1 minute ago, SFebey said:

So we actually get Lewis for pick 61 according to reports who have worked it out.

Also is Stretch in the best 22? I know he spins around like Taz devil but he doesn't start ahead of Tyson surely?

Best 22 100%

Plays on a wing so doesnt compete with Tyson for a spot. Stretch has relatively little competition for his spot given our lack of outside run. 

Any word on Hibberd trade??

1 minute ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Best 22 100%

Plays on a wing so doesnt compete with Tyson for a spot. Stretch has relatively little competition for his spot given our lack of outside run. 

I was referring to a previous post. Need his speed for sure, but may be passed quickly. Time will tell. I just wonder if Mahoney has something else up his sleeve considering Hibberd delay?

10 minutes ago, wheaters31 said:

Could we trade Dunn and pick 57 to Collingwood for pick 47. That makes Dunn the equivalent of pick 62.

This is what I'd suggest:

Dunn to Collingwood, Witts to Gold Coast, Pick 62 to Melbourne.

Melbourne then trade Picks 57, 62 & 68 = 364 draft points to Collingwood for Pick 47 = 316 draft points.

Helps the filth with two father/son selections coming this draft.

We go to the draft with Picks 29 & 47 and upgrade one rookie.

Edited October 18, 20169 yr by AngryAtCasey

4 minutes ago, AngryAtCasey said:

This is what I'd suggest:

Dunn to Collingwood, Witts to Gold Coast, Pick 62 to Melbourne.

Melbourne then trade Picks 57, 62 & 68 = 364 draft points to Collingwood for Pick 47 = 316 draft points.

Helps the filth with two father/son selections coming this draft.

We go to the draft with Picks 29 & 47 and upgrade one rookie.

Do we need to upgrade Joel Smith?

3 minutes ago, AngryAtCasey said:

This is what I'd suggest:

Dunn to Collingwood, Witts to Gold Coast, Pick 62 to Melbourne.

Melbourne then trade Picks 57, 62 & 68 = 364 draft points to Collingwood for Pick 47 = 316 draft points.

Helps the filth with two father/son selections coming this draft.

We go to the draft with Picks 29 & 47 and upgrade one rookie.

Didn't they change the rules to prevent this kind of trade?

2 minutes ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

Didn't they change the rules to prevent this kind of trade?

I thought they didn't, even though they were aware of it?

3 minutes ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

Didn't they change the rules to prevent this kind of trade?

 

1 minute ago, Wunders said:

I thought they didn't, even though they were aware of it?

There was talk of it, but hasn't there already been a trade of sorts to this effect?

Just now, AngryAtCasey said:

 

There was talk of it, but hasn't there already been a trade of sorts to this effect?

The AFL has made one change to its bidding system that will come into immediate effect this year, with clubs no longer able to access 'hidden picks' during the draft.

It means clubs will only be able to enter the draft with the number of selections that matches the available primary list positions at that time.

Last year some clubs entered the draft with more picks than they had available spots on their list. The extra picks were purely held so they could pay for academy prospects that attracted early bids. 

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-08-22/draft-loophole-to-remain-despite-some-clubs-concern

4 minutes ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

Didn't they change the rules to prevent this kind of trade?

Depends. A club cannot go into the draft with more picks than places vacant on their list. It wouldn't work to trade in three picks to have the points for one F/S.

Anyone else going to be concerned if we go into next year without a backup for Gawn?

Edited October 18, 20169 yr by stevethemanjordan

16 minutes ago, AngryAtCasey said:

This is what I'd suggest:

Dunn to Collingwood, Witts to Gold Coast, Pick 62 to Melbourne.

Melbourne then trade Picks 57, 62 & 68 = 364 draft points to Collingwood for Pick 47 = 316 draft points.

Helps the filth with two father/son selections coming this draft.

We go to the draft with Picks 29 & 47 and upgrade one rookie.

Maybe, I think we have something cooking.  Our unwillingness to part with our second round pick and keeping the two picks that were swapped for Lewis indicate to me that we have some plans.

It may be just be that we want these picks for kids this year that JT had identified, but I think there is more to it.

Quote

 

It means clubs will only be able to enter the draft with the number of selections that matches the available primary list positions at that time.

From AFL.com.  

So if you only have three spots on your list, you only have three draft picks and can't stockpile half a dozen third round picks to use on academy/FS selections.

31 minutes ago, AzzKikA said:

Throw in Garland and...

Because that worked so well for us................

1 minute ago, Stretch Johnson said:

Maybe, I think we have something cooking.  Our unwillingness to part with our second round pick and keeping the two picks that were swapped for Lewis indicate to me that we have some plans.

It may be just be that we want these picks for kids this year that JT had identified, but I think there is more to it.

Exactly, I reckon Mahoney has a trick up his sleeve. Why would he be so keen to keep pick 29 in a supposedly weak draft.....

20 minutes ago, AngryAtCasey said:

This is what I'd suggest:

Dunn to Collingwood, Witts to Gold Coast, Pick 62 to Melbourne.

Melbourne then trade Picks 57, 62 & 68 = 364 draft points to Collingwood for Pick 47 = 316 draft points.

Helps the filth with two father/son selections coming this draft.

We go to the draft with Picks 29 & 47 and upgrade one rookie.

Hibberd?

3 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

The AFL has made one change to its bidding system that will come into immediate effect this year, with clubs no longer able to access 'hidden picks' during the draft.

It means clubs will only be able to enter the draft with the number of selections that matches the available primary list positions at that time.

Last year some clubs entered the draft with more picks than they had available spots on their list. The extra picks were purely held so they could pay for academy prospects that attracted early bids. 

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-08-22/draft-loophole-to-remain-despite-some-clubs-concern

Cheers AW,

So if we did that trade, Collingwood would hold Picks 28, 57, 62, 65, 68

So as long as they have at least 5 spots on their main list available then we could do it.

So they've so far lost Golds, Goodyear, Swann, Toovey, MacAffer & Brown off their senior list and will likely trade out Frost plus Witts.

So that's 8 out.

They've brought in Wells, Mayne, potentially Dunn and possibly Hoskin-Elliott which takes it down to 4 spots.  So if they delist one more player or miss out on WHE, then it's still a poossability.

1 minute ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Anyone else going to be concerned if we go into next year without a backup for Gawn next year?

 

No.  Let's not forget that we have Spencer as a back-up.  If he (Pencil) has to step in, I'd imagine Pedo and/or Watts will play more ruck time.  And with the addition of Lewis in to our midfield, he will hopefully teach our other midfields how to shark an opposition ruck.

1 minute ago, jnrmac said:

Hibberd?

Future 2nd rounder.  Essendon will back down. 

Maybe???

1 minute ago, billy2803 said:

No.  Let's not forget that we have Spencer as a back-up.  If he (Pencil) has to step in, I'd imagine Pedo and/or Watts will play more ruck time.  And with the addition of Lewis in to our midfield, he will hopefully teach our other midfields how to shark an opposition ruck.

I reckon Watts actually outperforms in the ruck, goes OK in there IMO.

1 minute ago, jnrmac said:

Because that worked so well for us................

We are getting it back together for them, as a Thank you for all the great gifts they have given us.

10 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

Depends. A club cannot go into the draft with more picks than places vacant on their list. It wouldn't work to trade in three picks to have the points for one F/S.

2 F/S.

Just now, SFebey said:

I reckon Watts actually outperforms in the ruck, goes OK in there IMO.

I disagree. When Watts is rucking we lose momentum and often concede runs of scores while not scoring ourselves. It's a combination of not being competitive in the ruck and not having his creativity at high half forward. 

1 minute ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

I disagree. When Watts is rucking we lose momentum and often concede runs of scores while not scoring ourselves. It's a combination of not being competitive in the ruck and not having his creativity at high half forward. 

Not surprising since he isn't fully trained in that position and wouldn't have a chemistry with mids, just saying he performs well - more a communication problem than ability IMO.

50 minutes ago, AzzKikA said:

 

Just a smokescreen, he's obviously going to Brisbane in exchange for Rockliff.