Traded Melbourne trade #33, #43 and #53 to Port Adelaide for #27
- Thread starter Taylor
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Jello_B
Norm Smith Medallist
- Mar 2, 2014
- 5,589
- 4,620
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Rioli just got cheaper.
Jello_B
Norm Smith Medallist
- Mar 2, 2014
- 5,589
- 4,620
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Sure I wouldn’t be adverse to that. Might just be 44 now though.
Pure_Ownage
TheBrownDog
Odd trade for melbourne unless #27 is going to collingwood. One can only assume collingwood wanted one pick rather than #33 #43 and #53 as they already have 3 picks in that range.
manureid
Laziest Poster on Figbooty
33 - Graham
43 - Esava
53 - Rioli
Playstation trading.
43 - Esava
53 - Rioli
Playstation trading.
- Apr 29, 2016
- 11,228
- 9,827
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
you must trust our list management team a lot more than I do. I still wouldn't put it past us to offer a first rounder for Grundy.
Maybe looking to on trade a whole bunch of our picks to Lions for 15?
Leave us with 3 first rounders to offer for JHF (with a second or third coming back).
Leave us with 3 first rounders to offer for JHF (with a second or third coming back).
Get_The_Gaff
Premiership Player
- Apr 4, 2021
- 4,703
- 10,703
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Lions have limited list spots so they can't just take a bunch of late picks .
You would think 15 would be involved in the dunkley trade anyway
I hope they are smarter than that, I can’t see any other reason for this trade to have happened.
I think thats exactly what you guys will be doing. A gain of about 470 points is a good gain in pick trading.
A bit strange and desperate so early in the trade period from Melbourne. Surely they could have generated a better deal. I know they have said they wouldn't use the later 2 picks, but it doesn't mean they are worthless.
Pure_Ownage
TheBrownDog
Lions will get better offers than that for #15 if they dont trade it for dunkley.
Maybe you are planning to offer #33 for rioli and #43 for sav? (I'd take a r3 for sav as its fair although we would need to flip it and our other r3s to another club for 2023 picks as we dont have list spots for more 2022 pick)
Pure_Ownage
TheBrownDog
Costs more than that to trade up and other clubs (gc for example) can offer more points than that for 15.
- May 9, 2006
- 8,183
- 7,925
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- \m/ Babymetal \m/ New York Rangers
I wouldn't put it past us to accept a 3rd rounder for Grundy.
Excellent trade - I like it and there are multiple ways we can use these picks. That could be trading up for JHF, paying for Rioli and anyone else that takes Hinkley's fancy or go to the draft and there are a bunch of SA talls that might be available around that level.
Obviously wouldn't be just for those picks, but certainly adds to Ports options as to how to trade up if thats what they need to do. They could easily trade a future pick for a GC pick in the 2nd round, to add to their picks to trade into Pick 15. They may need some approval from the AFL to trade a future pick plus a future 1st but they may allow it to get that sort of quality in. The rules are "hard and fast" until the AFL don't want them to be, especially as Port have drafted 7 1st rounders in the last 4 drafts.
If we include our other picks in the 50s we can offer the equivalent of pick 8 in points which would help them a lot.
Ofcourse this doesn’t account for Dunkley. Either way I think they have to trade 15 to get extra points and look at future picks for Dunkley.
Jello_B
Norm Smith Medallist
- Mar 2, 2014
- 5,589
- 4,620
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Ok with that.
They can only take so many picks to the draft, so can’t just sell them 10 picks in the 50s
- Jun 19, 2016
- 20,845
- 40,059
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Lions need list spots though. They can’t just grab loads of picks in third/fourth round and use them.
Similar threads
