Nasher

Jake Melksham!

The other was Caddy.

For those who believe Mahoney caves too easy and should take a harder stance, consider Adrian Dodoro at Essendon, who has not for the first time just failed to deliver a trade for a big name player who wanted to go there. Edit: I’m dumb, trade period not closed yet. Hopefully this turns out to still be true in a few hours ?

We’re over 10000 already mate.

As if we get Cerra. You don’t get club’s best young players tossed in for good measure. Bell won’t spend two weeks strutting only to do that.

I don’t think so sue. Cripps is from WA and there’s never been any noise about a return there. Simon Black from WA had a long and fruitful career in Brisbane. The AFL is littered with interstate players who settle in. Furthermore I believe this has been as much driven by the MFC as it was Hogan driven.

I was going to point out that you were delusional, but I see you already acknowledged it. ?

Mahoney’s MFC are not in the business of shifting the goalposts. That would be a one-way street to deal collapse.

FYI all, the official thread count including deleted posts is already at 400. The milestone is already reached.

That’s the rule, but it’s not the first time we’ve let bygones be bygones, there are a handful of posters active in this thread in the same boat. This incarnation is wearing pretty thin though, especially when he had the hide to tell Andy to make sure he was moderating fairly, given that rule and our generous application of it.

Not the dreaded 60s. Gee whiz, we might even take a player in the 70s.

If the conspiracy theory you’ve dreamed up makes you feel sick, maybe stop thinking about it for a little while?

@Mach5

Unlike Peter Bell, Craig Cameron is an experienced and professional operator. Upon reading that I’m more confident than ever that MFC and GCS have prepared both a May/Kolodjashnij package deal and a Kolodjashnij only deal and are ready to execute either depending on what plays out with Freo re: Neale and Hogan.

Hopefully the clubs have agreed to both a “with May” and “without May” scenario and are just waiting for Freo to pull their finger out. It’s hard to believe a Kolodjashnij trade would be that hard to solve in isolation if it wasn’t tangled up with Neale/Hogan/May (refer Kent trade).

I’m confused about what’s confusing. Gist of post: pick 5 and 14, or 5 and 23 = not an enormous difference. Is that a bewildering proposition?

Yes, but you’re the one who keeps carping on about how his position is untenable now. If that’s true then it’s irrelevant whether what we get in return helps get May or not. You’ve been out-logicked(?) by WYL.

What?

Doubt it came from match committee. A million times more likely they’ve just stolen the idea from here.

14/23 is an immaterial difference anyway. It’s the same outcome: the ability to get May, and a draft pick in the range that gives us a reasonable chance to draft a good player. The chance of getting a good player does not reduce very much at all between 14 and 23. If the other pick was to be involved in an on-trade anyway, then it makes no difference at all if it was 14 or 23.

My interpretation was a more basic version of the same: dumb footballer trying to use corporate wank speak and mincing his words.

From this post I can only assume you are unaware of this poster’s history. I will suggest that you treat the info he shares with some circumspection and leave it at that.

How the heck did you arrive at this conclusion?

Ahh, here we go. The poster who knows eff all during the year, then at trade time, suddenly knows every intimate detail that gets discussed in the FD, right at the moment that you could probably just assemble all the rumours and take a wild stab and get to the same conclusion. Add a dash of “trust me, this is rock solid” and there you have it. The only surprising thing is that it’s taken over 300 pages of this thread for him to turn up.

Freo can very much validly offer a pick they haven’t received yet if they think they’ll be able to deliver it. If they are unable to, the deal simply falls through. That’s why you’ll often see one deal go through and then a chain of dependent trades go through in short succession.