Nasher

Yes, the state of the list usually is why teams finish last.

Your logic seems to be "St Kilda will improve more than us, therefore we'll finish last". Won't the same thing therefore be true the next year as well? It seems to me that you're just taking one fact (trades) and drawing an entire conclusion for a season - and one that has the most pessimistic outcome imagineable. I just don't see how you can do that when there are a million other variables that affect the ladder that haven't happened yet.

Yes, I get that other teams will improve. Can you explain to me, why that isn't what happens every single year then? How come the ladder doesn't end up the same every year?

DN9, going by this logic, *every* year, the team that finishes last is odds on to finish last the next year. If you're going to pencil us in for last this year, why stop there? Pencil us in for last every year for the rest of our lives. I don't know who we're going to leapfrog. We should improve, and some teams will get worse. It happens every year. Predictions of finishing last this far out make the assumption that everything will remain static - that's just not how it works.

lol You're working yourself up in to anger.

Why are we suddenly talking about finishing last? Do we think there's no scope for improvement in our existing players? Very few clubs turn over their lists in one off season, and yet clubs move up and down the ladder all the time. FFS guys, get a grip.

On this occasion I think reaching the lofty heights of mid table would have been important. If nothing else it may have slowed the rate of free agents buggering off from our club at the first opportunity, and reduced the number of players who laugh when approached by us. I want us to become an attractive place for players on the move, and not being a horrible footy side is step #1. There would still have been plenty of opportunity in the future to recruit good players for our premiership side in the draft- not having early picks this year would not necessarily have compromised that. Geelong and Sydney have shown you can build a good side without ever having picks in the top 5. I'm not sad about it, but I'm very sympathetic to those with short term views at this point in time.

The club obviously had a crack. I don't doubt for a second that they seriously explored the Beams, Dangerfield and Kennedy options, and probably others that didn't get leaked. So they didn't eventuate - they rarely do, these big name players are normally very hard to move, and it's not just the MFC. I really wanted a big name trade - as others have said, we need to improve and fast. We don't want to wait for kids to take us there. A Tyson trade would have been nice, but who honestly doesn't believe we were KOTD with that one? We got lucky, it's hard to expect that to happen every year. Going in to the draft with our first three picks is disappointing, but only a little bit for mine. We've still got every chance to significantly improve our list if we get the picks right. We now back in our recruiting staff.

We may or may not be winners, but we're the most sure about what we're getting. I'm happy. I'm somewhat bemused that it took so long though given the relative lack of complexity of the deal

Pfft, what would Quayle, two club doctors or a surgeon know? WYL said it was because the MFC played him too much two years ago and Ruchmond flogged him too hard on the track, so that must be what it is.

We only have three uncontracted players left on the list.

No room on the list, stmj. Assuming Frost and Lumumba come on board, we'll have only three live picks, unless we delist a contracted player or pass with pick 23, neither of which I would do for Petrenko.

The only reason everyone was in such a flap about Wines was because nobody paid any attention to Toumpas at all, because everyone assumed he'd be gone by our pick. All the discussion at the time was around Wines vs O'Rourke. I don't know why people find it so hard to believe that maybe Todd just thought Toumpas was a better player, like every other commentator in the business, professional or amateur.

I don't think so Redleg. Currently we've only got one vacancy on our list, with Clark still to exit and Lumumba and Frost still to come in - that'll leave zero. After Tapscott, Strauss and Blease go we'll have three live picks. Pending other trades or delisting of contracted players, our draft position will be 2, 3, 23, Stretch, Jetta upgrade, pass.

Okay all. The emotion rollercoaster has clearly taken its toll, as this is the most absurd thread I have ever seen, and I'm not kidding. Anyone who signs up a new account to post BS can expect a ban for both that account and their normal one. Give us a bloody break. Toying with fatigued supporters is not funny. I'll give the OP the benefit of the doubt as I believe he is truly sharing information he believes to be true, but this thread is done.

Don't think so - if I remember rightly, when we delisted Meesen and Newton when they were contracted, we picked them up on the rookie list without the payout. The Saints taking him would presumably mean they'll also take on his contract, which I can't imagine them doing given the condition he is in.

How could I possibly doubt a poster named "UncleWithBenefits"? Which, incidentally, is the creepiest username I've ever seen.

Okay, I'm pretty comfortable that we're going in to the draft with 2 and 3. Don't have the energy to believe the Kennedy rumour. This trade period has been insane. I'm exhausted.

What you would not have known, is that under that Tigers polo was a ticking timebomb of a player who was about to suffer a possibly career ending injury. It was only unfortunate timing that this didn't become Richmond's problem. (I'd still have been shattered for Jack either way)

That's pretty much what Webber already said.

Going way off topic now rjay, but while I've always understood you putting people's Demonland monikers in quotes, Jack's actual name is Jack, it could probably do without the quote marks.

Too late, I already did.

Is that your expert medical opinion is it WYL? Don't bother answering. Rhetorical question.

Had my say on GNF months ago.

Done.