Trade Radio Discussion

[DemonOX 8,529]

This trade period has become very constipated. It needs a good dose of something to get it moving.

Metamucil perhaps !!!!

[chook fowler 18,174]

Metamucil perhaps !!!!

more like an enema

[SaberFang 7,141]

A spoonful of drano? Sure, it'll clean you out, but it'll leave you hollow inside.

[dee-luded 2,958]

Are we keeping our powder dry?

this is the thing, so much skulduggery going on, with everyone playing cards so close to chest, re values/desires, not much gets done.... until some cards are swapped, then payments can be made.

[dee-luded 2,958]

It's like...

..... that looks like Gill ? or is it at ch.7 ?

[dee-luded 2,958]

Pick 3 & 35 for Howe & 6? Geez please nominate GC Jeremy...

Pick 3 & 16, for P-6 & Howe ? more like.

[Norm Smith's Curse 2,078]

The last ten pages on this thread feature some of the worst demonland posts i have ever read.

The trade period isn't a race - the club that gets the most trades earliest doesn't win. Because rushing out and committing early may just ruin your chances of capitalising on opportunities that appear later on.

To the guy posting the endless praises of Geelong for having an a+ grader fall in their lap and for trading in two b- graders in I would say this: the past does not automatically result in future chances being successful. Geelong traded in Mitch Clark and Sam Blease last year and jury out on one, fail on the other. When you have so many quality players leaving do you draft in replacements and hope you get it right or top up on b-graders and assume your unproven youngsters will automatically be as good as your departures? Sounds a lot like MFC post 2006 to me. Plenty can go wrong.

To the I want an a grader criers I'd say Judd went to Carlton and they were still a poor side. Dayne Beams is at Brisbane and fighting off the spoon.

We need to back in and develop our core of youngsters rather than rely on a saviour.

As for Toumpas. I like him and his heart but I have watched him carefully and I'd be staggered if he makes it at AFL level. Staggered.

[Davos 734]

The last ten pages on this thread feature some of the worst demonland posts i have ever read.

The trade period isn't a race - the club that gets the most trades earliest doesn't win. Because rushing out and committing early may just ruin your chances of capitalising on opportunities that appear later on.

To the guy posting the endless praises of Geelong for having an a+ grader fall in their lap and for trading in two b- graders in I would say this: the past does not automatically result in future chances being successful. Geelong traded in Mitch Clark and Sam Blease last year and jury out on one, fail on the other. When you have so many quality players leaving do you draft in replacements and hope you get it right or top up on b-graders and assume your unproven youngsters will automatically be as good as your departures? Sounds a lot like MFC post 2006 to me. Plenty can go wrong.

To the I want an a grader criers I'd say Judd went to Carlton and they were still a poor side. Dayne Beams is at Brisbane and fighting off the spoon.

We need to back in and develop our core of youngsters rather than rely on a saviour.

As for Toumpas. I like him and his heart but I have watched him carefully and I'd be staggered if he makes it at AFL level. Staggered.

10/10

[nutbean 8,837]

It's like birds at nesting time being attracted to bright shiny objects.

[jnrmac 18,914]

How can you with the track record record?

The track record since Roos has been here is pretty good.

[ManDee 7,073]

Surely you have to give our coaches and list management team a bit more respect than the above?

It's a long two weeks...

Let's not get carried away with negativity just yet

How can you with the track record record?

Jack, do you think before you post?

I think our current coaches and list management team are doing a good job. Some examples below.

2014 Brayshaw Petracca Stretch Neal Bullen O Mac Vanderberg Garlett Frost

2013 Salem JKH Vince Cross Tyson

2012 Hogan Viney Kent Pedersen

[samcantstandya 913]

Jack, do you think before you post?

I think our current coaches and list management team are doing a good job. Some examples below.

2014 Brayshaw Petracca Stretch Neal Bullen O Mac Vanderberg Garlett Frost

2013 Salem JKH Vince Cross Tyson

2012 Hogan Viney Kent Pedersen

Not a fan of Pederson drinks his own bath water. But am okay with a one year deal that he has for 2016.

[jnrmac 18,914]

The last ten pages on this thread feature some of the worst demonland posts i have ever read.

The trade period isn't a race - the club that gets the most trades earliest doesn't win. Because rushing out and committing early may just ruin your chances of capitalising on opportunities that appear later on.

To the guy posting the endless praises of Geelong for having an a+ grader fall in their lap and for trading in two b- graders in I would say this: the past does not automatically result in future chances being successful. Geelong traded in Mitch Clark and Sam Blease last year and jury out on one, fail on the other. When you have so many quality players leaving do you draft in replacements and hope you get it right or top up on b-graders and assume your unproven youngsters will automatically be as good as your departures? Sounds a lot like MFC post 2006 to me. Plenty can go wrong.

To the I want an a grader criers I'd say Judd went to Carlton and they were still a poor side. Dayne Beams is at Brisbane and fighting off the spoon.

We need to back in and develop our core of youngsters rather than rely on a saviour.

As for Toumpas. I like him and his heart but I have watched him carefully and I'd be staggered if he makes it at AFL level. Staggered.

Agree,

And not only that. If the whinging peanuts on here think there is something to be gained by the club being public about their intentions they are delusional. Its a negotiation and the worst possible position is to lay your cards on the table for everyone to pick off. Clearly some here have never been involved in a negotiation of any substance.

Posters complain about us not being able to get A graders at the trade table have zero idea about how difficult it is to get them to a club like Melbourne that has been poor for a decade. You have to play the cards you are dealt and there are only certain players up for trade in any given year. When they are, you are competing against the seriously competetive clubs like Hawthorn and Geelong. And you only have certain picks and player currency. Howe sems to be the player we have with the most currency and the club I am sure is trying to the best it can to genrate the best return. They have known he was leaving for some time. In fact they may have even pushed him. They have been talking to clubs for more than 12 months, not 2 weeks. They have a pretty good idea of who is doing what.

Judge them at the end of trade period. Not during trade period when the keyboard heroes want the information NOW!!!!

FFS Dangerfield has gone to a club and accepted (if you believe reports) around $700k a year less than was offered by Melbourne. Do the peanuts here really think there was anything else the club could do to get Dangerfield? It's laughable.

[ManDee 7,073]

Not a fan of Pederson drinks his own bath water. But am okay with a one year deal that he has for 2016.

The reason I listed Pedersen was that we swapped Gysberts for him. That was a win for us.

[The Chazz 4,077]

Surely you have to give our coaches and list management team a bit more respect than the above?

It's a long two weeks...

Let's not get carried away with negativity just yet

To be fair on Olisik, KJ, his whole year revolves around this two weeks. It's a bit like Emma Quayle and draft time, difference is Emma has some clue.

I have this image of Olisik being a mixture of (Good) Will Hunting and that kid off The Sixth Sense. He has this uncanny ability to work out the most difficult of mathematical equations, and can see things that most can't, including Roos and co.

[Scipio 5,868]

To be fair on Olisik, KJ, his whole year revolves around this two weeks. It's a bit like Emma Quayle and draft time, difference is Emma has some clue.

I have this image of Olisik being a mixture of (Good) Will Hunting and that kid off The Sixth Sense. He has this uncanny ability to work out the most difficult of mathematical equations, and can see things that most can't, including Roos and co.

I'd have thought that was the image Olisik has of himself.

[nutbean 8,837]

Agree,

And not only that. If the whinging peanuts on here think there is something to be gained by the club being public about their intentions they are delusional. Its a negotiation and the worst possible position is to lay your cards on the table for everyone to pick off. Clearly some here have never been involved in a negotiation of any substance.

Posters complain about us not being able to get A graders at the trade table have zero idea about how difficult it is to get them to a club like Melbourne that has been poor for a decade. You have to play the cards you are dealt and there are only certain players up for trade in any given year. When they are, you are competing against the seriously competetive clubs like Hawthorn and Geelong. And you only have certain picks and player currency. Howe sems to be the player we have with the most currency and the club I am sure is trying to the best it can to genrate the best return. They have known he was leaving for some time. In fact they may have even pushed him. They have been talking to clubs for more than 12 months, not 2 weeks. They have a pretty good idea of who is doing what.

Judge them at the end of trade period. Not during trade period when the keyboard heroes want the information NOW!!!!

FFS Dangerfield has gone to a club and accepted (if you believe reports) around $700k a year less than was offered by Melbourne. Do the peanuts here really think there was anything else the club could do to get Dangerfield? It's laughable.

Spot on.

Except... we should be judged at the end of the trade period but with the following proviso - as you rightly point out - we are still not a destination of first choice and that's the simple fact. If posters cannot see why players would chose most other clubs over ours then they need to take off the rose coloured glasses. We rank in the bottom four clubs as a desired destination - them's the sad truth. Mahoney said as much a couple of days ago.

[olisik 4,060]

To be fair on Olisik, KJ, his whole year revolves around this two weeks. It's a bit like Emma Quayle and draft time, difference is Emma has some clue.

I have this image of Olisik being a mixture of (Good) Will Hunting and that kid off The Sixth Sense. He has this uncanny ability to work out the most difficult of mathematical equations, and can see things that most can't, including Roos and co.

Your over thinking it. I am underwhelmed so far, that shouldn't be to hard to comprehend.

Let's hope for some movement soon as week one is coming to a close quick

[The Chazz 4,077]

Your* over thinking it. I am underwhelmed so far, that shouldn't be to** hard to comprehend.

Let's hope for some movement soon as week one is coming to a close quick

* - You're

** - too

[olisik 4,060]

* - You're

** - too

Sorry grammar police.

[Sir Why You Little 34,419]

Anything happened yet?

[ManDee 7,073]

Your over thinking it. I am underwhelmed so far, that shouldn't be to hard to comprehend.

Let's hope for some movement soon as week one is coming to a close quick

If you can replace your with you are then it is always you're not your. - You're (you are) annoying people when you get this wrong.

Your is possessive as in belonging to. - Your name is unusual. (You are name is unusual is wrong.)

This is not hard.

To or too . If you mean also it is too or excessive is too. Too far. I am going too.

This is harder to explain than I thought. Best I stop now.

Edited October 15, 2015 by ManDee

[Mach5 4,482]

Sorry grammar police.

I think you'll find it's spelling, not grammar.

[olisik 4,060]

If you can replace your with you are then it is always you're not your. - You're (you are) annoying people when you get this wrong.

Your is possessive as in belonging to. - Your name is unusual. (You are name is unusual is wrong.)

This is not hard.

Cool

[olisik 4,060]

I think you'll find it's spelling, not grammar.

Spelling police'

This thread has official been derailed by the spelling and grammar police.