I have little interest in trading and its rumours, as I've never had the time to understand any of it, other than what I learn from RWO. You may be able to comment as to whether adelaide-players-under-investigation-for-possession-of-illicit-substance has relevance to us, if it's verified.
Shades of no.Originally Posted by Odysseus
Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.
Not opposed to trading in a key forward but would prefer someone younger such as Marshall from Port. From our current list McCartin and Blakey could be our key forwards for the next 10 years, granted the coaches might not see them in those positions
Sent from my vivo 1902 using Tapatalk
Thanks, Annie. I asked because something has been said about player movements that could result in our first round pick being pushed down the order.
Don't think either Blakey or Mccartin are going to become KPFs though. We'd have to trade for someone or wait a while for a draftee to develop.
I detailed this previously, a future 2nd is our best bet so that our points deficit is used against 3rd/4th picks in 2021. It is highly possible that we can draft Thilthorpe, Campbell, and Gulden while also trading in a ruck without trading any current best 22 players.
I would think that it now less likely that Brad Crouch will be offered the dollars that would give the Crows pick 2 as compensation.
Maybe we can offer him the "Michael Talia" spot on our list?
Could this explain Adelaide's remarkable late season surge?
It's very hard to live in a studio apartment in San Jose with a man who's learning to play violin. That's what she told the police when she handed them the empty revolver.
The Scarlatti Tilt - Richard Brautigan
It was the players you chose, Florent, Hayward and Hewett, which I thought was unrealistic. We know these three are among the least likely to be on the trading table.
A ruckman is likely to cost a 2nd or 3rd round pick, probably from next year's draft. The main candidates would be Preuss, Wright, Coleman-Jones, Ladhams and Chol. I'm not sure what price tag PA would have on Ladhams. He might cost us a trade of our pick 3 since they would love to get a 1st round pick ahead of NGA draft pick Lachlan-Jones (around a pick 10). So a trade for Ladhams would likely involve giving up our pick 3 and getting a 2nd rounder back and maybe something else.
I've commented often that the Joe Daniher decision is the first piece in the puzzle that will have to be determined. If he does sign with the Swans, it's not worth arguing about his fitness. We just have to assume the medicos have sorted that out. Daniher obviates the need to try to get a KPF with pick 3, so I would be more inclined to trade it out with Ladhams being my prime target. We would get back enough points to cover the bids on both Campbell and Gulden.
Daniher, Ladhams, Campbell and Gulden, plus keeping our 2021 picks intact, seems a good outcome to me, and one that puts us in finals contention next year.
Daniher coming for nothing gives us an elite KPF and opens more options on the ruckman side of things. No Daniher will likely mean that we have to cut into our 2021 draft and make a couple of other moves as well, but not necessarily anything major.
That's about the best summary I can do at this point. I've been clear that I don't think we should use our pick 3 for anything other than McDonald or Thilthorpe, and there's a question about their availability at pick 3. Keeping pick 3, IMO would mean that we got Daniher and a ruckman other than Ladhams. We then take pick 3 to the draft and take the best available player, which puts Hollands into the mix. Whatever the damage to our 2021 draft, so be it. The 2020 haul would be so big that we can forgo 2021 as an important draft year.
Thanks for that, rbx4. As I mentioned, I don't follow these things with understanding, but I did wonder if it may have ramifications in that sort of way. I gather from your comment that the compensation given to a club losing a player is commensurate with the amount of dollars a destination club is willing to offer - is that right?
Right on. The compensation for an RFA is directly related to the $ they are offered yet the AFL moves in mysterious ways and is not very transparent. Brad Crouch will now be less attractive to potential suitors.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks