3 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

Let's see how it plays out with Petracca. If i was another club I would be reluctant to give a huge draft hual for a player on one of the biggest contracts in the AFL who is clearly on the decline. I wouldnt offer much more than #7 if i were GCS. I hope I am wrong.

Despite that, you don't need more than one year on the contract to have the whip hand in any trade negotiation.

Pick 7 in this draft is chump change. After academies etc. it will be after pick 10. Do you really think pick 10,11 or 12 is going to get you a player of Petracca's skill set? You would be lucky if you used pick 10,11 and 12 in this draft to find a player anywhere near what Petracca brings to the table even if he is approaching 30. All those picks could be busts. If GC offered pick 1 in this draft I would still be apprehensive. We know what we have with Petracca, and we don't with picks, you can only project and speculate. That is why it should always be a higher price when offering up speculative picks and why the MFC shouldn't consider it when he is under contract. It would be totally different if we didn't have any other option.

40 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

"Didn't even make the effort" - is that because he was a bit busy preparing Geelong for a prelim and then a grand final?

He apparently found time to sit down with McVee.

40 minutes ago, Ted Lasso said:

Literally last off season was WAYYYY more toxic with Trac and guess what, he walked back in the door

Last season he didn't even meet with any other clubs.

There was also a certain amount of understanding both from the club and the players about his mental state post serious injury.

Try again.

So no news then?

2 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

My gripe with Tim Lamb isnt just narrowed down to trading a contracted player out. You do realise there that being an official list manager of the club right? Clearly not..

He has made dumb list management decisions by bringing genuine list cloggers to giving out ridiculous long term contracts to Jack Viney.

You're delusional if you think he has done a great job of late.

Holy [censored] dude! Went ok bringing in May, Lever, Brown, Hibberd, Langdon, and what do they have in common?

1 hour ago, BigDavidNoitzzzz said:

You can infer the answer to most of these yourself.

The differing sentiment between Trac and Oliver simply boils down to leverage. View any and every tidbit of trade slop interrogation with this lens.

I can infer, but they were questions a good journalist could have asked to get decent responses. Instead they asked lots of questions that were always going to get "I can't respond to that." it was a waste of time.

56 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Isn't the reason for the different language between Trac and Oliver obvious?

That is, the club is prepared to take Trac back, but we don't want Oliver back?

If we did the same dance with Oliver, but then flogged him off for nothing, our words on Trac would look cheap.

In some respects this is smart - we're making it clear to the market that Oliver (and May) are players we're happy to facilitate a trade on, but Trac we're not, because if it were up to us his name wouldn't be up for discussion.

Because we may still be stuck with Oliver. Maybe he doesn't agree to trade or no one will trade anything for him.

I still believe we can telegraph "Oliver is a superstar, and we'll always find a role for him, but we don't believe his strongest role fits with Steven Kings game plan. He is a champion of our club, and we don't want to see a player of his talent out of the game, so we've offered the opportunity to seek a trade where he may be offered a role that suits his style better. If not, we know he will work hard within our system and game plan and compete for a spot on our best 22."

In a way that we can still trade him for a bag of chips. A trade comes up and people say "you accepted low for Oliver " and we say "they might think it was low, but given the role we saw him playing in the new game plan we felt it was a fair deal, and we wish Clarry all the best".

It's not hard. I think they've gone out of their way to make it uncomfortable for him. But I also think that diminishes his value in the market.

2 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I'm sure it's an oversight, but you seem to have missed out all the players he retained on the list.

You mean the players that he retained on long term contracts that now he’s trying to negotiate for them to leave … as we have guys like Trac and Clarry in $1.3m a year each. Irony is he’s trying to get us the best deal to try to salvage his long term 7 and 8 year contracts. Guys like Viney and May who got extensions out to be 35year old at end of term. Not sure he’s to be exactly applauded with such gusty. I like the AFL possibly introducing a 5- year contract max term by the way.

if Tim Lamb can’t come out a clear winner on the Petracca trade. He can give himself an upper cut and “explore his options as well”.

Post the 21 flag he has bought in nothing that has positively added to what was a premiership list.

Taylor is responsible for drafting, lamb does recruiting. I’d be frogmarching Lamb out the door post trade period.

Edited 2 hours ago2 hr by Doug Reemer

2 hours ago, Bonkers said:

Pick 7 in this draft is chump change. After academies etc. it will be after pick 10. Do you really think pick 10,11 or 12 is going to get you a player of Petracca's skill set? You would be lucky if you used pick 10,11 and 12 in this draft to find a player anywhere near what Petracca brings to the table even if he is approaching 30. All those picks could be busts. If GC offered pick 1 in this draft I would still be apprehensive. We know what we have with Petracca, and we don't with picks, you can only project and speculate. That is why it should always be a higher price when offering up speculative picks and why the MFC shouldn't consider it when he is under contract. It would be totally different if we didn't have any other option.

#7 wouldn't get you a player like Petracca, but this doesn't factor in the cap space relief which can be used for free agents and trades.

I think the club knows we are past the premiership window and will try to lift out Humphrey or take the picks and create some salary cap room for future years. I tip we do #7 and a second round pick, but without paying any of his contract.

32 minutes ago, Doug Reemer said:

if Tim Lamb can’t come out a clear winner on the Petracca trade. He can give himself an upper cut and “explore his options as well”.

Post the 21 flag he has bought in nothing that has positively added to what was a premiership list.

Taylor is responsible for drafting, lamb does recruiting. I’d be frogmarching Lamb out the door post trade period.

Not many people don't come off winners when trading with the Suns

Richmond received pick 6 & 23 for Dan Rioli!

We'll push hard for 6 & 7, with later picks going back to the Suns with track imo....the Suns having multiple academy kids is what complicates things though

8 minutes ago, adonski said:

Not many people don't come off winners when trading with the Suns

Richmond received pick 6 & 23 for Dan Rioli!

We'll push hard for 6 & 7, with later picks going back to the Suns with track imo....the Suns having multiple academy kids is what complicates things though

I'd only take 1 of those picks and a best 22 player... otherwise we going backwards

Gawd get me in as list manager!! How shizzen are we with our current siruation!??

5 minutes ago, picket fence said:

Gawd get me in as list manager!! How shizzen are we with our current siruation!??

What is shizzen supposed to mean, it’s your favourite word and I have no idea what you’re trying to say.

3 hours ago, ijustwannaseeaflag said:

Holy [censored] dude! Went ok bringing in May, Lever, Brown, Hibberd, Langdon, and what do they have in common?

Since the Ben Brown pick up back in 2020 remind me once again on who we have picked since then that has made a significant contribution on field?

I'll wait.

13 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Since the Ben Brown pick up back in 2020 remind me once again on who we have picked since then that has made a significant contribution on field?

I'll wait.

We have recruited since then Dazz...

Fat Rats Clacker and his performing bunghole!!

We are right to be critical of the long term deals but for all 3 of them (gus, clarry and trac) they have ended up as worse case scenarios. Who could have predicted that. Gus - retired, Oliver - off the rails, trac - injured and out of love with club.

There's an alternate universe where maynard doesnt lay out gus and they are all celebrating a second flag together. And we would say tim lamb is the man who put together a dynasty

3 minutes ago, Benny Dee said:

We are right to be critical of the long term deals but for all 3 of them (gus, clarry and trac) they have ended up as worse case scenarios. Who could have predicted that. Gus - retired, Oliver - off the rails, trac - injured and out of love with club.

There's an alternate universe where maynard doesnt lay out gus and they are all celebrating a second flag together. And we would say tim lamb is the man who put together a dynasty

Oliver's off field issues was fairly present at the time of when he signed his contract back in 2022. This has been confirmed by Goodwin and Pert.

1 hour ago, Doug Reemer said:

if Tim Lamb can’t come out a clear winner on the Petracca trade. He can give himself an upper cut and “explore his options as well”.

Post the 21 flag he has bought in nothing that has positively added to what was a premiership list.

Taylor is responsible for drafting, lamb does recruiting. I’d be frogmarching Lamb out the door post trade period.

Lamb isn’t the only one making decisions

2 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Oliver's off field issues was fairly present at the time of when he signed his contract back in 2022. This has been confirmed by Goodwin and Pert.

Which does show how much you can put up with when you're winning and a guy's playing well

3 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Oliver's off field issues was fairly present at the time of when he signed his contract back in 2022. This has been confirmed by Goodwin and Pert.

He was also a top 5 player in the league at that time

2 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

He was also a top 5 player in the league at that time

Absolutely he was, but that wasn't my point.

His off field antics were causing the club issues back then so then offering a 7 year deal on top of that isnt the smartest thing this club has done.

I was all for the Petracca long term contract and even with Kozzies this year, and even if Petracca does leave then I still have no issues with his contract status.. but how the club felt fit to offer Oliver a monster contract on top of his off field behaviour is just mind blowing really.

8 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Watching Tim Lamb talk tough is funny.

Lamb by name, Lamb by nature?

5 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Absolutely he was, but that wasn't my point.

His off field antics were causing the club issues back then so then offering a 7 year deal on top of that isnt the smartest thing this club has done.

I was all for the Petracca long term contract and even with Kozzies this year, and even if Petracca does leave then I still have no issues with his contract status.. but how the club felt fit to offer Oliver a monster contract on top of his off field behaviour is just mind blowing really.

Clarry had multiple similar offers at the time.

Would anyone here be happy to lose him given his form at the time?

What the clubs are saying (from the Herald Sun:

• Melbourne says trading Oliver and Petracca will only be done if the club feels it sets them up for their next premiership. 

• List boss Tim Lamb says he “will dispute” that Oliver was pushed out of the club.

• Lamb also confirmed the Demons are interested in Bailey Humphrey and now expects Steven May to remain at the club. 

14 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Absolutely he was, but that wasn't my point.

His off field antics were causing the club issues back then so then offering a 7 year deal on top of that isnt the smartest thing this club has done.

I was all for the Petracca long term contract and even with Kozzies this year, and even if Petracca does leave then I still have no issues with his contract status.. but how the club felt fit to offer Oliver a monster contract on top of his off field behaviour is just mind blowing really.

How about you post a link to your post that said Oliver's contract was a bad idea at the time ...