Unforgivable to end up with that collection of slop picks. Total lack of smarts.

We didnt want Morton, Gysberts or Martin. at all it seems, happy to rid of them as all 3 were contracted.

We were nice, got them a new home, we arnt animals, nobody would have given us pick we would us, ie top 30 so why not get deals done? for MFC players

AS I understand it dee-luded you cannot give a player to a club you have to get something.

so in the case of Morton they probably told him we do not want you and will try and get you back to WA if that is what you want.

So 88 is just to get the trade done.

Yes as I thought, consummation of the trade.

I'm happy with the theme of the direction we've taken, to cut out the soft & rotten wood.

Now we can build a sturdy house.

We didnt want Morton, Gysberts or Martin. at all it seems, happy to rid of them as all 3 were contracted.

We were nice, got them a new home, we arnt animals, nobody would have given us pick we would us, ie top 30 so why not get deals done? for MFC players

Where do nice guys finish? If they wanted to trade those guys, fine, but you've got to do better than that. We should have at the very least come up with some pick upgrades a la North and Collingwood near the deadline. 53 and 73 for Martin? Useless. It can be dressed up any way people like, but to end up with a draft result like this is nothing short of amateurish.

Where do nice guys finish? If they wanted to trade those guys, fine, but you've got to do better than that. We should have at the very least come up with some pick upgrades a la North and Collingwood near the deadline. 53 and 73 for Martin? Useless. It can be dressed up any way people like, but to end up with a draft result like this is nothing short of amateurish.

It's not about being nice. It's about getting rid of contracted players without having to pay them out. We need the space and we didn't need them.

Where do nice guys finish? If they wanted to trade those guys, fine, but you've got to do better than that. We should have at the very least come up with some pick upgrades a la North and Collingwood near the deadline. 53 and 73 for Martin? Useless. It can be dressed up any way people like, but to end up with a draft result like this is nothing short of amateurish.

As opposed to holding wasted players for another year or paying out their contracts to delist them?

We got rid of them, who were all contracted so we had to trade them, our deal were done at this time, we couldnt get Ray or anyone of interest at this point so we cut the dead wood imo, yeah its nice but we didnt sacrifice ourselves to do it.

It's not about being nice. It's about getting rid of contracted players without having to pay them out. We need the space and we didn't need them.

beat me to it!

Where do nice guys finish? If they wanted to trade those guys, fine, but you've got to do better than that. We should have at the very least come up with some pick upgrades a la North and Collingwood near the deadline. 53 and 73 for Martin? Useless. It can be dressed up any way people like, but to end up with a draft result like this is nothing short of amateurish.

Sorry pantaloons but that is rubbish.

We got what they are worth.

You are grossly over rating their value.

Have you forgotten the year we just had?

Sorry pantaloons but that is rubbish.

We got what they are worth.

You are grossly over rating their value.

Have you forgotten the year we just had?

Use your brain and have a think about it rather than rubbishing other posts. 46 for Morton and 49 would have been worth more than 88. The pick downgrade with the Gysberts trade was laughable. Pick 73 in the Martin deal is utterly useless. The returns on these players is effectively nothing. You're missing the point that these picks we've accumulated between 49 and 88 are garbage.

As for needing list space, can none of you seriously rattle off a handful of players to delist?

As for needing list space, can none of you seriously rattle off a handful of players to delist?

What? You don't think there is more to come? This was about getting rid of those under contract that were not seen as part of the future. The ones OOC come next.

Sorry pantaloons but that is rubbish.

We got what they are worth.

You are grossly over rating their value.

Have you forgotten the year we just had?

make that 5 years we just had

You are correct re Martin

However what do you think of the theory?

I agree with you about the theory; I actually think that we have seen a fairly subtle bit of trading over the last few weeks.

What? You don't think there is more to come? This was about getting rid of those under contract that were not seen as part of the future. The ones OOC come next.

That's not what I said. People were asserting that we needed to trade Gysberts, Morton and Martin because we needed the list space. I'm saying that we still have plenty of guys I'd delist in a heartbeat and that trading for the sake of creating list spots was not necessary.

Unforgivable to end up with that collection of slop picks. Total lack of smarts.

It looks like the club has done the right thing by these 3 players and have helped them find a new home. I think it's got nothing to do with the picks, but rather the club being up front that they were not in our future plans and such have helped them extend their careers, rather than going into the PS or national draft where they may well be overlooked.

Justin Sherman anyone? Is heading to the preseason draft via agreement with the doggies.

Use your brain and have a think about it rather than rubbishing other posts. 46 for Morton and 49 would have been worth more than 88. The pick downgrade with the Gysberts trade was laughable. Pick 73 in the Martin deal is utterly useless. The returns on these players is effectively nothing. You're missing the point that these picks we've accumulated between 49 and 88 are garbage.

As for needing list space, can none of you seriously rattle off a handful of players to delist?

.

I think you are missing the point. The FD did not want these players at the club and market determinwed their worth, which was virtually nil.

I think you are missing the point. The FD did not want these players at the club and market determinwed their worth, which was virtually nil.

For the love of Pete. I think I've been pretty clear. To recap:

1. If Neeld wanted to trade those three today because they're the spawn of Satan, a cancer on club culture or just not part of his plans, then be my guest.

2. We have picks 49, 53, 70, 73, 74 and 88 in the middle of the draft. That is nonsensical.

3. These players were obviously worth something to their new clubs.

Obviously Neeld did not want Gyberts, Martin and Morton at the club - all contracted. If you delist contracted players they have to get paid out - if you trade them and dont have to contribute to the contractual amount you are a winner right there. The pick is inconsequential ( as the other clubs know) for players with little value.

3. These players were obviously worth something to their new clubs.

yup - they are worth a punt at little cost as opposed to a punt and releasing a worthwhile pick.

yup - they are worth a punt at little cost as opposed to a punt and releasing a worthwhile pick.

Wow, we are going round in circles at a rapid rate. I'll leave it at this and people can argue and babble amongst themselves. I'm not suggesting we receive pick 8 for Martin. I'm suggesting we'd have been better off with pick upgrades. I don't think freeing up list spots was reason enough to trade these guys for diddly.

Our lackluster compo killed off any chance of securing Ray IMO.

I understand the clearance of duds- perhaps we could have been a little more patient and gotten more for the trades but that is just nit-picking. We achieved what we set out to do and that is clear dead-wood and recruit some robust experience.

We moved on more players than I thought we would, but I can honestly say I don't regret any of the losses and look forward to seeing how this new team works together!

Use your brain and have a think about it rather than rubbishing other posts. 46 for Morton and 49 would have been worth more than 88. The pick downgrade with the Gysberts trade was laughable. Pick 73 in the Martin deal is utterly useless. The returns on these players is effectively nothing. You're missing the point that these picks we've accumulated between 49 and 88 are garbage.

As for needing list space, can none of you seriously rattle off a handful of players to delist?

Unless we have done our numbers and we are only using pick 4 and JV pick. If that is the case then anything above them was always going to be useless. If we decided we couldn't trade to get better than 27, then it doesn't matter if we had decided to get rid of the boys we traded, come what may.

I agree on face value some of the deals look awful for us, but on further examination if that was our position then maybe they are not that bad.

I can see us maybe looking at 1 in the PSD and maybe a delisted FA, then closing up shop.

That's not what I said. People were asserting that we needed to trade Gysberts, Morton and Martin because we needed the list space. I'm saying that we still have plenty of guys I'd delist in a heartbeat and that trading for the sake of creating list spots was not necessary.

You obviously have no regard at all for the Culture angle.

It's clear, we are on a path with hard headed footy. no passengers & no mincing poodles.

Justin Sherman anyone? Is heading to the preseason draft via agreement with the doggies.

No thanks. He's a dog.

No thanks. He's a dog.

Was and is.

No thanks. He's a dog.

Can you refresh my mind? Come to think of it he did something fairly recently didn't he?

Edit: Checked it out, I'd completely forgotten about the racism thing, forget I suggested him.