No doubt Hawks owe us. The trade was to help Hawks get Merrett. Didnt happen, but they owe us twice now.

Imagine if Dean's name isnt called up by pick 9, with Hawks having the pick before our pick 11. What happens then? I don't think Hawks will bid for Dean.

Surely we can't blow both picks 9 and 11 on other players and not invest in Dean.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

One of those will go towards Dean. I’d doubt it but it would be nice if it was 11.

Perfect from here on out would be:

1. See off the bid on Annable, Uwland & Peterson
2. Trade pick #9 to one of West Coast (#s 13 & 34) or Adelaide (#s 16, 48 & 55), with a priority on points in this draft. West Coast are front runners because their bids will determine the value of those later picks. If they go early, Gold Coast or Brisbane will have to find a deal with Essendon* or North for their picks in the 20s.
3. Match the bid on Dean
4. Draft Cameron Nairn
5. Match the bid on Ison
6. Trade the surplus points to Gold Coast for 2026 assets
7. Add at least one utility big in the SSP, two if O’Farrell goes on LTI


I think we’ve been just fair, maybe a bit better, so far. Definitely not a failure, but not something to crack a fat over.

Curnow & Hayward - square… we lost more than Sydney. We’ll have to work for the win.
Silvagni - win
De Koning - square… there was a Curnow-sized bounty on him two years ago.
Reidy - win
Florent - win
Chesser - win
Durdin & Ainsworth - square… I like what we’ve got & think the price was fair. Happy that it’s a good deal for Durdin, but I think he’ll really kick on at Port.
Binns & Hollands - win
Cincotta - loss… in fairness, he might be busted.
White & Fantasia - square… spent big money to fill their spots.
Lemmey - loss… we’re still looking for his replacement.

_________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" - Winston Churchill.

Trade period
I'm happy with what we did. I’m not devastated to lose Charlie. TDK is a loss but it would have been worse if we’d kept him on anything more than $1m (and even then…). JSOS is neither here nor there. If we traded him a year ago, we would have been lucky to get a 3rd or 4th round pick in return. I loved his manic attack on the field but if he wasn’t feeling it, I don’t think he would have given quite as much. And we entered the trade period without the assets required to replenish, top-up or even be sure we could secure Dean and Cody. We came away with a strong hand now and into the future.

Draft
1) Get Dean
2) Secure what we need for Cody
3) Get capital to secure Butters or Humphrey next year
4) Get Ison and/or a top 20 (imo Lindsay, Schubert, Dovaston, or one of the highly touted top 10 mids if they slide)

FWIW, I don’t put much stock in any pick after 30 in this year’s draft (apart from Ison if he slides). I’d trade any surplus trades we are allowed to for the following year when we can use for points to strengthen our hand at the top end in 2026.

Dilemma 1
Is there a scenario where we are basically choosing to prioritise Ison ahead of that potential pick 15-20?
If so, are we confident that Ison is the better choice?
For example, isn’t that effectively the play if we decide to trade out pick 9?

Dilemma 2
Top 20 pick this year vs top 20 pick next year?
I feel like the additional pick next year will be required if we are seriously contemplating a trade for Butters or Humphrey.
Or, if we believe that next year’s top 20 pick will be significantly better than this year?
In this scenario, I’m happy giving up a Dovaston if we’re making a play for, say, Humphrey (who I think is more likely than Butters).
As it stands, I don’t think next year’s draft capital is sufficient although I suspect we will trade out of the 2027 first round to bump up our options for next year’s draft.
I assume we will need 5 first round picks next year to get Cody and Butters, which doesn’t leave much for another player from next year’s supposedly strong draft.

I feel like the Florent trade, even though it was technically seperate to the Curnow trade, was built into it.

We got Florent for unders IMO so if you combine him into the Curnow trade I think we came out ok.

That said, I got pretty ahead of things in trade week & wanted Gulden & the opera house

_________________
#DonTheStash

I thought Butters was a free agent next year, so we'd just need salary cap space not picks?

In my daydreams Curnow, struggling for fitness and pining for Geelong, is a total spud for Sydney and they are a bottom 8 club for the next couple of years, which makes it a winning trade for us.

My understanding is he will be a restricted free agent and Port will undoubtedly (posture as though they will) match any offer. Therefore, I think it will come down to a trade. Or a ridiculously high front ended contract which I would be against doing for a number of reasons.

They will force a trade.

Not sure they would match a $1.7M offer though.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

So he's headed for Moorabbin then?

_________________
#DonTheStash

Might be wishful thinking on your part GX but I reckon that's exactly how its gonna pan out . Charlies heart isn't in Sydney and we know how things pan out for Charlie when his heart isn't in something .

_________________
All my dangerous friends

Charlie will spend 1-2 seasons pouting in the SCG goal square, then Geelong will pick him up for a third rounder once the Swans are truly sick of him.

Charlie and a few of the Bloods looking really happy sipping coffee in the sunshine at Bondi today. The sunshine would make him feel like...he's a on a surf trip.

I hope he stays relaxed on and off the field.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue