25 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

The above equation is correct,  what I'm suggesting is:

• Looking to trade for Dog's 1st round pick, send Pick 26 to North (keep picks 33+50 to trade with Dogs)
• Not looking to trade up in the draft then send Picks 33+50 to North and keep Pick 26 (draft for quality, not quantity).

Can anyone clarify please?

With respect to comments about potentially bundling pick 33 plus ??  to the doggies for an upgrade,  is that even allowed? 

The 33 we just received from Adelaide was originally the Doggies pick.  

2 minutes ago, Port Demons said:

Can anyone clarify please?

With respect to comments about potentially bundling pick 33 plus ??  to the doggies for an upgrade,  is that even allowed? 

The 33 we just received from Adelaide was originally the Doggies pick.  

Yes, good point you raise. Can anyone shed light as to whether it's allowable?

Picks can move multiple times (I think one 4th rounder had four homes at some point last year), things to take into account are whether you have capacity to move picks in the first two rounds due to historical trades (we're fine here, I lose track of other clubs circumstances) and whether you theoretically have enough list spaces to accommodate the number of picks you are taking on.

For example if we were bundling up 4 picks for WB's first rounder, but they only had three vacancies on the primary list, deal would be nixed by AFL.

Obviously a different rule for players, who can only be traded once in a trade period. 

Edit. You also can't have a pick that you have traded out come back in as part of a separate deal.

Edited November 10, 20204 yr by ChaserJ
Addition

 

Just now, Demonland said:

 

Veeerrry interesting????? Browns a bargain in those terms SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHush

41 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

Yes, good point you raise. Can anyone shed light as to whether it's allowable?

Only hazarding a guess here but I'm pretty sure it's fine if the pick was traded in a previous year.

Last year when we did a pick swap for Langdon sending them pick 22? Later when we were trying to organise a pick swap to move 8 to 10 with freo, we were blocked from receiving the same pick 22 that we traded, instead involving I think it was Adelaide receiving 28 and Carltons future 4th. 

But since the bulldogs traded that pick 33 to Adelaide last year, I don't think there is anything preventing them receiving it this year. Can't confirm though.

Edited November 10, 20204 yr by Nascent

 

6 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

Hope this gets done today?

There's no way North are giving up Ben Brown for less than Preuss.

Well not right now anyway.

I hope this gets done with 30 seconds to go in the trade period. Because it will show Mahoney put it all on the line. We've got nothing else to do of any importance. What's the rush?

If it was not for Gawn and injury Pruess would have been our 1st ruck choice every week and filled the role admirably. Brown despite Kangas being crap all year could not crack a game. GWS was desperate for a reliable ruckman.

We will probably offer up the Pruess pick 31 to Kangas for Brown. More than fair. However Kangas will want more.

 

Seems like its how you go about getting the deal done that matters. Anyone dealing with Essendon + Geelong struggle big time

3 minutes ago, manny100 said:

If it was not for Gawn and injury Pruess would have been our 1st ruck choice every week and filled the role admirably. Brown despite Kangas being crap all year could not crack a game. GWS was desperate for a reliable ruckman.

We will probably offer up the Pruess pick 31 to Kangas for Brown. More than fair. However Kangas will want more.

 

so toss in a 4th rounder as well to make them feel better, no good to us antway

 

3 minutes ago, manny100 said:

If it was not for Gawn and injury Pruess would have been our 1st ruck choice every week and filled the role admirably. Brown despite Kangas being crap all year could not crack a game. GWS was desperate for a reliable ruckman.

We will probably offer up the Pruess pick 31 to Kangas for Brown. More than fair. However Kangas will want more.

 

Preuss and Ben Brown for Dom Tyson!

Could be traced back to 2013 pick 2 for Ben Brown, Christian Salem & Jayden Hunt...

Edited November 10, 20204 yr by ChaserJ

5 minutes ago, ChaserJ said:

 

Preuss and Ben Brown for Dom Tyson!

Could be traced back to 2013 pick 2 for Ben Brown, Christian Salem & Jayden Hunt...

and hore

i think it'll actually work out as...

salem, hunt, hore, brown

FOR

pick 2 (josh kelly), pick 20 (which became 21, which was jarman impey)

Edited November 10, 20204 yr by whatwhatsaywhat

I think we can give Roos the Preuss pick 31 and the future 2021 Lions 4th round pick.  They are kicking Brown out.  Screw them. 

Edited November 10, 20204 yr by spirit of norm smith
C

1 hour ago, Demonland said:

 

We did very well today. 
Sideshow is an excellent player

He will kick many a bag of goals on the MCG

Hopefully many in September 

1 hour ago, Demonland said:

 

Surely the alarm bells are ringing.

Why the discrepancy and whats wrong with Brown?

Without a satisfactory answer this should be a No Deal IMO.

And not the standard cliche about wanting a new start. What's really happening here?

 

1 minute ago, Demon17 said:

Surely the alarm bells are ringing.

Why the discrepancy and whats wrong with Brown?

Without a satisfactory answer this should be a No Deal IMO.

And not the standard cliche about wanting a new start. What's really happening here?

 

Covered ad nauseum in this thread.
He's out of contract.
He had a falling out with North over personal issues relating to death of his unborn child and subsequent treatment where he was asked to leave his grieving wife and other baby to play.
He was made to play with knee soreness, which caused further injury.
This is about Brown walking out on North, not the other way around. They've essentially thrown their arms up and said yep no contract, sour relationship, cya later!

He already passed Melbourne FC medical, so the one injury he's had in his entire career has been ticked off as not an ongoing issue.

If we get him for a 2nd rounder, it'll be one of the best trading coupes this century. We should be going as hard as possible to get him.

3 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Surely the alarm bells are ringing.

Why the discrepancy and whats wrong with Brown?

Without a satisfactory answer this should be a No Deal IMO.

And not the standard cliche about wanting a new start. What's really happening here?

 

I reckon you're overthinking it. Just because it sounds like an amazing deal doesn't mean its too good to be true. We've done our due diligence with a medical and are going in with eyes wide open. And if he doesn't work out, we won't have paid the earth for him in either trade currency or salary. Can't see the downside to be honest.

1 minute ago, Nascent said:

I reckon you're overthinking it. Just because it sounds like an amazing deal doesn't mean its too good to be true. We've done our due diligence with a medical and are going in with eyes wide open. And if he doesn't work out, we won't have paid the earth for him in either trade currency or salary. Can't see the downside to be honest.

Fair point Nascent. I don't believe any 'inside info', just looking at the equation. 

 

 

I would've thought trading Ben Brown for pick 26 is more than commensurate for a player that's kicked 10 goal in a game of footy, and one of the leading goal kickers of the last few years.

Not sure we have to be greedy and offer up 33 and nothing else. 

 

Just now, Lord Travis said:

Covered ad nauseum in this thread.
He's out of contract.
He had a falling out with North over personal issues relating to death of his unborn child and subsequent treatment where he was asked to leave his grieving wife and other baby to play.
He was made to play with knee soreness, which caused further injury.
This is about Brown walking out on North, not the other way around. They've essentially thrown their arms up and said yep no contract, sour relationship, cya later!

He already passed Melbourne FC medical, so the one injury he's had in his entire career has been ticked off as not an ongoing issue.

If we get him for a 2nd rounder, it'll be one of the best trading coupes this century. We should be going as hard as possible to get him.

Pretty much captures it.  I also think a bit has to do with the natural bias many of us have with how a player looks when playing the gamevs the effectiveness of the player. It's the sort of thing that Billy Beane tried to tap into with the Moneyball thing and the introduction of analytics.

We go nuts for players that play the game in an exciting and aesthetically pleasing way, whilst often ignoring the effective, but less appealing players. The numbers tell us Cameron & Brown should be equally valuable, and yet there's a big gap in valuation.

There are a number of things that of course influence the numbers (team systems, availability of other scoring options, etc.), but the 'eye test' still influences assessment of players more than it perhaps should. 

3 hours ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

I suspect the other 2 picks will be bundled up and offered to the dogs for their first rounder as well. 

so potentially 26 and 43 

I agree that 26 and 43 for Brown and something later coming back our way.

.Lets hope the trade gets done tomorow. We usually do not spend to much time pushing peanuts around the trade table.

I did not realise Brown's stats compared so well against Cameron. Thanks Demonland for posting them.

The Cats are copying the Tigers recruitment of Lynch hoping  Cameron will be the difference. Time will tell.