7 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Dees gave pick 6

Dees got May and Kolojashnij

kolodjashnij could have been so good for us, was a shame about his concussions, streets will never forget his first two years at the suns

Just now, Mouseymoo said:

6 & 7 to Port for Butters who says no?

Port. Big time

5 minutes ago, bing181 said:

What, the logic that:

a) Petracca will be 30 next year, most of his footy is behind him. Dangerfield was 26 when he was traded to Geelong, Chris Judd was 24 when he went to Carlton.

b) Petracca is on a MASSIVE salary that the Suns will have to take on. He would be highest paid player at GC.

c) Petracca wants out

d) We want Petracca out (forget all the public posturing)

e) Petracca has nominated the Suns

f) there are no other potential suitors.

None of the above plays in our favour. Quite the reverse.

That's all correct. However they really want him and we simply must hold to extract a solid return. Oliver is the freebie, not Petracca. We all realise Humphrey is a long shot but he's worth a really solid crack.

2 minutes ago, bing181 said:

It's called the AFL Trade Period for a reason. The clue is in the title. No-one is being bought or sold here.

You analogy only works if (for starters) your TV has a say in who buys it.

Huh? Petracca is a contracted Melbourne player which means we set the asking price.

You can debate what that is, or should be but beyond that it’s pretty clear cut.

I think it will end up getting done.

Early next week if only picks are involved and it could drag out to last minuet if Hump is part of the deal.

Whatever. Pick 23 is ours though. That's not part of the deal.

@Demon Forever I’m going to need you to come out and refute Jay Clark’s post that we’re targeting 7 and 8 (and not Humphrey) 😭

Picks 11 & 12 are the likely landing spots for picks 7 and 8 in this years‘ draft.

Josh Lindsay will be around that mark but there are SA and WA kids lurking everywhere around that mark in Cal’s most recent rankings. I’m sure that’ll provide the next fun thread on Demonland.

2 minutes ago, Ted Lasso said:

And…

He’s a contracted player.

The suns desperately want him hence their willingness to take on the entire contract

The suns are open to extending his offer to 5 years so they’re not worried about his age of footy quality

And they’re willing to negotiate a trade with us.

These are pretty big points that help us

Sure, but the idea that we hold all the cards here is difficult to justify. On overall balance, I'd say that the Suns are in a (much?) stronger position than us.

Also: the contract is meaningless once a player commits to leave. It might help get a first rounder instead of a second rounder, but doesn't provide any leverage in terms of whether or not the trade goes ahead. After all, this is the Bailey Humphrey thread and everyone posting here does so on the premise that if Humphrey nominates Melbourne the deal will get done, contracted or not.

And re the 5-year contract, I haven't seen that reported in the media. The Petracca camp proposed it to Adelaide as a kind of "go away" counter-offer because he didn't want to go there, but GC?

Just now, bing181 said:

Also: the contract is meaningless once a player commits to leave. It might help get a first rounder instead of a second rounder, but doesn't provide any leverage in terms of whether or not the trade goes ahead. After all, this is the Bailey Humphrey thread and everyone posting here does so on the premise that if Humphrey nominates Melbourne the deal will get done, contracted or not.

And re the 5-year contract, I haven't seen that reported in the media. The Petracca camp proposed it to Adelaide as a kind of "go away" counter-offer because he didn't want to go there, but GC?

The Suns list boss this morning on trade radio mentioned they were open to spreading his deal out over 5 years if that suits their TTP better,

Ultimately we all just want to see a good trade for the MFC and i am certain that's what's going to happen be it with Draft picks, players or a combination of the two i think there is little doubt Trac will be at the Suns and the Dees will get something they can sell as a win in return.

2 minutes ago, demoncat said:

@Demon Forever I’m going to need you to come out and refute Jay Clark’s post that we’re targeting 7 and 8 (and not Humphrey) 😭

Well a meeting is on tomorrow with Humphrey so I doubt that very much even after listening to Cameron talk today

2 minutes ago, Ted Lasso said:

Ultimately we all just want to see a good trade for the MFC

Agreed, but "good" is doing a lot of work there.

1 minute ago, bing181 said:

Agreed, but "good" is doing a lot of work there.

Not sure what else we can really hope for. we're selling two of our best ever players, no matter what the trade return is it'll probably feel a little bit underwhelming.

9 hours ago, Very Jaded said:

we have told them all along we won't be trading Trac for picks alone.

Why do people keep saying this? We've never said that.

Head scratcher.

1 minute ago, bing181 said:

Why do people keep saying this? We've never said that.

Head scratcher.

Lamb has said multiple times we have no interest in this draft and it’s why we deliberately exited out of the first round last year

So suddenly we do think this draft is good enough to throw away a sure thing in Trac for?

It makes no sense

6 minutes ago, Very Jaded said:

Lamb has said multiple times we have no interest in this draft and it’s why we deliberately exited out of the first round last year

So suddenly we do think this draft is good enough to throw away a sure thing in Trac for?

It makes no sense

3 minutes ago, Very Jaded said:

Lamb has said multiple times we have no interest in this draft and it’s why we deliberately exited out of the first round last year

So suddenly we do think this draft is good enough to throw away a sure thing in Trac for?

It makes no sense

Sorry to be a pain Jaded but where did he say this? I'm sure you're right but I just don't remember hearing it.

In todays interview when asked if he would potentially still buy into the early parts of this years draft he answered:

"you never know, if the right opportunities there for the right player, we will certainly look into it" Lamb.

21 minutes ago, Mouseymoo said:

Whatever. Pick 23 is ours though. That's not part of the deal.

Some posters aren't keen on picks 7 and 8 in a shallow draft.

They'll be the same posters having a fit if 23 goes back the other way.

3 minutes ago, Very Jaded said:

Lamb has said multiple times we have no interest in this draft and it’s why we deliberately exited out of the first round last year

He hasn't said "we have no interest in this draft" either. He's said that the draft is compromised by father son/academy picks.

Unlike Oliver, Lamb and co. pick their words very very carefully, and they're not saying anything that might come back and bite them.

Edit: See Youngblood's post above.

Edited yesterday at 08:201 day by bing181

1 minute ago, Young Blood said:

Sorry to be a pain Jaded but where did he say this? I'm sure you're right but I just don't remember hearing it.

In todays interview when asked if he would potentially still buy into the early parts of this years draft he answered:

"you never know, if the right opportunities there for the right player, we will certainly look into it" Lamb.

Listen to the update that was posted on the club with Lamb just before trade week started

I think if the opportunity was there to grab pick 2 from West Coast for example then yes we would be interested.

IF we trade Trac for picks 7+8, it says to me that we just couldn’t get Humphrey to push his case hard enough, and that we are pretty keen to get the Trac drama out the door

But I’m not sure we are

4 minutes ago, Very Jaded said:

Listen to the update that was posted on the club with Lamb just before trade week started

I could have sworn you were right and that he did mention either a wariness about returning to the top part of this draft or even more specifically wanting a player rather than draft picks in the Petracca trade. But I can't find it. In the update prior to trade week and in the early interview with Cal Twomey, he doesn't really go one way or the other on this draft and just says the "turn our head" line.

For clarification, what is the difference between curnow being traded and Trac being traded?

Both in contract

Both have somewhat selected their preferred destinations

Both want out

????

Edited yesterday at 08:361 day by Demon Forever

12 minutes ago, bing181 said:

He hasn't said "we have no interest in this draft" either. He's said that the draft is compromised by father son/academy picks.

Unlike Oliver, Lamb and co. pick their words very very carefully, and they're not saying anything that might come back and bite them.

Edit: See Youngblood's post above.

There is no where in this video does he say "we have no interest in the draft"..

If anything he sounded like we're still open minded to stock piling on young talent if need even though we have hit the draft hard the last few years. As he said, it will also depend on the balance of adding mature age players as well.

3 minutes ago, Demon Forever said:

For clarification, what is the difference between curnow being traded and Trac being traded?

Both in contract

Both have somewhat selected their preferred destinations

????

The dif is one is a premiership player and Norm smith medal winner and the other hasn’t done anything yet.

Edited yesterday at 08:371 day by DemonOX

1 minute ago, DemonOX said:

The dif is one is a premiership player and Norm smith medal winner and the other hasn’t done anything yet.

Exactly but the media have the view that the return for curnow should be a lot more. Eg Jay Clark who wouldn't know his nose from his toes

Just baffling!