Gysberts2Bate
Brownlow Medallist
Can the Swans realistically convince Green not to nominate and play for them instead? Would assume you'd be interested in pick 3 then.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

They were the days. Didn't post much at all but just followed a bit of the chatter. Nothing like on here which I am more passionate about.Another Hotcopperite... Now I'm trying to figure out which one you were...
Out: Jones + pick 63 (112)
In: Pick 18 (985)
985 - 112 = 873 btw picks 20-21
We wouldn't use pick 63 and we might be able to move an earlier pick anyway and maintain a good relationship with our trading colleagues.
Or maybe straight trade.
18 for Daniher - It is a 1st rounder [emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Lol.Out: Jones + pick 63 (112)
In: Pick 18 (985)
985 - 112 = 873 btw picks 20-21
We wouldn't use pick 63 and we might be able to move an earlier pick anyway and maintain a good relationship with our trading colleagues.
Or maybe straight trade.
18 for Daniher - It is a 1st rounder [emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
We won't use pick 5.You take best available at pick 5 regardless of position. For me, best available is Joe Daniher.
Yes, but we have a good relationship with the Saints.I like the Daniher part of it. That's all I would be offering.
As for the rest. Firstly, I think 12 and 18 are likely to go to Freo for Hill.
I think StKilda would rather not get anyone this trade period than give up their future 1st, which they will be keeping safe for the Ben King. So it will be those 2 picks for Hill.
Lastly, Id be amazed if we get a pick inside 25 for Jones. I reckon he is worth a 1st round pick, but unfortunately we have zero leverage.
We won't use pick 5.
Yes, but we have a good relationship with the Saints.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Yes, this is what the Giants tried with T. Mitchell and effectively what Carlton did with MurphyCan the Swans realistically convince Green not to nominate and play for them instead? Would assume you'd be interested in pick 3 then.
Out: Jones + pick 63 (112)
In: Pick 18 (985)
985 - 112 = 873 btw picks 20-21
We wouldn't use pick 63 and we might be able to move an earlier pick anyway and maintain a good relationship with our trading colleagues.
Or maybe straight trade.
18 for Daniher - It is a 1st rounder [emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Points only matter of you're matching a bidI would think we'd give picks 9 & 24 (2254 points) to Melbourne for 3 (2234 points).
That would leave us with pick 3 & 5 in the draft, then we could give the Bombers 5 & whatever else we can score for Jones, perhaps the 18.
Pick 3 gets us a top notch player.
Picks 3 & 5 gets us Grundy now!![]()
Would be so depressing5 and 9 will be going to bombers
Its a huge risk...but its what he is worthWould be so depressing
We have pick 44.Lol.
I do like pick Jones + 42 for pick 18.
Saints then package up 37 for Steven &42 for a pick in 20s for Howard.
Bruce compo and 12 for hill.
Ryder for late.
What reports?5 and 9 will be going to bombers
View attachment 762038+View attachment 762039= PICK 26
View attachment 762040= Delisted and Picked up Free as they had nothing suitable to offer in trade having approached him
View attachment 762042= View attachment 762043???
Id rather see him go to the draft... than see us get a useless backend pick in return.View attachment 762038+View attachment 762039= PICK 26
View attachment 762040= Delisted and Picked up Free as they had nothing suitable to offer in trade having approached him
View attachment 762042= View attachment 762043???
