old55

You've changed your tune. Sure Hogan is open to a trade to Freo when they are offering him a long fat contract. But the fact is, as you at least used to acknowledge, MFC has been in favour of trading him too this time and has been actively courting the idea. It's not all or even mainly Hogan driving IMO. I have no issue with this position of MFC and would be fine if he's traded for reasonable return like 5 + 23 that gets us May and makes us better - and it still could happen. We're lucky to have a surplus of KPF talent, Hogan is the most tradable and saves long term salary cap that enables us to keep our other stars - the FD probably calculated that we can't keep them all. Now Freo have forked this up totally and any resurrection of the trade is totally in their court on our terms. In the absence of this we should actively turn it around to a positive with Hogan staying. That's where we should get around him and play him in the backline in 2019.

I'm a big fan of this idea. I think he is well suited to this role and it is less likely to bring out his sometimes dubious attitude episodes (although I acknowledge it hadn't stopped Rance similarly playing for frees in this role). This whole Hogan trade debacle may yet have a silver lining because it may be the circuit breaker that makes a somewhat left field idea like this possible to execute. Goodwin has shown a willingness to try this type of move e.g. Melkshan forward, TMac forward, but probably needed a catalyst to enable an idea like Hogan back to get traction. It makes sense from a number of angles. The need to improve KP defence as indicated by the interest in May. The over load of KPF as indicated by our willingness to contemplate trading Hogan and amplified by the recruitment of Preuss. I think the FD may have assumed no Hogan when pursuing this trade - not that that is the primary reason. Also final silver lining, surely Hogan is over his flirtation with Freo and may now be willing to commit to our cause if we strongly welcome him back across the board.

Umm Greg Denham announced it was on weeks ago.

Are you Peter Bell's estranged twin?

Tin foil hat material - you probably think the moon landings were faked.

It's very possible West Coast may be an option, that cannot be denied. They don't seem to have ever been in the frame before but Kennedy is aging now. But I don't think it's a fait accompli that Hogan won't be with us beyond next year as you stated earlier. Lokk it seems we've got some common ground now. I genuinely think Hogan could play key back very effectively. He has great ball reading capability and is a nice field kick. His aerobic capability would suit the up and back between press and zone. Whether he's be up for this role change is another question though i agree. And it may push him over the edge to leave at then end of next year. We've made a plan for him not to be in our forward line next year and we've telegraphed a plan that we need to bolster our backline. Occam's Razor says Hogan back.

I wouldn't. I'm strongly in favour of dealing fairly and not making ambit claims. Players respect that and it makes us an attractive destination who can get the job done. I think it's good that Mahoney has made it clear all along that to get May depended on the Hogan trade. We save face with May too. I'm not a a take it or leave trade hardman but Freo have behaved very unprofessionally and we should not co-operate with them and re-inforce this type of behaviour. Otherwise it will set a precedent we don't want. They have created their own disaster. There appears to be a reasonable price from us in the public domain and that's 5 & 23. Freo could come back cap in hand at that price and a deal could still be done if Jesse would still entertain going there.

Seems to me like the pull has always been from Freo, now that nexus is surely broken, maybe there's a new path.

yeah, nah

Where is he going? Surely the Freo bridge is burnt now. I get that this saga has pi55ed you off, but there's an opportunity to get around him and make him feel at home.

Preuss arriving, Weed developing, Hogan staying. Hogan to CHB as discussed. No need for May.

Nope looks like I was wrong @Lucifer's Hero - rule is as it always was ... From AFL Rules at http://s.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/AFL-Rules-June-2017.PDF

Pretty sure - will search for confirmation article and post here.

Pick trading can continue after the Trade period deadline and also at the Draft so there's no rush. The AFL scrapped having to use picks for rookie upgrade @Lucifer's Hero - anyway it doesn't really matter because they are the last picks so it's academic - could be pick 128 and 144.

Will be fascinating to see how the Hawks get Wingard and Scully. Still after that Hannebury trade I'll believe anything!

Even that sounds low to me! Salary cap dump!

Holy Motors! That is one hell of a deal for a player on 4 × $800k. As you say effectively pick 39. The Saints didn't want to trade 4 and 39 was their next pick but that still doesn't make sense. If I was Sydney I would've asked for future 1st.

Do you think Rankine might slide to us then?

Pick 2 + 3 + May + KK our opening ambit Get it done you wimp Mahoney

Surf on Gold Coast pretty good - warm water all year round.

Well they only had 6 and 81 and want Lobb and Hogan so that's a problem. So they did a deal for a bunch of picks including 11 and 23 with Port who want an early pick to get access to the highly rated SA players in the draft.

I think the knock on him is lack of pace.

Fremantle made a low ball offer that we cannot accept. But the hypocrisy of the "hardmen" here is gobsmacking. On one hand it's "5 + 6 or tell Freo to get [censored]." "Mahoney needs to man up". We even had one highly respected poster saying the fair price is 5 + 6 + Brayshaw/Cerra. Now Peter Bell comes out with the same logic at the other end of the scale and the outrage is palpable. You hardmen should be appreciating and admiring his work. It's the way to negotiate according to you isn't it? It's just turbulence, Mahoney is smarter than that and we'll get the right deal. Relax.

Sorry it has been a long first half of the trade period

Possibly a red herring. Suggest some stupid idea as a cover. Bring in the ideas you want but reject the stupid idea. What you want is more easily swallowed.