Farewell Jesse Hogan

[Dr.D 1,771]

bailey smith is exactly the type of player jason taylor loves. yes, we have a lot of his type but you gotta take best available and would be stoked to get him

[faultydet 7,593]

5 hours ago, adonski said:

Massive no from me. Need a ready made kid if we go to the draft, not a project player. 

How anyone could be advocating for an 86kg 200cm plus stick insect defies belief.

We have just entered our first Premiership window for almost 20yrs. If we add just a few more adult bodies with the required skill into the team, we may just be able to end our 5 decade plus flag famine.

Load up, win as many flags as we can, then we can all sit back and watch the rebuild again, finally knowing what its like to drink from that cup.

[old55 21,287]

It is possible that Jason Taylor has identified a premium early draft prospect and we want to trade in to get him like we did with Clarrie and Weed.  

There's a lot of different scenarios to play out.  Fascinating times.

The report that we asked permission to trade our 2019 1st just adds to the intrigue.  I've only seen a couple of posters say this and haven't seen an official confirmation though?  I guess it just provides more flexibility and may not be directed at a specific target.

Sounds like future picks will be eligible in draft night live pick trading too

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2018-08-08/twoday-draft-to-add-live-pick-trading

Edited October 2, 2018 by Fifty-5

[Constant Mongrel 571]

3 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

The report that we asked permission to trade our 2019 1st just adds to the intrigue.  I've only seen a couple of posters say this and haven't seen an official confirmation though?  I guess it just provides more flexibility and may not be directed at a specific target.

that will just never ever happen.. worth a try though. why would they let us and no other club? not really fair just cos we might wanna use it to get kelly or something. i'd be happy to get may and a really good kid that's ready to go, just not sure that there will be one left at 5/6 that won't be a flight risk/defender/lanky lad.

[old55 21,287]

3 minutes ago, Rocky said:

that will just never ever happen.. worth a try though. why would they let us and no other club? not really fair just cos we might wanna use it to get kelly or something. i'd be happy to get may and a really good kid that's ready to go, just not sure that there will be one left at 5/6 that won't be a flight risk/defender/lanky lad.

I think the AFL gave Geelong permission last year.  They just want to protect against basket cases and desperate regimes selling their future down the river.  But if the club looks in good shape I think they'll allow it.

Here's a possible link I found but it's behind the paywall

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/geelong-can-again-trade-its-firstround-draft-pick-in-2018/news-story/82989f88db7d2425be27dae06077fab7

[Constant Mongrel 571]

wow, i'd never heard of this?! crazy.. keen!

Edited October 2, 2018 by Rocky

[Skuit 9,169]

My reaction to Hogan leaving, like many on here: damn . . . ooh wait, what can we get in return!? If it were Oliver I'd probably quit football and/or life altogether. Such is the difference.

Yet, we've apparently asked the AFL for special dispensation to trade out our 2019 first-rounder. Many have speculated that we may have something extra in the works, despite no other obvious signs or leaks from a fairly straightforward club - so perhaps it's just bargaining assurance? 

I haven't closely followed the make-it-up-as-you-go precedents (free kick Hawthorn), but I imagine we'll be given the green by the AFL on next year's first. With respect to our list profile, and recent history of trades, we're clearly not operating in the fashion of which the rule was obviously designed to protect against - e.g. a Ross Lyon-era Saints dive for the flag but with supercharged status. 

Us having next year's first-round potential in the pocket prevents the MFC from getting bent over by Freo. As is now our rhetoric. Two early firsts or we walk, and back ourselves in between now and next year to snag a signature or even a flag. As such, if Hogan were to stay, and we got May and KK for next year's first and trade change, we would then have to be pretty damned chuffed. 

Add a surprise Gaff to that mix and a Pruess exchange and it would just about equate to our best trade haul and list quality ever. If Hogan does go however, then we should have an extra top-ten chip. I believe we're sitting pretty on this one, with special thanks to the foresight of Mahoney and co. 

 

 

 

Edited October 2, 2018 by Skuit

[Skuit 9,169]

30 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

The report that we asked permission to trade our 2019 1st just adds to the intrigue.  I've only seen a couple of posters say this and haven't seen an official confirmation though?  I guess it just provides more flexibility and may not be directed at a specific target.

 

25 minutes ago, Rocky said:

that will just never ever happen.. worth a try though. why would they let us and no other club? not really fair just cos we might wanna use it to get kelly or something. i'd be happy to get may and a really good kid that's ready to go, just not sure that there will be one left at 5/6 that won't be a flight risk/defender/lanky lad.

 

18 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

I think the AFL gave Geelong permission last year.  They just want to protect against basket cases and desperate regimes selling their future down the river.  But if the club looks in good shape I think they'll allow it.

Here's a possible link I found but it's behind the paywall

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/geelong-can-again-trade-its-firstround-draft-pick-in-2018/news-story/82989f88db7d2425be27dae06077fab7

So a few of us posted at the exact same time on the same subject. It has always seemed slippery to me, including by original definition, but does anyone know the exact rules of future first-round trading? And then the dispensations that have been given since? 

Could have sworn Hawthorn and Geelong have both been granted liberties in recent times. But also vaguely recall something about the rules not being super-fixed in the early years but set to become more rigid over time? Also, any official source for where we've actually put in a request? 

[Constant Mongrel 571]

personally i am ethically pretty against this loophole.. it's there for a reason, but if its been used before and we can navigate it, why not?

Edited October 2, 2018 by Rocky

[faultydet 7,593]

6 minutes ago, Rocky said:

personally i am ethically pretty against this loophole.. it's there for a reason, but if its been used before and we can navigate it, why not?

I am not ethically challenged by a single legal thing that brings us a flag.

Zero.

[Skuit 9,169]

10 minutes ago, Rocky said:

personally i am ethically pretty against this loophole.. it's there for a reason, but if its been used before and we can navigate it, why not?

I think it's perfectly legit when you're suddenly a top-four team. 

[Wells 11 4,698]

I’m sure it’s been raised somewhere here and burnt down as a thought. But.... thinking back to Geelong and Dangerfield they traded a first rounder ( pick 9 ?) to Adelaide for him when he was a Rfa as gaff is now.  Adelaide were threatening to match any offer but, aside from that,  it also helped danger feel he was taking care of his old club. I’m wondering ( given we get 2 first rounders fr Hogan) if we made an offer of one of these picks  to WC  for  Gaff. Especially given how his season ended with all the support he got, it might Help him choose us over others. In Dangerfields case it allowed the cats to pay unders in salary also and opens that possibly fr us too. 

[jumbo returns 6,487]

6 minutes ago, Wells 11 said:

I’m sure it’s been raised somewhere here and burnt down as a thought. But.... thinking back to Geelong and Dangerfield they traded a first rounder ( pick 9 ?) to Adelaide for him when he was a Rfa as gaff is now.  Adelaide were threatening to match any offer but, aside from that,  it also helped danger feel he was taking care of his old club. I’m wondering ( given we get 2 first rounders fr Hogan) if we made an offer of one of these picks  to WC  for  Gaff. Especially given how his season ended with all the support he got, it might Help him choose us over others. In Dangerfields case it allowed the cats to pay unders in salary also and opens that possibly fr us too. 

Gaff is North bound

Looking elsewhere

[John Demonic 4,794]

1 hour ago, Skuit said:

My reaction to Hogan leaving, like many on here: damn . . . ooh wait, what can we get in return!? If it were Oliver I'd probably quit football and/or life altogether. Such is the difference.

Yet, we've apparently asked the AFL for special dispensation to trade out our 2019 first-rounder. Many have speculated that we may have something extra in the works, despite no other obvious signs or leaks from a fairly straightforward club - so perhaps it's just bargaining assurance? 

I haven't closely followed the make-it-up-as-you-go precedents (free kick Hawthorn), but I imagine we'll be given the green by the AFL on next year's first. With respect to our list profile, and recent history of trades, we're clearly not operating in the fashion of which the rule was obviously designed to protect against - e.g. a Ross Lyon-era Saints dive for the flag but with supercharged status. 

Us having next year's first-round potential in the pocket prevents the MFC from getting bent over by Freo. As is now our rhetoric. Two early firsts or we walk, and back ourselves in between now and next year to snag a signature or even a flag. As such, if Hogan were to stay, and we got May and KK for next year's first and trade change, we would then have to be pretty damned chuffed. 

Add a surprise Gaff to that mix and a Pruess exchange and it would just about equate to our best trade haul and list quality ever. If Hogan does go however, then we should have an extra top-ten chip. I believe we're sitting pretty on this one, with special thanks to the foresight of Mahoney and co. 

 

 

 

Mahoney said its may or hogan cap space wise. How on earth can we have Hogan, May & Gaff in the same team?

[jumbo returns 6,487]

1 hour ago, Skuit said:

My reaction to Hogan leaving, like many on here: damn . . . ooh wait, what can we get in return!? If it were Oliver I'd probably quit football and/or life altogether. Such is the difference.

Yet, we've apparently asked the AFL for special dispensation to trade out our 2019 first-rounder. Many have speculated that we may have something extra in the works, despite no other obvious signs or leaks from a fairly straightforward club - so perhaps it's just bargaining assurance? 

I haven't closely followed the make-it-up-as-you-go precedents (free kick Hawthorn), but I imagine we'll be given the green by the AFL on next year's first. With respect to our list profile, and recent history of trades, we're clearly not operating in the fashion of which the rule was obviously designed to protect against - e.g. a Ross Lyon-era Saints dive for the flag but with supercharged status. 

Us having next year's first-round potential in the pocket prevents the MFC from getting bent over by Freo. As is now our rhetoric. Two early firsts or we walk, and back ourselves in between now and next year to snag a signature or even a flag. As such, if Hogan were to stay, and we got May and KK for next year's first and trade change, we would then have to be pretty damned chuffed. 

Add a surprise Gaff to that mix and a Pruess exchange and it would just about equate to our best trade haul and list quality ever. If Hogan does go however, then we should have an extra top-ten chip. I believe we're sitting pretty on this one, with special thanks to the foresight of Mahoney and co. 

 

 

 

Will never happen.....Gaff will go to Norf

PS I'm not overly excited by May or KK

[Lucifers Hero 37,004]

1 hour ago, Skuit said:

So a few of us posted at the exact same time on the same subject. It has always seemed slippery to me, including by original definition, but does anyone know the exact rules of future first-round trading? And then the dispensations that have been given since? 

Could have sworn Hawthorn and Geelong have both been granted liberties in recent times. But also vaguely recall something about the rules not being super-fixed in the early years but set to become more rigid over time? Also, any official source for where we've actually put in a request? 

Rule:  Clubs must make at least two first-round selections in each four-year period. If they don't, they will face restrictions from trading any further first-round draft picks.

Geelong may need to play catch up  http://www.geelongcats.com.au/news/2018-07-19/cats-first-round-requirements

With no first round picks in 2016, 2017, 2018 (might change) used, technically we need to trade in a first round pick this year or an extra one next year otherwise we won't have the required two picks (unless we get exemption) but like Geelong it eventually catches up with you. 

 

I can't find any reference to an mfc request to trade our 2019 pick.  I would suggest if we had it would be public knowledge by now as the trade starts in a few days.

 

As an aside, something that is untested with the AFL is the number of 1st round picks taken over a period ie would we get an allowance for traded in an extra pick in 2015? 

 

Edit:  Just re-read the AFL article in the above link and found this line:  "... the rest of the competition has already met its quota and is free to place 2018 and 2019 first-round picks on the table."  So we don't need permission.

Edited October 2, 2018 by Lucifer's Hero

[Dockett 32 1,213]

11 hours ago, MurDoc516 said:

4 and 5 would be a statement. Freo won't do it. Port want their pick 4/5 and Freo want as many picks in top 10 as possible because Lobb, Kelly, Hogan and Hill are all available.

Mahoney is usually clear about his position. Haven’t heard him say things he didn’t mean and don’t expect it to be any different should Jesse wish to leave.

 

[Undeeterred 2,844]

8 hours ago, Dr.D said:

the infamous 4276. im just wondering of thats the plan and if i should start looking at the under 18 draftees

Depends. Are you Jason Taylor?

[Dr. Gonzo 22,412]

9 hours ago, Dee Zephyr said:

This was mentioned last night by Tom Morris ‘On The Couch’. I’m not sure what his track record is like but he believes the Neale trade will start an 8 way mega trade. I can’t remember the specifics, all I remember is him stating we will get their first pick and a player back which he didn’t name. 

It would be May

[Ethan Tremblay 28,358]

2 hours ago, Wells 11 said:

I’m sure it’s been raised somewhere here and burnt down as a thought. But.... thinking back to Geelong and Dangerfield they traded a first rounder ( pick 9 ?) to Adelaide for him when he was a Rfa as gaff is now.  Adelaide were threatening to match any offer but, aside from that,  it also helped danger feel he was taking care of his old club. I’m wondering ( given we get 2 first rounders fr Hogan) if we made an offer of one of these picks  to WC  for  Gaff. Especially given how his season ended with all the support he got, it might Help him choose us over others. In Dangerfields case it allowed the cats to pay unders in salary also and opens that possibly fr us too. 

Of course Gaff can be traded for however he doesn’t want to come to us so it’s a non-issue unfortunately. 

Edited October 2, 2018 by Ethan Tremblay

[jumbo returns 6,487]

14 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Of course Gaff can be traded for however he doesn’t want to come to us do it’s s non-issue unfortunately. 

Correct

Just confirmed he's off to Norf

[Demons11 6,404]

8 hours ago, Rocky said:

not the one we had wolfy.. this one: 

 

POS: Tall forward
Ht 202cm, Wt 86kg, DOB 7/7/00
From Sandringham Dragons/Vic Metro
August ranking: 4

King continues his recovery from an early-season knee reconstruction which wiped out most of his draft campaign. The key forward was seen as a possible No.1 contender before the injury struck, and is still likely to be one of the first handful of players selected on draft night. King has been doing his rehabilitation program twice a week using St Kilda's facilities. He is an athletic tall who is as good in the air as he is when the ball hits the ground.

Get an onballer 

[ManDee 7,077]

1 hour ago, johndemonic said:

Mahoney said its may or hogan cap space wise. How on earth can we have Hogan, May & Gaff in the same team?

No he didn't. He said we couldn't afford May without Hogan leaving. I took that to mean we had nothing to trade (picks). We need early picks to afford to be able to trade for quality players.

[Demonland 64,790]

Gary stating the obvious.

 

[dazzledavey36 48,715]

 

NAB AFL Trade Radio

 

@traderadio

@sam_mcclure

: If I'm@freodockers
, I'm saying Hogan wants to come home and I'm giving pick 5 and nothing else. If Melbourne don't want that, I'm going to the draft.

ok Sam......?‍♂️?‍♂️