14 hours ago, DubDee said:

Clearly Judd and Lily orchestrated this at least 12 months ago

loyal high quality people

6, if you <cough> believe Judd...

1 hour ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

As to the trade, though, it's interesting to note she wasn't top 10 in the 'Daisy', despite her goals tally (while co-forward Alyssa B was, despite what appeared to be a poor - and definitely low-goals - season).

We have to remember how the voting system works. I'm guessing every player gets a certain number of votes every game, and under that system if you miss matches it really pulls you back. Zanker effectively missed two matches, so no (in the game she missed) or minimal (in the game she was concussed early) votes in those games. It makes it hard to catch up when players who are even having average games are still getting votes. Same with top ten finishers Heath, missing most of the Collingwood game and one other match completely, and S. Taylor, who missed a few with her hammy. Bannan played every game. If you look at votes per game the top ten would look quite a bit different.

The biggest hit was probably to Chaplin, who finished only four votes away from third after missing two games. But it's still probably a fairer system than 3-2-1!

3 hours ago, higgsy75 said:

This is going to be an unpopular view based on the thread so far, but I think the Zanker deal is pretty good.

She’s uncontracted for a start so makes it harder to push when she clearly wants to go. Looks like we may only use two draft picks, so getting one in the top 10 is super handy and the other will likely be mid teens if the deal with GC goes through. And we end up with two future second round picks.

Yep, it clearly impacts the starting team, but with Harris staying on it gives Gall an opportunity to shine, as well as Campbell and Hose.

I’m also not sure that Zankers record in finals is that crash hot either, that’s probably the biggest knock on her to this point.

As for Johnson, would likely have been delisted anyway.

In terms of what the bigger picture looks like re draft/trade/list management, I really think it’s not bad at all.

I agree with this:

Take away the Johnson aspect as you mentioned she likely would have been delisted anyway, and take in the GC deal which looks to be tied to this one

Zanker for 9, GC F2, Freo F2 and we move pick 17 to 14 in 2025 - GC F2 likely to be 19, 20 or 21?

Looks like we would only be taking 2 in the draft so moving 35 not a huge deal.

Edited 17 hours ago17 hr by Bsims

1 minute ago, Bsims said:

I agree with this - take away the Johnson aspect as you mentioned she likely would have been delisted anyway, and take in the GC deal which looks to be tied to this one - Zanker for 9, GC F2, Freo F2 and we move pick 17 to 14 in 2025 - GC F2 likely to be 19, 20 or 21 so sitting just outside a 2nd first rounder?

Yep, I get it too. We had quite limited leverage on Eden to pull a strong trade if she really wanted to go.

but I still have a bad feeling about list management tied with us being without a coach right now.

Anyways, we'll see what shakes out.

We've got a pretty good list and we shouldn't forget Wotherspoon as a developing mobile forward target either.

I think she'll go from strength to strength

2 hours ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

Very sorry to see Eden go (we have a pet in the family named for her, as posted elsewhere sometime 😊🥺)

As to the trade, though, it's interesting to note she wasn't top 10 in the 'Daisy', despite her goals tally (while co-forward Alyssa B was, despite what appeared to be a poor - and definitely low-goals - season).

that’s crazy! Zank had 10 times the year Bannan had. Easily top 5 worthy

Pity about Zanker and fav player for us. I guess if give an opportunity for another and we seem to have an abundance of talls (not as experienced) coming through.

We looking at trading anyone in?

Hatchard traded by the crows to the suns. Great pick up for them but she is exactly the sort of trade we should have looked at.