I'm not sure how a team can "lose" trade week when it comes out in a better position than it went in.

I'm not sure how a team can "lose" trade week when it comes out in a better position than it went in.

Well said.

I can't sit here and say whether he's the best in the business (Graeme Wright and Stephen Wells top that list IMO), but he's proven his ability to get deals done that are fair for both parties, while being in our best interests. This means that despite the need from the peanut gallery for trades and action to happen for the sake of it, he won't budge from the core objective to get the best talent into the club without overspending. Sometimes this means a stalemate.

Has he got them all right? No, but few have. I admit thinking at the time we picked Finbar "We should've rolled the dice on Stack there", and rookie/late selections have been sketchy at best (although is this more Brodie's doing?). But he's hardly Robinson Crusoe there.

Yesterday he took a hit, but not of his making. He came up against two incredibly stubborn and stupid organisations (GC and *) who wanted to make a point, and were willing to cut their noses to spite their faces. The difference is where those organisations get celebrated for 'standing firm', SOS cops it for failing to bend over and take it, undoubtedly because of his profile and the club he represents. Would you all have been satisfied if we sacrificed all of our draft currency (and/or players) for Papley and Martin? Because that's what it would've taken.

He had no Plan B? On the radio this morning he was categorical that there was a Plan B, which was to take the "Papley pick" to the draft and nudge Martin to PSD. Works for me.

My point is that whether or not he's the best we can get, we're in very good hands nonetheless with SOS and the team at his disposal.

I can't sit here and say whether he's the best in the business (Graeme Wright and Stephen Wells top that list IMO)...

Given we now know Papley was only moving if Swans got Daniher, "overpaying" for him would've meant more than pick 9.

I like what he is doing but I do think overpaying for Papley early in the window would have worked out pretty good for the club , Papley and the Swans.
Would have been a pretty professional move to my eyes and kept positive momentum for the club.

Shame we couldn't identify another player to go for when we weren't going to get papley done

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

This post along with the opening post from Mosche make a lot of sense.

At the end of the day, we may have missed out on Papley this year because he was in contract and Swans wanted to add players and ignore the welfare of one of its most loved players.

For the first time in the modern AFL era, we have a List Manager who

- knows players' values (both ours and others);
- isn't afraid to make bold plays; and
- understands how negotiation works and knows "when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em".

I feel that with any one of thousands of others in that position (posters on TC and BF included), we would've overspent - either a first rounder for Martin or a first rounder plus some for Papley.

Most Silvagni knockers reckon he got his pants pulled down the past few years. Well, I disagree. But guess what? He definitely didn't THIS YEAR. And we still have a live pick in the top ten plus an early PSD pick (for Martin) to show for it.

I for one am happy he's at the helm!

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

More than happy with his performance.