8 hours ago, Matt said:

Hopefully, we get 2 firsts, and an early second from Freo. Maybe Freo get one of Norths seconds. We could then give that early second to the Pies. That would be my hope. But as I’ve said before, I heard ages ago from someone close to the Pies that it will be a first. Hoping they’re wrong though

An early second is about right I reckon. Really hope we can hold firm a bit om this.

28 minutes ago, layzie said:

An early second is about right I reckon. Really hope we can hold firm a bit om this.

Yeah I agree. Early 2nd seems fair

4 minutes ago, Matt said:

Yeah I agree. Early 2nd seems fair

I was on that bandwagon but maybe the ride has stopped for me.

I now think it’s the nett result that really matters.

For example if we get the boy we want with a later pick, but would have used our earlier one to get him anyway, same result for us.

So I think success in trading has to be assessed on the final result and with draftees, we know that will usually take a while in the analysis and with hindsight as the major measurement tool.

57 minutes ago, mo64 said:

I take it that you'll refrain from making negative comments about any trades, re-signings or delistings we make. The club always gets it right so we're not entitled to have a discussion about it's merit.

And likewise, I'm allowed to suggest that you don't have all the facts to make an adequate call.

Edited September 23, 20222 yr by A F

3 minutes ago, Redleg said:

I was on that bandwagon but maybe the ride has stopped for me.

I now think it’s the nett result that really matters.

For example if we get the boy we want with a later pick, but would have used our earlier one to get him anyway, same result for us.

So I think success in trading has to be assessed on the final result and with draftees, we know that will usually take a while in the analysis and with hindsight as the major measurement tool.

Bingo. We need to look at the net result before we judge.

16 hours ago, adonski said:

The Herald Sun reckons we'll agree to pay 'fair value' for Grundy (one of the 1st rounders received for Jackson)

ffs

4 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

ffs

The only hope I hold now is that it's a 1st for Grundy + Pies 2nd

And what happens if in giving up a first rounder for Grundy, we can quickly move on to improving our list? 

Let's say we managed to get Grundy, Henry and an elite key forward, giving up a first rounder for Grundy won't even be remembered.

14 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

ffs

That is probably coming from a Pies source.

2 hours ago, mo64 said:

I take it that you'll refrain from making negative comments about any trades, re-signings or delistings we make. The club always gets it right so we're not entitled to have a discussion about it's merit.

If only????

28 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

ffs

We dont need him that badly do we?

On 9/21/2022 at 7:37 PM, JimmyGadson said:

Our problems are ball movement going inside 50, inside 50 pressure and around the ground pressure.

Grundy is a gun when fit. 

But he's not helping those elements of our game.

Goodwin is saying "we can fit him into our game plan"

This is a disaster in the making. Would rather Weid/TMac as second ruck and find some good deliverers i50 to help Spargo AND a Key Fwd

 

3 hours ago, picket fence said:

I will be FURIOUS if the club parts with a first rounder for Grundy. Its a salary Dump by the Filth, take a third or fourth rounder or get stuffed!

That's a head in the sand attitude and one adopted by Dodoro and Bell. Let's screw them to the wall mentality. MFC does not operate like that. They want their man, they get their man. Who really cares in the future whether we give away a first selection or a second pick. It is only noise. We complete deals because Lamb and Taylor always seek out trades that benefit both parties.

Edited September 24, 20222 yr by djr

5 minutes ago, djr said:

That's a head in the sand attitude and one adopted by Dodoro and Bell. Let's screw them to the wall mentality. MFC does not operate like that. They want their man, they get their man. Who really cares in the future whether we give away a first selection or a second pick. It is only noise. We complete deals because Lamb and Taylor always seek out trades that benefit both parties.

Yes I am yet to be convinced that a high cost player ( First Round +$400000) is going ot address our current list issues

16 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Goodwin is saying "we can fit him into our game plan"

This is a disaster in the making. Would rather Weid/TMac as second ruck and find some good deliverers i50 to help Spargo AND a Key Fwd

 

The move smacks of desperation frankly. I suppose they thought at end of 2021 season Jackson would cover the Gawn issues with a break glass type ruck at Casey (Majak etc).

Jackson clearly leaving from mid season spooked them.

The gameplan is slow and cumbersome to say the least.

Amazing what six months can do to one's MFCSS but the 2021 finals series being an aberration is becoming startlingly clear

2 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

 

The gameplan is slow and cumbersome to say the least.

Amazing what six months can do to one's MFCSS but the 2021 finals series being an aberration is becoming startlingly clear

People jump off quickly. 

It looked great last year. It looked great for the first 10 rounds this year. It looked good for the second half of the year for first halves but was not sustainable for four quarters. Just need to improve the list and unpick the reason for the second half fades. The worst thing we could do is try and make major change. 

People freaked out re May for pick 7.. and two 1sts for Lever ( no mention of the 2nd rounder back.. was it Rivers?) 

Over at the pies site they reckon 2 x 1st rounders . Over here it’s 1x a second rounder. Every supporter at every club wants a win / lose  in trading. Dodorro over at the bombers pretty much tries to own that space and look at the bombers. Dees go about their work in a quiet , fair way. I respect that.  In the end I think a latish first rounder is about right. 

2 minutes ago, Wells 11 said:

People freaked out re May for pick 7.. and two 1sts for Lever ( no mention of the 2nd rounder back.. was it Rivers?) 

Over at the pies site they reckon 2 x 1st rounders . Over here it’s 1x a second rounder. Every supporter at every club wants a win / lose  in trading. Dodorro over at the bombers pretty much tries to own that space and look at the bombers. Dees go about their work in a quiet , fair way. I respect that.  In the end I think a latish first rounder is about right. 

Agreed. The club clearly has a formula for player value. They aren’t trying to play someone else’s game with trades. They know what they want to do, and regardless of external noise they get it done.

Too often people conflate this seasons relative disappointment with the clubs many moving parts. When it comes to trading we’ve been exceptionally well managed for almost a decade.

I am surprised people are getting so upset about giving up a late first round pick for him. We clearly want him, he’s a bloody good player and where prepared to pay in the vicinity of $700,000 a season for him. And we are a club that like to get deals done so we can maximise other deals. I don’t agree with chasing Grundy and would much rather focus on other areas of the ground but he his worth a late first round pick even with it being a salary cap dump. 

5 minutes ago, Lil_red_fire_engine said:

People jump off quickly. 

It looked great last year. It looked great for the first 10 rounds this year. It looked good for the second half of the year for first halves but was not sustainable for four quarters. Just need to improve the list and unpick the reason for the second half fades. The worst thing we could do is try and make major change. 

Was it great for the first ten rounds though. It gave in the main wins by 16 points. The only team that adopted the run against us was Port who couldn't hit the barn door that day.

Collingwood has now outplayed us in three straight games for example. Geelong is now smashing us.The list goes on.

Anyway we seem to be stuck with what I term the Python Play (squeezing your opponent to death) so we will see how next year goes

People saying we should pay based on the nett result are kidding themselves. I'm not in the Dodoro camp of getting every possible steak knife, but we are doing the Pies a favour, and that's how the trade should be negotiated.

Why should we be giving another flag contender a leg up? They've beaten us the past 3 times.

Edited September 24, 20222 yr by mo64

3 hours ago, 58er said:

What players gradings  ( draft pick no's) are are what the Clubs and gurus think.

In reality I am saying over a period of time thats not what the order plays out. 
Down  the track judgements change due to performance.

I don't know the current draftees well enough to grade them sorry.

The future is irrelevant to my comments and to your sniping. I was saying that clubs will value top five picks in this particular draft probably reasonably close together with a dropoff to the how they value subsequent picks.

Most clubs put players in tiers or bands when they compose their draftboard.

What actually happens in the future is irreleVant to the value  of a pick as a trade asset unless the clubs have some way of seeing into the future.

Our negotiators really need to do some negotiating and earn their money. I'm sure 1st round is the starting point but please don't get hussled.

1 hour ago, A F said:

Let's say we managed to get Grundy, Henry and an elite key forward, giving up a first rounder for Grundy won't even be remembered.

Well judging by the May and Lever trades some folks here will find it hard to let it go because they could have made a much better deal!

1 minute ago, grazman said:

Well judging by the May and Lever trades some folks here will find it hard to let it go because they could have made a much better deal!

I guess we need go be looking at the overall net result. Easy to get bogged down in individual trades.