AaronDaveyChipsAndGravey

Lost Hogan (40 goals) and Garlett (albeit missed half the season) from that side plus decent fwd cover in Tim Smith. Tmac and Weideman have been constantly injured since then. We're really putting the house on those 2 plus Fritch, Melk and Trac producing 100 goals between them. I'm bullish that our offensive game will recover next year, but there's an awful lot riding on what was mentioned above as wells as some decent draftees having a big impact. I really hope as many do that we'll get our act together, however if Tomlinson and Langdon is all we get out of the trade period, there's just something that doesnt assure me we'll bounce straight back up from 17th into finals contention.

A bit of hyperbole never hurt anyone. Regardless, I don't think a club has much of a leg to stand on when the player has been constantly injured and dropped

I know Mahoney is a bit of a straight shooter, but I don't think he's really going to give up everything going on behind the scenes. Maybe something pans out and we get what we're looking for, but imo its a failure if we fail to either trade for or split the pick to draft a small/tall forward this trade period.

Wright spent more than half the year in the 2s for whatever reason. Either he's rubbish, so why would we bother, or he's worth a player that has spent most of his time in the ressies who can't crack a game at the worst club in the AFL. GC cant have it both ways, likewise with how they're positioning themselves on Jack Martin. Dropped him numerous times this and last year, yet asking the world for him.

I can't see how Mahoney and co. escape this trade period without getting a forward of some description. The price on their heads if our forward line continues to kick low scores next year would be phenomenal. At the bare minimum they need to at least organise the splitting of pick 3 so we can bring some talented young forwards.

Apologies then, were these as a junior though? I genuinely looked through all the recentnews stories around him and found nothing about acl damage.

As much as people keep saying "its such a deep draft that picks x,y,z in the 2nd round arent that different to 1st round picks" is a bit reductive. Clubs will have their intended draftees in mind to fill a certain position. A few others on here have said it much better, but if we're trading 3 to 6 and 11 we can afford to draft a player on a more needs basis (e.g. gun small forward) which may not be available come pick 26, rather than just grabbing the best player that could be superfluous to our current needs. I'd be more than happy to part with 26 in a deal that landed us 6 and 11 that got us some gun outside run and forward craft rather than another mid at pick 3 and a development player at 26.

That's a good point. They could be up to exactly what you're thinking and trying to get as many picks as they can in the 2nd and 3rd rounds (hence the hold up with trades around Patton and Bonar) in order to grab a high end pick and Green. However, whoever holds 3 will undoubtedly bid on Green, so with 6 and later picks they get that done, but I'm not sure what that pick after slides down to? If that's the case, I doubt what they end up with in the trade period in terms of picks will be enough to take a player in the top 10 AND match any bid for Tom Green. For reference Sydney had to use up picks 18, 37, 38 and 57 just to match our bid on Heeney. I also don't know why they gave up 12 and 18 which equate to about 400 or so points above what is required to match our bid for Tom Green. GWS will likely have 6, 30 and 42 and maybe another 3rd-4th round pick for Patton. Hypothetically we bid on Green at 3, GWS have to use up their pick 6 instantly, and use 37 points worth of pick 30 to match that out bid. Pick 30 slides to about pick 31/32. On that, I really think the reason they did that move with St Kilda was to package up 6 and possibly other picks/players to send our way so they can 100% guarantee having Tom Green at their club. The ball is firmly in our court on this one and we should be driving a hard bargain over it. EDIT: have seen the replies and appears we're all on the same page with it

I don't think you can lump HWSNBN into the same basket as Bonar who was drafted only 2 years ago and hasnt suffered a nearly career ending leg injury

Realistically, it will be Jetta and Hibbo that are holding out Hore from that lockdown small defender position, which going into next year may see one of them out of the side. Yes he may have lost some horses out of the mustang engine, however no one can seriously question his effort or workrate. I don't think he'll ever be as good as that 2017 AA year, however hopefully he can adjust himself to being a bit slower and working more on his defensive side of the game and return to the consistency of 2018. He's one that I really don't want taking the ball out of D50, so turning him more into that Jetta role would be a much better idea imo.

If I were the Giants I would be laughing at Hawthorn if they seriously came for Bonar (previously a pick 11), Patton (previously pick 1) and only had to pay pick 11 for all that plus other picks coming from us. It seems that Hawthorn seem to be trying to get away with blue murder each trade period and I hope GWS play hardball with them.

Why do Giants need picks after 3 if we deal that pick to them (which I've taken you're implying here) Gold Coast for sure wont be placing a bid on Tom Green. Once they get to 3 they're in the box seat to land him. What I can't see is the Hawks giving up 11 which they'll use on McGinness. Despite that, the most logical scenario I can see is: Hawthorn out: 11 GWS out: 6, Bonar, Patton Melb out: 3, 26 Hawthorn in: Bonar, Patton, 26 GWS in: 3, 42 Melb in: 6, 11 Later pick swaps would have to come into it to balance it out, but at the base of it I reckon that's pretty fair

EAD St Kilda. By the way they've been talking about it you'd have thought he was already living at Moorabin. Seeing their meltdown on BigFooty is pure gold.

King re-signing definitely gets Hill done to St Kilda, think this one can be put to bed now. On a side note though - Geelong entering the race for Hill this morning reminds me of this:

But where’s that feather in his cap??

From Trade Radio with Hawks GM Barret: Would you look to get involved in the Brad Hill scenario? Wright: I think that's drawing a long bow. I think he's made his intentions clear he wants to get to the Saints. I think we wouldn't be able to get near what the Saints are offering

It certainly is rare in this day and age thats for sure. I could be wrong here, but I reckon the Saints have stuffed it big time. They know they’ll have to pay up big time to try get King out from Gold Coast next year and will certainly be made to pay overs with 2 1st rounders next year, thus not wanting to give a future one up this year for hill. Add in Port demanding a 1st for Howard and you certainly have a conundrum on your hands.

How? Only moved 4 picks back this year, got the player we were after and only had to send back the Hawks 2nd round pick that will most likely be 30 something

Our future second or the one we just got from Hawks? I assume its the latter as the deal got done straight after Frost

Completely agree, I’m not saying that the move doesnt make sense, but sinking nearly $2 mil of salary into our wingers seems like a lot of money to be spending when he still have an enormous hole in our forward structure. Had Hill nominated us in the first place I doubt we would have brought Tomlinson in. Langdon and Tomlinson are definite upgrades on our wing stocks and will be more than competitive. Hill sure would be a bonus, but I dont think it would be prudent to take on such a massive salary when that money could be used on a better forward target. My take on this whole situation is that the Saints got greedy on all the players they wanted in and severly underestimated what would actually be required to bring them all in. They’ll have to offload a half-decent player thats for sure. Theres definitely a huge possibility that if they don’t get more attractive picks in that Hill will get stuck at Freo.

I get what you’re saying, but I think we have played and prepared for this trade period on the assumption Hill isnt available. I dont think the club should bend over backwards and just grab him because he’s there now. We were happy to go into it with just getting Tomlinson and Langdon and look at using some money and picks on some decent small/tall forwards which is still a massive deficiency at the moment. We cannot rely on Weideman and Tmac who for the better part of last year were badly out of form or injured.

Brown is kicking that regardless on Oscar or Frost - he is simply not a lockdown defender

I highly doubt Hawthorn would be that stupid to pay him that much

Anyone got the points value of the trade? Future 2nd is obviously speculative, however I see Hawks being around that 6-10 mark next year

My only problem is why did we recruit Tomlinson then? He’d have to move either forward or back and probably completely changes why he was recruited in the first place. Also Freo were demanding 2 1st rounders for Hill. How is that going to get both Hill and Langdon done? We’d be selling the farm to get both done and paying out the a for Hill. We need to be saving this money for a decent forward