11 minutes ago, armstrong35 said:

As much as we've picked up some future stars with early picks the last couple of years, I trust our recruiters with later picks as we've picked up some gems with Gawn Jetta hunt and the McDonald's. If we had the same recruiters a few years ago I'd rather late picks as we didn't get out early picks right. We really need another ruck because if Gawn goes down we are screwed.. Would love a Dangerfield type, he is just so explosive and we really lack that. Would love to have a player like Betts but only younger to crumb around Hogan and Weideman. Garlett is too inconsistent and probably won't be around when we are seriously ready for the flag. We have some holes to fill but once we get that right we will be a seriously good team. 

You do realise that Gawn, Jetta and T.Mac were all recruited under the previous regime? And are you expecting us to pick up a Dangerfield type with a late pick?

2 minutes ago, mo64 said:

You do realise that Gawn, Jetta and T.Mac were all recruited under the previous regime? And are you expecting us to pick up a Dangerfield type with a late pick?

Yes I did realise that I'm just stating that we've always been better with our late picks...

I said I would love his type, I did not say anywhere about expecting us to pick up his type in the late draft? That Doesn't mean we couldn't if there was a smokey

People make it sound so easy lol recruit a dangerfield type, explosive dominant goal kicking midfielder outside of Danger himself, Robbie Grey and maybe Jake Stringer there aren't many players around capable of doing what Danger can do. 

 

1 hour ago, Abe said:

People make it sound so easy lol recruit a dangerfield type, explosive dominant goal kicking midfielder outside of Danger himself, Robbie Grey and maybe Jake Stringer there aren't many players around capable of doing what Danger can do. 

 

No one said its easy? People like myself are just stating what the team needs and what they'd like? They're not saying go out and find one exactly the same? 

2 minutes ago, armstrong35 said:

No one said its easy? People like myself are just stating what the team needs and what they'd like? They're not saying go out and find one exactly the same? 

I get what you mean, they're just extremely rare, there are 17 other clubs who would love that type of player and maybe 2-3 league wide 

I really think we just need to invest in Petracca and he'll fill that role for us.

10 minutes ago, Abe said:

I get what you mean, they're just extremely rare, there are 17 other clubs who would love that type of player and maybe 2-3 league wide 

I really think we just need to invest in Petracca and he'll fill that role for us.

100% and I wish they fell in our lap but for me personally I would rather develop our own players to become a good team rather than trade in a couple of good players to speed up our success. Let jones Garlett Jetta and so on keep playing and help the younger ones keep developing whilst our new draftees develop into their roles. I rather have a decade of success than get close for a year or two like north.

1 hour ago, Abe said:

I get what you mean, they're just extremely rare, there are 17 other clubs who would love that type of player and maybe 2-3 league wide 

I really think we just need to invest in Petracca and he'll fill that role for us.

Petracca Vs Dangerfield (at same age)

Now here's a player we may want to make a play for.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/richmond-star-brett-deledios-punt-road-future-uncertain-20160913-grfkkc.html

About to turn 30 will not come cheap.

Been injured majority of year unsure if he can get back to his best

Quality player but not sure what is his best position in our current best 22.

 

2 minutes ago, Bates Mate said:

About to turn 30 will not come cheap.

Been injured majority of year unsure if he can get back to his best

Quality player but not sure what is his best position in our current best 22.

 

He could still play 3 or 4 years easily on a back flank like is becoming quite common to protect the more mature players.

Doesn't matter what spot he would play for us, as other than a key position he would be better than any other player we have.

Im a fan but no idea what we could offer to get him over

Why would Laverde not want to go back to Essendon? Now i wonder......

3 minutes ago, willmoy said:

Why would Laverde not want to go back to Essendon? Now i wonder......

I don't follow.

Ok so the AFL has closed the loophole around trading multiple later picks for an earlier pick to gain points for academy selections. This closure isn't possible however for future picks. The rules state if you trade away your future first round pick you can't trade any others. There are no rules around subsequent picks though.

This means we could potentially trade next years 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round picks to GWS for a 1st round pick this year. This could be done with any of the 'academy' teams, I just used GWS as an example. Obviously whichever of those teams had the most/best academy kids would be our target. It woud leave us with a 1st round pick and two rookie upgrades for next year, but that's ok.

So essentially the loophole is closed, but there's still potential for exploting the rules somewhat. What damage could we do with a 1st round pick this year?

Deledio - tremendous player but 30yo with bung achilles.

11 hours ago, Dante said:

Now here's a player we may want to make a play for.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/richmond-star-brett-deledios-punt-road-future-uncertain-20160913-grfkkc.html

Richmond never win If Delidio doesn't play

I would love him at the Dees much better than Thompson (Completely cooked) or Del Santo (Too old and slow)

22 hours ago, Abe said:

People make it sound so easy lol recruit a dangerfield type, explosive dominant goal kicking midfielder outside of Danger himself, Robbie Grey and maybe Jake Stringer there aren't many players around capable of doing what Danger can do. 

 

And people forget that he took a while to get to be a game-breaking player. He was seen as a relative under-achiever for the first 4 years.

1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

And people forget that he took a while to get to be a game-breaking player. He was seen as a relative under-achiever for the first 4 years.

As an aside, didn't Lids get to 200 games quicker than anyone else? 

On 9 September 2016 at 4:11 AM, Adzman said:

I am torn about a Garland and/or Dunn trade. Here is why:

We will lose Grimes. Losing Garland, or Dunn or both thins our depth and leaves us vulnerable. Wagner, Omac, Frost, came out of thin air. If one goes down we are in trouble, or if they struggle to maintain form we are short on options.

On the other side of the coin, those young mentioned players are our future and will be given most game time. This will weaken Dunn and Garlands trade value the following season and also hurt their chances of playing more Afl games elsewhere.

I am going to be bold and suggest if we can find some win wins deals for both Dunn and Garland we take the risk.

Those players are done. Finished

14 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I don't follow.

Laverde, young Bomber player, hasn't signed up yet. Being kept quiet for no idea why.

14 hours ago, FireInTheBelly said:

Ok so the AFL has closed the loophole around trading multiple later picks for an earlier pick to gain points for academy selections. This closure isn't possible however for future picks. The rules state if you trade away your future first round pick you can't trade any others. There are no rules around subsequent picks though.

This means we could potentially trade next years 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round picks to GWS for a 1st round pick this year. This could be done with any of the 'academy' teams, I just used GWS as an example. Obviously whichever of those teams had the most/best academy kids would be our target. It woud leave us with a 1st round pick and two rookie upgrades for next year, but that's ok.

So essentially the loophole is closed, but there's still potential for exploting the rules somewhat. What damage could we do with a 1st round pick this year?

I like this thinking, not 100% its possible but cant see why it might not be.

If it is, we'll only get this year to have a crack as you can bet it will also be 'closed" afterwards.

2 hours ago, willmoy said:

Laverde, young Bomber player, hasn't signed up yet. Being kept quiet for no idea why.

Think St Kilda may be his new home.

2 hours ago, beelzebub said:

I like this thinking, not 100% its possible but cant see why it might not be.

If it is, we'll only get this year to have a crack as you can bet it will also be 'closed" afterwards.

Yes agreed. I think there's only one shot at it.

3 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Those players are done. Finished

Agree. It's possible to bring in depth that is actually competing for the best 22, instead of not in the best 22. Eric MacKenzie the West Coast defender is on the market. You don't have depth for the sake of depth, they're either good enough or they're delisted. Edit: If Oscar or Wagner get injured and Dunn or Garland are depth, then we're basically accepting a stagnant year in the same ladder position as last year or worse.

1 minute ago, DominatrixTyson said:

Agree. It's possible to bring in depth that is actually competing for the best 22, instead of not in the best 22. Eric MacKenzie the West Coast defender is on the market. You don't have depth for the sake of depth, they're either good enough or they're delisted.

Exactly. If Garland Dunn or Grimes were still required they would have played in the last round if the team was "cooked"

Nathan Hrovat is rumoured to be looking for a new club, he's highly rated by Macca who drafted him and would come very much on the cheap, and while he's probably not best 22 he's won a rising star nomination and has some ability, i personally think he'd be as good an investment as most 3rd-4th round picks and would be well worth considering, 

i've also heard the Dogs want an experienced key defender for next season and Dunn is on the list, while he isn't their first preference i wonder if there is any chance of swapping them over.