Trading talk thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • liz
    Veteran
    Site Admin
    • Jan 2003
    • 16778

    Originally posted by Will Sangster
    That is exact;y why we should be demanding their 2nd round pick. Their 3rd rounder is worth zilch
    Depending on how many picks we expect to us, swapping their 2nd round for our 3rd round might be a reasonable deal. They lose around 8 spots; we gain them.

    Comment

    • ugg
      Can you feel it?
      Site Admin
      • Jan 2003
      • 15971

      I think this is how it works out from our point of view
      Seaby + 39 -> 22
      39 + Buchanan -> 28

      Sydney
      In: Seaby and 28
      Out: Buchanan and 22
      West Coast
      In: Dalziell and 22
      Out: Staker, Seaby and 39
      Brisbane
      In: Buchanan, Staker and 39
      Out: Dalziell and 28
      Reserves live updates (Twitter)
      Reserves WIKI -
      Top Goalkickers| Best Votegetters

      Comment

      • Reggi
        On the Rookie List
        • Jan 2003
        • 2718

        Originally posted by CureTheSane

        As for Collingwood and Jolly, I'd love to see them let Jolly slip through their hands just like Plugger did

        Heh Heh hopefully Josh Fraser's dad is on the board
        You don't ban those who supported your opponent, you make them wallow in their loserdom by covering your victory! You sit them in the front row. You give them a hat! Toby Ziegler

        Comment

        • Ludwig
          Veterans List
          • Apr 2007
          • 9359

          Originally posted by ugg
          I think this is how it works out from our point of view
          Seaby + 39 -> 22
          39 + Buchanan -> 28

          Sydney
          In: Seaby and 28
          Out: Buchanan and 22
          West Coast
          In: Dalziell and 22
          Out: Staker, Seaby and 39
          Brisbane
          In: Buchanan, Staker and 39
          Out: Dalziell and 28
          Looks like a pretty good deal for all parties concerned. I think pick 39 is ours. The way a deal should be. Out of favour players go to new clubs and not much difference in the pick swaps. From our standpoint, picks 28 and 39 may be better than just 22. I'd definitely swap Buchanon for Seaby. Rucks are always more valuable. If Jolly goes, Seaby will be crucial.
          Last edited by Ludwig; 5 October 2009, 03:57 PM.

          Comment

          • Tuhob
            Pushing for Selection
            • Sep 2003
            • 65

            Originally posted by Jeffers1984
            I think if you actually analyse what they've said in the report, Brisbane receive pick 39 (39 -> Sydney -> Brisbane)

            EDIT: Or what ugg has posted

            Comment

            • Ludwig
              Veterans List
              • Apr 2007
              • 9359

              Originally posted by Tuhob
              I think if you actually analyse what they've said in the report, Brisbane receive pick 39 (39 -> Sydney -> Brisbane)

              EDIT: Or what ugg has posted
              I think pick 39 is ours. Pick 39 was originally Brisbane's. Doesn't make sense that they would get it back. Why bother mentioning it. I think UGG misspoke.

              Comment

              • i'm-uninformed2
                Reefer Madness
                • Oct 2003
                • 4653

                Originally posted by Ludwig
                I think pick 39 is ours. Pick 39 was originally Brisbane's. Doesn't make sense that they would get it back. Why bother mentioning it. I think UGG misspoke.
                Yep - 39 was swapped for Seaby and 22 after Brisbane sent 39 to WCE.
                'Delicious' is a fun word to say

                Comment

                • hammo
                  Veterans List
                  • Jul 2003
                  • 5554

                  If Brisbane get 39 as well then they're laughing all the way to the bank.
                  "As everyone knows our style of football is defensive and unattractive, and as such I have completely forgotten how to mark or kick over the years" - Brett Kirk

                  Comment

                  • liz
                    Veteran
                    Site Admin
                    • Jan 2003
                    • 16778

                    39 was originally West Coast's, not Brisbane's.

                    Comment

                    • The Big Cat
                      On the veteran's list
                      • Apr 2006
                      • 2356

                      Originally posted by i'm-uninformed2
                      Yep - 39 was swapped for Seaby and 22 after Brisbane sent 39 to WCE.
                      39 comes to us with Seaby in return for 22. (Not too bad given that we acquired 28 for Bucky) Thus Seaby cost us Bucky and six places in the draft
                      Those who have the greatest power to hurt us are those we love.

                      Comment

                      • caj23
                        Senior Player
                        • Aug 2003
                        • 2462

                        WTF didn't we hand over 28 instead of 22???

                        If we're lucky enough to screw the Lions over on the trade we shouldnt have pandered to the Eagles demands for pick 22

                        Seems like most of our trades are lopsided against us

                        Comment

                        • i'm-uninformed2
                          Reefer Madness
                          • Oct 2003
                          • 4653

                          Originally posted by liz
                          39 was originally West Coast's, not Brisbane's.
                          Oops, sorry - well, we ended up with it anyway.
                          'Delicious' is a fun word to say

                          Comment

                          • ugg
                            Can you feel it?
                            Site Admin
                            • Jan 2003
                            • 15971

                            Originally posted by Will Sangster
                            WTF didn't we hand over 28 instead of 22???

                            If we're lucky enough to screw the Lions over on the trade we shouldnt have pandered to the Eagles demands for pick 22

                            Seems like most of our trades are lopsided against us
                            the swans could have held out for those six places but is it really worth it. Seems the recruiting team already has its hands full with the Jolly and Hall deals so they probably wanted this one to clear
                            Reserves live updates (Twitter)
                            Reserves WIKI -
                            Top Goalkickers| Best Votegetters

                            Comment

                            • 10Totti10
                              On the Rookie List
                              • Apr 2009
                              • 443


                              Dogs say third round pick too much for Hall - AFL.com.au


                              Pick 47 for Hall basically

                              Comment

                              • ugg
                                Can you feel it?
                                Site Admin
                                • Jan 2003
                                • 15971

                                Originally posted by 10Totti10
                                not according to that link. 47 is apparently too expensive for them
                                Reserves live updates (Twitter)
                                Reserves WIKI -
                                Top Goalkickers| Best Votegetters

                                Comment

                                Working...