I went with B- for the trade period. I thought we should have been more aggressive in shopping pick #3 with GWS for their pick #6 and something else. Whispers were their #6 pick and next year's first rounder. I don't mind that to slide back a few spots.

  On 16/10/2019 at 11:09, Beetle said:

Sorry guys, all the nuffies on the Melbourne Facebook pages are up in arms, so I’m afraid this trade period is officially a failure.

May as well close the thread please Admins.

 

Ive given us a B, however our trade period shouldn’t be officially graded until a minute before our first selection on draft night. 

If we manage to walk into the draft with picks 6, 8, a second rounder and get a 2020 first round pick back then it’s an A grade from me.

Don't tell me Vera Wellington is having a whinge.

 

I think it's a bit of a Meh to be honest.  Langdon for a second round pick is fine.  Frost was an ok deal.  I think we lost out a but on the gifting of extra low-round picks in the deals we made.  I'm certainly not sold on giving up next year's first pick, although the draft looks like it will suck so maybe it's worth it.  My big issue is that we went and got our two easy targets and then sat on our hands for the rest of the period.  Maybe the press simply didn't hear about any attempts, but surely we should have been sniffing around trying to shake get in on Martin or Papley or trying to bring in a tall forward? 

https://m.afl.com.au/news/2019-10-16/trade-period-ranked-from-worst-to-best-whos-in-out-draft-hand

In: Ed Langdon, Adam Tomlinson, pick No.8, 2020 round two pick (Hawthorn), 2020 round four pick (Fremantle) 
Out: Sam Frost, pick No.22, pick No.42, pick No.61, pick No.79, 2020 round one pick, 2020 round two pick, 2020 round four pick 
2019 draft picks: 3, 8

What they couldn't get done: The Demons made clear a fair way out that they were open to 'splitting' their No.3 draft pick and nothing eventuated but there is still plenty of time for that. Chose not to upgrade their small forward stocks in the Trade Period and could look to do so with their extra top-10 pick now.

Verdict: So much depends on whether Melbourne can rebound into a finals or even premiership contender next year after the pick swap with the Roos. However, the Dees addressed their lack of run and happily traded Frost. –Marc McGowan

Rating: 7.5/10
Rank: 5th

Our trading will be ok if we can sort out a small Forward. We still lack Goal Kicking options. Melksham needs assistance 

 

Given our list demographic I like us trading next years first round pick. We already have an optimal blend of youth and experience - getting in guys like Lever and May in the past couple of years. We now add solid bodies in Tomlinson and Langford, the latter who will address a need for us (lack of pace). I also think Tomlinson is a lot classier than people give him credit for. He can seriously play. Versatility is also handy in a recruit, he has it, good pick up. We gain pick 8, which is the perfect pick to have this year for us. I expect we will turn over pick 3 into something even better. Jack Martin is also a possibility for us in the PSD. With just a touch of luck I think we can go from a B to an A-. But a lot will also hinge on who we select in the draft and how they measure up years down the track.

  On 16/10/2019 at 10:24, Undeeterred said:

If McDonald and Melksham get back on the park next year we will be fine up forward. We probably forget how damaging Melksham in particular can be.

I think we did extremely well - got the outside players we needed who push a couple of fringe players out. It also takes Brayshaw, Jones, Salem, Hunt and god knows who else off the wings

We can use 3 or really push GWS - I reckon they will pony up before the draft with something decent

 

I am thinking that Melksham and Hibberd fit will make a huge difference to the team

  On 16/10/2019 at 12:25, Sir Why You Little said:

Our trading will be ok if we can sort out a small Forward. We still lack Goal Kicking options. Melksham needs assistance 

 

How are we going to sort out a small forward with what we have left? I mean, going to the draft is a complete lottery. Any small forward in the draft is probably 70kg and unlikely to be seen in 2020. If any draft observers can enlighten me on who in the top 10 is a ready-made small forward who can impact at AFL level next year, I’d be very keen to hear. Meanwhile premiership small forward Butler goes for peanuts, Taylor goes for peanuts and the KPF in Jenkins goes for a bag of crisps. After losing Garlett and now knowing Spargo is not a small forward, what did we do to fix this area? Are we pinning hopes on Beford ? Jay Lockhart? I would have liked us to bring in one more experienced forward. Either small or tall 

  On 16/10/2019 at 13:02, Leoncelli_36 said:

How are we going to sort out a small forward with what we have left? I mean, going to the draft is a complete lottery. Any small forward in the draft is probably 70kg and unlikely to be seen in 2020. If any draft observers can enlighten me on who in the top 10 is a ready-made small forward who can impact at AFL level next year, I’d be very keen to hear. Meanwhile premiership small forward Butler goes for peanuts, Taylor goes for peanuts and the KPF in Jenkins goes for a bag of crisps. After losing Garlett and now knowing Spargo is not a small forward, what did we do to fix this area? Are we pinning hopes on Beford ? Jay Lockhart? I would have liked us to bring in one more experienced forward. Either small or tall 

Agree. Our defence and attack look very dodgy at this point

B- 

 

Went in with a plan and stuck to it.  Got two top 10.  Apparently nexts years draft is very compromised so they so that as a win for us.

Lost marks for not seeing what else in available (At least in public), but since we are a much more professional organisation nothing really leaks so we don't know what else was discussed on the period. 

 

I didn't like losing Frost one bit. Pace, strength and unpredictability are not bad traits.

I like Langdon (despite the ponytail) and to a lesser extent Tomlinson who should be running into his prime.

The pick swap with Norf was a bit like a rich woman from Brighton wanting to spend more after maxing out her husbands credit card! Buy now, pay later. Let's see what our two first round draft picks bring. Taylor won't be trotting out: "we picked the best available..." this draft if we are serious in trying to address our gaping holes .

Would love there to be a surprise in the PSD, but those don't happen to Melbourne!

Edited October 16, 20195 yr by dee-tox

  On 16/10/2019 at 10:58, Wiseblood said:

Here are the grades the Herald Sun gave every club for their trade period.  Interested to read what people think - we all know how biased they can be:

Adelaide:  B-

Brisbane:  B

Carlton:  B

Collingwood:  B-

Essendon:  B+

Fremantle:  C

Geelong:  A

Gold Coast:  B+

GWS:  B

Hawthorn:  B+

Melbourne:  C+

North:  C

Port:  C+

Richmond:  C

Saints:  A+

Sydney:  C

West Coast:  A

Dogs:  B+

how odd . I had not seen this but I ranked us at C+ as well.

Simply put we overpaid in every trade. If they come off great. We also continually undervalued our second round pick. At 21/22 it was almost a first rounder.

Most of us agree with the risk because let's face it... we're desperate.

Hell we had better nail those draft picks.

I voted 'A'.

I don't like losing Frost's athleticism, but essentially swapping him for Tomlinson makes the team better overall. Indeed, Tomlinson and Langdon on either wing is an enormous upgrade over the absolute disaster we all saw on the wings throughout 2019. Just that alone will hopefully make a huge difference.

Really loved the swap with North Melbourne. Next year's draft looks like a joke with all of the concessions, so preferencing this year whilst the Club has high picks is perfect, even if nothing further happens and we pick at 3+8. After the year from hell, I like that the Club is looking to maximise the 'reward' rather than denying it being there. 

Further improvement would be bringing in Martin and perhaps punting on Murray. 

The forward line remains problematic, but there didn't seem much out there, and I think Bruce or Jenkins would have been underwhelming solutions. I'm also happy to give Stretch and JKH another year. People say we have no depth, but they should be very good depth as long as there aren't 15 injuries at the same time. 

Overall, the FD added two very good wings and two of the best 8 kids in the country for Frost, a 2nd rounder, and a compromised 1st. That's good work imo.

  On 16/10/2019 at 09:16, Jaded said:

We essentially got two starting 22 players for one second round pick. And managed to get another top 10 pick. 
 

8/10 for me. 

Frost is starting 22.

I gave us a B.

I think we're a better team with Frosty, but it will be dependant on May and Lever staying fit.

Tomlinson and Langdon are very good ins, especially Ed. Tomlinson will provide a lot of versatility and gives us at least one mid/winger who can push back hard to help out. Langdon is the run we've been screaming for and if he tidies up his ball use will be a weapon.

We had to overpay to get 8 in the door. Why else would North have dealt with us? Unfortunately that meant giving up a low second rounder but I'd rather have 8 than 26 and 15+ next year. 

Would've liked Jenkins as a back up but if Weid is fit expect them to pick him. Not sure Jenkins wants to play VFL.

Hopefully we can either extract maximum value from GWS for 3 or take it to the draft, make them pay up for Green and who we want anyway. I'm not set on serong but Young/Kemp plus weightman, I'm a happy man.

 

Just to follow up - these are the grades ESPN has given to each team.  Interesting to see how different they are to the Herald Sun:

Adelaide:  E

Brisbane:  B+

Carlton:  E

Collingwood:  B+

Essendon:  C+

Fremantle:  C

Geelong:  B+

Gold Coast:  B+

GWS:  C

Hawks:  A+

Melbourne:  B+

North:  A

Port:  C

Richmond:  C+

Saints:  B+

Swans:  C+

West Coast:  A+

Dogs:  A+

  On 16/10/2019 at 11:48, Adzman said:

I went with B- for the trade period. I thought we should have been more aggressive in shopping pick #3 with GWS for their pick #6 and something else. Whispers were their #6 pick and next year's first rounder. I don't mind that to slide back a few spots.

That can still (and likely will) happen right up until draft night.

We didn't take a calculated risk with Jenkins when we should have IMO but i really like what we have done. 2 first rounders inside the top 10 is perfect for this club that has not had a lot of top end talent lately. Langdon is a great pick up and i think Tomlinson make sour bottom 6 stronger, and that's the key, upgrading your depth because we have the talent.

My concern is we dont have a first rounder next year, which potentially could be embarrassing, but we back ourselves in to rebound.

B.

Edited October 16, 20195 yr by Demon3

  On 16/10/2019 at 21:04, Wiseblood said:

Just to follow up - these are the grades ESPN has given to each team.  Interesting to see how different they are to the Herald Sun:

Adelaide:  E

Brisbane:  B+

Carlton:  E

Collingwood:  B+

Essendon:  C+

Fremantle:  C

Geelong:  B+

Gold Coast:  B+

GWS:  C

Hawks:  A+

Melbourne:  B+

North:  A

Port:  C

Richmond:  C+

Saints:  B+

Swans:  C+

West Coast:  A+

Dogs:  A+

The HS rankings were embarrassing and the "Journos" at the joint are an absolute mess, they think they are bigger than the game, they no longer write stories about what has happened, its all about ramifications and putting themselves on TV or radio. Its a 2 bit rag run by 2-bit operators.

  On 16/10/2019 at 21:21, Demon3 said:

The HS rankings were embarrassing and the "Journos" at the joint are an absolute mess, they think they are bigger than the game, they no longer write stories about what has happened, its all about ramifications and putting themselves on TV or radio. Its a 2 bit rag run by 2-bit operators.

What stood out was, in one article, they give the Blues a 'B' for their trade period, and then on the same page there is an article slamming them for only recruiting an 'ageing' Betts and a second ruckman.

  On 16/10/2019 at 21:23, Wiseblood said:

What stood out was, in one article, they give the Blues a 'B' for their trade period, and then on the same page there is an article slamming them for only recruiting an 'ageing' Betts and a second ruckman.

Yep, that would not surprise me at all.  its an awful rag each Journo with their own agenda and egos out of control. 

Good

- Langdon is a decent player and the price was right.

- I'm not sold on Tomlinson, but he didn't cost us a pick and is an upgrade on guys who were getting a game in 2019.

Bad

- The Frost deal was a shocker and assumes that May and Lever will play each week (highly unlikely). We'll likely live to regret this one.

- Resigning the Wagners and others before the trade period left us unable to make a play for the likes of Cutler, Butler and Jones who could have played a role next year and cost little.

Ugly

- We had the 17th best forward line this year - not addressing our dire lack of key forward depth was a massive failure, particularly given that Bruce, Jenkins and Patton went relatively cheap.

Unknown

- The pick swap with North has the potential to be a disaster if we don't improve next year. It also assumes that we nail pick 8 - and that won't happen if we pick anyone under 6ft.

Rating = C

 

 

Wallace rated team's as winners, break evens and losers.

He only had four winners. We were one.

IMO, whether you think we did well or not depends on your pre-trade period views on whether we are capable of bouncing back next year.

In other words, if before the trade period you thought we were capable of bouncing back next year, then the trade period was excellent - we get two top 10 picks, add Langdon and Tomlinson to our wings, for the cost of next year's first rounder and Frost. 

If, though, you thought pre-trade period that we are actually miles from the top, then our trade period was not so good - spent a lot to get the second top 10 pick, Tomlinson costs a lot of salary, reliance on May/Lever/OMac, no new small forward and no new tall forward.

As I was already more optimistic about 2020, I quite like what we've done this trade period. But I understand how, if you already viewed our list/prospects poorly, you might question why we didn't make more active plays for players like Butler, Bruce, Keath, Jenkins, Papley or Martin.

I gave us an A

our core deficits were addressed.  If we are healthy, or nearly healthy, we have most other needs covered.

losing Frost is no biggie.  Shame we didn’t land Elliott, but that was a long shot.

moving to first round (top 10) x2 in this year’s draft instead of having a lower, compromised pick next year is a massive plus.

holding 97 allows one rookie upgrade, probably Dunkley.

A+ would have been if we pulled off a heist, and snuck a treasure.

We ended up better than we were, and in a great position for the draft.  Mahoney also best communicator, and we got stuff done with no fuss, and without being arschlochs in the process.  That has to be an ‘A’ rating.