Nasher

Now you've gotten to the heart of the issue. This happens all the time - if there's nothing to say, the writers just fill their column with horse poo instead of just saying nothing.

One. I agree with Ben's assertion that a star is necessary if you want to reach the ultimate, I just disagree that downgrade pick 2 to pick 9 is throwing away the chance at a star.

Who's to say you won't get your star at 9? In perfect theory pick 2 should be better than pick 9, but I'd be interested to take a really good look back and see where in the draft stars are found. My hypothesis is that you're just as likely to get your star anywhere in the top 10 as you are at #2; I don't see it as a huge gamble if we get two solid players out of it.

You'd be better off not wasting everyone's time and just offer them nothing, rather than trying to rip them off and having them slam the door in your face.

It does, but how many vacancies do we have? (Sorry for the lazy question, I'm in no position to self research at present)

How so? I think we need to try and cram as many AFL standard mids on to our list as possible. If we grab Lyons as well as all the other things going on then it becomes logistically difficult to get Cross on the list, but that's very different to not needing him at all.

Are we really in a position to be making 3-players-for-1 deals with the number of vacancies we have? It'd have to be for players we really needed and I'm not sure these two are it.

Doubt we'd have ever really pushed that hard to be in the race anyway. He's one of my favourite non-MFC players, but given the irons we have in the fire in regards to midfielders and how urgent a need that is, a flanker would be well down the priority list I'd have thought.

He went on a... a h... a hol...oh, I can hardly bring myself to say it... a holiday to Europe? In his off-season break? OH THE HORROR!

Yes, I think that's a more realistic scenario. And one I'd still be stoked with.

Upgrade Clisby and find another Terlich and Jones with the picks in the 60-80s and there's your three. Given the relative age of our list and the urgency of our need to improve the midfield, I'd be quite happy to trade our first 5 picks and not pick a single 18 year old this year. If our trade period turned out as described by Demonof1994, add "wet my pants" to "do back flips".

Any danger of both? I'd do frigging back flips if we did. Instant midfield.

BBO, Lordweaver and Biffen, please stop flooding threads with inane nonsense. It's sad that I just had to delete an entire page of posts from this thread.

Exactly. And if it were me, I wouldn't want this hanging over my head for weeks, I'd want it sorted and done with as soon as possible so I could enjoy my damn holiday. Being overseas won't be a hold-up to the trade if it's happening.

We start talking to Adelaide now and have the deal ready, on the assumption that he will agree. He may have already agreed, or take calls while he as away - if I remember correctly Dawes was overseas when his trade took place. We don't have to trump GWS if he's told Adelaide he wants to sign with us. The only way it becomes a competition with GWS is if he's said he'd be equally open to a trade to either club.

He'd have to also want to go to Essendon, of course. If Vince indicates to Adelaide that he wants to be traded to Melbourne, I really doubt Adelaide would try and hold us to ransom over two or three places in the draft.

Exactly how I remember it, too. My rank amateur psychological assessment says it must created a decent psychological barrier, because he was never able to consistently produce like that again. That says, he was a decent player who copped (and cops) more criticism than he deserves I think. He's probably a victim of his own form from 2000-2005.

It's kind of funny the way that so many people in this thread have talked about trading pick 20 for Vince or using it on Jones as if they're the only two possibilities for the pick. I don't remember reading anywhere that said we'd pick Jones with pick 20.

In terms of the player's salary that's true, but what business is it of the player manager's what happens in the trade? It's got nothing to do with him at all, that's a deal between the two clubs. At best, commenting on what pick his player is worth adds nothing at all, and at worst it could hinder the trade.

This is a thing that's probably been around since they started putting numbers on jumpers. I agree that it's silly and goes against what I'd like to see, but it's never going to change and has no real consequence, so it's probably not worth getting your blood pressure up over.

I ran a repair on the most recent crash, which in the process of getting things running again, has fixed the "likes" thing as well as page 110 of the rumours thread. This problem will happen again though until I figure out why.

Yes, sorry all, life getting in the way. Current to-do list as it stands, in priority order: 1. Find and correct root cause of the occasional database errors that are popping up (the rumours thread page 110 and the two crashes on Thursday night - I suspect were all related) 2. Install the package on the server that is obstructing particular avatars and attachments 3. Look in to the likes thing. Don't even know where to start with this one. These are all teething problems that should be quite addressable. Otherwise the new site seems to fly, even when busy.

A point can be hypocritical and correct at the same time.

Connolly was a nice bloke with the right intentions that was just in way over his head. I did some work with the club during the Bailey years and found him to be helpful and accommodating. He's a genuine people person, I expect he'd have been great in a relationship management role, playing guide for sponsors and so on. Those potting him or making snide remarks either never met him or are just being silly keyboard warriors. Craig was a good resource who clearly knows his stuff and had a good relationship with the players. I think it was pretty clear though that he became redundant when Roos was appointed.

The alternative is keeping them, which is also continuing the cycle if they don't add value.