DeeSpencer

I think you are confused between knowing how to negotiate and knowing when to take a good deal. The idea to separate the higher valued player from the lower valued player is good negotiation. The first thing we have to do with Howe is get a benchmark value for him and get Collingwood to offer a reasonable deal. If we end up converting that deal to one for Kennedy and picks then that's fine as long as the picks are decent. If we want Kennedy and they want Howe then it's fine that they end up in the same trade eventually. Keeping them separate is just important until we get value for Howe.

Buckley said Freeman will take some of his issues with him to his next club. Without looking it up that's almost a direct quote. I'm not sure he would've said that if he was just referencing the hamstring injuries. I've now heard it from a few sources that Freeman like a drink and a night out. Not uncommon with young footballers. But when injured you are meant to be ultra disciplined.

Cincy Houston NE

Tyson's best (last year) was much better. More prolific ball winner. Better hands in close. Goal kicking from stoppages. Reads the ball from the ruckman better. He had a down year this year but is 22 and can likely spring back. If he had 2 more average years then he'd be where Melksham is. Melksham hasn't elevated his game in the midfield. Isn't winning big numbers, isn't dominating through great ball use. So he's getting reinvented through a move to half back and can hopefully step up a level with that chance.

I have no interest in picking him up, but I would have some interest in getting him to the club to train in the lead up to the drafts if that was allowed. If he is a good trainer and kept himself in good shape despite being out all year then he could bring a bit of leadership and a ruthless edge to the training track. I'm not sure anyone would give him a 2nd chance but being in Melbourne might be his best shot to impress clubs. Just a bit of out of the box thinking.

Incredibly unlikely they win the division but the 2nd wildcard spot seem pretty open. Who's looking at better than a 9 win season from (taking out the Packers and Cardinals): NFC North - Vikings maybe NFC East - whoever wins, plus Cowboys if they get hot late NFC south - one of Carolina/Atlanta yes NFC West - Seahawks capable, Rams possible With 2 wins the Saints are now tied for the 2nd wildcard spot for wins. Going 7-3 and 9 wins isn't impossible if they start to clean up in the division. I love the wildcard system, it's going to be a good race in the AFC as well. Steelers, Chargers and Jets probably the favourites, but Bills, Browns, Raiders all in contention for a wildcard spot is fun for their fan bases.

I think he'd be fringe 22 for them next year. I think they'll look to settle Griffen on a back flank, will want the pure pace and skill of Wilson or Williams (I can't tell them apart) on the other flank, will want 2 talls (Davis and Corr/Marchbank/Mohr) and 2 mediums (Patfull, Buntine and Haynes) plus Heath Shaw. If you can get lock down ability from Heath Shaw or Patfull then you don't need someone like Bugg. It's ambitious planning but you don't win flags carrying too many negative players. Coming from a Hawthorn background and with a list with so many good skilled players I think Leon Cameron and GWS will know that. They have a tight salary cap as well so if they can free space by replacing Bugg now rather than locking him in at average money that's a decision they might have to make. He'd start the year in our best 22, but it depends a bit on the development of Mitch White, Lumumba bouncing back, the move of Melksham to half back, the progress of ANB, Stretch and Petracca in to midfield depth as to whether he'd stay there. A good pick up if we don't give up too much.

Devon Smith has to be number 1, in a contest with Toby Greene, Heath Shaw and Rhys Palmer for number 2 spot in the pest ratings!

Kennedy for Toumpas. Melksham and a 3rd round pick for Howe. I'd settle for that. We need to get a 2nd and 3rd rounder for Howe. It's possible, but will take some negotiation.

How did Paul Johnson go at Hawthorn? Or even Cam Bruce for that matter? Cheney was a decent servant but he never played in crunch time. The Hawks likely want Fitzpatrick as they need a mature tall to replace Hale and Lake and Fitzpatrick can be an emergency option at either end. If Hawthorn teach him how to kick properly and can get him with a proper AFL looking body, heck even teach him how to run without looking like a baby giraffe then maybe he might make it. But he wasn't going to make it at Melbourne.

GWS are near certain to use their best picks this year on 2 academy kids who are predicted to go early in the first round. They have pick 8 and will get pick 7 from Collingwood for Treloar. They've worked out that because they don't need the picks alone but only the points that come with picks that they can auction off the top 10 picks for 2 picks in the 20's and then use those for the bidding. Essendon's picks 23 and 25 combine to more points than pick 8, so they can trade them and get a top 10 pick pretty cheaply. Sounds to me that once again through a lack of knowledge and abstract thinking around the rules we've missed an opportunity here. Instead of Milkshake we could've loaded up our 2nd rounder and possibly Collingwood's as part of the Howe deal and got another pick in the 10 ten. Have we missed a trick once again?

Jack Watts has played 100 games and is a walk up start in our 22. No other club would touch him for that price. The 100 games is a statistic. It means nothing on it's own. He was a high draft pick that was ready to play early and mostly played in a mid level team or below that never had huge pressure for spots. Certainly at no stage did Essendon have a deep midfield. The experience means he knows what it takes to play AFL but we are moving his position which counters against that.

If Gold Coast offered 3 and 19 for Howe and 6 and the Pies offer Kennedy and 26 for Howe then to be honest I'd take that. We can beat around the bush all week but that's not a bad deal. The Pies will offer 26 and Kennedy for Howe and 43. That's not enough

Taking a C grade midfielder who doesn't make great decisions, giving up a good pick and hopefully turning him in to a solid defensive and attacking back flanker. It's an interesting tactic. Half back isn't a bad spot for us to bring in a mature player, I'm just not sure he's the right one.

Yeah not much point bagging the development team when we've just bought in McCartney. And he's way off the mark with Kent. Who does have to lift in certain areas but is a great talent. He's right on: the need for outside speed and skill the need for extra developmental rucks/forwards the need to bring in the right experienced players at the right time

What is a success though? Besides landing a gun free agent (and for free not in a match and trade) I think success is hard to judge. Because to win a trade you almost have to have the club on the other end stuff up. Even if you get a superstar to nominate you like Brisbane and Beams it costs a hell of a lot to get them. We've made some really good moves over the last few years. But when you break them down almost every deal has cost something to get something which is how it's meant to work. Our best deals: Letting Sylvia walk for pick 23 Garlett Our very good deals: The Vince trade with the Sylvia pick Signing Crossy Letting Frawley walk The Salem Tyson for 2,20 deal We can't recreate any of those this year it seems and that might be disappointing, but it's also about opportunity and needs. There isn't a Garlett this year as far as I can tell. We don't have a Sylvia to flick or a Frawley. We don't have the need for Crossy type. Trying such an ambitious move as the Tyson trade isn't really on the table. I find it hard to think Howe and Toumpas out for Kennedy, Bugg and Melksham makes our list any worse. I'm a touch disappointed we didn't have someone better than Melksham lined up knowing Howe would leave. But then I look around at the trades and I struggle to see who it would be. For the late 1st to 2nd round market (because we aren't signing a star this trade period) there's: Henderson, Yarran, Zac Smith, Redden (left for success), Jetta, Sinclair (contracted, would avoid us), Bennell (no), Ben Lennon (unlikely). It's not a great bunch. Aish and Freeman are the 2 young players out of contract, leaving cheaply and possibly available that could fit our list build and have great upside. But I'm not exactly disappointed we didn't get them. I don't think West Coast made a single trade last year and they jumped right up the ladder. The Dogs traded out Cooney and Griffen for Boyd (who rarely did anything) and jumped up the ladder on the back of their kids improving not trade ins really. Hamling was a nice find as a delisted free agent and that was about it.

Stephen Hill or Jack Ziebell Andrew Gaff or Josh Caddy The skinny smaller guys might be a bit hit or miss but they are also incredibly valuable to your team. By the way Kelly isn't a Bont (in size or ability) but he's not exactly small. Even with the growth in size of midfielders 183cm isn't going to be small and he's skinny but not tiny and is building his frame. Treloar leaving will only up a spot for him to get more midfield time and I think he'll develop pretty nicely.

If you play to a structure you can. I doubt Brad Hill has taken a contested mark in his career and Isaac Smith wouldn't have many more. They burn the wings for the hawks whilst the aerial work is left to the talls, bigger flankers and inside mids.

No but if we trade up the supporters will

I'm a little worried about moving up to pick 3 to take this kid or any kid, because I think it's a throw back to the messiah days. Especially given our need for pace and skill I think a lot of pressure on him to improve our ball movement which is quite ridiculous given there are 18 players on the field at once. If we did do it and it's a decision based on a player we think is head and shoulders above the rest then I still think he'd need to be managed cleverly. The idea that a kid is going to step in on to a wing in his first season and revitalise a stagnate team is quite silly.

Melbourne: Pick 6 = 1751 Howe (pick 20) = 912 pick 25 = 756 pick 44 = 362 Collingwood Kennedy (pick 35) = 522 Seedsman (pick 40) = 429 pick 26 = 729 pick 45 = 347 Gold Coast pick 3 = 2234 pick 35 = 522 pick 41 = 412 Howe + pick 44 = 912 + 362 = 1274 Kennedy + 26 = 522 + 729 = 1251 6 + 26 = 1751+729 = 2480 3 + 41 = 2234+412 = 2646 My player values are just a rough guide. But adding up the points I think we can trade Howe, pick 6 and 44 and come back with Kennedy, pick 3 and 41. Though we might need to convince Gold Coast to deal before they worry about Seedsman that might be difficult. It all depends on how keen they are on picking up an upgrade in the 2nd round. Given they will likely get pick 10 to go with 16 and 19 I'm not sure they'll be all that keen. But it also highlights why it takes so long to get deals done. So many clubs are waiting on one deal to fall before they can work on the next one. I imagine that if Gold Coast do end up with picks 10, 16 and 19 that St Kilda will come calling with pick 5.

Um no. Redden is a solid as a rock as a defensive inside mid. Henderson has a long career ahead of him as a CHB once settled in position. Howe's leaving because teams hope they can fix his issues and make him in to a good half forward flank. His talent is worth a fair bit, but so many insipid performances at either end of the ground detract from it. 20-25 is probably fair. Any other deal we do is about getting that kind of value.

They made it clear as soon as they announced his retirement that they wanted to keep him around. But that's a bit irrelevant to the on field aspects of keeping him v bringing in a 28 year old. I think it was the plan to get Melksham and play him at half back, the emergence of White as a decent prospect from the rookie list and the very small semi-resurgence of Jack Grimes (going from complete liability to somewhat ok depth) that made the FD think Crossy should retire. They didn't want him taking up a list spot if he wasn't going to be a regular in the team. Guess we will never know.

Rosa is a far better kick and might have 4 or so years left. Cross had 1 year at best, maybe 10 weeks. He was too slow to play in the midfield, too poor a kick for half back. Rosa could play wing or half back and help with our skill and work rate. Doesn't help with our pace though. I'd want him, but if we are getting all 3 of Melksham, Kennedy and Bugg even if they play different roles we are getting a lot of ready made players in. We might have to see what Melksham, Stretch, Grimes and White offer on a wing/half back instead of Rosa and if Melksham looks the good or someone like a Mitch White is a player of the future or we draft someone then we will be thankful we didn't get the short term option in.

The 5 was against Brisbane in a rout wasn't it? Hogan had 4 in a half and could've had way more with any kind of supply. Even Dawes was up and about that day. Walker is about as good as you get for a depth key forward. Not many sides will have better players sitting in their reserves. But I don't think that should make him a target for us.