13 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

Bell left Freo last year. This is the second trade period without his ridiculous influence.

Has he.. thanks for that.

I think the lesson here is that inside info should always be taken with a grain of salt and doing so isn't necessarily a personal attack on the person providing that info.

16 minutes ago, mmwd6 said:

This is an out of contract player who we only offered 2 years to

Judd was offered 4 but only wanted 2

1 minute ago, Fritta and Turner said:

Judd was offered 4 but only wanted 2

Big red flags there.

57 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Can people please stop contemplating pick 11 for McVee. The out of contract Bailey Smith, who is a top 3 player in the AFL based on the brownlow and coaches votes, cost Geelong a late first rounder.

I agree we ain’t getting a first rounder for him but for a pick near the 30s in a compromised / weak draft I’m not against the idea of sending Judd into the draft if/when Freo low-ball us.

Send a message to the comp that we’re not going to roll over in these scenarios.

I reckon Dogs were close to doing this last year with Smith, the return was just a bit too much to throw away.

Edited 5 hours ago5 hr by The Jackson FIX

If its Pick 29 which will slide out, would it a bit more pleasant if they threw in someone like Sam Switkowski

17 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

I don’t care for his disposal efficiency when he didn’t make a risky choice all year.

21st defender in the whole comp for score assist suggest he made the right choice more often than not.

FWIW, I think using the rubric of previous trades is only ever a general guide because the quality of each draft is so variable. In the end most trades are done on the basis of mutual benefit.

33 minutes ago, Phil C said:

I haven’t been on Demonland for a while. Geez the tone has descended in this thread….might come back after preseason 🤔🙄

Sadly it is Shangri-La for the Eeyores right now. All good - some better news won't be far away.

14 minutes ago, roy11 said:

If its Pick 29 which will slide out, would it a bit more pleasant if they threw in someone like Sam Switkowski

They would demand a first for him alone. We’re not getting a player out of this.

I think our best bet is getting them to upgrade their 29 a bit so we get like a pick 23-25 instead.

Edited 4 hours ago4 hr by mmwd6

4 minutes ago, mmwd6 said:

They would demand a first for him alone. We’re not getting a player out of this.

I think our best bet is getting them to upgrade their 29 a bit so we get like a pick 23-25 instead.

Really? He's 29 in a few months.

1 hour ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

He obviously doesn't believe in the direction of the club, and I can't blame him. There was always going to be departure repercussions for a dismal 18 months both on and off field.

Can people please stop contemplating pick 11 for McVee. The out of contract Bailey Smith, who is a top 3 player in the AFL based on the brownlow and coaches votes, cost Geelong a late first rounder.

Based on the market, the out of contract McVee who had poor year and played one of the worst individual defensive performances of the year on Rankine in round 17, would be lucky to fetch pick 38.

You really do have a penchant for highlighting singular examples to make your points.

Last year Caleb Daniel was traded for pick 25. Based on that, he’s worth 11 a lot more than he’s worth 38.

And Judd played a bad game this year vs Rankine? Cool. Shall we go through all the good things he’s done since debuting, plus his age, skill set and importance to us moving forward?

Or is context not really your thing?

43 minutes ago, KozzyCan said:

I think the lesson here is that inside info should always be taken with a grain of salt and doing so isn't necessarily a personal attack on the person providing that info.

This is correct. It's never personal.

Some you get right, some you get wrong and some you never choose to post. Jason Davenport from GWS was going to come in and head up development last off-season. Saad El Hawli we would take in the MSD.

I'm sure Judd had signalled his intention to re-sign more than once or twice. He will be a big loss if he does leave. A smart player.

7 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

You really do have a penchant for highlighting singular examples to make your points.

Last year Caleb Daniel was traded for pick 25. Based on that, he’s worth 11 a lot more than he’s worth 38.

And Judd played a bad game this year vs Rankine? Cool. Shall we go through all the good things he’s done since debuting, plus his age, skill set and importance to us moving forward?

Or is context not really your thing?

Well maybe you can start a Judd McVee Fan club & be President or maybe a gofundme page for him to defray his removal costs.

5 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

You really do have a penchant for highlighting singular examples to make your points.

Last year Caleb Daniel was traded for pick 25. Based on that, he’s worth 11 a lot more than he’s worth 38.

And Judd played a bad game this year vs Rankine? Cool. Shall we go through all the good things he’s done since debuting, plus his age, skill set and importance to us moving forward?

Or is context not really your thing?

Pick 11 for McVee is completely unrealistic. He's out of contract so we have little bargaining power.

Once again, Bailey Smith was traded for just pick 17 (and a swap of later picks)- a player that won the coaches votes this year and won his side a final in 2021. How can McVee be anywhere near that market value?

Caleb Daniel was under contract, so North had to pay above market value. McVee is uncontracted.

If you believe McVee is going to be the premier small defender of the comp with an All Australian blazer in 2026, then sure, pick 11 is commensurate.

Why not send him to the draft? Is it simply because we don't want a reputation as [censored]?

47 minutes ago, Travy14 said:

21st defender in the whole comp for score assist suggest he made the right choice more often than not.

Hate to nit pick, but that doesn’t seem right. So I just checked wheeloratings and at least in that site he is 92nd for defenders score involvement’s. Just as well I am on a train with nothing better to do than scroll through 25 pages of players ranked by SIs.

Hate to say it, but if you are not invested in making our club better, then move on.

If its Freos 2nd rounder then so be it, we need players who want to make a difference and play for the red and blue.

Same goes for Tracc.

Sick of all this BS every year.

Edited 4 hours ago4 hr by Deestinga2

Just now, mmwd6 said:

They would demand a first for him alone. We’re not getting a player out of this

37 minutes ago, roy11 said:

Really? He's 29 in a few months.

Yeah I don’t think they’d get it, but they rate him very highly internally. Not someone they’d willingly offer up.

1 hour ago, Fritta and Turner said:

Judd was offered 4 but only wanted 2

Clubs often will offer a player extended years at a lesser dollar value per annum. The longer contract gives the player job security, but it also benefits the club because the salary cap is always increasing.

Judd is within his rights to value his ability to outperform the 4 year contract we offered.

Without knowing the actual dollar terms, there is nothing treasonous in Judd and his management knocking back our 4 year contract offer. He clearly had suitors offering him a better deal.

3 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Pick 11 for McVee is completely unrealistic. He's out of contract so we have little bargaining power.

Once again, Bailey Smith was traded for just pick 17 (and a swap of later picks)- a player that won the coaches votes this year and won his side a final in 2021. How can McVee be anywhere near that market value?

Caleb Daniel was under contract, so North had to pay above market value. McVee is uncontracted.

If you believe McVee is going to be the premier small defender of the comp with an All Australian blazer in 2026, then sure, pick 11 is commensurate.

Sure, but Bailey Smith hadn't played in two years due to injury and the Dogs wanted him gone by the time his contract was up. What he was going to do in '25 was speculative when it came time to do a deal. We clearly wanted to keep Judd and he is a best 22 player. It's objectively a bigger loss for us than either Smith or Daniel were to the Dogs. I'd be comfortable drafting a replacement w/pick 25 in last years draft (North are clearly operating with a different set of values given the amount of draft capital they've held as well), but pick 30 something is a shot in the void this year. By the time you get there 9-10 players already tied to clubs will have been bid on. A third of the best kids in the crop will not be accessible and we'll struggle to see 50 kids taken in total.

So are you suggesting we approach the trade deal eager and happy to take 29 because it's the closest to fair in your eyes? How do you want the Dees to approach?

Edited 4 hours ago4 hr by ChaserJ

2 hours ago, beelzebub said:

@Ted Lasso said: Not to mention Judd would probably be in the top 10 of this draft if not the top 5, it’s a really good get for freo but I just can’t see them caring what’s fair.

With good ol' ding long Bell watching over this you just 'know' we'll get overs 🙄🥴

Cmon man! There is no chance he will would be a top 10 pick even with the experience under his belt

18 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Pick 11 for McVee is completely unrealistic. He's out of contract so we have little bargaining power.

Once again, Bailey Smith was traded for just pick 17 (and a swap of later picks)- a player that won the coaches votes this year and won his side a final in 2021. How can McVee be anywhere near that market value?

Caleb Daniel was under contract, so North had to pay above market value. McVee is uncontracted.

If you believe McVee is going to be the premier small defender of the comp with an All Australian blazer in 2026, then sure, pick 11 is commensurate.

Smith had also just missed a year of footy and had/has incredibly difficult off field issues

15 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Pick 11 for McVee is completely unrealistic. He's out of contract so we have little bargaining power.

Once again, Bailey Smith was traded for just pick 17 (and a swap of later picks)- a player that won the coaches votes this year and won his side a final in 2021. How can McVee be anywhere near that market value?

Caleb Daniel was under contract, so North had to pay above market value. McVee is uncontracted.

If you believe McVee is going to be the premier small defender of the comp with an All Australian blazer in 2026, then sure, pick 11 is commensurate.

You did it again - Smith won his side a final in 2021. You seriously have unbridled ability to cherry pick singular moments!

Also yes he was amazing this year (albeit with a side of dickheadishness). Caleb Daniel may have been under contact but was awful, and in no way was worth 25 under contract before or after that trade (plus how old is he? Judd’s 22).

Anyway, my point is that 11 is as unreasonable as 38, which you think we’ll be “lucky to get” because Judd got torched by Rankine.

And whilst I don’t currently believe McVee will be AA next year, I think he has potential to be an AA defender, and I’d like to see us ask for remuneration in a trade which reflects that. Again, in the context of everything, not just one game.

3 minutes ago, mmwd6 said:

Yeah I don’t think they’d get it, but they rate him very highly internally. Not someone they’d willingly offer up.

That's fair, I was just looking at their list and trying to see if there was a realistic add-on that could be included. Thought at his age and as a Victorian he could be one to consider.
I don't mind him, tackles and runs hard. Would be an upgrade on Spargo but both need to score more goals.