Nothing that the club has done so far in this trade period fills me with any confidence that their decisions will bear fruit. 

1 minute ago, AaronDaveyChipsAndGravey said:

My only problem is why did we recruit Tomlinson then? He’d have to move either forward or back and probably completely changes why he was recruited in the first place. Also Freo were demanding 2 1st rounders for Hill. How is that going to get both Hill and Langdon done? We’d be selling the farm to get both done and paying out the a for Hill. We need to be saving this money for a decent forward

We wouldn’t have known Hill might have been available when we signed Tomlinson, but he is versatile, so I think that would be ok. On trade radio they are saying we would need to use 3 only, I’m guessing because it’s such a high pick. I would argue say 700 would be money well spent, and look for a forward later. We haven’t heard mention of a decent forward wanting to come to us at the moment anyway.

Nope, would rather bend over gws stating we will bid on Green at 3 and force them to move up by trading pick 6 and a future first round pick. We could send some later picks to help then retain some points to bid on Tom Green after they select another top talent at 3.

If we bid on Green at 3 and they match they lose out. GWS having pick 3 allows them to get two top 7 players because they can still match a bid for Green after pick 3.

Edited October 11, 20196 yr by Adzman

13 minutes ago, AaronDaveyChipsAndGravey said:

My only problem is why did we recruit Tomlinson then? He’d have to move either forward or back and probably completely changes why he was recruited in the first place.

You rotate more then two players on a wing during a game. It's not like Hill and Langdon will sit on the wings permanently. All three of said players can play in the midfield at times. Tomlinson was recruited as a wing but he's a utility player with his size that can go back forward and pinch hit in the ruck reasonably.

I would honestly pull the trigger on Hill for pick 3 easy.

How many players are there available with his talent that fill a desperate need for us? How many players of his level have we signed or traded for in recent times?

I just think after the first two picks and Green outside of that is a bit of a gamble this year. We've got some young players developing and hopefully if we can hold onto it we will have first round pick to use next year.

It's highly unlikely but if we could steal Hill away from St Kilda I would be ecstatic. He's 26 in the prime of his career and exactly what we need. He literally is a game changer, he can win games for you.

Edited October 11, 20196 yr by Yung Blood

3 minutes ago, Dees247 said:

We wouldn’t have known Hill might have been available when we signed Tomlinson, but he is versatile, so I think that would be ok. On trade radio they are saying we would need to use 3 only, I’m guessing because it’s such a high pick. I would argue say 700 would be money well spent, and look for a forward later. We haven’t heard mention of a decent forward wanting to come to us at the moment anyway.

I get what you’re saying, but I think we have played and prepared for this trade period on the assumption Hill isnt available. I dont think the club should bend over backwards and just grab him because he’s there now. We were happy to go into it with just getting Tomlinson and Langdon and look at using some money and picks on some decent small/tall forwards which is still a massive deficiency at the moment. We cannot rely on Weideman and Tmac who for the better part of last year were badly out of form or injured. 

7 minutes ago, Yung Blood said:

You rotate more then two players on a wing during a game. It's not like Hill and Langdon will sit on the wings permanently. All three of said players can play in the midfield at times. Tomlinson was recruited as a wing but he's a utility player with his size that can go back forward and pinch hit in the ruck reasonably.

Completely agree, I’m not saying that the move doesnt make sense, but sinking nearly $2 mil of salary into our wingers seems like a lot of money to be spending when he still have an enormous hole in our forward structure. Had Hill nominated us in the first place I doubt we would have brought Tomlinson in. Langdon and Tomlinson are definite upgrades on our wing stocks and will be more than competitive. Hill sure would be a bonus, but I dont think it would be prudent to take on such a massive salary when that money could be used on a better forward target.

My take on this whole situation is that the Saints got greedy on all the players they wanted in and severly underestimated what would actually be required to bring them all in. They’ll have to offload a half-decent player thats for sure. Theres definitely a huge possibility that if they don’t get more attractive picks in that Hill will get stuck at Freo. 

Rather split it with gws and get their no6 so green doesnt attract a bid.

Edited October 11, 20196 yr by TheoX

1 minute ago, AaronDaveyChipsAndGravey said:

Completely agree, I’m not saying that the move doesnt make sense, but sinking nearly $2 mil of salary into our wingers seems like a lot of money to be spending when he still have an enormous hole in our forward structure. Had Hill nominated us in the first place I doubt we would have brought Tomlinson in. Langdon and Tomlinson are definite upgrades on our wing stocks and will be more than competitive. Hill sure would be a bonus, but I dont think it would be prudent to take on such a massive salary when that money could be used on a better forward target.

My take on this whole situation is that the Saints got greedy on all the players they wanted in and severly underestimated what would actually be required to bring them all in. They’ll have to offload a half-decent player thats for sure. Theres definitely a huge possibility that if they don’t get more attractive picks in that Hill will get stuck at Freo. 

Yeah its possible but we've been after Tomlinson for a few years I still think we would have looked at Hill regardless. I agree re cost for him I imagine that would have been a deal breaker.

Regardless he will either stay at a stubborn Freo or most likely end up at St Kilda who will probably end up having to pay overs for him. I've said it many times on here but how many times has a player not ended up at their nominated club?

2 minutes ago, Yung Blood said:

Yeah its possible but we've been after Tomlinson for a few years I still think we would have looked at Hill regardless. I agree re cost for him I imagine that would have been a deal breaker.

Regardless he will either stay at a stubborn Freo or most likely end up at St Kilda who will probably end up having to pay overs for him. I've said it many times on here but how many times has a player not ended up at their nominated club?

It certainly is rare in this day and age thats for sure. I could be wrong here, but I reckon the Saints have stuffed it big time. They know they’ll have to pay up big time to try get King out from Gold Coast next year and will certainly be made to pay overs with 2 1st rounders next year, thus not wanting to give a future one up this year for hill. Add in Port demanding a 1st for Howard and you certainly have a conundrum on your hands. 

From Trade Radio with Hawks GM 

Barret: Would you look to get involved in the Brad Hill scenario?

Wright: I think that's drawing a long bow. I think he's made his intentions clear he wants to get to the Saints. I think we wouldn't be able to get near what the Saints are offering

Love St.Kilda putting Freo and Bell on the back foot behind the wicket keeper.

 

Unlike Melbourne who salivated at a Lever trade earlier in that trade period, and also letting Freo take the steering wheel with the Hogan trade.

 

Getting a guy in his late 20's!  We must seriously think we are in the premiership window.  A club, with little excuses that just beat GC in KPIs!

Typical and utter crazy Melbourne to offer pick 3 when St.Kilda played hardball beautifully and walked away from 6 and...

Geelong don't mess around.

 

4 minutes ago, Demonland said:

Geelong don't mess around.

 

As I have posted hill is exactly the player we need. But to be honest I doubt we could afford him.

With ablett, danger, the hawk and Sellwood approaching the end their careers the cats could I suspect. That's a lot of cap space in those four players.

They might need our pick 3 though.

 

On 10/11/2019 at 11:32 AM, AaronDaveyChipsAndGravey said:

My only problem is why did we recruit Tomlinson then? He’d have to move either forward or back and probably completely changes why he was recruited in the first place. Also Freo were demanding 2 1st rounders for Hill. How is that going to get both Hill and Langdon done? We’d be selling the farm to get both done and paying out the a for Hill. We need to be saving this money for a decent forward

What was Tomlinson recruited for?? I thought he played back or ruck never saw him as a winger

I would really like to know

 

 

4 minutes ago, Kent said:

What was Tomlinson recruited for?? I thought he played back or ruck never saw him as a winger

I would really like to know

 

 

You must have missed the memo.

He has been recruited as a winger as he has noted in a number of interviews as has Mahoney.

7 minutes ago, binman said:

You must have missed the memo.

He has been recruited as a winger as he has noted in a number of interviews as has Mahoney.

Thanks Bin. Been away and out of touch. I will look at some highlights Thanks again.

On 10/11/2019 at 11:30 AM, Lucifer's Hero said:

Please merge with Brad Hill thread...

I'll second that

King re-signing definitely gets Hill done to St Kilda, think this one can be put to bed now. On a side note though - Geelong entering the race for Hill this morning reminds me of this: