FireInTheBennelly

Agreed, and that would take him to the next level. A genuine star and Brownlow contender.

I think he'll come good as a forward ruck. He can mark the ball, he took 9 marks in a 2017 game against GWS, 4 contested. He was down on confidence this year, and perhaps too heavy. If he trims down he'll be dangerous. There were 2 very simple marks (amongst others) he spilled this year that probably led to the lack of confidence and being dropped from the team. Big preseason and Preussy's set up for a big 2020.

Missed... by that much

That's what I thought, until he flipped the bird straight afterwards.

Jarrod Lyons says a big hello

I wanted him in the draft and haven't seen anything that would change my mind. Yep.

Do these rules apply to brown paper bag payments? For the sake of the argument, let's call them 'Visys'.

I honestly don't know much about him, is he a small forward, a HF, can he roll through the midfield, wing? If he can play a crumbing role, we'd be mad not to have a long hard look.

Ok, apologies, must've missed that one.

Apparently we're drafting 2 kids, both going by the name Basil, with our 2 first rounders.

Interesting

This all begs the question. Which player would we accept? Personally I'd like Finlayson, but not sure they can let him go now Patton's out. Who else? I can't see anyone else I like that would be around the right value.

I thought players could only be traded until 7:30 tonight, after that point only picks can be traded? We surely won't be doing a trade without a very good player?

Starting to look like we're done? For this trade period anyway.

This suggests his issues this year were not mental health related, rather they were personal conflict related?

I'd say it's a classic distraction from the Bombers, because they aren't going to get what the fans want for a broken Daniher.

Wasn't it deemed an illegal substance purely because it wasn't an approved substance?

No cast offs, and no future first pick. It needs to be a genuinely good player or no deal. Their upside is huge, ours would need to be similar and I don't think a late first rounder in a dodgy draft would do it.

So here are some scenarios with GWS A. No trades happen Melbourne selects Green with pick 3. GWS matches the bid and is forced to use 1787 draft points (pick 3 2234 - 20% discount). This consumes their pick 6 and moves their next pick 40 back to around pick 42. B. GWS trades 6 and ‘ice cream’ for our pick 3. GWS picks up elite talent with pick 3 Worst case for GWS is that then at pick 4 Adelaide selects Green. GWS matches the bid and is forced to use 1627 draft points (pick 4 2034 – 20% discount). This consumes their remaining picks in the first 4 rounds this year (40, 59, 60) and another 1024 points off their first pick in the 2020 draft. They may pick up more points from a Bonar trade, but not enough to eliminate a deficit going into 2020. C. GWS trades 6 and ‘ice cream’ for our pick 3. GWS picks Green with pick 3, and their next pick is 40. Scenario A gives GWS their Academy star, while scenario B gives them a top end talent pick as well as their Academy star, but leaves them short next year. I don’t know what Academy talent they have coming through for next year, but it would be a big call to go into deficit. Scenario C gets them Green and the rest of their draft is unchanged. A and C are very similar for 2019, so I can’t see why they’d do a trade with us to simply pick up what they could without a trade including ‘ice cream’. It’s even worse for them if they trade us their 2020 first rounder as the ice cream. That would mean their 2020 deficit comes off their 2nd rounder. That would be a draft disaster I’d say. Whichever way you look at it, they won't be trading with us for 3, and then choosing Green with pick 3. We 100% need to know who they're after at 3 if we were to do a trade.

Pathetic isn't it.

Isn't the point of them trading up to 3 so they can pick up another player, then use later picks packaged up for Green. Why would you use a pick on a player when you can get him later for less?

Any deal with GWS shifting our pick 3 back to 6 needs to come with an agreement from GWS that they won't choose who we want at 6. e.g. If we're dropping back to pick 6 because we think pick 3 is too high for Stephens (just guessing a name), but then GWS use pick 3 on Stephens, we lose out on getting the player we wanted. We don't hold all the cards here, yes we have the good ones, but certainly not all of them.

I got the impression Orazio was a big wind up as well, purely to keep the druggos on the front page.