Hopefully becomes 26, 29 & 49 to GWS for pick 8 and Bugg

not sure why Port would do that

Toumpas being a top 5 pick 3 years ago, and in a weak draft Port are backing themselves to get him to come right. If anything I'd say we are losing out if you focus on that part of the trade alone

Not dissimilar to us going with Melksham really, except he's played a lot more football than Toumpas.

Edited October 19, 201510 yr by Ouch!

Port payed more for Polec who had shown less than Toumpas IMHO.

Unless the Toumpas pick is going towards something greater, I'd rather keep Toump.

26,29,49 for pick 8?

that's what I was thinking. Maybe add our current 3rd rounder (pick 43) and give us Bugg

Toumpas being a top 5 pick 3 years ago, and in a weak draft Port are backing themselves to get him to come right. If anything I'd say we are losing out if you focus on that part of the trade alone

Not dissimilar to us going with Melksham really, except he's played a lot more football than Toumpas.

Toumpas is no longer a top 5 pick - he's a player that struggles to get a game in a side that sits in the bottom third of the ladder. No use valuing him by the number we took him in the draft.

If that deal occurs, we should be big winners.

The risk with Toumpas is not only that he won't come good, but that he will turn the ball over in a few crucial matches and quell their momentum and lose them a game or two ruling out any serious challenge for top 4 spot, if Port actually hit their stride next year. Really needs to fix his kicking efficiency and for that reason I want to see him traded.

Edited October 19, 201510 yr by johndemons

that's what I was thinking. Maybe add our current 3rd rounder (pick 43) and give us Bugg

Hopefully becomes 26, 29 & 49 to GWS for pick 8 and Bugg

Why not add 43 to that and go for pick 7 (traded to GWS for Treloar)?

If we can finish the trade period with pick 6, 8, Melksham, Bugg & Kennedy and only lose Howe Toumpas and our second rounder (maybe third as well if part of the Bugg deal) I would say we have done very well.

Particularly if 6 & 8 can get us two of Curnow, Weideman and Milera

If we can finish the trade period with pick 6, 8, Melksham, Bugg & Kennedy and only lose Howe Toumpas and our second rounder (maybe third as well if part of the Bugg deal) I would say we have done very well.

Particularly if 6 & 8 can get us two of Curnow, Weideman and Milera

Speculation that we're talking to Goldie about securing a pick, so would the idea maybe be then to package up 6 & 8 and switch it for 3 - thereby locking away Parish?

Wouldn't mind it either way frankly.

6 & 8 sound like a steep price for pick 3, you'd think there'd be a later pick included to even it out if that were to happen. Also wouldn't be shocked if 3 wasn't used on Parish, but on someone like Weideman

Edited October 19, 201510 yr by grazman

If we can finish the trade period with pick 6, 8, Melksham, Bugg & Kennedy and only lose Howe Toumpas and our second rounder (maybe third as well if part of the Bugg deal) I would say we have done very well.

Can we lose Dawes as well? Think big!

Speculation that we're talking to Goldie about securing a pick, so would the idea maybe be then to package up 6 & 8 and switch it for 3 - thereby locking away Parish?

Wouldn't mind it either way frankly.

I'd rather bring in Weideman and Curnow with picks 6&8, than Parish with pick 3.

yeah two players would be a safer bet.

But I think Curnow is going to go earlier than our pick 6 no?

Why not add 43 to that and go for pick 7 (traded to GWS for Treloar)?

You'd have to do the maths... GWS want Kennedy and Hopper, so they will probably need 7 or 8 for them.... in which case its academic exercise which one of the two we have.

6 & 8 sound like a steep price for pick 3, you'd think there'd be a later pick included to even it out if that were to happen. Also wouldn't be shocked if 3 wasn't used on Parish, but on someone like Weideman

Indeed. It's a sort of Josh Kelly deal in reverse for us, and would be a surprise as such.

Trade Radio now saying Treloar deal first, then Howe deal done. I wish they'd make up their mind which order.

Two bob each way so they can spruik 'we got it right.'

NFI.

Looking at it from a purely numbers (bidding points) 6 and 8 are 1 point different to 3 and 16?

Looks to me a bit like this yeah? Obviously it might change between 3,4 and 5.

Excluding Academy picks

1. Carlton - Weitering

2. Brisbane - Schache

3. Gold Coast - Parish

4. Essendon - Francis

5. Saints - Curnow

6. Dees - Balic, Weideman, Milera?

Academy picks

Sydney - Mills

GWS - Hopper

GWS - Kennedy

I'm torn. I think Parish could be a terrific if not consistant midfielder with more potential then the already impressive player he is.

But having a creative player AND a possible key position player moving forward would be great also

Edited October 19, 201510 yr by mongrel

If we were to end up with 2 top 10 picks come draft time, we simply must take Weideman with one of them. Hogan needs another decent KPF for support.

Pretty much, looking like its

Collingwood lose Seedsman (Adel), Kennedy (Melb) and 26 (Melb)

Gain Howe and 28

Adelaide lose 28 (Coll) and gain Seedsman

Port Adelaide gain Toumpas (Melb) and pick 62 (melb) and lose 29 and 49 (Melb)

Melbourne gain lose Toumpas (port) and Howe (Coll) and pick 62 (Port)

and gain pick 29,26,49 and Ben Kennedy

Clearly we come out winners, but it seems pretty fair IMO, everyone wins

The Adelaide - Seedsman - Collingwood deal seems independent of the rest?

As others have said - hard to see why Port would add the 49 to 62 upgrade for us, especially when GC are asking for more than 10 for Dixon and 49 could be handy there. So Toumpas for 29 (or even with the 49/62 swap) is independent too.

Then it's just Howe for 26 + Kennedy.

Three independent trades - can't see why they aren't happening.

Edited October 19, 201510 yr by Fifty-5

Looks to me a bit like this yeah? Obviously it might change between 3,4 and 5.

Excluding Academy picks

1. Carlton - Weitering

2. Brisbane - Schache

3. Gold Coast - Parish

4. Essendon - Francis

5. Saints - Curnow

6. Dees - Balic, Weideman, Milera?

Academy picks

Sydney - Mills

GWS - Hopper

GWS - Kennedy

I'm torn. I think Parish could be a terrific if not consistant midfielder with more potential then the already impressive player he is.

But having a creative player AND a possible key position player moving forward would be great also

Teams have to bid for both Hooper AND Kennedy in the top 6 for GWS to have to use 8. With Mills in there to be bid as well, it may not happen and 8 will be a live pick for GWS.

The Adelaide - Seedsman - Collingwood deal seems independent of the rest?

As others have said - hard to see why Port would add the 49 to 62 upgrade for us, especially when GC are asking for more than 10 for Dixon and 49 could be handy there. So Toumpas for 29 (or even with the 49/62 swap) is independent too.

Then it's just Howe for 26 + Kennedy.

Three independent trades - can't see why they aren't happening.

i can only imagine its a case of the jitters 55. Its not these trades but the next ones ( in line ) You wouldnt want to necessarily commit to teh former if the deal youre trying to do afterwards isnt iron clad... just a thought

Trade Radio now saying Treloar deal first, then Howe deal done. I wish they'd make up their mind which order.

Two bob each way so they can spruik 'we got it right.'

NFI.

NFI more like one of the best clubs in the land , they would be saying [censored] Melbourne they can wait send that [censored] to the PSD

If we were to end up with 2 top 10 picks come draft time, we simply must take Weideman with one of them. Hogan needs another decent KPF for support.

If Frost is fit to go they might be thinking they have that issue covered