The Facepainter
All Australian
- Jul 4, 2012
- 795
- 643
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- REDS BASEBALL
Reminds me of my son playing U/10'sI was under the impression every player on our list was a mid. Is this not the case?
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.
Reminds me of my son playing U/10'sI was under the impression every player on our list was a mid. Is this not the case?
Do we really need more gws list cloggers??I'll give it a go
Trade in: Marchbank + Pickett, Corr, Stewart
Trade out: 23 (or whatever we get for Touhy) and 2nd round next year
We'll take some of the burden off GWS
GWS players get more opportunity at our club
I'll be wrapped with that - then we draft mids mids and more mids
Okay, this may just be an oversight but Trigg very clearly said in the Bartlett interview that Carlton would not be looking to use their first pick (#5) on Marchbank (and Co. I assume). Yet when the article is written up by Carlton media on Carlton's website there is no mention of this at all. I'm wondering why, because this is pretty big news for members and if they really wanted to make the point wouldn't they have included it in the article as well?
I might be reading too much into this but it just seems a little odd.
http://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/2016-09-21/tuohy-offered-three-years
How can you call something "dumb" when you don't even know what it would be for?Can we stop the speculation about next year's first already? Trading away a future 1st is incredibly stupid if you are a struggling team which is likely to get worse next year (two steps back, ten steps forward).
SOS is not dumb, and he will not trade away what is almost certainly a top 3 pick next year. This is validated even further by the rumours from our quality sources that he is cooking something big up for next year.
Ha ha, Just because I know you love him so much, you could extend it to ...WHE - Marchbank - Corr - Stewart. 33,34,35,36 jumpers. Just me?
Stringer won't budge from WB. Why should he?
That's actually a valid question, but frankly, it's common sense.How can you call something "dumb" when you don't even know what it would be for?
This years second and next years second for Marchbank, Stewart, corr, Pickett.
If we actually get a pick in the 15-18 range for Tuohy, it will be that pick and this year's second.
We have a pick in the top 10 this year. I dunno what the justification for keeping this years and trading the next is aside from giving one of the academy sides a leg up.How can you call something "dumb" when you don't even know what it would be for?
except that gws need picks next year
If Jeremy Cameron wanted to come to a Victorian club (as an example), our first rounder next year would instantly be discussed as a starting point. Number 5 this year would suddenly seem more tradable as well.That's actually a valid question, but frankly, it's common sense.
It is all about relative value. Because to a struggling side that is bereft of talent like us, next year's 1st rounder is invaluable. Based on our needs vs everyone else's needs, there is no plausible haul of picks or talent that we could receive in return that would be more valuable to us than that pick.
Aside from Cripps & Weitering, it is our most valuable asset (yes, more valuable than pick 5 this year, as I believe we'll finish lower, and that's not even taking into account the general chatter that next year's draft is supposed to be superior at the top end than this year's). I cannot see the great man selling the future and greatly diminishing our flexibility down the track, especially when we know something is being cooked up for next year.
Alas, do not fall into the trap of undervaluing our 2017 first rounder. Classic case of hyperbolic discounting.
You have to give a little to get MarchbankDo we really need more gws list cloggers??
A cake that takes a long time to bake, but is worth the wait!!Any word on what type of cake we're talking here, LtD?
Because GWS would value next years twice as highly so we could get a hell of a lot more out of them for it then we could for this years.We have a pick in the top 10 this year. I dunno what the justification for keeping this years and trading the next is aside from giving one of the academy sides a leg up.
Two in the hand is not worth one in the bush depending on the species of bird.
take a look at the GWS list - teams win premierships when they have stars on every line - GWS have stars in every position - what a concocted bucket of spoof
I can see us potentially trying to send Everitt and 41 to GC for pick 14
Need to make a few assumptions here, but assuming GC get pick 14 from Hawks for JOM, I can see us potentially trying to send Everitt and 41 to GC for pick 14 and using that to secure Marchbank and maybe another GWS player. This would rate Everitt at about pick 25-27 by my rough calculations. Or Everitt and Graham for pick 14. This would rate them both between 30-36.
I can't see the Hawks getting a 1st for Hill. Freo won't give up pick 3 and GC already have their 2nd rounder, so Hawks will most likely have to use 14 for JOM and this fits with the post yesterday about Mitchell being told that the Hawks will struggle to get him across.