Latest rumuor from the Dees facebook...

"I don't normally get involved in this rumour [censored]. But my mate plays with someone related to a certain GWS player with the initials AT. And apparently we're doing another deal with GWS that will see us give up pick 9, and a player for AT and a player."

He doesn't name them but there are two players with those initials - Adam Treloar (midfielder) and Adam Tomlinson (193 cm forward).

Have no idea whether its bullsh1t or not.

Wouldn't cough up pick 9 for either of those boys personally.

depends who the other player is i suppose, Treloar and O'rourke for Blease and pick 9 sounds good to me.

Tomlinson no, Treloar YES and by a country mile.

Although I just can't see GWS give up Treloar, he will be one of their best midfielder in years to come.

Thanks for the rumour Bay Riffin, I hope you don't get grilled for it because it came from a FB page.

Cheers.

when you're up by 6 goals you don't just say 'eh that'll do'... you increase your lead!

You do if you're North Melbourne

Up by 6 goals....wtf is that.....

Up by 6 goals....wtf is that.....

Would it help if we explained it the opposite way?

If you're down by 6 goals, you don't just stop, you keep going to increase the defeat.

I think for this off season we have done enough trading. We have added some very good pieces to go with some, hopefully, good draft selections. We can start to improve and consolidate our list while also starting to regain some respect. Come the end of 2014 we can hopefully entice a few more players (and get Billy Stretch via F/S) who are now more willing to play for our club now that they see the improvements we have made. I think we've done extremely well to not only cut some fat from our list but also add some legitimately good pieces along the way. No need to get greedy now.

Greedy? WTF?

Would it help if we explained it the opposite way?

If you're down by 6 goals, you don't just stop, you keep going to increase the defeat.

Exactly,

its seems to have been a great trade period but there is still much to be done.

Im as excited as anyone, but lets not forget that Dom Tyson is still a kid and has never done a preseason and has played just 13 games, Viv Michie has played 1 AFL game in 3 seasons, Daniel Cross is 30 and Bernie Vince replaces Sylvia.

I think we can go into these last 2 and a half days not having to push for anything. But if a great deal falls in front of us we still need to take it. We are in a very good position in that we've probably got all our main deals through already and now we can just keep an ear out and accept offers which may be in a favour.

Up by 6 goals....wtf is that.....

what are you a little bit dense?

we haven't 'won' this trade period. We appear to be doing well in it so far. Ten years from now we will now how successful it has been/was. At no stage should we be sitting back and resting on our laurels we need to keep pushing to increase our position and advantage as much as we can. If we need to send pick 9 and/or another quality player somewhere to improve our overall position then we should bloody do it in these last 3 days of the trade period.

that's what the f it is, I would have thought that would would be a pretty basic thing to understand but apparently not

Greedy? WTF?

Not sure what the word means? Seriously though, stellar contribution.

All I'm saying is that I think we've done very well and there is no need to push through anything else unless it's a deal that's too good to refuse. We've added the right pieces to start the climb back up the ladder and we can build on that in the coming years when more players are open to the idea of playing for us.

there is no need

this is the bit that makes no sense. Are you suggesting there is no way our list could possibly be improved and that we have the next 5 flags stitched up? Because unless that is your assessment, then there is obviously a need to improve it more.

this is the bit that makes no sense. Are you suggesting there is no way our list could possibly be improved and that we have the next 5 flags stitched up? Because unless that is your assessment, then there is obviously a need to improve it more.

Not what I said at all. I'm specifically talking about this trade period, which is just two days shy of finishing up. What I'm saying is that this off season has been very good for the club. You might say terrific. Outside of adding Tyson, Vince, Michie and Pick 9 to our midfield, we add Hogan to the mix and Clark looks to be over his foot injuries. Add Roos on top of all this and it's the first time in a long time we've looked good coming out of one of these periods.

And I think it's all we need to do for this off season. Now we look to the 2014 season and improving our on field fortunes and off field stability. Then we look to be aggressive again in the 2014 trade period and even the 2015 one by adding more talent through free agency/trading and adding the extra pieces we need to become a flag contender.

I know we need to improve it more, and if another deal came up in this trade period that was too good to refuse then we jump all over it. But if it doesn't then we need to content with the efforts we have made over the last 3 weeks and look to winning some games of football in 2014.

Up by 6 goals....wtf is that.....

You don't remember the Dogs game this year then? 6 goals wouldn't have been near enough.

AND by the way, does anyone with an ear to the ground have any updates on the Kennedy fantasy? (and I don't mean Dallas, Oswald, CIA & JFK).

You don't remember the Dogs game this year then? 6 goals wouldn't have been near enough.

AND by the way, does anyone with an ear to the ground have any updates on the Kennedy fantasy? (and I don't mean Dallas, Oswald, CIA & JFK).

That game has been drowned by all the floggings we received

I hope this is true, because every Freo supporter in the west reckons they're going to poach him from us after his first two years!

many of his friends are freo supporters

Up by 6 goals....wtf is that.....

Since several posters have poured scorn on the above post. I'm obviously dense too. I naively assumed Srjennings was just joking that we Demon supporters were just unfamiliar with the concept of being 6 goals up.

Wouldn't cough up pick 9 for either of those boys personally.

depends who the other player is i suppose, Treloar and O'rourke for Blease and pick 9 sounds good to me.

Are you out of your ******* mind?

Treloar is the best young midfielder GWS have got!!

i would happily have given both pick 2 and 20 just for Treloar.

Crony capitalism = communism?

Trade and Draft Month Fatigue Syndrome sets in

Since several posters have poured scorn on the above post. I'm obviously dense too. I naively assumed Srjennings was just joking that we Demon supporters were just unfamiliar with the concept of being 6 goals up.

Correct Sue. It was a mere sense of humour but obviously all the floggings in the past has taken that from them.......lighten the [censored] up guys, where is your bloody sense of humour?

Crony capitalism = communism?

Yes.

Trade and Draft Month Fatigue Syndrome sets in

I'm not sure it's fatigue. It's more like the letdown after the high of the last week. Michie was the fix we needed to settle our nerves and Tyson put us all on a high. Vince added and we were close to overdosing and the unexpected early comittment of Cross was clearly more than most of us could handle.

Please note the above analogy got a little out of control and was merely referencing candy stores and sugar hits not any illegal substances. Thanks.

My source says 17.8%.

WHO'S RIGHT?

Capitalism is not capitalism unless both sides benefit from the transaction. If you're taking advantage -- using someone as a means -- then it's not capitalism. That's closer to crony capitalism aka. communism.

Racism is born of individual fallacy. Don't degrade the worth of the individual with your closest commie crap. "I" will always be great than the "we".

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.

Stop reading Green Left Weekly.

Whaaaaaat? Whaaaaaaaaat?

Whether something is capitalism or not is in no way related to whether all parties benefit. Fundamentally, capitalism is defined by the cycle of reinvestment of income into further income-producing capability. This can apply very broadly - an individual who invests in their personal development through formal training or simply self-directed learning is investing to improve their productive asset, just as an individual or corporate entity which allocates money to expand or improve their production facilities or even land viability. The 'Capitalist System' historically refers to the architecture of capitalism such as savings and loan facilities, company formation, share ownership and contract-oriented (rather than obligation-oriented) labour relations.

There is no inherent moral or ethical dimension to capitalism, it is not inherently negative and it is certainly not inherent positive. If you defined capitalism as 'not really capitalism unless every transaction benefited all parties' you would a) have very, very few, if any, examples of capitalism in practice, and b) be laughed out of the room by any serious economist you encountered, regardless of political perspective.

I don't know where you're getting this 'crony-capitalism = communism' nonsense either. Communism is a radical, and dysfunctional, system of centralised control of the capitalisation process and labour relations (implicitly on an 'obligation' basis, which is a lovely historical irony) ostensibly in order to meet the goals set by the state, theoretically 'on behalf of the people's collective welfare'.

Crony capitalism can mean different things to different people, but the Indonesian example is considered classic in that the movement and distribution of assets and the decision-making basis of ostensibly commercial operations was made on the basis of the political and social relationships with key figures, leading to accumulation of wealth and productive assets on a hierarchy of proximity to a central core of power. Capital flows to cronies; crony capitalism.

Also, racism is systematic. Or more to the point, it is only problematic when it is systematic. If a society normalises racism, then it is a problem. If one person is racist, then they are just an a4s3hole. Historically, the implicitly racist colonial system played (and is playing) a significant part in creating 'opportunities for accumulation' which accelerated the process of but was not inherently necessary for he emergence of the capitalist economic system.

But it is true that personal liberty and rights were a critical factor in the emergence of capitalism - if people live under the understanding that their property and/or labour can be appropriated or devalued without notice or due compensation, then obviously they would be much less inclined to accumulate a pool of productive capital. This relationship between personal security from sovereign risk and the success of capital business enterprises drove the initial bond between liberalism and capitalism, however something confusing has happened where in the present political context 'liberal' business environments (minimum regulation etx) and 'liberal' personal rights have diverged, such as in the Tea Party movement which simultaneously argues for radical minimisation of government 'public good' activities while also supporting the use of government as a tool for imposing sectarian social expectations. Bizarre, eh.

So. I hope that helps to clear a few things up. Let's get back to the trade and draft discussion. AND NEVER SPEAK OF THIS ON A FOOTBALL FORUM AGAIN.

...

I'm keen to just draft with pick 9, as there seem to be many good options. But if any reasonable deal could be struck for Taylor Adams, I'd be keen. I do worry about which player(s) might have to be given up to sweeten the deal.

Wow, imagine if GWS wanted Pick 9 and Lynden Dunn? He does fit their stated needs...

taylor adams just swapped with heath shaw at the pies.

taylor adams just swapped with heath shaw at the pies.

That's a big loss to GWS in my eyes.

That's a big loss to GWS in my eyes.

True but they had no option - Shaw was still contracted so they had to do a trade of some sort. They either let Adams go for nothing as there didn't seem to be any late moves for him, or they trade him for the bloke they want. They were always going to be losers out of the trade, but at least this way they minimise the damage.