Sloane was taken at pick 44. I don't think that draft number holds much relevance anymore. Personally, I'd want a bit more than pick 9 and Gregson too, but I think he's shown that he was pretty bloody good value at pick 47.
I bet if Selwood was wanting to join Hawthorn as a RFA for 600k a year, Geelong would be doing the exact same thing that we're going to do and all their supporters would be urging the club to do it.
Pick taken means dickall. If you wanted to go based on the # they were taken we should ask for Tambling to come back because he must be a superstar. Gregson has performed like a player worth a lot more than pick 47. From what I've seen he's probably worth something like an early second rounder/last first rounder.
Combined with pick 9 it's still far below Dangerfield's worth. But it's pretty clear we won't get his worth in the current system. Just have to make most of a bad situation.
I mean Geelong and Hawthorn are in the same league / level where as Adelaide is a low-end feeder club
Why would Geelong give up a top player to direct competitor like the Hawks? Adelaide giving up Danger to Geelong is just giving a top-bloke a real chance at success while allowing his family to drive to the games ... right?
Their supporters seem to have a hugely overinflated view of their club and their sense of self-entitement is laughable.
Geelong are a middle of the road club who have been punching above their weight due to a once in a generation group of players and were hugely assisted early via father/son players that they obtained for next to nothing.
Pick taken means dickall. If you wanted to go based on the # they were taken we should ask for Tambling to come back because he must be a superstar. Gregson has performed like a player worth a lot more than pick 47. From what I've seen he's probably worth something like an early second rounder/last first rounder.
Combined with pick 9 it's still far below Dangerfield's worth. But it's pretty clear we won't get his worth in the current system. Just have to make most of a bad situation.
Def has performed above 47 but at his size will he ever be able to be a full time mid? If his ceiling is a forward pocket then that also limits the ceiling on his worth.
We need rangy flanker/wing types that are quick but most importantly can use the ball well. I don't have a problem with our midfield, particularly if Crouch gets back to full fitness and stays there.
I think he's the better player but can he push up successfully into the midfield? Am I overrating Gore or would he be the better prospect (esp if we don't get Redden).
Also 9 + Gregson (a forward pocket) is nowhere near good enough imo…I wonder how he will figure into the trade.
My guess is Geelong will try to palm us pick 9 and a player worth a 2nd rounder. If our club has any balls whatsoever we should demand their other 1st as well but I'd bet we will settle for their 2nd rounder…thus leaving Geelong another 1st (2016) for Henderson.
Problem is that this year's draft is (reportedly) pretty rubbish. So 2nd round pick this year is more or less worthless in the context of the Dangerfield trade. So if we want a 2nd round pick from Geelong, we would want their 2016 2nd, not this year. And they can't trade their 1st AND 2nd next year, which means they wouldn't be able to trade next year's 1st for Henderson in that case.
Problem is that this year's draft is (reportedly) pretty rubbish. So 2nd round pick this year is more or less worthless in the context of the Dangerfield trade. So if we want a 2nd round pick from Geelong, we would want their 2016 2nd, not this year. And they can't trade their 1st AND 2nd next year, which means they wouldn't be able to trade next year's 1st for Henderson in that case.
We need rangy flanker/wing types that are quick but most importantly can use the ball well. I don't have a problem with our midfield, particularly if Crouch gets back to full fitness and stays there.
The various levels of posturing and posting make me believe that we will not get what Dangerfield is worth on the open trade market. Plus, in the background we have an AFL which is very keen to see its interpretation of its rules work. This will be the first Free Agency challenge. The AFL will stop at nothing to see that it is enacted in a way that protects Free Agency and to ensure it is quite distinct from a typical trade transaction. Somewhere at sometime, a terse whisper will come down the line to support of Free Agency (Geelong) and warn against creative trading (Adelaide)
I've given up on that dream; the dream of another Judd trade revisit. I think the best we can hope for is their pick 9 plus a player that will get straight into our best 22, and perhaps something else. That is most likely to next years Round 1 or 2 from Geelong or perhaps a whole of picks upgrade from them to us - they give us 28, 46 and 64 and we give them 32, 50 and 68.
I feel that the most likely scenario is we'll get pick 9 from Geelong, they will say take it or leave it, then we will hold off and hold off and then just take it.
The then response from the club will be that we needed to move on, as there were other trades we needed to do and we would not have had time to do them if we held off longer with the Dangerfield trade. Our other trades we manage to do in the last part of trade week will be mediocre at best.
Hope I'm very wrong.
What I would ideally like is pick 9 and Nakia Cockatoo. But they will never give up Nakia, well if they really want Danger so bad, give us Nakia and pick 9 and all will be good.