Lil_red_fire_engine

Go you Lil Red Fire Engine. 

7 minutes ago, ChaserJ said:

That's now both the Age & HS that are thinking we'll take Windsor at 6.

The Age "early mail mock" has us taking Windsor then Tholstrup (O'Sullivan going to Swans to picks later).
 

States Weagles plan to offer F1 to get Curtin and this would likely be with GWS. Expect Hawks to take Watson and that Dees ""have been dazzled by draft bolter Caleb Windsor, a blistering outside mid who kicks goals and would immediately add polish to the clubs forward connection issues....The demons know they need to pounce to get Windsor at 6 because GWS will otherwise take" 

Article states Geelong like Caddy at 8 and Essendon is keen on OSullivan at 9. 

If that occurred that would leave one of Wilson or Leake for us at 11 as well. 

Curtin & Leake

1 minute ago, Demonstone said:

Bless. Now corrected. 

In dont see it with him for such a high pick that we jumped up the order to get. I would want to take any of  Wilson, Windsor, Leake ahead of him if there. 

26 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

At the time the move was probably for Windsor but now it sounds like he’ll be gone even earlier than we expected 

Tim Lamb interview from a month ago. I suggest the tier of quality changes and we have him in the next tier. We gave up a fair bit to move 3 spots in a draft to get a player who would still be there.

Club perceives a large jump in available talent at pick 11 compared to pick 14. 'Confident of getting two top quality players with 6 and 11'.

23 minutes ago, FTB said:

Hearing that we’re right into Koltyn Tholstrup with this pick. Hard as nails mid/fwd from WA. There’s likely a few names ahead of him on the draft board but if they’re all taken then Koltyn could be our man. Could be a WA double with Curtin firming for us at pick 6.

We shouldnt have needed to trade up our original pick to get 11 to make this happen. I dont think its likely unless we trade backward on the night.

I sense at this point Cal does not appear to really have a clue what we plan to do. 

Play selfless first option footy for each other with a dash of fun and flair. 

23 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

I don't think Melbourne is going all into get pick 3. Its pick 1 or nothing (ie: keep 6 and 11)

I sense we rate Reid/Duursma significantly higher than all others available and will attempt to do whatever we can to land either. 

We need high confidence that we are adding elite talent not medium confidence nor high confidence we will get just a good player. Our list is in a position where we need to add the truly special ones that will impact early and will develop to be our next top 20 in league players as Gawn, May, Trac, Oliver age. As we have found (Gawn aside) you are more likely than not to find these at the true pointy end of the draft. If this draft trails off in talent quickly giving a pick 6 with a pick that is more like 15 with NGAs and Father Son, a pick we dont plan to use and a future pick we would expect to be around 14 onwards is not a lot to get a true top end talent. I say go all in if we can pull it off but it looks like West Coast recognise already that its not enough.    

1 hour ago, old55 said:

So when Petty goes to Adelaide at the end of 2024 and May retires at the end of 2026 and "Trac, Clarry, Viney and Bradshaw" are all still playing, will Sanders be playing key defence?

How quickly people are jumping on this being Petty farewell season astounds me. Ignoring the fact he has 2 years of contract a lot can change for him personally and professionally. As can Adelaides interest and ability to pay the price to get him out of final year of contract.

As far as defensive stocks, even if the case Is that not why we have D Turner and Adams drafted? If we really want to take swing all of Weitering (UFA), Sam Taylor (RFA) and Charlie Ballard (RFA) are out of contract before we look at trading for someone else in in contract. Additionally plenty of cases of mature key backs filling needs quicker than developing elite mids. I would state confidence we have quality key backs is a lot more than confidence we have our next elite mid. 

I am not stating we should take a mid at all costs. Take best available but if the difference is a top tier mid or top tier defender its the former for me. 

43 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Interestingly, someone posted that we haven't spoken to Reid.

I can think of 3 reasons why.

First, if we got pick 1 we would take him regardless.

Second, we don't think we will get pick 1.

Third, we actually prefer someone else and that may allow us to have another pretty good pick as well.

It has been rumoured all along that we are more into Duursma than Reid. Whether that’s just based on outright expectations or the cost difference is unknown. 

9 minutes ago, Redleg said:

You are probably correct.

North can also throw a late first rounder to WC as spice.

However for us, if we are after Duursma, he could cost us a Sanders/Curtin and a O'Sullivan/Caddy/etc.

That is a huge price to pay for one kid who is a flanker essentially.

I would be happy keeping our picks and maybe trying to move our second pick up slightly, or if we did the above deal, to get Duursma, giving 42 as well and getting a late first back from North and maybe getting someone like Ollie Murphy as a key back.

We may not have access to these high picks for a while, unless Petty leaves, so I hope if we are chasing Duursma, he is worth it.

 

I dont think we or he see him as a flanker longer term. We should be looking for our next elite addition more so than a few quality players. If we make the move JT clearly thinks its worth it and he has the runs on the board for that to be enough for me. I have seen enough of his set of attributes to think its likely the thinking. 

B/B+ is right for us. We landed three money ball players for various needs that at worst offer positional depth at best have upside to make our 23 better. We cleared 3 non top 23 players requiring top 23 wages off the books. We protected our first current and future pick and moved up into the range we think has most quality. I look at all of the deals done for our needs and cost and the only ones I would have liked for us is Flynn (who chose WC to be number 1 ruck) or Sweet (who chose going to his home state). The other deals for cost (McKay) or contract length (Schultz) for the player value for need for us were not for us.   

30 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

That pretty much leaves us with Curtin...

I assumed with Hawks taking Ginnivan and their lack of key backs that they would shifty attention from Watson to Curtin. If not though he Bradbury’s to us and we would be silly not to swoop. In saying that I think there is still more likelihood we push up to 3 and jag Duursma in some form of Nth, WC three way deal. 

10 minutes ago, Kick_It_To_Pickett said:

I have to agree. Two premiership players and an AA out the door. Another premiership player retirees, and so far we have a young ruckman that Lion’s fans couldn’t wait to see the back of. Supposedly this was going to be a massive trade period for us. Even if we land McAdam, the list has not improved one bit and the Casey stocks are almost bare 

Alternate words/thinking. We have cleared 3 players not in our best 23 who require salaries commensurate with players in your best 23.

Who has been traded thus far to a club who you think we should have taken for the cost? 

Matt Flynn is the only one I can think of and if I was Matt Flynn I would choose being clear first ruck now at West Coast over being back up for Gawn for at least the next 2 years (which he would then be 10 years in the system).

You can only trade for whats available then need to have them agree based on something you think is fair and reasonable and then in some instances get their club to agree to clear the way.

Wow. Lets trade a pack marking kid who kicks 28 goals in his debut year of AFL footy. AND pick 6 for a pick 1 messiah. Whilst there lets take a washed up undersized forward who has shown a lack of work rate. 

I have now heard everything.  

3 minutes ago, Demonsone said:

Hanging out for a fwd yet the filth are going to get Schultz from freo.., what is our club doing apart from letting JJ, Harmes & Grundy go????

You want us to offer Schultz a 5 year deal? 

6 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

I'd also take Walsh every day before Rozee.

A good ball user who can run all day and hits the scoreboard. Rozee's ball use is good and he hits the scoreboard, but Walsh is an aerobic freak.

Butters is better than both and went at 12. Worth considering Ports position in that year having picks 5 and 12 is very similar to ours this year. If you trust in Jason Taylor and his record would you back in the potential to trade for pick 1 (Walsh) instead of gaining  a Rozee and Butters equivalent quality.  

Anyone know where we can get the full list of positions  and votes. MFC has only published the top 10. It’s always good to calculate the leader board by votes per game played vs total votes. It usually says a lot. 

49 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Max had to wait 8 years I recall....

Fair but this guy already has. We would be asking him to wait 2 more. Do you think Gawn would have come to us at that point under that scenario?

2 hours ago, Redleg said:

They have two, Williams and youngster Barnett.

Williams is a forward forced to play first ruck and Barnett is a kid. Flynn I guess is looking to plant his flag as number 1 ruck somewhere now not as a transition. 

1 minute ago, Jaded No More said:

But he’s 32 next year. His time is limited but our window is not. West Coast are a decade off a flag. 

Do you think after 8 years on GWS list Flynn wants to leave to wait another 2 years to play regular senior football?