It's still a 1st round pick for moving down 3 spots in a very even 1st round. We would probably have gotten the same player at 6 that we get at 3. Too much accepting mediocrity
List Mgmt. The 2019 Trade and Free Agency Thread
- Thread starter Scythe94
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Banned
- #6,902
Or Young and Jackson would be gone at 6 meaning we get neither of the 2 we wanted at 3 just to get a pick which could be closer to 30 than 18 wont get that fat curly headed campaigners nephew surely so at 6 it narrows down further so 6 and 8 basically become the same. Id rather have first dibs on whoever the * we think is the next best after Rowell and Anderson. I just hope we bid on Green if we get him sweet if not suck on that GWSIt's still a 1st round pick for moving down 3 spots in a very even 1st round. We would probably have gotten the same player at 6 that we get at 3. Too much accepting mediocrity
I feel like you would complain against Melb for this non trade now. But if we did the trade and got (for example ash at 6 over young at 3 and young was a better player) you'd spend 27 years complaining about how we could have had young but gave it up for a stupid trade.It's still a 1st round pick for moving down 3 spots in a very even 1st round. We would probably have gotten the same player at 6 that we get at 3. Too much accepting mediocrity
You have to think what we had pre draft. We have pick 3 and a future first which would be likely top 10 based on form. What you're saying is down grade pick 3 to 6 this year and most likely downgrade in next years draft. Why would the club do that?It's still a 1st round pick for moving down 3 spots in a very even 1st round. We would probably have gotten the same player at 6 that we get at 3. Too much accepting mediocrity
Cobwebs
Team Captain
- Oct 21, 2019
- 452
- 377
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
There is a better deal than what Adelaide got and the way Sydney operate we might already be locked in for it. 3 and 2020 2nd for Sydney's 5 and 2020 1st.Sooo GWS were looking to move above the bid for Green and were willing to pay a first round pick next year in order to move up 2 picks, 3 if it was us, and we said no and let Adelaide do the deal? There's virtually no difference between 3 and 6 in this draft, we're already rumoured to like multiple players, WTF is Josh Mahoney doing? Surely i can't be the only one who saw the ADE & GWS trade and just went into full meltdown mode at Melb declining such an obv winning trade. We don't even have a 1st next year and GWS was offering one up for nothing, like you'd never get a better deal, Adelaide are absolutely laughing, i hope we bid on Green now just to teach GWS a lesson in trading pre draft/bid. Anyways, **** this team
Cannon82
Cancelled
10k Posts
Melbourne Poster of the Year
Melbourne Demons - Ben Kennedy Player Sponsor 2016
Melbourne Demons - Jeremy Howe Player Sponsor 2015
Melbourne Demons - Dom Barry Sponsor 2014
Melbourne Demons - Jeremy Howe Sponsor 2014
- Oct 26, 2012
- 16,398
- 23,165
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Can't see Sydney doing that. Don't see Sydney suddenly shooting up the ladder this year, so they'd effectively be handing over a top 5 ish pick for pick 20 just to piss in GWS' corn flakes. I'm all for being nasty and spiteful, but it's a high price to pay just to stiff GWS.
GatesOfHell
Club Legend
- Oct 19, 2019
- 1,471
- 1,736
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Banned
- #6,907
We. Must. Bid. On. Green.
Cobwebs
Team Captain
- Oct 21, 2019
- 452
- 377
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
I was thinking more along the lines of Sydney bidding on Green to cover for an aging midfielder in Josh Kennedy.
Cannon82
Cancelled
10k Posts
Melbourne Poster of the Year
Melbourne Demons - Ben Kennedy Player Sponsor 2016
Melbourne Demons - Jeremy Howe Player Sponsor 2015
Melbourne Demons - Dom Barry Sponsor 2014
Melbourne Demons - Jeremy Howe Sponsor 2014
- Oct 26, 2012
- 16,398
- 23,165
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
And you would think GWS would match it. Don't see them letting Sydney pick up one of their academy prospects. Who else is available after the top 3 that is worth giving up a probable top 5 pick next year just to move up two places in the draft?
Cobwebs
Team Captain
- Oct 21, 2019
- 452
- 377
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Depends if they want Jackson [please] as has been reported, they have a decision to make. With the abundant talent they have at mid they just might have to let him go. Or they could just look around for another disposable ruck or two. Who knows.
Do not forget they have there own academy selections next year that will potentially need to use there first selection on regardless. This trade would help give them the option to have a crack at the player close to the best player in the draft based on there needs and they still get the player they’d need to use next years first round selection anyway. Plus as you say they get to piss in there cross towns rivals corn flakes.
Cannon82
Cancelled
10k Posts
Melbourne Poster of the Year
Melbourne Demons - Ben Kennedy Player Sponsor 2016
Melbourne Demons - Jeremy Howe Player Sponsor 2015
Melbourne Demons - Dom Barry Sponsor 2014
Melbourne Demons - Jeremy Howe Sponsor 2014
- Oct 26, 2012
- 16,398
- 23,165
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Likewise don't forget that if Sydney decide to one up the Giants and trade pick 3 in at great expense, GWS can just accept they won't get two top 5 picks this year and trade out their first rounder to the highest bidder. I doubt all the shenanigans and tomfoolery is happening in the background. Sounds like an impressive waste of time and effort to slowly give away all your draft currency via horse trading. Bring on the draft so all this silly speculation can end.
Devastating Boris
Premiership Player
Pick 8 this year is far better than our first next year (unless we finish bottom 3). For example pick 8 next year could potentially be used on the 19th player available (11 f/s and academy bids prior).
- Banned
- #6,914
If we bid on Green could GWS then trade 4 to port or geelong or would it have to happen before we pick Green? Obviously shouldnt be able to but with the AFLs other rules that make no sense i was just wondering if this is another.
Yeah they can. If we bid on Green, they'll get the standard 5mins to make a deal to shift themselves back and pick up the points to match and keep a pick before their next pick at 40.
Why should they not be able to do it?
Cobwebs
Team Captain
- Oct 21, 2019
- 452
- 377
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Same for us though, we could bid on Green, GWS successfully match the bid and we could trade out our pick 3 to another club in our next move. Not that that would happen.
If MFC do not want to bid on Green, why not do a straight swap - #3 for #5
The purpose of the trade is just to damage GWS.
Sydney goes the draft and bids with #3 and:
a) GWS match and Sydney picks another player
b) GWS waives their right to match, and takes another player with #4
and one of Jackson or Young will be available at Melbourne's #5 selection
3 for 5 straight up makes no sense for us.
With 3 we get whoever we want, with 5 we are comprised. Albeit it means we all get our wish and draft Young instead of Jackson
And you're basing this on what? Your intimate knowledge of my neural makeup? I Def wouldn't complain if we made that trade. It's a pretty obv trade to make and a huge error to not make it...
- Banned
- #6,920
So theyll just do that anyway and another club like port or Geelong win from us bidding on Green. So then could Port/Geelong then trade back pick 4 for their 2 picks plus another from GWS so GWS get back pick 4? Or are those picks lost straight away
Wait what? What do you mean downgrade next year? The trade would've been -
Melb receive pick 6 & GWS 2020 1st
GWS recieve pick 3
So how are we downgrading next year when the deal is just gaining a 2020 1st to move down 3 spots this year?
I thought I was pretty clear "that the purpose of the trade is to damage GWS".
If no Green bid comes then GWS will essentially have 2x top 5 prospects.
And if we don't do this then our pick 8 effectively moves back to 9.
Doing nothing means MFC just helps a strong side get better. How does that help the Dees?
Puhhhlease. Jackson is a massive reach at 3 and no other club is dumb enough to use a top 3 pick on a ruck with the intention to play him as a KPF. If we use 3 on Jackson it's a massive spit in the face to Gawn who will probably leave because the club is so damn inept. The only reason Jackson is in consideration is because the club butchered last off season as well and instead of actually using 6 to draft a generational tall in Ben King we overpaid for a very average May. Now when we had the chance to actually win a trade we didn't do it so we can use pick 3 on a guy that would be there at 6 and 8 anyways when we have virtually no other picks outside 3 & 8. A pick in the 12-25 range is easily worth moving down 3 spots in an even draft and the only reason they didn't do it is because half the football department are just eyeing off this season as make or break because they will all lose their jobs if we have another terrible year.
- Banned
- #6,924
Whats Ben King done to say hes a generational player? * me must have missed those games. Yeah Hogan also tore the s**t out of the competition this year. GWS will/would take Jackson at 3/4 and play him forward for a year or 2. So you say we'll play him as a forward and some how that spits in the face of Gawn? If anything its telling Weid to pull his finger out. Neither May nor Hogan did * all this year so ****ed if i know how you can claim we didnt win the trade. Oliver was a reach when we got him as well according to every single phantom draft up until there was word we were gonna take him. Im sure you have watched every game of Jacksons to sit here and say how bad of a move its gonna be. Taking a player like Jackson is a bold move which isnt going to pay off in year 1 so * knows how you think the FD are going to pick him for a make or break year youd obviously go the other way and pick up the players who will actually have an impact next year but a lower ceiling.
Because we already traded our 2020 first rounded. Let me put it this way, lets forget that we traded our 2020 first round ok. Based on ladder positions our picks would be 3 this year and 2 next year if we finish 17th again and if gws finish 2nd again next year thats pick 17. So pick 3 and 2 for 6 and 17 is a downgrade. It's all hypothetical we could finish higher than gws next year but it's not as if we gained anything. I hope that makes sense I'm not the best at explaining things. I just think why would the club make that trade with north to gain pick 6 this year only to trade 3 for to get back into the 1st round next year.
