old55

Yes, there's definitely no harm and possibly some benefit in offering King a monster contract too because GC wouldn't be able to match but would have to pay up big to re-sign him and that would help in the Humphrey chase.

Butters isn't coming to MFC and we'd be dumb to get in that fight. Port will match too so it will be a trade, not FA. We should continue our good work and concentrate on wooing Humphrey, even though he's a longshot too. Crafting our draft selections this year on the basis of them being available next year, ie not taking a mid, would be crazy stuff.

I agree it's better but it's not aligned with list spots, it's just the first 4 rounds.

I think we'd need to offer our F1 + 8 or 7 + 8 + GC F1 for 2 + 13. That would probably net Robey and Pickett, but it would be a pretty high price.

I heard it was Essendon trading later points picks to GC for 15 and then 5 + 15 for 2.

If Adelaide are interested in Schubert then maybe 8 + 37 for 16 + F1. Would 16 be early enough for Pickett?

16 + F1 for 8?

Not if you have great research and significant insight into our list ...

I think if we want to, there should be a way we can convert 7, 8 and 37 into a mid (Sharp/Cumming), a HB (O.Taylor/Lindsay) and a small forward (Dovaston/LSP) with some creative pick trading.

I like his profile - "defensive first mindset" and his 20m and Agility Combine results. His stats indicate he gets plenty of it. His highlights look good of course, but a nice mix of kick and handball to create play and use of his speed and agility. Hard to judge his contested game. He looks more dynamic than Lindsay to me. But I'm a no authority.

The deal widely discussed earlier was Petracca + 24 for 7 + 8. That means it was 28 + F2 for 37 + F1.

"Threw away" to get GC F1 in the Petracca deal you mean?

That could make for some comical wrestling engagements where Nank wrestles Heath in our forward line who doesn't go for the the throw in and JVR gets the hit out. Heath says "I was never in the ruck contest, he's holding the man". I think nomination is required.

No I haven't. I'm probably looking at the centre square match ups at the next bounce (RIP) or some stat on the AFL app or day dreaming as is often the case ...

I don't know ... but Bassett has gone and Rivers has arrived so I'm guessing Rivers is backline coach. Chaplin is retained so I'm guessing he's forward line coach again, what else? Jones has been reffered to as midfield coach and Atkins has just arrived and I doubt it's as forward line coach. Scarlett to assist Rivers and Hawkins to assist Chaplin.

I never even knew about the goal square rule in 6-6-6 😀

NWM, Ash, D.Rioli, N.Martin, Amon, Blakey, Noble, Impey ...

I watched 5 minutes of highlights and I shouldn't because I'm a hopeless judge of junior talent, but I didn’t see him run with ball at all and that concerns me for the role he plays. Yes nice, quick distribution over varying distances which is very good and "first option" is a great mindset. But I also want to see some line breaking 80-90m run and kick plays mixed in there too for the role.

IMO we should continue to focus on Bailey Humphrey despite having to trade for him. Let other clubs battle it out for these guys.

So in other words you'd get rid of Chandler, Fritsch and Sparrow? Seriously, there is no way any of them are staying on 2 year contracts.

The points discount is 10% but then it's locked in at 195pts after round 1. Pick 43 is worth 184pts, so from there the discount outweighs the cost so no picks are required to match. 37 to 43 is a tight window so we'd have to be very unlucky, mind you 37 should come in a fair way as picks get eaten up matching bids, so the window will be wider.

Robey presented well on Gettable, very confident but not arrogant. I like his Eastern jumper number too. Hopefully if we get him he retains it.

But do two Whites make it wrong?

Chris Connolly

Jeff White