old55

We can help there, give us 12 and we'll give you McVee and the Spargo compensation pick

Fremantle traded Hogan to GWS for pick 54, it's a bit rich to blame Tim Lamb for that.

Luke Jackson is the only similar level player we've traded out in living memory and we extracted good value there. Melbourne trading myths ...

Going ad hominem pretty early aren't you?

"You’re also ignoring the other fact, there would be multiple suitors for Petracca if the GC negotiations fell through; Adelaide would likely revisit this, I imagine other Victorian clubs may come knocking too. A future second rounder, in your words, would be laughed out the door because even if GC looked to lowball, other clubs would be prepared to offer something far greater or overpay for him." You mean Adelaide and Justin Reid who told Cal Twomey they backed away from the trade because the price was too high? Yeak OK, I guess that leaves your "other clubs" to overpay.

Although for some reason you don’t seem able to admit it, I think we've agreed that there is a bottom line that below which we wouldn't trade Petracca for. Now we're just haggling about what that is.

I think because we're "pushing" then Clarrie gets to go where he wants to. It's not an auction.

Very keen for you to explain to me which of the 17 other clubs have made out like bandits in trades with Tim Lamb and therefore think he's a laughing stock. Please give me the examples of all their killer deals.

Old mate @bing181 who is running the same line as you that it's impossible for Petracca to remain at the club said he'd be traded for a F2 if we didn't say we wanted a fair price. I'll try to spell out what the club and I am saying. Petracca won't be traded for a discounted price. That means if the price is discounted then Petracca won't be traded.

But do you acknowledge that the club's messaging about Petracca - "he wants to expore new opportunities and we're open to that only if it provides a good return" has been different from Oliver and May who we've openly encouraged to look for new opportunities without the good return caveat? I guess you're going to say that the only reason we were able to say that about Petracca is because he wants to leave, but what if he didn't? Would we be pushing him out too like @BLWNBA implies for "future second rounder". And if that is the case and it's as obvious as you both imply and that "only in the delusional world of football supporters" would believe it then why would GC be fooled and offer more than an F2? I don't think your "reading in" holds water. Petracca won't be traded at a discounted price.

"Nowadays, everybody wanna talk like they got something to say But nothing comes out when they move their lips Just a bunch of gibberish"

That's not what I heard King say re Petracca in his interview on SEN, he wants Petracca to stay. The messaging is quite different for May and Oliver. Walking back the Petracca trade is a real option if we don't get adequate compensation.

Humphrey hasn't done it year after year because he’s 21. That's what he's going to do when he comes to us. Petracca has done it year after year with us because he’s 29, that doesn't benefit GC. "Wrestling with a pig ..."

It doesn't have to be. We can take a stand and hold Petracca to his contract and send McVee to the PSD.

And what if the Petracca to GC story fizzles with it? Dimma "que sera!"?

And when GC say "no, be grateful you're getting Humphrey" what then?

If we get Humphrey for Petracca we need to sign and run. It's a great deal for both clubs. We're not getting a Humphrey any other way and GC aren't getting a Petracca for him when he inevitably leaves at the end of his contract. We just need to sell it to Humphrey and "it's gonna take money, a whole lot of spending money"

Don't get greedy

It's Humphrey for Petracca or we keep Petracca. He's a sooky prima-donna but he's a pro. No doubt he'll be back for the RedBull camp in Europe in ripping shape for the pre-season. I wouldn't take 6 + 7 + Ainsworth in a deal unless our ambition is to end up 17th next year and enjoy pick 2 in next year's draft. Go full @WERRIDEE and select a starting, bench and depth midfield for 2026 without Petracca, Oliver and without a proper replacement. It's fugly!

The other complcating issue is FA compensation. My post was out of date even when I made it. Compensation for Allen, Draper, Silvagni etc and the WC draft concession have already or will shortly push out our original 2nd at 23 and the Spargo compensation so it's a moving feast even for a "points nerd" like me to keep up with. The only thing possible is to assess scenarios as they are presented.

It's complicated. The new points system has definitely made it harder to match bids with rubbish picks. afl.com.auThe draft change adding another element to upcoming trade...Cal Twomey takes a look at how changes to the points model could impact this year's Trade PeriodGC have some very highly rated Academy players, Twomey's rating 2 - Uwland, 4 - Patterson and then 26 - Addinsall. Of course these players tend to get bid a little later than they are rated. GC have enough points with picks 6, 13 and 16 to cover bids at the positions above but they do need them or equivalent value picks. They can't just trade 6 away. Of course they have players up for trade: Flanders, Rosas, Fiorini, Budarick and now maybe Ainsworth who will provide points and that will make a big difference. Our pick 23 and 24 or 37 from Spargo are pretty small beer in the equation. It's hard to be definitive, all those players going out should nett enough points to allow them to trade say Flanders + 6 to us and maybe they'd like 23 back. IMO Humphrey is a straight swap for Petracca that if available we should take and run. Humphrey + Flanders to us would need Petracca + 12 (from GWS for Clarrie) IMO. Yeah, I said what I said - Petracca and Oliver for Humphrey and Flanders.

Zac Merrett doesn't like this ....

Don't give up your day job.

Oooh, tough guys! It's a rumours thread ...

Wow, what a coincidence! Petracca's media mouthpiece responds with face saving BS the day after MFC announce that HE has asked for a trade. FFS, if it's a "genuine 50/50" decision from Petracca's point of view then it's absolutely not up to him, it's up to MFC and who can provide the better deal. Now I'm starting to get unhappy with him.