AFL Trade Period

[Nascent 9,215]

I presume there won't be a ban on trades until the last hour like years gone by? Not that anything exciting is going to happen anyway.

[drdrake 3,168]

1 minute ago, Nascent said:

I presume there won't be a ban on trades until the last hour like years gone by? Not that anything exciting is going to happen anyway.

It looks like they have banned trades from Lunch time today. 

[old55 23,577]

4 hours ago, Premiers said:

Its a bit rich for Port and Cats to demand 1st round picks for players on their lists for several years that they hardly ever play.  

I hope Freo hold off on pick # 19 which is a lot more valuable than it sounds as it is the first pick after draft day 1 and can demand a premium in a pick trade on that night.  

And the cheek of Port on Ladhams: weazel-word a 'he is available to trade but we are happy to keep him' message then demand pick #18 from Sydney.  Hope Sydney hold firm, having just been worked over by the Crows for Dawson.  Valuing Dawson and a 2nd ruckman (Ladhams) at the same pick makes a mockery of the whole system.

I get that it is all posturing but I really hope Freo and Sydney don't give in.  

Now that Scarlett has gone from Geelong maybe they will play Clark.

[DubDee 25,869]

2 hours ago, Redleg said:

Pick 22 is not being shafted for a player you don't play.

Oh right, didn’t realise that was the other offer. You’d certainly take that if you’re the Cats

[Turner 1,514]

ok someone help me i'm confused, the blues have recontracted Kennedy, Honey, Parks, Boyd, OMac as rookies, plus have another 12 months of Mirkovs 18month mid season rookie contract, plus have committed to rookie-ing Cottrell and Lochie O'Brien... that makes 8 Cat A rookies??? impossible? illegal? unless they plan on upgrading 2 of them to the senior list? but why wouldn't they announce that now or not delist LOB who's already senior listed and just sign him back to the senior list? doesn't make sense to me

[picket fence 17,169]

17 minutes ago, Turner said:

ok someone help me i'm confused, the blues have recontracted Kennedy, Honey, Parks, Boyd, OMac as rookies, plus have another 12 months of Mirkovs 18month mid season rookie contract, plus have committed to rookie-ing Cottrell and Lochie O'Brien... that makes 8 Cat A rookies??? impossible? illegal? unless they plan on upgrading 2 of them to the senior list? but why wouldn't they announce that now or not delist LOB who's already senior listed and just sign him back to the senior list? doesn't make sense to me

Makes perfect sense if you 

A .. Source raw materials ( I.E) Timber Pulp for brown paper bags 

B .. Arrange raw materials to be shipped FOC to factory for reclassification

C ... Prioritise holding order and design proposal

D... Change , Enhance and modify Raw material and design brief

E...Engage in " State of the art" Technology ( That leaves NO TRACE)

F...Transform said goods as marketable Carltank "Official Product"

G.. Complete unilateral and intensive media Campaign to sell ""Ice Cubes to the Eskimos"

Pity though....😵 Ice cubes tend to make into Paper Mache ....... Brown Paper Bags AND......................................

The CONTENTS!🌊

Hope this all makes perfect sense!

Edited October 13, 2021 by picket fence

[manny100 1,558]

1 hour ago, old55 said:

Now that Scarlett has gone from Geelong maybe they will play Clark.

If the Cats get pick 22 for Clark they can consider themselves very, very lucky.  They are a team in desperate need of youth and he cannot get a regular game. Puts him in the 'fringe' category. If he stays and has a similar season and out of contract what is he worth then??  Probably a 3rd rounder at best?

[The Lobster Effect 891]

22 minutes ago, Turner said:

ok someone help me i'm confused, the blues have recontracted Kennedy, Honey, Parks, Boyd, OMac as rookies, plus have another 12 months of Mirkovs 18month mid season rookie contract, plus have committed to rookie-ing Cottrell and Lochie O'Brien... that makes 8 Cat A rookies??? impossible? illegal? unless they plan on upgrading 2 of them to the senior list? but why wouldn't they announce that now or not delist LOB who's already senior listed and just sign him back to the senior list? doesn't make sense to me

Oscar lives again!

[picket fence 17,169]

2 minutes ago, The Lobster Effect said:

Oscar lives again!

A new Telemovie is going to be made entitled "OSCAR LIVES AGAIN"

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Geelong recruiting 30 year old Ceglar is hilarious.

[Deestroy All 14,266]

Adelaide got slightly better. 
Carlton got better (shaking in my boots). 
 

Apart from that, sweet [censored] all. Successful trade period by us even if we did absolutely nothing. 
 

Oh I forgot Max will need a huge preseason to combat the 80 point gap Geelong just closed by obtaining Ceglar. 

[Ethan Tremblay 30,861]

31 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Geelong recruiting 30 year old Ceglar is hilarious.

Trying to lower the average age of their playing list I suppose? 

[Demonland 72,202]

54 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Geelong recruiting 30 year old Ceglar is hilarious.

 

[Whispering_Jack 30,159]

I’ve never been one to really get involved in the discussion about who won the trade period because it’s such a useless exercise. As we all know, the proof of the pudding etc. and it’s about who you end up drafting and how you develop the players you draft so that we’ll never really know until we’re years down the track. 

However, I think it’s worth pointing out that Melbourne’s trading effort yielded the player who received more Brownlow votes than any other traded. In fact, 10 more than the player considered by many as the prize of the trade period. 

Let that sink in.

[Turner 1,514]

1 hour ago, Whispering_Jack said:

I’ve never been one to really get involved in the discussion about who won the trade period because it’s such a useless exercise. As we all know, the proof of the pudding etc. and it’s about who you end up drafting and how you develop the players you draft so that we’ll never really know until we’re years down the track. 

However, I think it’s worth pointing out that Melbourne’s trading effort yielded the player who received more Brownlow votes than any other traded. In fact, 10 more than the player considered by many as the prize of the trade period. 

Let that sink in.

was it cerra or dawson?

[WERRIDEE 5,479]

5 hours ago, Turner said:

ok someone help me i'm confused, the blues have recontracted Kennedy, Honey, Parks, Boyd, OMac as rookies, plus have another 12 months of Mirkovs 18month mid season rookie contract, plus have committed to rookie-ing Cottrell and Lochie O'Brien... that makes 8 Cat A rookies??? impossible? illegal? unless they plan on upgrading 2 of them to the senior list? but why wouldn't they announce that now or not delist LOB who's already senior listed and just sign him back to the senior list? doesn't make sense to me

I think they will go 2 short on the senior list.

[buck_nekkid 5,862]

10 hours ago, Demonland said:

 

Looks like he should wear an electronic ankle bracelet and is not allowed within 500m of childcare facilities…..

[Demonland 72,202]

[ChaserJ 5,096]

On 10/7/2021 at 1:05 PM, ChaserJ said:

I’d like us to have a crack at p23 from the Dogs. 37 & 57 over to them would give them a 70 point gain on DVI and chuck in a future 3rd to give them something tangible to make it worth their while. 23 too good a pick to be swallowed up in bid matching.

Tiges have done a pretty similar deal to the above with Collingwood. Hoping we can get a similar deal done with Dogs for p23:   Collingwood swapped its pick 27 for Richmond’s picks 38 and 40 in this year’s draft as well as a future third-round selection.

[DeeSpencer 25,713]

1 hour ago, ChaserJ said:

Tiges have done a pretty similar deal to the above with Collingwood. Hoping we can get a similar deal done with Dogs for p23:   Collingwood swapped its pick 27 for Richmond’s picks 38 and 40 in this year’s draft as well as a future third-round selection.

If the price of 27 is any guide we'd have to give up 37, 57 and a future 2nd (which we aren't even allowed to trade having traded our future first). 23 is too expensive I think.

Our philosophy has been to trade up aggressively early to try to get decent value before the offers get more and more expensive closer to and then at the draft.

[Deemania since 56 6,639]

On 10/7/2021 at 1:19 PM, Maldonboy38 said:

Things at Carlton just seem so different. I don't know if it is new board, new coach, SOS departing or a bundle of things all working together. 

I am not a fan of what GC has done with the priority pick, but good on them for using a loophole to their advantage. We would have been gloating if we achieved it (not that we have needed to over the last few years).

Essendon still strutting through trade week like silent, smug gods, not realising that no-one wants to trade with them. 

As for the Dees, I still get the sense that some very quiet but brilliant game of Rummiking is being planned behind the scenes and we will end up with Mac Andrew (is this name right?) or some other specific target. 

SHHHHH! This is secret men's business.

[Deemania since 56 6,639]

On 10/13/2021 at 9:04 PM, Ethan Tremblay said:

Trying to lower the average age of their playing list I suppose? 

Of course that in not the primary reason. Geelong have spent an absolute footballing fortune on prosthetics, crutches, bandages and wheelchairs to assist prop up their list across 20/21. Ceglar's acquisition is proof that Geelong is making the most out of its prior investments and capital developments. Ceglar needs a back brace, a prosthetic knee, three ankle braces per foot, a pretty handbag for his limp wrist and as the 22 season progresses, the ongoing counsel of an Eastern mystic to remind him why he is out on a football field.

 

[Colm 2,157]

34 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

If the price of 27 is any guide we'd have to give up 37, 57 and a future 2nd (which we aren't even allowed to trade having traded our future first). 23 is too expensive I think.

Our philosophy has been to trade up aggressively early to try to get decent value before the offers get more and more expensive closer to and then at the draft.

Yeah I agree 23 I’d def out of our reach as there’s no doubt Richmond would have offered the same deal they offered to Pies  if not better. Our only move now would be to try and improve 37 to a pick in the lower 30s. Perhaps our old pick back off Adelaide. 

[spirit of norm smith 16,460]

On 10/14/2021 at 7:25 PM, Demonland said:

I’m still laughing. Great work 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,757]

On 10/12/2021 at 2:40 PM, durango said:

Remember Daw is 31 going on 32 and Gawn is 29 going on 30 a ruckman in his early 20's or late teens would have a great grounding learning from these older players without being thrown to the wolves by playing in the ones when he is not ready.

Also we have settled on a 2 ruck combination so we need the backup for Gawn and Jackson in the short term, we could use TMac, Brown or Weids in a pinch as the 2nd ruck.  

That comment is so 2021. There are two reasons why that might change. Firstly, AFL rule changes can increase or decrease the value of any position on the ground. With Hocking gone and Brad Scott new to the role, we could see more rule changes sooner rather than later.

Secondly, to keep winning (whether in sport or in business), you can't stand still. Goodwin will have to keep changing the way we play or we'll be caught and eventually overtaken. This might mean a change to the current 2 ruck strategy. We might go back to one with a pinch hitter or we might go with three. Or one day, we may not need any. It's not foreseeable now, but a team full of Petracca/Bontompelli clones may change the way the game is played to make ruckman redundant.