1 minute ago, Gator said:

But you never had access to them anyway.

Crying over something out of your control is usually a waste of time. But, by all means.

In this case it's incredible relevant.

the 6th and 7th ranked players in the 2024 draft would very likely have gone at pick 1 in 2025

the quality of the draft is a huge hurdle for all trades this year, if the players you're bringing in don't appeal, of course you wouldn't value the picks as part of any trade.

Edited Wednesday at 23:231 day by Ted Lasso

10 minutes ago, Gator said:

But you never had access to them anyway.

Crying over something out of your control is usually a waste of time. But, by all means.

But you’re missing the point.

It’s not the 6th best player you’re getting access to, so the pick’s not as valuable. It’s like having pick 11, not 6.

If there were 0 academy and FS kids before your pick 6 you’re getting the 6th highest rated player in the year’s draft class. If there were 50 academy and FS kids before your pick 6 you’re getting the 56th highest rated player in the year’s draft class.

In a compromised and shallow draft, pick 6 isn’t nearly as valuable as it’d be in a normal year. That’s all people are rightfully pointing out.

Edited Wednesday at 23:221 day by Dee Boys

12 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Someone's annoyed he didn't get rhe new head of footy role. 😉

Just now, Adam The God said:

Someone's annoyed he didn't get rhe new head of footy role. 😉

the tension with the bloke he's sitting next to being the one we want.

16 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

Someone's annoyed he didn't get rhe new head of footy role. 😉

Absolute goose.

Understand the Humphries chat but why are we not chasing Jed Walter as part of the deal ?

4 hours ago, Earl Hood said:

As Hird & Co point out there was a first round pick on offer last year for Oliver but we said no

I’m yet to see any reporting from last year that the cats offered a future first rounder and even if they did I don’t think it came with any significant cap relief. Ie. We’d have been paying the 500-700k pa that we’d pay this year.

The only reporting on an actual deal was Jake Niall I think said the cats would offer a pick or cap relief but not both and were light on details.

Geelong’s first rounder that will blow out to around pick 28 might be better than GWS although I hope we get 34 or 37 (which becomes 40-45).

But I’m still totally fine with us giving it the one more year to see if we could turn Clarry around. The best thing for us would’ve been Clarry rediscovering his form and massively increasing his value. Instead he was kind of ok and we haven’t really lost much.

Same thing for Tracc. He had no offers last year due to his health and reluctance to move interstate. 12 months later we should still get value for him.

Bookmark this post.

It got back to us that Trac said to GC we would fold like a cheap suit in requesting Humprey as part of a trade for him. Obviously we are irate he would get involved in the trade like this.

What I don't know is what will play out from here.

My guess is GC keep low balling us and we confront Trac about this (if we haven't already done so) and privately say we are keeping him to his contract. Then Lamb comes publicly out over weekend or early next week saying Trac will be kept to this contract (as an acceptable trade doesn't look like it can de done) to try and put pressure on the other parties to poney up a better deal.

What also supports GC low balling us is another player (Jake Rogers) we are interested in Cameron said today is not up for trade today in an interview.

43 minutes ago, Dee Boys said:

But you’re missing the point.

It’s not the 6th best player you’re getting access to, so the pick’s not as valuable. It’s like having pick 11, not 6.

If there were 0 academy and FS kids before your pick 6 you’re getting the 6th highest rated player in the year’s draft class. If there were 50 academy and FS kids before your pick 6 you’re getting the 56th highest rated player in the year’s draft class.

In a compromised and shallow draft, pick 6 isn’t nearly as valuable as it’d be in a normal year. That’s all people are rightfully pointing out.

I'm not missing any point.

In fact, the point is a club can only offer the picks they have. Their best pick is 6. If they had pick one or two then potentially it might be in play. But they don't.

Stating there are 5 academy and F/S that push that pick out further is stating the bleeding obvious.

You can't access what you can't access.

If Flanders cost saints pick 7 then trac is worth twice that, 7 can’t be the main component to this trade or the club has failed to deliver on there promise to trade trac only if the offer was compelling

5 minutes ago, Demon4Life said:

Bookmark this post.

It got back to us that Trac said to GC we would fold like a cheap suit in requesting Humprey as part of a trade for him. Obviously we are irate he would get involved in the trade like this.

Are you just making this up as 'gut feel', or did someone with actual intel tell you this?

What GCS must know Humphrey is gone might not be next season but as soon as he can get out he will. Melbourne are happy to keep Petracca, so the end of the day GCS need to get the deal done or they will not have either Petracca and over next 2 years Humphrey.

5 minutes ago, Very Jaded said:

Are you just making this up as 'gut feel', or did someone with actual intel tell you this?

As I said. The part about Trac I have very good mail.

The rest is what I see playing it out logically when GC is correctly (given the cards been dealt) playing hard ball

Just now, Demon4Life said:

As I said. The part about Trac I have very good mail.

The rest is what I see playing it out logically when GC is correctly (given the cards been dealt) playing hard ball

So Trac is trying to blow up his own trade by telling Gold Coast to play hardball on Humphrey, thinking we will cave like a deck of cards?

Well if that's true, he's stupider than I even gave him credit for

4 minutes ago, Very Jaded said:

So Trac is trying to blow up his own trade by telling Gold Coast to play hardball on Humphrey, thinking we will cave like a deck of cards?

Well if that's true, he's stupider than I even gave him credit for

He's not blowing up any trade. Don't have to be Nostradamus to know Trac and Clarry are 100% gone this trade period.

What we don't know is how bad GC want him and who blinks first between Lamb and Cameron

2 minutes ago, Very Jaded said:

So Trac is trying to blow up his own trade by telling Gold Coast to play hardball on Humphrey, thinking we will cave like a deck of cards?

Well if that's true, he's stupider than I even gave him credit for

Of course. He wants out. He's selling a cheap trade to GC to get them to take him and cares not one whit about a deal that is acceptable to us. We're not his priority, and haven't been for some time. But King wants to bring that back inside the team if a deal falls through? Madness.

All posters need to understand that people just lie at this time of years.

I told my boss at 9am this morning i wasn't going to sit in my office and eat Twinkies and listen to trade Radio.

it's lying season.

31 minutes ago, Demon4Life said:

Bookmark this post.

It got back to us that Trac said to GC we would fold like a cheap suit in requesting Humprey as part of a trade for him. Obviously we are irate he would get involved in the trade like this.

I'm not saying this didn't happen, and I'm not suggesting you weren't told this. But I don't see in anyway how this makes sense, what the logical purpose of it is, nor how it benefits the trade in anyway.

If anything it seems pretty illogical.

Trac's desire to screw us, while it may be there (or not), is definitely not greater than his desire to get this deal done and get to Gold Coast

To say that everyone knows he's 100% gone is simply not true

King wants to keep him, and at no point have we ever relented on our position that unless we get a mind blowing deal, Trac will be at the club next year

If he wants to risk playing FF next to Jeffo at Casey next year, then by all means, go tell the club of your choosing to try and screw us in a trade... what could possibly go wrong for you!

Just now, Very Jaded said:

Trac's desire to screw us, while it may be there (or not), is definitely not greater than his desire to get this deal done and get to Gold Coast

To say that everyone knows he's 100% gone is simply not true

King wants to keep him, and at no point have we ever relented on our position that unless we get a mind blowing deal, Trac will be at the club next year

If he wants to risk playing FF next to Jeffo at Casey next year, then by all means, go tell the club of your choosing to try and screw us in a trade... what could possibly go wrong for you!

It's not about Trac trying to screw us in a trade. It might have been as innocent as GC asking Trac this thoughts on what would get the trade done (I don't know the whole story). What I do know is we are rightly [censored] about this and Team Petracca's actions in the past.

King's initial comments on Trac mean nothing. Saying anything would have only further diluted his trade value. I highly doubt they even met face to face.

Clubs can't come out and tell the truth about players actions including leaks.

I’ll be [censored] if the club folds. If we don’t get what we want (Humphries or someone similar) then team Petracca is back at dees come preseason….too bad too sad. The dog wags the tails not the other way round. Need to stop worrying about getting a player offside. Club is bigger than the player.

1 hour ago, Demon4Life said:

Bookmark this post.

It got back to us that Trac said to GC we would fold like a cheap suit in requesting Humprey as part of a trade for him. Obviously we are irate he would get involved in the trade like this.

What I don't know is what will play out from here.

My guess is GC keep low balling us and we confront Trac about this (if we haven't already done so) and privately say we are keeping him to his contract. Then Lamb comes publicly out over weekend or early next week saying Trac will be kept to this contract (as an acceptable trade doesn't look like it can de done) to try and put pressure on the other parties to poney up a better deal.

What also supports GC low balling us is another player (Jake Rogers) we are interested in Cameron said today is not up for trade today in an interview.

I don't buy any bit of that.

3 minutes ago, Mouseymoo said:

I don't buy any bit of that.

Don't need too. But it happened.

Listening to Lamb on trade radio now. How's his demeanor????

3 minutes ago, Demon4Life said:

Don't need too. But it happened.

Listening to Lamb on trade radio now. How's his demeanor????

Being a hit sheepish

58 minutes ago, Demon4Life said:

King's initial comments on Trac mean nothing. Saying anything would have only further diluted his trade value. I highly doubt they even met face to face.

King and Petracca have been in contact, with another meeting this week. The relationship is amicable. Whilst I'm steadfast that he won't be at the Club next year, I wouldn't exactly put him and the situation into the Oliver / May mould.