old55

It would be nice if we could turn Oliver into Steele. Use the pick and the saved salary and have the Saints pay Steele some.

Kulcha

Some of us just underestimated how much the club wants Petracca gone.

The problem you are struggling to understand is that we wouldn't have even been playing poker if we hadn't "blown" it up. We knew we were going to lose the hand but we're playing a longer game.

I reckon we've already done that for two years. We helped Clarrie to a better place now it's time for both to move on.

Would have been better if you said: "We did this for a reason"

I think we did it for reasons. It's clear to me that he's recently broken the last straw. There's got to be a line and he's crossed it. We needed to "blow it up" because that was the only way to move him. As others have posted, there's not a queue of clubs out bidding GWS' modest offer - why would that be? I hope he prospers at GWS and in life generally. I'll be very fine with that and cheer him on like Jesse and Toby, except against us.

Bad kick at Hawthorn = Elite kick at MFC?

Our midfield is going to get belted next year, we need more rebound from defence than Bowey and Salem. CJ sounds good.

Whatever the trade, I hope we hang onto 24, last year Richmond traded that first pick on night two of the draft to North for F1 which became pick 4 this year. I know this draft is not as deep but the pick is still likely to be valuable on night two for rated players who slipped through. GC only care about points and the pick will just vanish on draft night one if they hold it and the next pick, 25 ironically with North currently, will be first on night two. Our 28 is nearly as good for points, give them that.

I think a stumbling block in the trade with GC is that 7 and 8 aren't liquid assets outside the Petracca trade. Sure they could trade them back for more points but they've got plenty of points already with them. No-one really wants to trade future picks into this year's first round and there isn't anyone else of merit to trade them for. If they wanted to go all-in they could do Humphrey for Petracca + 23 + 28 + 41 and then offer Carlton 7 + 8 + F1 for Curnow and forget JUH.

The comparison is broken contracts on both sides vs broken contract on one side and low value draft picks on the other side. Not difficult.

Do Essendon get anything?

AJ is contracted for 26 we drafted him last year, don't sweat the small stuff ...

A warchest like Norf's or the Saints? We're a minnow club and we're not going to attract A graders in future, no matter the warchest. The one opportunity we have to do that is this year with Humphrey for Petracca, rewrite the narrative and at least become a piranha.

So much sooking over pick 61 and F3. Posters must have been to a Petracca master-class. Looking forward to the mega melts when we pay real extras in the Petracca-Humphrey deal.

They've talked some big "head-turning trade" talk, it's a great test to walk the talk. I didn't think they'd have the cohones to sack Goodwin and do it when they did so they could get the new coach in before trade week, so that was a good sign. Here's hoping ...

Look I fully get your reservations about Petracca but I'm prepared to go to the wall for Humphrey.

No, that’s why I said "they won't all be".

I'm not keen on 7 and 8, and I'm fine to trade 23 if it helps land Humphrey.

Nope they won't all be. I'll give Petracca and 23 for Humphrey if necessary.

We really need a replacement for McVee but I can't see GWS swapping Olivers unfortunately.

That's right, players have to want to be traded.

How exactly? IMO he just needs to let GC know that he's good with it.

I think it rests on GC coming to understand that the only way they get Petracca is to trade Humphrey. That said, if it happens, I expect we'll have to trade Petracca plus something to close the deal.