Nasher

You mean, we're not downgrading pick 3 like olisik said?

It's not rewarding us for being poor, it's helping us because we've been poor. Anyone who uses the "Franklin for 19" is just being silly. I and most other Melbourne supporters would take the flag and pick 19 any day. Hawthorn are welcome to finish near-last every year if they'd like a higher pick. As for your last line - I'd prefer you stayed and be the good contributor to the forum that you used to be.

Hogan?

Stop. Next fish pun gets the thread closed. It was funny for the first 5 pages, if I'm generous. Some of us come here for our dose of lies, innuendo and non-events you know!

You missed the joke. BB. Don't worry, you're not missing much.

I kept my head mostly in the MFC sand this year - why did he? Whatever it was didn't affect him for the previous three seasons, where he barely missed a game.

I like Blease for Garlett too. Both players are worthless to their current clubs but could revive their careers at a fresh environment. Has the the chance to be the ultimate nil-all draw trade though.

Yes, "hope we've done our due diligence" is something of a redundant comment. I always hope we've done our due diligence.

As to why we didn't go after him, I would think the "no free agents after trading a compo pick" rule would have played a big part. Given the sounds Roos has made about using early draft picks to their full currency on the trade table, I can't see him compromising pick 3 for any but the absolute best free agent. To put it on to perspective: pretend this Dangerfield thing was real for a second. Taking Malceski would have caused out compo pick to be downgraded, thereby strongly weakening our bargaining with Adelaide; taking Malceski might have cost us Dangerfield. You can apply the same logic to any real deal that might be cooking in the background.

His motive is cash, that's been apparent all along. And that is OK.

No, the competition thinks he is a second rounder, hence the second round pick bid.

It has been a long time. This thread was started about four Machsy aliases ago - by the original, no less.

It's a lot better than the old system where either club would get the player in the 40s without any of the other clubs having access to him.

Stoked. We get Stretch without compromising our position at the trade table. Excellent way to begin my favourite period of the year. Welcome Billy!

Saty's account has gone unused for nearly a month. Hope the old boy is alright.

I saw it, and have thoroughly failed to understand why it's got people in to such a spin.

I think he'll stay.

I'm all for downgrading one of our earlier picks ala the Tyson deal, but 3 to 15 seems a large jump for mine.

That's what I thought, too. I had to force myself to read beyond his first line, and spent the rest of the time just wondering why this guy still bothers. Munga, if it's all over, walk away now and spare yourself the heartache.

I'm another too young and distant to have seen him play. Condolences to all of Robbie's family, the MFC family and my friends on Demonland.

I agree, and in the past I've been supportive of the 'slow burn rebuilds' as initiated by Dean Bailey that we've been stuck in ever since. This time though I'm at risk of dying of boredom waiting for the team to come good.

As far as the five stages of grief go, I skipped the middle ones and went straight from denial to acceptance. *shrug*

Not in my place dc. I've had three of them go through the system and another on his way. They are learning their lesson - albeit slowly!

Let's hope that's what happens, Redleg.

I don't think it's how strong clubs do it. It's how clubs who don't want to be traded with do it. I've posted it before that I knew a guy who spent time with a club and sat at their table during trade week. His story went that clubs like Roos's Swans would target the player they want, put their best offer on the table immediately, the trade would be done within the hour, and both clubs can move on with other things. Other clubs, like Essendon, would make completely unreasonable demands and waste everybody's time (which is not limitless). We saw this ourselves with the Darren Jolly trade - fair price (late first rounder) offered straight away, deal is done, we move on. My mind also goes back to the Brock McLean deal - the trade was executed within the first couple of hours on the Monday of trade week and we were well compensated (that we blew the pick on Gysberts later is beside the point). On the extreme end of the scale, Essendon missed out on Josh Caddy altogether a couple of years ago because of their unreasonable trade demands. I'm not suggesting we roll over and take any shafting Geelong will offer us. I just don't want to see a long, protracted negotiation that saps all our time away from getting the deals *we* want to get done. And I definitely don't want to see him walk - someone hasn't done their job if that happens.