Adam The God

Not a fair or 'efficient' indication though, is it? Ironic, given it's disposal efficiency.

Agreed. Treloar has the pace to take his game to Judd's level a couple of years ago. He's a natural ball winner too. He gets into the right places, makes good runs, uses the ball pretty well and can kick goals.

Gun, isn't he? I think Shiel would be next on my list, followed by Greene and then Coniglio.

I hate that stat. It's the biggest load of rubbish ever. We can run around in circles or handball/kick from side to side and gain no ground, yet our disposal efficiency might be considered terrific as a result of this. I think Richmond have better users coming off half back too, so it's not just their midfielders that use it better than ours.

If we can convince them to come (long contract, big money, Roos and Melbourne) and tell GWS we can compensate them with a top pick, we could conceivably get any of the GWS blokes, Treloar included.

If we win a few more games, journos will pay more attention to him and rate him higher. Very unfair, but journos are popularists, so they write what the masses want to read.

Gee, our man Jones looks good in that, doesn't he? Legend. Goals are the only things he's missing. How he didn't make the top 50 list is a joke.

True. Brown and Neeld were a vital part of luring Dawes across at the time. I can imagine us going hard after Tex next year. Get the midfielders we need this off season and come back for Tex in FA next year.

Yeah, me too. That threw me a little. Of course, some of that is subjective, but it made me think that we're hopeful of landing Dangerfield (or Beams) and then someone else who we haven't broached or discussed on DL.

It's funny. I've been pretty confident throughout the last few days that we'll get at least one star into the club. Given our available picks, I'm hoping 2 A graders are very doable. I'm certainly hoping this is a game changing week for our club.

Welcome, Craig. Love the avatar. Is that Steve? I think we're working on a number of angles. It sounds like we're fishing with Dangerfield and Beams. I'd say we've also spoken to GWS, who are more likely to give up one of their young stars, because they have so many of these kids, many of them Victorian and are/will be looking to get back home soon. If we offer large contracts at the player and a high pick at GWS, they may well say it's better than they'd get in a year or two when some of these guys leave for nothing. I think we're in a similarly strong position for Dangerfield. Adelaide know we can offer them the best compensation. I think they'll offer him up for trade if he doesn't commit to them. That doesn't mean he'll come to us, because he's still got to agree to the trade, but I can't imagine he'll stay at Adelaide once he's a FA. But the hidden trade target is obviously...hidden. That's why this trade week is so fascinating. There are rarely leaks from the MFC anymore, so deals are done and then we find out who we were after and not before.

Best time of year. Just let our imaginations take us away...to Disneyland apparently.

I think we'll get one of those GWS blokes, I dunno who, but I expect us to land one. Particularly, if we don't land Dangerfield. At this point, I'm quite happy to be positive in my ignorance. No, he wouldn't. One high pick, plus a late first rounder or second rounder will do it. Remember the Judd trade? Particularly, as pick 2 or 3 will be better than pick 10 for next year.

Roos may also feel the mental scar tissue is beyond repair too. If Trenners gets drafted by Richmond in 2009: by now he's played in two finals series; doesn't play in the worst team in league history; doesn't have the media spotlight on him as the game's youngest captain; doesn't have to endure a torrid and tumultuous time where the football administration has backstabbed his coach; and it's quite possible (probably likely) that he is better managed and is rested and treated for his OP/foot issue a lot earlier. With this all considered, it's really not an apt comparison, because of the baggage that being at the MFC has imposed on him (and others).

It's interesting. It seems most Demonlanders could deal with the Trengove trade if we can get a star in exchange for his pick and one of our top picks. Myself included. I think this crushes the view that this Trengove stuff was put out by the club to allow supporters to get used to the idea. Surely, it would have been better to do the trade for a star and then there would have been no chance to speculate. It's in this speculation that people are worried we're simply throwing him out for 'nothing'/a young draftee. There's certainly a more beneficial reason for announcing it though and that's to show other clubs what we're prepared to do.

I think I'm in agreeance, mate. I have a real ethical problem with taking Beams, but I'd take Greene. For mine, I'd also prefer to seek another trade, rather than go to the trade for Brayshaw. It's hypercritical on my behalf though, because I've been a strong advocate of not caring about anything else, except whether a bloke can play football. There are some things I just couldn't support someone for.

That all depends on whether you think it was all down to poor development. IMO, it was a combination of both, but mostly weak draft pools.

I hope you're right. It was discussed on Demonland earlier this year that he and Tyson were best mates. I wonder if this means anything at all. I hope so.

I think Roos is probably quite happy/prepared for some of this year's draft class to be stars that we might pass on. It's doubtful they'll be stars next year though. We'll have to wait a few years to see. Instead, I think he'll ensure that we get ready-to-go mids that have some runs on the board at AFL level and have the potential to deliver A grade output very quickly. So in the end I think he'll take a draw between trading blokes this year and the potential draftees we could have landed. For me, it's a win-win. RE: the Salem/Kelly deal, I think if Salem gets anywhere near B grade, we've won that trade. If he turns into an A grader, then we've won it handsomely. I can't see Roos potentially distabilising the club with a Trenners trade that will merely return a draft pick. We want it for something bigger. I'm really hoping this trade period could be a game changer. It really could be too, if we land Shiel, Greene/Coniglio and Dangerfield. I'm not going to like seeing Trenners running around for that mob either, but I might enjoy it more if a Shiel is tearing it up for us.

It just shows there's a wealth of talent up there at GWS, just waiting to be pillaged. Shiel, Treloar, Coniglio, Greene, Cameron etc.

If we did manage to get Shiel, Greene and Dangerfield, that is some serious ball winning ability there. Combine that with Tyson and Jones who consistently get high 20s, plus Vince and Cross who get mid 20s and you've got a midfield that can really accumulate and get on top of the opposition. Shiel and Dangerfield would bring some much needed pace to the midfield too. Particularly, Dangerfield. Livin' in a dream, huh?

He's a Western Australian actually. And I'd rather bring in Greene and Coniglio and not bother about Brayshaw. For me, it's a case of known quantity versus unknown.

I agree, Macca. The thing is I think Roos agrees with you too. He'll try and take lower picks to the draft and trade off all our high picks. Can almost guarantee it.

He's a bloke who was suspended for his club and charged by the police, only for those charges to be later dropped. He's a risk and therefore we can use this as leverage.

Has Roos actually hinted or explicitly said there is a no [censored] policy? Where has this idea come from?