9 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

We've been awful quiet on getting shafted.

Obvious answer is the AFL has our nuts in a vice with cash.

Hopeful answer is part of the Suns rescue package was a quid pro quo with us. Could pick 3 for Ben King be the sweetener? (I doubt it but a man can dream).

That is the huge problem,that is the AFL have every clubs nuts in a vice.

They have way to much say in what clubs should and shouldn't do.

5 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

You are bang on @DeeSpencer, it's what is not said that matters at times. Some interpret our silence as getting shafted/bent over rah rah rah, - all clubs and all personel are part of an industry that is happy to look after all parties, even if appearances from the outside it does not look like it. 

The AFL still want Melbourne (read ALL teams) to be competitive due to TV rights...

It could be King, it may not be, and I guarantee that there is an agreement for something ie:, player, political, financial assistance, other , hence the carry on as usual stance.

Hope your right?

On The Road to the Draft Podcast from today, they were asked about who they would take if they got pick 3, and they answered: “they’re (the Dees) really keen to trade it, so it will be really interesting to see if they get any takers to be able to split that pick into 2 selections”

32 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

You are bang on @DeeSpencer, it's what is not said that matters at times. Some interpret our silence as getting shafted/bent over rah rah rah, - all clubs and all personel are part of an industry that is happy to look after all parties, even if appearances from the outside it does not look like it. 

The AFL still want Melbourne (read ALL teams) to be competitive due to TV rights...

It could be King, it may not be, and I guarantee that there is an agreement for something ie:, player, political, financial assistance, other , hence the carry on as usual stance.

I'd be guessing that's the exact reason why we fronted the commission right after the Suns. I'm sure the conversation went something along the lines of - "we're giving the Suns pick 1 (plus bucket loads more) but we're giving you X". What X is we might not know for a long time or it might remain hidden in the background, but we'll be getting something as well. 

21 minutes ago, Dees247 said:

On The Road to the Draft Podcast from today, they were asked about who they would take if they got pick 3, and they answered: “they’re (the Dees) really keen to trade it, so it will be really interesting to see if they get any takers to be able to split that pick into 2 selections”

GC and GWS are our only real options if we're only looking to package the pick into multiple picks and players.  

The other options we have available is trading down slightly (ie. from Pick 3 to 7-8) with a player attached to that.  For example, if Sydney are really keen on Joe Daniher, do they look to trade up to 3 and give them that with something else?  Do we look to move down two places while also acquiring a player as well?

There are plenty of options for us, it will just be about taking the right one.

17 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

GC and GWS are our only real options if we're only looking to package the pick into multiple picks and players.  

The other options we have available is trading down slightly (ie. from Pick 3 to 7-8) with a player attached to that.  For example, if Sydney are really keen on Joe Daniher, do they look to trade up to 3 and give them that with something else?  Do we look to move down two places while also acquiring a player as well?

There are plenty of options for us, it will just be about taking the right one.

It could involve future picks too

1 minute ago, Dees247 said:

It could involve future picks too

True.  

Either way, we can put Pick 3 on the table to all clubs and see what they can come up with if they're interested.  We have all the power here - we can trade it for a great package, or select a highly rated kid.

5 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

Splitting the pick with GWS would be a [censored] trade.

Suns want Billy Stretch? Pick 3 + Stretch for Pick 2. Gets Billy where he wants to go, They get mature talent and for only a one pick downgrade. Make it happen Dees. Go [censored] yourselves AFL.

More chance of me playing for the Dees next year.

5 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

My personal opinion,

Out: pick 3, Future 2nd round pick.

In: Pick 11, Pick 18 and Xavier O' Halloran/Jye Caldwell from GWS giants. 

Put simply they want Green and another unnamed player.

If we keep 3 and nominate Green, they get him and lose the other player.

We are in the box seat here. Time to get tough and play hardball.

If they are prepared to consider one of O'Halloran/Caldwell, then we don't need to give them our future 2nd rounder and IMO we could also get the Tomlinson compo pick in the deal.

It sounds a lot and could be, but not when you look at what they potentially are getting, 2 stars. 

In other words they get their 2 boys, potential stars and we get 12, 18, one player and say 28. That is  very fair.

Edited September 30, 20195 yr by Redleg

Soon to be delisted Billy Stretch and pick 3 for pick 2? Come on @Lord Travis, you’re better than that! 

9 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Put simply they want Green and another unnamed player.

If we keep 3 and nominate Green, they get him and lose the other player.

We are in the box seat here. Time to get tough and play hardball.

If they are prepared to consider one of O'Halloran/Caldwell, then we don't need to give them our future 2nd rounder and IMO we could also get the Tomlinson compo pick in the deal.

It sounds a lot and could be, but not when you look at what they potentially are getting, 2 stars. 

In other words they get their 2 boys, potential stars and we get 12, 18, one player and say 28. That is  very fair.

Just remembered about Tomlinson compo, we could be paying him overs to create an extra draft pick for GWS to then give back to us in the pick 3 deal. That would be clever. Salary for a draft pick.

If we can bump Tomlinson's compo from after their 2nd round pick to after the first round then we're doing them a huge favour.

As you've suggested I'd do pick 3 and a future 2nd (20-30) for Caldwell (rough value pick 10), pick 12 and pick 18.

If we do them a favour on Tomlinson and they suddenly get pick 20 in compensation instead of pick 38 then they might give us an even better deal. Then I think we should look to move pick 12 in to the top 10 (depending on how we rate the kids).

I'm a fan of trading down but you have to get an A grader with the trade. Tyson was never an A grader. Caldwell might be. No a grader, no deal.

1 hour ago, Red and Blue realist said:

I'd be guessing that's the exact reason why we fronted the commission right after the Suns. I'm sure the conversation went something along the lines of - "we're giving the Suns pick 1 (plus bucket loads more) but we're giving you X". What X is we might not know for a long time or it might remain hidden in the background, but we'll be getting something as well. 

More like,    'we are giving the suns your pick 2, what the f,,,k are you gunna do about it???'.

Pick splitting, an exercise in seeing who the brainless, idiots are at the Club. 

30 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Just remembered about Tomlinson compo, we could be paying him overs to create an extra draft pick for GWS to then give back to us in the pick 3 deal. That would be clever. Salary for a draft pick.

If we can bump Tomlinson's compo from after their 2nd round pick to after the first round then we're doing them a huge favour.

As you've suggested I'd do pick 3 and a future 2nd (20-30) for Caldwell (rough value pick 10), pick 12 and pick 18.

If we do them a favour on Tomlinson and they suddenly get pick 20 in compensation instead of pick 38 then they might give us an even better deal. Then I think we should look to move pick 12 in to the top 10 (depending on how we rate the kids).

I'm a fan of trading down but you have to get an A grader with the trade. Tyson was never an A grader. Caldwell might be. No a grader, no deal.

Those picks will fall out to at least 13 and 19 with Green sure to be drafted earlier. That trade really relies on Caldwell becoming a good player. If he is as good as we want him to be, I doubt GWS would be willing to include him as they are essentially trading him and some to get an Ash, Serong, Kemp, Young etc.

9 minutes ago, Watts the matter said:

Those picks will fall out to at least 13 and 19 with Green sure to be drafted earlier. That trade really relies on Caldwell becoming a good player. If he is as good as we want him to be, I doubt GWS would be willing to include him as they are essentially trading him and some to get an Ash, Serong, Kemp, Young etc.

Valid point, my only counter to that is Caldwell as an inside mid will be behind Coniglio, Hopper, Taranto, De Boer, most likely Ward and whatever combinations of Kelly, Whitfield, Greene and Williams rotate in. Plus they'll be adding Green. 

If he sits in the NEAFL all year he's not helping them win games and is losing trade value. Meanwhile they can get a forward or back flanker to replace him. If I was them I might like Young just as much as Caldwell and Young has a chance to replace Heath Shaw in their best side within 2 years. 

Of course the problem for us is Caldwell might be stuck behind Viney, Gus, Oliver etc for a midfield spot immediately as well but if he's as good as pick 3 and we get some extra picks thrown in then it's worth it.

10 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Valid point, my only counter to that is Caldwell as an inside mid will be behind Coniglio, Hopper, Taranto, De Boer, most likely Ward and whatever combinations of Kelly, Whitfield, Greene and Williams rotate in. Plus they'll be adding Green. 

If he sits in the NEAFL all year he's not helping them win games and is losing trade value. Meanwhile they can get a forward or back flanker to replace him. If I was them I might like Young just as much as Caldwell and Young has a chance to replace Heath Shaw in their best side within 2 years. 

Of course the problem for us is Caldwell might be stuck behind Viney, Gus, Oliver etc for a midfield spot immediately as well but if he's as good as pick 3 and we get some extra picks thrown in then it's worth it.

They'll use pick 3 on Tom Green, not Hayden Young.

3 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

They'll use pick 3 on Tom Green, not Hayden Young.

No, the idea behind getting the pick would be so they wouldn't have to use it on Green. They would use a bunch of 2nd and 3rd rounders for the Green bid.

2 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

GC and GWS are our only real options if we're only looking to package the pick into multiple picks and players.  

The other options we have available is trading down slightly (ie. from Pick 3 to 7-8) with a player attached to that.  For example, if Sydney are really keen on Joe Daniher, do they look to trade up to 3 and give them that with something else?  Do we look to move down two places while also acquiring a player as well?

There are plenty of options for us, it will just be about taking the right one.

Don't rule out the Eagles as part of the Kelly trade. Freo are going to make a pitch to the Cats with the intention of getting Kelly or forcing the Eagles to pay big for him

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

Valid point, my only counter to that is Caldwell as an inside mid will be behind Coniglio, Hopper, Taranto, De Boer, most likely Ward and whatever combinations of Kelly, Whitfield, Greene and Williams rotate in. Plus they'll be adding Green. 

If he sits in the NEAFL all year he's not helping them win games and is losing trade value. Meanwhile they can get a forward or back flanker to replace him. If I was them I might like Young just as much as Caldwell and Young has a chance to replace Heath Shaw in their best side within 2 years. 

Of course the problem for us is Caldwell might be stuck behind Viney, Gus, Oliver etc for a midfield spot immediately as well but if he's as good as pick 3 and we get some extra picks thrown in then it's worth it.

Caldwell is not a pure inside mid. He’s actually more outside at this stage, but he’s capable both inside and outside. He’s really well rounded and if he was included with the split picks then I’d do it in a heartbeat. I rate him as better than this whole draft bar the top two. He’s got a good burst of pace, and a beautiful kick both long and short. He’s exactly what we need and IMO will be a star. The only reason he didn’t play more this year is he was injured/building his body up and basically didn’t play consistent matches until second half of the season. 

Get him Dees!

5 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Just remembered about Tomlinson compo, we could be paying him overs to create an extra draft pick for GWS to then give back to us in the pick 3 deal. That would be clever. Salary for a draft pick.

If we can bump Tomlinson's compo from after their 2nd round pick to after the first round then we're doing them a huge favour.

As you've suggested I'd do pick 3 and a future 2nd (20-30) for Caldwell (rough value pick 10), pick 12 and pick 18.

If we do them a favour on Tomlinson and they suddenly get pick 20 in compensation instead of pick 38 then they might give us an even better deal. Then I think we should look to move pick 12 in to the top 10 (depending on how we rate the kids).

I'm a fan of trading down but you have to get an A grader with the trade. Tyson was never an A grader. Caldwell might be. No a grader, no deal.

I actually posted that we could get Tomlinson compo pick and keep our future pick, all for pick 3 and taking Tomlinson off their hands as a FA.

From GWS perspective:

Trade 12, 18 & Caldwell for Pick 3 and Green.

Or keep them and get just Green, and go into big points deficiancy.

So effectively they are giving up Caldwell for whoever they want at pick 3.

Would they do that? I thought they really rated Caldwell?

I think GC is the only team worth splitting the pick with given they will have 9 and 15 once the Martin deal goes through... 

I guess it just depends on what we do with those picks if we split. If we are just taking them to the draft id prefer to just keep 3. If we have a few more players coming accross where we need first rounders as trade value then it makes sense.

5 hours ago, GCDee said:

I think GC is the only team worth splitting the pick with given they will have 9 and 15 once the Martin deal goes through... 

I guess it just depends on what we do with those picks if we split. If we are just taking them to the draft id prefer to just keep 3. If we have a few more players coming accross where we need first rounders as trade value then it makes sense.

we've in a better position over the Giants because they want to prevent bids on Green. we could probably get a better outcome overall from them, however i personally am leaning towards the idea of hanging onto pick 3 and drafting Lachie Ash.

I would seriously consider offering Freo Picks 3, 22 and Frost Pick, for Pick 6, 7, and Langdon. I generally think we need two top 10 picks, and Freo may be willing to get Pick 3. Only a hypothetical, but I think there will be several clubs trying to get Pick 3 from us.

Edit: I recon we could be inclined to trade next years First Pick as well. I believe we can quickly rise up the ladder again next year if everything goes right.

Edited October 3, 20195 yr by AshleyH30

Essendon could end up with 5 and 9, for Daniher (9 in from Papley to Carlton).  That would be the perfect pair to split the pick on.