17 year old gems they have access to...

If I wrap to bad presents together, it doesn't make it a 'super present' it makes it a bad present, just two lots of bad present.

You're forgetting that GWS cannot use those picks. They HAVE to be traded. For two senior players, both with 6-7 years left? I reckon they'd do that.

Edited July 6, 201114 yr by Striker475

You're forgetting that GWS cannot use those picks. They HAVE to be traded. For two senior players, both with 6-7 years left? I reckon they'd do that.

Your completely ignoring the fact that 16 other teams will come up with better offers, the first two picks will be basically for the first two picks in the 2012 draft, O'meara and Lachy Whitfield, they may even only trade 1 this year and keep 3 for next year securing one of these two players, i think they have 2 years to trade these 4 picks

You're forgetting that GWS cannot use those picks. They HAVE to be traded. For two senior players, both with 6-7 years left? I reckon they'd do that.

Yeah but where does it say they have to trade the "best" 2-4. But think we have also been here before.

Just thinking about GWS and the 17yo, in 2012 draft we have committed to Jack Viney, he will cost us our first pick, can we offer GWS our first round pick in 2012 for one of the 17 yo we then only use our second round pick for Viney as it will be our first pick. If this can happen it would basically see us getting two of the best kids in 2012 group. And if Scully does go we might still have a mid first round compensation pick.

Edited July 6, 201114 yr by drdrake

You're forgetting that GWS cannot use those picks. They HAVE to be traded. For two senior players, both with 6-7 years left? I reckon they'd do that.

If they're absolutely desperate we might get away with that. Can't see it being anything other than a last resort though. And personally I'd settle for a lot less for two players we don't want that we're otherwise going to be stuck with. Frankly I'd take anything at all, even if it was picks we won't use.

If any care to think about it then One of the delistings will have all but made itself. ( such is reality ) . respect given to to the lad concerned.

There by we have two more positions to vacate. ( min )

This then leads to the spaghetti like nature of the numbers game. Its entirely likely maybe three more will seek a trade ( let alone us giving nudges) Do we then seek a pick in return as opposed player. This might well be the nature of the beast as the RD tries to amass a handful of numbers it can then somehow regurgitate into a less amount of better picks. Possibly one thats deferred til the following draft. With all the differentials presenting its not even remotely straightforward any more.

As per above Warnock trade ... you are not really gaining anything of value in this draft.

So it not a win-win ... its far more like a loss for us in this draft.

Did you look into future with your crystal ball...How do you know we will not get anything of 'value' at this next draft?

When Warnock, Bate and Maric get a game for the demons they can't bring their form from Casey. If this is continually the case we should go with kids instead.

If they're absolutely desperate we might get away with that. Can't see it being anything other than a last resort though. And personally I'd settle for a lot less for two players we don't want that we're otherwise going to be stuck with. Frankly I'd take anything at all, even if it was picks we won't use.

Sounds like a very real possibility if you are trading for draft picks in isolation. However, if you horse trade player for player you might get something to work out as more equitable.

What are peoples thoughts on our current crop of Rookies? Would you be looking to to put Nicho or Evans on the Senior List next year, or no big rush? If we do then its obviously two delistings straight off the bat and probably a few more for draft selections?

I cant see us trading for a player unless a big name puts their hat in the ring. We are more likley to trade players and a pick for a slightly better pick etc?

Possible Delists / Trades;

Dunn (possibly wants to go elsewhere if he could get more oppertunities?)

Newton (delist)

Bate (possibly wants to go elsewhere if he could get more oppertunities?)

Warnock (possibly wants to go elsewhere if he could get more oppertunities?)

Maric (possibly wants to go elsewhere if he could get more oppertunities?)

Jetta (possibly wants to go elsewhere if he could get more oppertunities?)

Spencer (might see the writing on the wall with Jamar, Martin and now Gawn all ahead of him?)

Aussie (possible delist / rookie downgrade?)

If any care to think about it then One of the delistings will have all but made itself. ( such is reality ) . respect given to to the lad concerned.

There by we have two more positions to vacate. ( min )

This then leads to the spaghetti like nature of the numbers game. Its entirely likely maybe three more will seek a trade ( let alone us giving nudges) Do we then seek a pick in return as opposed player. This might well be the nature of the beast as the RD tries to amass a handful of numbers it can then somehow regurgitate into a less amount of better picks. Possibly one thats deferred til the following draft. With all the differentials presenting its not even remotely straightforward any more.

B59 - Just for my benefit, and wanting a one word answer (and not wanting to turn this in to a Scully thread), but what do you think, is he staying or going? There are a lot on this site that have shown where they stand regarding Tom, and gee, if he actually stayed, they'd want to be very careful what they write in the years to come. You on the other hand, I just can't work out - I feel you're siting on the fence, so that you don't over-commit for people to use in future reference. Just curious.

What are peoples thoughts on our current crop of Rookies? Would you be looking to to put Nicho or Evans on the Senior List next year, or no big rush? If we do then its obviously two delistings straight off the bat and probably a few more for draft selections?

I cant see us trading for a player unless a big name puts their hat in the ring. We are more likley to trade players and a pick for a slightly better pick etc?

Possible Delists / Trades;

Dunn (possibly wants to go elsewhere if he could get more oppertunities?)

Newton (delist)

Bate (possibly wants to go elsewhere if he could get more oppertunities?)

Warnock (possibly wants to go elsewhere if he could get more oppertunities?)

Maric (possibly wants to go elsewhere if he could get more oppertunities?)

Jetta (possibly wants to go elsewhere if he could get more oppertunities?)

Spencer (might see the writing on the wall with Jamar, Martin and now Gawn all ahead of him?)

Aussie (possible delist / rookie downgrade?)

Would the easy option be delist Bate, Dunn & Warnock/Maric from the senior list (giving us our 3 picks), then upgrading Evans and Nicholson with our 2nd and 3rd pick, which will allow us to use our 1st round pick on a kid. Then delisting Newton from the Rookie list (giving us 3 rookie spots), and then giving Bate, Dunn & Warnock a place on the rookie list.

Not sure if we are able to do that. I know some will want us to use the rookie list as an opportunity to give project players a chance, but heck, we have a list full of kids already. And we will still have a couple of youngsters on the rookie list to work with.

Edited July 7, 201114 yr by billy2803

Billy >>> http://demonland.com...post__p__454166

ps..Couldnt give a r@ts should people quote me for future mischief, esp when some have no real opinoins themselves..

Edited July 7, 201114 yr by belzebub59

i think it comes down to the FD deciding where guys like Nicho sit in the pecking order with a fully fit list?

For example, If Grimes, Davey & Tapscott were all fit, Nicholson might stuggle to get a run? I guess the other issue is whether or not other clubs would pick them up if we didnt upgrade these sorts of promising rookies - that probably has alot to do with which way they would go?

Other Consideration is wether our youngsters are better back ups than the guys who we are flagging to delist?

Ie. If Cook is betetr than bate or Dunn, then they are certain delists. Like wise if Tom McDonald is better than Warnock then delist Warnock. Im not sure whetehr this is the case just yet though?

Your completely ignoring the fact that 16 other teams will come up with better offers, the first two picks will be basically for the first two picks in the 2012 draft, O'meara and Lachy Whitfield, they may even only trade 1 this year and keep 3 for next year securing one of these two players, i think they have 2 years to trade these 4 picks

They've got 2 years.

O'Meara's apparently tracking to be a just as well as Scully, Trengove, Martin, DSwallow etc at the same age.

GWS knows they've got a gun to deal and will get full value.

Will cost a first rounder + a Sylvia + a Tapscott.

If Scully does decide to go and i take his word he hasn't signed anything and will make his decision at years end, He should insist to be traded and a Scully for a O'Meara.

Edited July 7, 201114 yr by jacey

The essence with the likes of Nicholson and Cook and other relative newbies is we havent really seen the elvel to which they can climb. The likes of Bates, Newton, Warnock and Dunn etc we effectively have. The kids will get more time to build the others are looking more and more like the perrenial list cloggers.

if I were the likes of Bate, Dunn, Newton et Warnock Id be getting my manager to shop me around and see just what is out there in terms of interest. For some the realy future may be in the footsteps of say Fraser ( Col ) etc....i.e get a gig..keep playing.

Ive always liked Maric but he may well indeed struggle to get a consistent call up at Melbourne. He too might want/need to look afield. Someone else mentioned Spencer. Theres a certain idea of a conundrum here. he's seemingly been opvertaken by Martin. It stands to reason that it might get crowded in the queue having Jamar, Martin, Spencer and Gawn. But Rucks ( good ones ) are hard to come by but does one position warrant 10% of your player stocks ? Its a curly one !! Is there value in realising some value amongst that , say Spencer and investing that into another ? Do we need those particular 4 for another season ? Could we pickup another player in a year or two to groom as a ruck , or indeed if we were in a possition to have a tilt we might be able to trade for one.

What happens will depend a lot on how other clubs see this years draft. Will they see more value in looking to some players already in the system but under utilised ( or indeed under-done ) or continue to go to the well irrespective.

That is not what is said. nice try.

The comment is of the notion that martin is still young and maturiing into a role that probably is still 2-3 seasons away from his prime. In that light he might truly warrant a latter ( if slightly ) pick but Im compensating for supply /demand .

There are always far more backs and forwards on teh market than rucks

If you're suggesting that I have failed to glean your point then you are spot on.

But wait ... we think Bate & Dunn are guns ... both have contracts so we should demand a higher price for them. B)

Now where have I heard that before ... hehehe. Lets go round in circles.

Once again I am lost reading one of your posts.

Get rid of the not properly used elipses and talk in English.

Or at least Spanglish...

Something.

Once again I am lost reading one of your posts.

Get rid of the not properly used elipses and talk in English.

Or at least Spanglish...

Something.

but please not hip-hop

but please not hip-hop

That's racist.

That's racist.

but not if one is black, honky

but not if one is black, honky

I am a cracker, it's true.

Bate and Dunn is not what the GWS have in mind for those 17 year old gems they have access to...

If I wrap to bad presents together, it doesn't make it a 'super present' it makes it a bad present, just two lots of bad present.

Still rolling on the floor after this one...gold!