So Dees plan is to try and replicate the trade the Dogs did, but using even more draft capital than we did. Going to be some furious Dees supporters based on the Dogs trade thread lol
Traded Melbourne trade #14, #27 and #35 to Gold Coast for #11
- Thread starter Taylor
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Jun 23, 2013
- 10,747
- 12,869
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Los Angeles Clippers
Didn’t know the trade period has closed doggies fans?
- Sep 3, 2018
- 4,199
- 5,480
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Agree with you but 35 could still have netted a future 2 for you
Will need to see what else they have in store
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
It's not superfluous as you can get value from it, especially now with being able to trade future picks.
Kane McGoodwin
Make me an Admin!
- May 21, 2001
- 81,460
- 82,003
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Adelaide Crows
This is arguably the most lob-sided trade so far.
We did.
So this comment 'so in reality it was 14 and 27 for 11.' Isn't true then?
It really is and the amount of Dees fans defending it is just mind-blowing. Went from having one of the strongest hands in the draft to having no hand at all and we moved up 3 spots in a part of the draft where moving up 3 spots is very possibly totally irrelevant.
It's these sort of reactions that make me laugh, calm down and wait till the trade period is over.
Kane McGoodwin
Make me an Admin!
- May 21, 2001
- 81,460
- 82,003
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Adelaide Crows
If you didn't need all the picks, should have traded in futures.
Right now, we only need 2 picks. Six and 11 is a strong hand. 35 got the deal done. Without it we don't get the deal done. But it's a pick we won't be using. Make your own determination as to whether the comment has veracity.
Having watched Melbourne's trade periods these last few years I've learnt to wait until the end to see the ''net ins'' vs the ''net outs'' before making judgement.
Fair enough, you'd think the fact it's so early in the trade period they have more moves up their sleeves
That's an interesting bit of fiction you've pulled out of your anus.
- Oct 12, 2016
- 6,746
- 7,708
- AFL Club
- GWS
Craig Cameron must have turned into trade week stand over man by watching re-runs of Chopper.
I think he knows Dimma is watching, had to pull the finger out
- Dec 17, 2003
- 16,812
- 9,844
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Glasgow Rangers, Liverpool, Storm.
This trade must be part of a bigger picture, because it looks heavily lop-sided in favour of GC as it stands.
1966 ......
Juzzk1d
Senior List
- May 1, 2015
- 172
- 330
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Is this a joke?
Missed 7-8 games, subbed out in 4, only played forward as your others are horrific and of those only 1 game was good but many others kicked goals that day. He isnt Buddy, the rumours of us offering $1M is madness
More importantly, we dont need that. We need a proper bull midfielder. Put the picks to get that. Petty mightn't even be a starter when we have Tex/Fog/Thill
Proud New Father of 3
Senior List
- Jun 25, 2020
- 167
- 275
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
One of the worst trades I've heard of.
27 and 35 aren't bad picks. Plenty of talent taken around that area in the draft every year.
Absolute shocker by Melbourne
27 and 35 aren't bad picks. Plenty of talent taken around that area in the draft every year.
Absolute shocker by Melbourne
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,334
I know many trading mechanisms have changed since FS/NGA bidding came in and I'm more than happy to acknowledge I've not kept fully up to date with it all, but I'm glad I'm not the only one who was completely puzzled when I saw that trade come through.
Gold Coast are only interested in points, so surely 14 and 35 would have done the job, giving GC 300 additional points...
Even if Melbourne isn't planning on using 27 (the report above says they're only using 2 picks in the draft) you'd rather have it in your hands to try and use it to leverage another pick upgrade, right?
Gold Coast are only interested in points, so surely 14 and 35 would have done the job, giving GC 300 additional points...
Even if Melbourne isn't planning on using 27 (the report above says they're only using 2 picks in the draft) you'd rather have it in your hands to try and use it to leverage another pick upgrade, right?
They seem pretty open to me.
Seriously though, there has to be something else at play here; Melbourne aren't throwing away that many draft points - to a club desperate for them - for a 3-pick upgrade.
Similar threads
