-
-
The Sunday 11th phase of BigFooty's maintenance and upgrade has been completed. Reactions are limited for now. Search is rebuilding. Scheduled Posts are back! Other upgraded features may look/operate slightly different. The styling and colours will change over time.
Draft/Trade Talk Only Thread
- Thread starter OldSchool
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
X_box_X
VFL is taking over.
Veteran
10k Posts
Western Bulldogs - Ed Richards Player Sponsor 2018
Western Bulldogs - Bailey Dale Player Sponsor 2018
Western Bulldogs - Mitch Honeychurch Player Sponsor 2018
Western Bulldogs - Nathan Mullenger-McHugh Player Sponsor 2018
Western Bulldogs - Nathan Mullenger-McHugh Player Sponsor 2017
Western Bulldogs - Bailey Dale Player Sponsor 2017
Does anyone share the thought we should go for Jude Bolton? Instead of looking only at key forward duds like Damon White, Henry Playfair and Jay Schultz, we need to understand we currently get pushed off the ball far too easily in the midfield.
The experience of Jude Bolton, not to mention his hardness at the ball and courage, would complement our midfield magnificentally well. I have rated Jude Bolton since I first saw him play out at St Bernards. He was the most highly skilled U18s player I have ever seen in the WRFL.
Any chance Eade will try and lure his former Sydney Swans nuggety midfielder across to Melbourne?
His hardball gets, tackling ability and in-and-under style is something we desperately need. I know Gian has expressed his interest in remaining with the Dogs, but I would have happily welcomed Jude for Guido if Gian wanted to part ways.
The experience of Jude Bolton, not to mention his hardness at the ball and courage, would complement our midfield magnificentally well. I have rated Jude Bolton since I first saw him play out at St Bernards. He was the most highly skilled U18s player I have ever seen in the WRFL.
Any chance Eade will try and lure his former Sydney Swans nuggety midfielder across to Melbourne?
His hardball gets, tackling ability and in-and-under style is something we desperately need. I know Gian has expressed his interest in remaining with the Dogs, but I would have happily welcomed Jude for Guido if Gian wanted to part ways.
Sorry mate, but id definitely doubt Jude would want to come back and play for Rocket after all the troubles theyve supposedly had when Rocket coached the Swans. I would have thought Jude wuld go for the Saints with Ross Lyon (who was a former swan assistant) as head coach.
- Banned
- #1,229
Funny statement in the following story from AFL.com this arvo sought of contradicts the Australians one a bit
Hudson close to signing
4:25 PM Wed 10 October, 2007 | Back
By Jennifer Witham
for westernbulldogs.com.au
News
THE Bulldogs look set to welcome Ben Hudson and Tim Callan to Whitten Oval, with both Adelaide and Geelong expected to reach agreements with the club by the end of the week.
While the former Crow is closer to signing than the Cats' VFL best-and-fairest winner, recruiting manager Scott Clayton said the Dogs are confident both will be traded to the club by Friday's 2pm deadline.
"Hudson we've agreed to, in principle, but every scenario hasn't been documented yet," Clayton said.
"(Callan) will be end of the week. We're very confident that we should be able to deliver that.
"That's all the news we have, basically."
He said the Dogs are continuing to field enquiries about both Jordan McMahon and Sam Power, but are yet to consider any potential offers.
"Nothing is happening there, at this point in time. There has been some interest, so we're just evaluating the situation," he said.
He also said the club was "not doing anything at the moment" about acquiring Port Adelaide's Damon White, but admitted the Dogs are looking into some other names currently on the trade table.
"There probably are (other players), but none for public consumption at the moment."
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
May as well go for Johnstone too.
Hudson and Johnstone into the midfield, we'd be tough to stop... for a couple of years anyway.
the rumour is that white failed a medical so we lost interest.
that being the case... whos left?
boyle?
I hear essendon were chasing brennan. ironic if we got him - the guy we would have got if peter rhode hadnt coached us to a win in his first game against collingwood. instead we got walsh and the rest is history.
the usual rogues galery of geelong hack tall forwards.
that being the case... whos left?
boyle?
I hear essendon were chasing brennan. ironic if we got him - the guy we would have got if peter rhode hadnt coached us to a win in his first game against collingwood. instead we got walsh and the rest is history.
the usual rogues galery of geelong hack tall forwards.
I'd rather get no tall key forward than a mediocre one. Boyle fits the mediocre class IMO. Hawthorn are doing exactly the right thing trying to off-load him while he is at his highest currency. If he was the lone target up forward he would not get a sniff.
- Banned
- #1,233
Forgive me if it's already been mentioned but how about the talk of McMahon to Richmond, Schulz to Port, White to Bulldogs??? (with possible other alterations eg. draft picks)
What do we think?
What do we think?
- Apr 4, 2006
- 7,282
- 15,590
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Pick #5 may be in play this week (then again, maybe not!)
I have been too busy to post here lately, and almost too busy to read more than a few trade rumours on this board this week, but I thought I would share this one, as I like the thinking behind it, even at the risk of perpetuating the rumour-mongering on here (which I just have, I suppose!). Now, I don’t necessarily believe it, but just appreciated the ingenuity of either (a) the person that it originates from (whom I am acquainted with personally), or (b) the Dogs recruiting staff if they actually came up with it.
To paint the picture, the “rumour” comes from my cousin’s cousin (no, really!) who happens to be employed at Alberton, which I can verify as I’ve seen his email address, but I can’t verify in what capacity he works there. (My cousin and I are western suburbs-born and Doggies through and through, but his cousins on the other side of the family are all Adelaide born-and-bred.)
Anyway to the rumour…
Apparently Eade and Clayton are not prepared to trade away pick #5 for a single forward. However, they are prepared to give the pick up for a package of two decent young talls. The scenario passed to me tonight goes like this (although the Alberton mole believes the Doggies are canvassing several variants with a number of clubs):
Dogs would get White from Port and Boyle (or other) from Hawks, and give up pick #5. Sticking point is that only one of Port or Hawks would get pick #5, so the one that gets it would have to compensate the other with their own first round pick and/or a player/s. So, for example, if we gave Hawks pick #5, they would give their first pick (13?) to Port. We get two young talls, Hawks get pick 5, Port get picks 13 and 16, and probably a player. Alternatively, Port gets 5 and gives 16 and a better player to Hawks (who keep 13), and we still get two players.
If true, it is thinking outside the square, everyone potentially wins, but would be hard to get over the line I imagine.
Anyway, make of it what you will.
I have been too busy to post here lately, and almost too busy to read more than a few trade rumours on this board this week, but I thought I would share this one, as I like the thinking behind it, even at the risk of perpetuating the rumour-mongering on here (which I just have, I suppose!). Now, I don’t necessarily believe it, but just appreciated the ingenuity of either (a) the person that it originates from (whom I am acquainted with personally), or (b) the Dogs recruiting staff if they actually came up with it.
To paint the picture, the “rumour” comes from my cousin’s cousin (no, really!) who happens to be employed at Alberton, which I can verify as I’ve seen his email address, but I can’t verify in what capacity he works there. (My cousin and I are western suburbs-born and Doggies through and through, but his cousins on the other side of the family are all Adelaide born-and-bred.)
Anyway to the rumour…
Apparently Eade and Clayton are not prepared to trade away pick #5 for a single forward. However, they are prepared to give the pick up for a package of two decent young talls. The scenario passed to me tonight goes like this (although the Alberton mole believes the Doggies are canvassing several variants with a number of clubs):
Dogs would get White from Port and Boyle (or other) from Hawks, and give up pick #5. Sticking point is that only one of Port or Hawks would get pick #5, so the one that gets it would have to compensate the other with their own first round pick and/or a player/s. So, for example, if we gave Hawks pick #5, they would give their first pick (13?) to Port. We get two young talls, Hawks get pick 5, Port get picks 13 and 16, and probably a player. Alternatively, Port gets 5 and gives 16 and a better player to Hawks (who keep 13), and we still get two players.
If true, it is thinking outside the square, everyone potentially wins, but would be hard to get over the line I imagine.
Anyway, make of it what you will.
Dogs_r_barking
Premiers 2016
Veteran
Western Bulldogs - Ed Richards Player Sponsor 2024
Western Bulldogs - Bailey Dale Player Sponsor 2024
Western Bulldogs - Ed Richards Player Sponsor 2023
Western Bulldogs - Bailey Dale Player Sponsor 2023
10k Posts
Western Bulldogs - Bailey Dale Player Sponsor 2022
Western Bulldogs - Ed Richards Player Sponsor 2022
Re: Pick #5 may be in play this week (then again, maybe not!)
I wouldn't be to keen on giving away our #5, as we could pick up a decent young player with that pick. I especially don't want to give it to either Hawthorn or Port. However, I do like the look of Boyle - don't know about White.
I wouldn't be to keen on giving away our #5, as we could pick up a decent young player with that pick. I especially don't want to give it to either Hawthorn or Port. However, I do like the look of Boyle - don't know about White.
Re: Pick #5 may be in play this week (then again, maybe not!)
We could trade seperately but only after they had agreed in principle
pick 5 to hawks for Boyle and pick 13
then pick 13 to port for white
But I think we are paying massive overs on those two players.
We could trade seperately but only after they had agreed in principle
pick 5 to hawks for Boyle and pick 13
then pick 13 to port for white
But I think we are paying massive overs on those two players.
Re: Pick #5 may be in play this week (then again, maybe not!)
Yea, when you break it up like that, it looks like we are getting done badly
Yea, when you break it up like that, it looks like we are getting done badly
Aquamarinejewel
Norm Smith Medallist
Some trade news according to the Age....
The Age
Stephen Rielly | October 11, 2007
The Dogs want pick 18 from the Tigers or pick 16 from Port for McMahon, not White, so that they can remain in the second round of the draft. They have to give over an unspecified second-round selection to Adelaide for ruckman Ben Hudson. McMahon, who was claimed with pick 10 in the 2000 draft, appears likely to be traded to Richmond or Port Adelaide.
Western Bulldogs defender Sam Power is likely to join the Kangaroos, whom he spent yesterday morning talking with. Power was also taken at pick 10, in the 2001 draft. The Roos are likely to give up their third-round selection, pick 48, for the 24-year-old, who could be the third Bulldogs first-round draftee to leave the club in the wake of a poor season.
The Age
Stephen Rielly | October 11, 2007
The Dogs want pick 18 from the Tigers or pick 16 from Port for McMahon, not White, so that they can remain in the second round of the draft. They have to give over an unspecified second-round selection to Adelaide for ruckman Ben Hudson. McMahon, who was claimed with pick 10 in the 2000 draft, appears likely to be traded to Richmond or Port Adelaide.
Western Bulldogs defender Sam Power is likely to join the Kangaroos, whom he spent yesterday morning talking with. Power was also taken at pick 10, in the 2001 draft. The Roos are likely to give up their third-round selection, pick 48, for the 24-year-old, who could be the third Bulldogs first-round draftee to leave the club in the wake of a poor season.
I really really don't want to trade McMahon. But if we got pick 16 you'd have to say we did the best we could possibly do under the circumstances.
Better than if he didn't re-sign & nominated for the PSD, which in a way would be ironic as many on here wanted to bend Adelaide over that way with Ben Hudson.
Re: Pick #5 may be in play this week (then again, maybe not!)
My thoughts exactly. Its like 1+1 doesn't = 3. (Apologies to George Orwell)
My thoughts exactly. Its like 1+1 doesn't = 3. (Apologies to George Orwell)
Re: Pick #5 may be in play this week (then again, maybe not!)
Rumors are going that Bulldogs are trying to get involved but Port don't want them involved.
They're trying to do:
McMahon to Tigers
Schulz to Port
Port's draft pick to Bulldogs
Bulldogs wants Port's first rounder, Port has offered their 3rd rounder.
Rumors are going that Bulldogs are trying to get involved but Port don't want them involved.
They're trying to do:
McMahon to Tigers
Schulz to Port
Port's draft pick to Bulldogs
Bulldogs wants Port's first rounder, Port has offered their 3rd rounder.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Re: Pick #5 may be in play this week (then again, maybe not!)
Like i've said before if Mattner is worth pick 28 then McMahon is worth at least pick 25.
Like i've said before if Mattner is worth pick 28 then McMahon is worth at least pick 25.
ths week is turning into a nightmare.If we gave pick 5 for white and boyle i would spew.
If mcmahon goes to rich (god help us) for pick 18? then use 5 and 18 on the 2 best kids we can draft.
White - no
boyle - no
brennan - no.
with what brennan would cost us I would rather use pick 38 for bradley.
If mcmahon goes to rich (god help us) for pick 18? then use 5 and 18 on the 2 best kids we can draft.
White - no
boyle - no
brennan - no.
with what brennan would cost us I would rather use pick 38 for bradley.
Please clear up a few things.
You have an 'if' that was never going to happen,
If macmahon goes I just want the best deal for him and pick 18 sound like his worth. Who cares if its Richmond.
Pick 18 is what Brennan is worth. The rest won't go for that.
Who is bradley? Kepler Bradley? Hadley?
ernie.i would rather cheer on jordy at port than richmond. 1st pt.
i would rather he go to port for their pick 16, than to rich for 18.
I dont want to give ANY pick in the top 20 for brennan.
I would rather keep 5 and 16-18? and give ess pick 38 for k. bradley instead of getting brennan.
