For mine, I am surprised, or at least disappointed, everyone is so upset about the quiet trade period. Let's look at some historical ones that have proved good in hindsight.
2015:
In with the new: Matt Suckling (free agent), picks 20, 21, 2 x 2016 4th round picks
Out with the old: Michael Talia, picks 11 and 69, 2016 3rd round pick
2015 was very quiet, perhaps understandably people wondered whether the internal development would be enough given we hadn't made much of trade week.
2014:
What we got: Tom Boyd (GWS), Shane Biggs, pick No.27 (free agency compensation, Shaun Higgins), pick No.39, pick No.46
What we lost: Ryan Griffen, Adam Cooney, Shaun Higgins, Liam Jones, pick No.6, pick No.37 (free agency compensation, Adam Cooney)
We came 14th that year. We lost a brownlow medallist, our captain, a promising Higgins and Jones. We brought in the largely untried Boyd and Biggs. By most standards a pretty negative looking trade period, but it coincided with a big on field turn around which was widely unexpected.
I think this goes to show that those who put all their eggs in a successful trade week are ignoring other factors.
How anyone can not consider our list worse than two weeks ago is beyond baffling.
Dahl is a better footballer than Jong and Honey at 50%. Adams is better than Roberts or Young or Trengove.
Our list(and not all the clubs fault has gone backwards from the end of season) it may improve but as of RIGHT NOW it’s worse
see our trade period in 2014 above. Other circumstances at play as well of course, but I hope it can at least elicit a little bit of hope, if nothing more. This is just to point out that a list may look worse when in fact good things may come from it.