TeamPlayedFine39

Phenomenal second half of the year and won over a very, very sceptical fan base. If he's within 60m of the goal - get the ball in his hands!

Because, despite appearances, he was deceptively strong and incredibly well balanced.

Agreed, he's moved off the ball and has his approach blocked - that gives the impression he is out of position. If it's still happening in a year or two, then we have real issues. He's a junior player on the list - he needs to fill out.

Draft predictions are never accurate this far out. I remember people salivating a year early over the 'certain' 1,2,3 of Scully, Lucas and Butcher.

Well, don't i look the fool! I guess the point i was trying to make is that I wonder what we could down grade our pick 10 for this year and what could we get in return. Would make a two first rounder trade a lot better for us.

My bad. I would hope, for equality's sake, it would take more than pick 16/17 to get a player of Stringer's quality- especially whilst under contract.

Adelaide want two first rounders... How about we trade pick 10 to Geelong for Blicavs or Menzel and pick 16-18. We trade Geelong's first pick and our 2018 first pick to Adelaide. Adelaide get their two first round picks. Geelong get pick ten to use on Stringer or Ablett. Melbourne get Lever and Blicavs/Menzel.

I'm genuinely concerned that I might be sick of Jake Lever before he even arrives at the MFC...

Preaching to the choir!

He questions the asking price of two first rounders, as most of us do.

He was a Demonland special in his draft year- his highlight package litvthis place up. I very much doubt the gc would want to part with him.

Of course you can trade a contracted player! Do you really not see the difference??? Anyway, I'll bow out now. I've said my piece and the threads not about me. All the best to Garland, great servant of the club and played his best football when we were at our worst. I have a lot of respect for him. Maybe he'll be there 2018, maybe he won't.

Does that account for the difference between a player who plays 22 AFL matches as apposed to someone like Kennedy who plays 22 VFL matches?? Maybe that have revamped the match payment system, but that seems unusual.

Yeah... forced retirement... that's not honouring a contract. Club offered him 3. The club gives him 3.

So no retirement??

No match payments whilst injured would have been a big financial hit, and we'd be giving him another whack as he'd get none of them in a settlement. Collin would have played senior games this year; most likely would have played round one given our kpd stocks at the time. And whilst we don't owe anyone a game, we should honour contracts, particularly of those who are veterans of the club and are coming off a serious injury.

Agreed, but it would be rare for that to happen whilst contracted. Generally speaking, AFL footballers love playing AFL football; and you're a long time retired. I can't imagine why Garland would want to retire, with a year to go on his contract, from a team on the verge of finals, after toughing out the last decade?? However if retirement's what he really wants - then that's his decision. Coercion from the club is unfair after taking him off the free agency table with a 3 year contract.

You don't get full pay upon retirement though... and the career you've worked towards your entire life towards is over.

Re Garland... Why are so may of the belief that a 29 yo, contracted, KPD would retire?? Has he given any indication that is anything other than committed to rehabbing and getting back to playing? Those advocating for a us to delist him; I think delisting a contracted, long term servant of the club, after he's missed a season due to serious injury would be unconscionable.

Might be trying to off load only one of them and it could possibly be for the pick they're looking for, not the money. Would be strange to trade Salem after just re-signing him... (I thought you couldn't trade a player in their first year of contract... or did i imagine that..??)

Who are they..? If we can talk so openly about Lever, why not them..?

Wonder if they literally mean two first round picks or if the mean pick 10, plus another first round pick. Could we, for example, trade down our pick 10 to pick 17 before we forward it to Adelaide with next years..??

If that could be negotiated down to 10 & 45 for Lever, we'd be laughing.

I think our Football Department staff should stare at a picture of Scott Thompson for three minutes without blinking, before entering into any negotiations. The football world hasn't played fair with the MFC in the past, we're under no obligation to pay more than we absolutely have to for Lever.

Would not include either of those with pick 10- especially not Hunt.