Is this the most critical 4 hours in Reid’s career?
2021 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel
Collapse
X
-
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
In other words, Adelaide never negotiated in good faith, because they didn't have to, because they had the PSD threat, and a player who stabbed us in the back on the way out.
- - - Updated - - -
Or the goal on the run from 50m at the end of the dream passage of play started by Alex Johnson (cry) in the 2nd quarter'Delicious' is a fun word to sayComment
-
If we do get Ladhams, should the Swans try and do a deal with St Kilda for McLean?
Ladhams puts McLean and Amarty further down the depth list for key forwards.Comment
-
Sounds like Adelaide did nothing but put straw men offers up. No suprises there.Here is exactly what Charlie said about Adelaide's initial offer last week:
."The final offer Sydney accepted was “significantly better” than what the Crows initially offered early last week.
“In terms of the negotiations, what I can say is the deal that was tabled on Tuesday last week involving pick 17 was not as good a deal as we accepted last night,” Gardiner said.
“It involved a slide of picks in this year’s draft together with future selections given up in next year’s draft that would have compromised not only this year, but next year.""You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."Comment
-
I’d argue that most here have been critical of Reid’s career for the last 4 years, not 4 hours
- - - Updated - - -
WTAF, put up a player that just re-signed?!
Or, both Amartey and McLean could diversify their roles to differ from Ladhams, considering neither Joel nor Hayden are or will be first string ruckmen, and are thus not likely competing for the same position as Ladhams.Last edited by 0918330512; 13 October 2021, 02:54 PM.Comment
-
Not on your sweet bippy, Bangalore! We need all the tall timber we can get- competition plus cover for injuries.
Why trade McLean, who is more than useful and with upside?Comment
-
The most critical hours of Sam Reid's career would surely have been on draft night 2009!All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated, and well supported in logic and argument than others. -Douglas Adams, author (11 Mar 1952-2001)
Comment
-
The AFL site strangely reported that the Giants were interested in sending pick 13 to Hawthorn, in exchange for Luke Breust?? Not long after, they claimed that the deal was off, because Breust wants to stay at Hawthorn. Personally, I suspect that they got the story very wrong? I mean: pick 13 for a 30 year old small forward?
However, if the Giants are actually that desperate to increase their small forward stocks, then perhaps they'd be interested in Ronke or Taylor?Comment
-
Is Port holding up the Ladhams deal? Nearly 4 o’clock, surely we won’t bend over! KB and team- we’re relying on you to get it done!Comment
-
I think there is a catch to these Hawthorn deals, which is that they'd be buying the pick by paying the player's entire salary for next year or even beyond. I wonder if the Giants think they can get a Breust or Wingard for free. Offload Bobby Hill for a future second round pick and use that and the saved $$ to have another crack at Lobb. I believe the sticking point was that the Giants couldn't offer him enough money or enough $$ for long enough. Future 2nd rounder was the offer for Lobb, so they could turn Hill into Lobb and Breust by sending pick 13 to the Hawks.The AFL site strangely reported that the Giants were interested in sending pick 13 to Hawthorn, in exchange for Luke Breust?? Not long after, they claimed that the deal was off, because Breust wants to stay at Hawthorn. Personally, I suspect that they got the story very wrong? I mean: pick 13 for a 30 year old small forward?
However, if the Giants are actually that desperate to increase their small forward stocks, then perhaps they'd be interested in Ronke or Taylor?Comment
-
Deja, I’ll personally drive Ronke to the Giants (well, a bit hard at present as I’m in Melbourne) but want to keep Squizzy for another year.The AFL site strangely reported that the Giants were interested in sending pick 13 to Hawthorn, in exchange for Luke Breust?? Not long after, they claimed that the deal was off, because Breust wants to stay at Hawthorn. Personally, I suspect that they got the story very wrong? I mean: pick 13 for a 30 year old small forward?
However, if the Giants are actually that desperate to increase their small forward stocks, then perhaps they'd be interested in Ronke or Taylor?Comment
-
Yes, that does sound quite Hawthorn-ish or Kennett-ish. It also sounds quite Kennett-ish, to not sound out the player involved beforehand.I think there is a catch to these Hawthorn deals, which is that they'd be buying the pick by paying the player's entire salary for next year or even beyond. I wonder if the Giants think they can get a Breust or Wingard for free. Offload Bobby Hill for a future second round pick and use that and the saved $$ to have another crack at Lobb. I believe the sticking point was that the Giants couldn't offer him enough money or enough $$ for long enough. Future 2nd rounder was the offer for Lobb, so they could turn Hill into Lobb and Breust by sending pick 13 to the Hawks.Comment
-
Comment

Comment