1 minute ago, FireInTheBelly said:

Any deal with GWS shifting our pick 3 back to 6 needs to come with an agreement from GWS that they won't choose who we want at 6. e.g. If we're dropping back to pick 6 because we think pick 3 is too high for Stephens (just guessing a name), but then GWS use pick 3 on Stephens, we lose out on getting the player we wanted.

We don't hold all the cards here, yes we have the good ones, but certainly not all of them.

If GWS do the trade it will be 100% to take Tom Green.  They won't do it and then select someone else.

I reckon GWS will get 26 from North for Bonner and then trade us 6, 26 and 2020 1st for 3

1 minute ago, Wiseblood said:

If GWS do the trade it will be 100% to take Tom Green.  They won't do it and then select someone else.

Isn't the point of them trading up to 3 so they can pick up another player, then use later picks packaged up for Green. Why would you use a pick on a player when you can get him later for less?

35 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

Issac isn't worth a high pick though.  So unless we are in a split via swap of pick / player deal, and soon, that's not even viable as it stands.  If he was part of a deal that's already been in play and discussions well under way?  Possibly.

Would you consider pick 8 for Smith and 11. especially if the intention is to take Weightman with that pick so you're really getting Smith as a bonus.

Why help GWS?

Just now, jimbo1982 said:

Why help GWS?

Where only helping them to help ourselves, hence why they have to include significant other assets to make the move. We hold the power in this one.

3 minutes ago, jimbo1982 said:

Why help GWS?

Mutually beneficial deals is why our club gets stuff done at trade week and clubs like Essendon just blow hot air out their [censored]

Community Service Announcement for any poor souls tuned into Trade Talk. 

Fox Footy: Why the AFL will make fans wait until AFTER 3pm Wednesday for any trades

 

 

3 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

Community Service Announcement for any poor souls tuned into Trade Talk. 

Fox Footy: Why the AFL will make fans wait until AFTER 3pm Wednesday for any trades

 

 

Pathetic isn't it.

2 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

Yes they can but the discussed scenario includes losing their 2020 1st rounder to us so they'd be down to later picks which would wipe out their 2020 draft. If they have academy players then they'd be in trouble paying for them.

True but they can deal with that next year by trading back in to those rounds as long as the AFL signs it off (which they certainly would)

38 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

If GWS do the trade it will be 100% to take Tom Green.  They won't do it and then select someone else.

Nah it would be so they DON'T have to take Green. They would select someone else with 3 then match a bid for Green later in the draft. Staying at 6 means missing out on the extra player as they would need to use 6 to match a bid for Green at 3, 4 or 5.

So basically they'll get Green either way but this allows them to get someone else on top (eg Serong)

So here are some scenarios with GWS

A. No trades happen

Melbourne selects Green with pick 3.

GWS matches the bid and is forced to use 1787 draft points (pick 3 2234 - 20% discount). This consumes their pick 6 and moves their next pick 40 back to around pick 42.

B. GWS trades 6 and ‘ice cream’ for our pick 3.

            GWS picks up elite talent with pick 3

            Worst case for GWS is that then at pick 4 Adelaide selects Green.

GWS matches the bid and is forced to use 1627 draft points (pick 4 2034 – 20% discount). This consumes their remaining picks in the first 4 rounds this year (40, 59, 60) and another 1024 points off their first pick in the 2020 draft. They may pick up more points from a Bonar trade, but not enough to eliminate a deficit going into 2020.

C. GWS trades 6 and ‘ice cream’ for our pick 3.

            GWS picks Green with pick 3, and their next pick is 40.

Scenario A gives GWS their Academy star, while scenario B gives them a top end talent pick as well as their Academy star, but leaves them short next year. I don’t know what Academy talent they have coming through for next year, but it would be a big call to go into deficit.

Scenario C gets them Green and the rest of their draft is unchanged. A and C are very similar for 2019, so I can’t see why they’d do a trade with us to simply pick up what they could without a trade including ‘ice cream’. It’s even worse for them if they trade us their 2020 first rounder as the ice cream. That would mean their 2020 deficit comes off their 2nd rounder. That would be a draft disaster I’d say.

Whichever way you look at it, they won't be trading with us for 3, and then choosing Green with pick 3. We 100% need to know who they're after at 3 if we were to do a trade.

So Gws want another high draft player at 3 and then use their next pic 40 to take green who is by all accounts a gun  

Why the hell would we bend over to give them pic 3. Make them pay overs and see how much they want it. If not we have pic 3 and 8. GWS Next yrs first rounder is pretty worthless give the comprised draft  

Why would we assist GWS in getting an even better side than they are. 

1 hour ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

Would you consider pick 8 for Smith and 11. especially if the intention is to take Weightman with that pick so you're really getting Smith as a bonus.

Provided the Hawks sent back pick 42 for a Jenkins peanuts deal.... certainly PO!

As long as we don't play the GWS cast off game again I'll be content.

We've already done that a few times and it hasn't been a happy ending.

51 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Nah it would be so they DON'T have to take Green. They would select someone else with 3 then match a bid for Green later in the draft. Staying at 6 means missing out on the extra player as they would need to use 6 to match a bid for Green at 3, 4 or 5.

So basically they'll get Green either way but this allows them to get someone else on top (eg Serong)

Dr G is on the money. Good diagnosis 

9 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

As long as we don't play the GWS cast off game again I'll be content.

We've already done that a few times and it hasn't been a happy ending.

No cast offs, and no future first pick. It needs to be a genuinely good player or no deal. Their upside is huge, ours would need to be similar and I don't think a late first rounder in a dodgy draft would do it.

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Nah it would be so they DON'T have to take Green. They would select someone else with 3 then match a bid for Green later in the draft. Staying at 6 means missing out on the extra player as they would need to use 6 to match a bid for Green at 3, 4 or 5.

So basically they'll get Green either way but this allows them to get someone else on top (eg Serong)

Right, cheer for that Doc.  I was off the mark on that one.

Apologies also to @FireInTheBelly.

1 hour ago, DemonOX said:

So Gws want another high draft player at 3 and then use their next pic 40 to take green who is by all accounts a gun  

Why the hell would we bend over to give them pic 3. Make them pay overs and see how much they want it. If not we have pic 3 and 8. GWS Next yrs first rounder is pretty worthless give the comprised draft  

Why would we assist GWS in getting an even better side than they are. 

Being the second best team in the comp behind GWS is a pretty good situation. Richmond were that and just won the flag by 89 points. 

In 2016 Brisbane traded pick 2 and late picks for 3, 16. 

Taranto for McCluggage and Berry. As good as Taranto is the Lions got 2 core pieces of their rebuild who both stuck around and a couple of years later really should’ve beaten GWS in a semi final. 

Speaking of huge deals, what happened to Billy Stretch to GC?

22 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Speaking of huge deals, what happened to Billy Stretch to GC?

Probably go as delisted free agent.

Starting to look like we're done? For this trade period anyway.

What time does trade period officially finish today? 

1 minute ago, PaulRB said:

What time does trade period officially finish today? 

7.30