Just now, AngryAtCasey said:

They totally shot themselves in the foot giving up 14 fot Mitchell first and trading themselves into a corner.

I would have thought after getting Pick 23 for Hill they would simply off 14 & 23 for O'Meara or on-trade 23 for Lyons plus steak knives with Lyons etc heading to GC with 14.

They then could have traded next years1st Round Pick for Mitchell as your starting point.

Where they are now, would Pick 10 to the Crows be enough for them to send 13 & Lyons to Gold Coast? I'm not sure....

I reckon they've gotta add a player, pick 10 and say Hartung

the Suns clearly want a first round pick and a ready to go player.

 

3 minutes ago, Abe said:

I reckon they've gotta add a player, pick 10 and say Hartung

the Suns clearly want a first round pick and a ready to go player.

 

None of the Hawk players want to go to the Suns.......

Talk of Geelong using another future first rounder in getting Tuohy. Thought they used 2015 (danger), 2016 (Henderson) so wouldn't be eligible to do that? Anyone know how this works? 

6 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

None of the Hawk players want to go to the Suns.......

Do any of them want to go to Adelaide though given Lyons is happy to go to Gold Coast?

3 minutes ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Talk of Geelong using another future first rounder in getting Tuohy. Thought they used 2015 (danger), 2016 (Henderson) so wouldn't be eligible to do that? Anyone know how this works? 

This explains the AFL ruling:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-trades-2016-geelong-carlton-close-on-tuohy-deal-20161019-gs5okq.html

 

 

3 minutes ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Talk of Geelong using another future first rounder in getting Tuohy. Thought they used 2015 (danger), 2016 (Henderson) so wouldn't be eligible to do that? Anyone know how this works? 

Have to get AFL approval. Means they've have to use their 1st Round Draft Pick in 2018 and trade back into the 1st Round next year somehow.

3 minutes ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Talk of Geelong using another future first rounder in getting Tuohy. Thought they used 2015 (danger), 2016 (Henderson) so wouldn't be eligible to do that? Anyone know how this works? 

They need to use 2 first round picks across 2017/2018 drafts thereby satisfying the 2 first round picks in a rolling 4 year period:  2015 to 2018.

That is different to what the AFL issued before this draft - it seems they had not thru what their rules actually meant in practice!!

Toby Nankervis to Richmond for 46 is a pretty good deal for the Tigers.  22 year old tall with a bit of ability and upside.

1 minute ago, AngryAtCasey said:

Have to get AFL approval. Means they've have to use their 1st Round Draft Pick in 2018 and trade back into the 1st Round next year somehow.

 

Just now, Lucifer's Hero said:

They need to use 2 first round picks across 2017/2018 drafts thereby satisfying the 2 first round picks in a rolling 4 year period:  2015 to 2018.

That is different to what the AFL issued before this draft - it seems they had not thru what their rules actually meant in practice!!

Seems strange isn't it? Looks like a job on the run. 

Maybe they've gone to the AFL and said "don't worry Motlop's out as a free agent next year so we'll get a high pick for him"? 

2 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

That is different to what the AFL issued before this draft - it seems they had not thru what their rules actually meant in practice!!

Yep, AFL once again making it up on the fly.

AFL spells professionalism 'J--O--K--E'

3 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

They need to use 2 first round picks across 2017/2018 drafts thereby satisfying the 2 first round picks in a rolling 4 year period:  2015 to 2018.

That is different to what the AFL issued before this draft - it seems they had not thru what their rules actually meant in practice!!

Interesting, but what about the period 2014-2017? They've only used 1 to date, and don't currently hold a 2nd following this decision.

that zac tuohy deal makes hibberd look like even more of a bargain - he's a far better half-back flanker than the irishman.

4 minutes ago, FireInTheBelly said:

Interesting, but what about the period 2014-2017? They've only used 1 to date, and don't currently hold a 2nd following this decision.

Yep, that's why if the AFL approve them trading next years 1st Round Pick, Geelong will go into next years period having to trade into the first round.

52 minutes ago, Ron Burgundy said:

Hawks must be a little restless.

They traded their reigning B&F winner thinking that:

- they'd then be bringing in Tom Mitchell AND Jaeger O'Meara; and

- Jordan Lewis would spend at least one further season at the club.

Since Sam Mitchell exited the building though, they've not yet landed O'Meara and they've lost Lewis.

If they don't manage to land O'Meara, they would've brought in only Tom Mitchell and, in doing so, they've lost two super experienced mids (1&2 in the B&F). And they've lost a truckload of leadership and possibly respect within and external to the club.

On any construction, that'd have to be a pretty bad trade period. A high stakes approach in the circumstances.

 

An absolute disaster, mate.

47 minutes ago, Choke said:

Lol

 

 

As is this. I feel a bit dirty for my Dion love now. Clearly he's not the messiah, he's a very [silly] boy.

37 minutes ago, AngryAtCasey said:

They totally shot themselves in the foot giving up 14 fot Mitchell first and trading themselves into a corner.

I would have thought after getting Pick 23 for Hill they would simply off 14 & 23 for O'Meara or on-trade 23 for Lyons plus steak knives with Lyons etc heading to GC with 14.

They then could have traded next years1st Round Pick for Mitchell as your starting point.

Where they are now, would Pick 10 to the Crows be enough for them to send 13 & Lyons to Gold Coast? I'm not sure....

They're bloody lucky in a way that the Swans played ball with them and gave up Mitchell for merely pick 14.

5 minutes ago, FireInTheBelly said:

Interesting, but what about the period 2014-2017? They've only used 1 to date, and don't currently hold a 2nd following this decision.

They have got a second, both this year and 2 seconds next year (at this stage).

Could come back to haunt them quickly, if they don't win it in the next year or 2 they've got next to no young depth coming through. 

3 minutes ago, AngryAtCasey said:

Yep, that's why if the AFL approve them trading next years 1st Round Pick, Geelong will go into next years period having to trade into the first round.

That's precarious for them.

4 minutes ago, DemonAndrew said:

that zac tuohy deal makes hibberd look like even more of a bargain - he's a far better half-back flanker than the irishman.

SOS is becoming the new Dodoro if Tuohy's price is a 1st Round Pick. Totally unreasonable and on the flip side asking for two 1st Round Picks for Gibbs.

15 minutes ago, AngryAtCasey said:

SOS is becoming the new Dodoro if Tuohy's price is a 1st Round Pick. Totally unreasonable and on the flip side asking for two 1st Round Picks for Gibbs.

I think the rest of the league will look back on SOS' time as a list manager at GWS and Carlton and realise he was an incompetent disaster. 

A top 18 pick for Tuohy LOL

This sort of evens out the charity trade they got for Dangerfield.

Fark Geelong.

Hawks and Cats have their arses hanging out at the moment

And Buckleywood is going nowhere.

I'm glad gcs are making a stand (also blues/Gibbs and Richmond/deliodo), teams have actively pursured players in contract with the view to nominate them without the clubs resourcing the trade. 

 

Hawks look like they're trying it now with 10 and 48. That's all we've got so take it or get nothing which most are suggesting gcs should (media etc).

 

I hope gcs tell JOM that they will take him with pick eight regardless the amount he puts on his head, so it's resign or go to the bombers.  It will teach one of the bigger clubs that you still need to trade, not just convince the player and he becomes yours. 

6 minutes ago, AngryAtCasey said:

Yep, that's why if the AFL approve them trading next years 1st Round Pick, Geelong will go into next years period having to trade into the first round.

Serious question: who have Geelong got that they could realistically trade for a first round next year?

Excluding Danger, Selwood the elder and perhaps Hawkins.& Blicavs, who you'd think would be their untouchables. Who else is there?

5 minutes ago, Akum said:

Serious question: who have Geelong got that they could realistically trade for a first round next year?

Excluding Danger, Selwood the elder and perhaps Hawkins.& Blicavs, who you'd think would be their untouchables. Who else is there?

Cockatoo...that's about it

24 minutes ago, FireInTheBelly said:

Interesting, but what about the period 2014-2017? They've only used 1 to date, and don't currently hold a 2nd following this decision.

2014 doesn't count as 2015 was the first time clubs could trade future picks.  So the rolling 4 years are:

2015 to 2018, 2016 to 2019, 2017 to 2020 etc etc

So for Geelong there options are 2 1st round picks in 2017, or 2018 or 1 in each of those years to comply with the new interpretation of the rule.  In one of those years they will need to trade in a 1st round pick.

4 hours ago, daisycutter said:

huh? richmond's 2nd rounder next year more likely to be in the 30's

 

4 hours ago, ManDee said:

I would have thought around pick 19

 

4 hours ago, godees said:

Haha good one!

And our, with all the manipulation that goes on with compo, will be early 40s

1 hour ago, Ron Burgundy said:

Hawks must be a little restless.

They traded their reigning B&F winner thinking that:

- they'd then be bringing in Tom Mitchell AND Jaeger O'Meara; and

- Jordan Lewis would spend at least one further season at the club.

Since Sam Mitchell exited the building though, they've not yet landed O'Meara and they've lost Lewis.

If they don't manage to land O'Meara, they would've brought in only Tom Mitchell and, in doing so, they've lost two super experienced mids (1&2 in the B&F). And they've lost a truckload of leadership and possibly respect within and external to the club.

On any construction, that'd have to be a pretty bad trade period. A high stakes approach in the circumstances.

 

Yeah. But they did manage to con and stave off all the suitors for Vickery ?