Rumour Bluemour Discussion XL - ‘Silly Season’ in full swing 😱

[Aphrodite]

#BUMP from February


Re: 'Alleged' rumours resurfacing ...

Folks, this is the way things are here.

Posters are responsible for what they post. Moderators can not attest to the accuracy or otherwise of any rumour posted.

Moderators will intervene for a couple of reasons.

1. If a thread is threatening to be derailed because of a post.

2. If invested parties request the removal of material.

None of this draws a conclusion as to the accuracy or otherwise of the original post.

There is no need to further speculate. What will be will be.

Also, you need to remember that this thread like all parts of this forum is bound by the rules of poster conduct. If you want to express skepticism towards a rumour that's fine, but having a crack at posters who are contributors to this forum is simply not on and will be acted upon.

Simply put, don't be a dick.

Thanks all!

 

[circusdevil]

Poor valuation aside, that's overloading GWS' forward line.

Not sure why you need to comment on a trade hypothetical. As a keyboard list manager you have never missed a target at any draft pick in National, Rookie, SSP or Mid Season Draft so you'd never need to trade for anything.

Also ... I didn't say straight swap for Charlie so you and your evaluation - as someone recently stated - "can jog on"

 

[Blue_Fusion]

If not now when? With Cripps. Walsh, McKay, Weitering mostly into the second half of their careers, now is the time to strike if you want to make the most of those assets

I'll be honest, I don't give a shit about making the most of those "assets" ... trying to capitalise on them and get them a flag is not a priority.

Don't get me wrong, would love to win a flag with all of them, but reality is, when they were at the peak of their powers, the best they managed was a prelim alongside a pathetic finals appearance the following year instead of building. They're not going to get better from here, and their ability to hit the levels of consistency as they did during their peak has declined.

I will stand by what I believe, that is, it is not the right time for this club to sell the farm to bring Butters in. Port will not trade him this year. They will match any bid next year and will demand a king's ransom for him. We're not in a position to give up that sort of capital when we're trying to reset the list...

 

[jimsta10]

can we trade their future 2026/2027 picks?

 

[ctwenty1]

can we trade their future 2026/2027 picks?

yes

 

[Blue__Balls]

Shall we wait for the Trac deal?

A mid first rounder plus a late first rounder is not earth shattering - equiavlent to pick 4 or 5 plus hayward

Not sure how to value Hayward

I think Hayward is a pick in the early-mid twenties. Not a game changer, but a reliable contributor, comfortably best 22 in just about any team, with plenty of time left in the game.

You'd balk at a first rounder for him, in the hopes of getting a key position or x-factor player instead. But once you're into the 20s you're getting players with clear deficiencies and plenty of risk.

I reckon good list management would use first rounders at the draft where a player who lives up to potential is being bought at an effective discount vs. paying a premium when they're established, and then using second and third rounders to get bankable role players.

 

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

Do we do the geelong deal though? I thought our remit was to get players + picks unless we are thinking on on trading?

It’s a nice “fall back” option to have.

But I really think Geelong are playing games with the Saints and it’s in turn turning up the heat on the swans.

In the words of Denzel Washington “We can’t lose”.

 

[ctwenty1]

It’s a nice “fall back” option to have.

But I really think Geelong are playing games with the Saints and it’s in turn turning up the heat on the swans.

In the words of Denzel Washington “We can’t lose”.

as in forcing swans to overpay for curnow because they are still hanging around with R1 pick?

 

[NavySteel]

It’s a nice “fall back” option to have.

But I really think Geelong are playing games with the Saints and it’s in turn turning up the heat on the swans.

In the words of Denzel Washington “We can’t lose”.

 

[CFC_#17]

So much can be done with those picks. We will also have money. Brings names like Butters into play.

Those picks are picks in the 20s they are a joke. Port aren’t trading Butters for early second rounders

 

[95blues]

Not really stressing about CC. It'll get done in a multi team trade and we'll do well from it.

No more cringing every time he jumps at the ball expecting his knee to blow out.

 

[DZ4]

He clearly wants Geelong and Geelong only. Here they come swooping late as if this hasn’t been planned all along. Arrogance.

Call his and Geelong’s bluff and accept big overs from the desperate Swans. He either stays or we win the trade. Don’t bend over to the Cats like every other club. Add a top 10 player to your 3 shitty firsts and then we may consider the death ride.

 

[jimsta10]

so bloody juicy...cant wait for the swans response.

 

[The Fantom]

Geelong and Swans offers are unders. Why weaken our team to strengthen these players thieving clubs.

Give us an A grader + picks or take a hike. He’s contracted for 4 years.

Haywood is a B grader, you’ll be disappointed if you think anything else.

 

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

as in forcing swans to overpay for curnow because they are still hanging around with R1 pick?

I think it just raises the bar.

The swans in all likelihood wont part with three first round picks because they have academy considerations….. but it may just force them to put players on the table who were previously declared as “untouchable” to compete with the offer

 

[Blue__Balls]

It’s a nice “fall back” option to have.

But I really think Geelong are playing games with the Saints and it’s in turn turning up the heat on the swans.

In the words of Denzel Washington “We can’t lose”.

Agreed. This is "Take 19 for Marshall while you can, or we'll spend it elsewhere and you'll be stuck with two high-priced rucks, one of whom is pissed at you."

 

[Blue since 72]

So much can be done with those picks. We will also have money. Brings names like Butters into play.

Far as I’m concerned if GW hits the go button on whoever’s deal he likes enough i’m happy. If not we keep Charlie for at least another year.

Said it before and I’ll say it again, the future is now and I’m more interested in getting in a mix of new young talent and foot soldiers who make the list better than pissing contests about who won the deal or “we must get a star as good if not better than Curnow”.

The guy doesn’t want to be at the club anymore so lets get what we need for the future and move on.

 

[ctwenty1]

cal twomey reporting that Geelong have offered Carlton3 first round pics for Charlie

Hopefully not their own first rounders

 

[Sonny Jim]

So much can be done with those picks. We will also have money. Brings names like Butters into play.

I don't think so mate.
Port will not want any part of that.
No chance in hell.
At least it's a start in this auction.

 

[skadoosh]

Thanks, but no thanks.

Being the cats it's 3x picks between 14-18....
No thanks.

 

[Matty411]

Id go back and say: "CC makes you flag faves so 3 x picks in the 20s doesnt move the needle enough". Give us COS or Miers and were a chance.

Otherwise, lets see how this plays out.

 

[ctwenty1]

I think it just raises the bar. The swans in all likelihood won part with three first round picks because they have academy considerations….. but it may just force them to put players on the table who were previously declared as “untouchable” to compete with the offer

warner brothers may be heading to WCE early

 

[Benaly28]

Gotta love the cats.

It’s no deal obviously but at least theyve got the ball rolling.

 

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

I would love to be a fly on the wall at the Mackie vs Allen/SOS/Lyon old guard discussions

 

[Big Delut]

I think it just raises the bar. The swans in all likelihood won part with three first round picks because they have academy considerations….. but it may just force them to put players on the table who were previously declared as “untouchable” to compete with the offer

I don't see how it raises it from the already rumoured offer from Sydney. 2025 Pick 11 Vs 19 is a clear advantage to Sydney. 2026 I think you could argue Sydney's pick will likely be better, at worst they'd hold the same value. 2027 Geelong 1st will likely be mid 30s at best due to the Tassie picks. Is that a better asset than a player like Hayward?

 

[Bic]

Clearly no deal but at least it shows a starting point. Over to the Swans now.