If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
I think he's guilty of stupidity more than anything. It was sent on snapchat to a friend, not broadcast on Facebook, and I don't believe it's anything more than a poor joke. He would have to be insanely stupid to film himself taking illicit drugs. Stupid enough to joke about it but not the same thing. @@@@ty friend he's got to, selling him out like that.
I have no doubt that Melbourne will bid for him at 3. It'll be vexatious too because Melbourne need other player types before midfielders and these players are just behind Mills. We're going to get screwed again.
I like to think the best of people and I'm just hoping Melbourne act properly re this draft. If they genuinely feel a mid is their priority then as much as we hate it they really should bid for Mills as he is rated the best mid in the draft. If they require a tall then they should not bid for him.
I may be in the minority here but I trust Roosy's integrity here
Taking him at 3 would be annoying but it is still worth it IMO
Reckon if we go at three we will still draft Dunks provided he goes at about mid 20s which would leave us with a deficit of about 300 points. If he goes later or if we get something for Robbo tomorrow then that will just increase our chances.
Also, what on earth is going on at the Giants? They have just given Tomas Bugg away, they seem to have shed half a team and all they have to show for it is a first rounder and second rounder next year. I can only assume they have to tighten their salary cap and list and that word has gotten out not to offer anything decent to their players. I guess Treloar is the exception because they genuinely want to keep him but I would have thought Treloar would have been worth a cheeky bid. I suppose they also want to look after these players who they feel are surplus without throwing them to the PSD
Herald sun reporting : "MELBOURNE is expected to target the draft?s best midfielder and a key forward to complement Rising Star Jesse Hogan in one final talent raid."
Wish they had inserted "available" in there somewhere!
Those who have the greatest power to hurt us are those we love.
Herald sun reporting : "MELBOURNE is expected to target the draft?s best midfielder and a key forward to complement Rising Star Jesse Hogan in one final talent raid."
Wish they had inserted "available" in there somewhere!
I think the Dees have traded fairly well actually, they have two top 10s plus Petracca. They should be looking at 10 wins and if they do then I reckon it will be a fair call to rate the Roos rebuild an absolute success given the parlous state they were in under Neeld.
They absolutely should be throwing the far at Jesse Hogan though
Herald sun reporting : "MELBOURNE is expected to target the draft?s best midfielder and a key forward to complement Rising Star Jesse Hogan in one final talent raid."
Wish they had inserted "available" in there somewhere!
Since everyone knows that Essendon will also be targeting a key forward as well and they will have the 2 picks following their pick 3, if Melbourne really chose the player they wanted at pick 3 it would be Weideman, or perhaps Francis, but not a midfielder as plenty will be available at pick 7 but their choice of forward would be gone by then. If they bid on an academy midfielder at 3, it would certainly meet the definition of a vexatious bid in that it would be made only to induce the academy club to match the bid.
Given that we handed Craig Bird to Essendon for nothing, I would never trade with either Essendon or Melbourne if one of them bid on Mills and he doesn't slip to at least pick 6. Melbourne and Carlton should feel they owe something to the Giants for all the favours they did for them.
The one good thing about the new bidding system is that it adds liquidity to the market which helps facilitate trades. I feel that the top 5 picks are overvalued from a points perspective as are the ones from around the 3rd round on, but he ones in between are relatively undervalued. It was thought at the time that Mills would probably be a top 2 pick which is why it was skewed in this manner. We will see if Eddie and Mike get their wish.
Just noticed the Pies need another 2016 second rounder to trade to Brisbane for Aish.
We could give them our 2016 second rounder and grab 26 or 28 that the Pies currently have in this years draft. If we want Dunkley that's what we will do, be certain to have enough points for Mills and Dunkley.
If we don't trade picks tomorrow I think we can say that Dunkley is not on our radar.
Thinking about today's trade, I reckon it was about shutting out Hawthorn from getting 24yo Carlisle.
Just noticed the Pies need another 2016 second rounder to trade to Brisbane for Aish.
We could give them our 2016 second rounder and grab 26 or 28 that the Pies currently have in this years draft. If we want Dunkley that's what we will do, be certain to have enough points for Mills and Dunkley.
If we don't trade picks tomorrow I think we can say that Dunkley is not on our radar.
Thinking about today's trade, I reckon it was about shutting out Hawthorn from getting 24yo Carlisle.
I like your thinking re swapping second rounders
And I agree about shutting the Hawks out, if we've taken one for the team then so be it
Just noticed the Pies need another 2016 second rounder to trade to Brisbane for Aish.
We could give them our 2016 second rounder and grab 26 or 28 that the Pies currently have in this years draft. If we want Dunkley that's what we will do, be certain to have enough points for Mills and Dunkley.
If we don't trade picks tomorrow I think we can say that Dunkley is not on our radar.
Thinking about today's trade, I reckon it was about shutting out Hawthorn from getting 24yo Carlisle.
It's actually better to run a bit short in the current year as we can utilise next year's draft picks to pay the points deficit. It would seem preferable to do it that way rather than have unused points left over this year. We could conceivably end up with pick 54 and choose not to use it, or use it on an unlikely prospect that we hadn't intended on picking. You can't carry them over to the following year.
Comment