old55

Yes would have looked better. We must have a specific target to pay that heavy price.

Probably fair enough, GWS already have 37, 53 and 56 this year too so don't need 46 in addition. Maybe F2 for Peatling - do you think that's fair? F2 + F3?

Seems strange for Adelaide with Peatling to get done, 46 could have been useful. 46 + F2 for Peatling + GWS F2 sounds about right to me.

I think that means we'll get a F3 back in the deal so we have a full suite of futures beyond the F1 that's going. The only other path I can see is F3 from Collingwood for Tomlinson and that seems unlikely.

I'll try to break it down for you. Pick 5 will get access to the next best player that Richmond, North, West Coast and Adelaide don't take. If one of them bids on Ashcroft and Brisbane match then our pick 6 will get access to the next best player that Richmond, North, West Coast and Adelaide don't take. You know, the same player in either case ...

Old dee confused Bowey for Weid.

That old55 loony, has someone let him off the leash again? Always cooking up some bs conspiracy theory. He even thought Goodwin could coach back in early 2021 - can you believe it? Always talking made-up rubbish.

So what. He's Brisbane's anyway. It doesn't affect our pick at 5. I'm not sure you really get what's happening here.

Big deal. They're not available to us anyway so the picks are 5 and 9 in the open draft.

If we really rate someone that we think Richmond won't take but who won't make it to 5 we could gun for 2 + F1 from North for 5 + 9. North don't really need more mids but could get two talls there.

It's our little secret then. If it gets out I'll know it was from you!

No but if he gets past Richmond at 6 and the Saints at 7 and 8 then worst case they'll be paying pick 10 points instead of pick 5 (note these picks will all be +1 after Ashcroft gets bid).

Maybe something with Brisbane for Sharp + 34 with any picks we have left over from the 9 deal? If 28 + 40 go then we only have 49, 54 and 65 - that won't do it.

If Dodo was still there I reckon clubs would have been lining up to bid on Kako just to give him the finger after all those years of impossible dealing.

Yes. 44 for Bedford.

"Trade us 9 or we'll bid at 5"

We probably agreed not to bid on Kako with either 5 or 9 too, that's a big bonus for Essendon.

We probably agreed not to bid on Kako with either 5 or 9 too, that's a big bonus for Essendon.

A year of development shouldn't be underestimated, look at the expectations on Windsor and Kolt for next season.

Sharp steak knives 😉

I won't mention that you've been dealing your UPPER CASE to @picket fence for years then.

It's likely 28. Maybe GC will give us 41 back and we can package 40, 41, 49, 54 and 65 to Brisbane for 32 and 34. Gives us 5, 13, 32 and 34.

What @Dr. Gonzo says is correct AFL Media editorial is independent of AFL control. Barrett slags off the AFL regularly, he even has a dedicated slot for it at the bottom of his weekly Sliding Doors column Posters here are now whinging that the AFL should rein Barrett in, the usual paranoid whinge, yes like you @Clintosaurus, is that journalists are in the AFL's pocket - you can't have it both ways ...

Holy sheet, this is getting to you daisycutter, I see a capital letter in that post!

One pick? They've got 10 off their list already. Draft is alleged to be deep and strong, if they fancy someone in the early 20s that's the only way to get him and Lombard.