This is why we need a passionate and successful board willing to challenge the AFL instead of rolling over like our current one does, makes me sick they don't care that we are being shafted by the AFL

no stress. this is all in GW's wheelhouse. his area of speciality. he'll work the phones if he has to until he finds his own protege to take over.

Good point

Chris Davies is officially looking after List management. He's across all of Austins work. GW and CD combo calms me.

I've seen on other threads people calling for more trades of big name players to get more picks for the next two drafts. The Prendercast boys talked about this and I'm wondering if someone can validate their argument.

The hypothetical was that we come 15th, Sydney comes 3rd, and we trade McKay for a first round pick that turns out to be #10. So we go to the draft with picks 4, 10 & 16.

Richmond comes last, and bid on Walker at #1.

According to the boys, the rules say that we must use picks 4 & 10 to match, even if 4+16+ Max deficit offset to 2027 would cover the 2700 points (i don't know if they do... you can move the pick numbers around to match if necessary).

Is that true? Is the rule not just you must use two picks+deficit , but that you have to use your most valuable picks, even if you have 3+ first rounders?

If it is true, then - as the boys pointed out - there is nothing to be gained by trading any of our players for first round picks because we'd just be diluting their value when we already have the picks needed for Walker (provided we don't do something stupid like sugar hitting our way to 11th).

[carlton Execs] have been openly fighting the AFL alongside Port and Essendon*** for the better part of 12 months now.
And I am yet to hear otherwise on them giving up the fight.

We are only allowed to use 2 picks, then go into deficit. I'm guessing we can use any 2 First round picks. Can't see why not.

We are only allowed to use 2 picks, then go into deficit. I'm guessing we can use any 2 First round picks. Can't see why not.

Hey Crusader,

did you check to find out if we go into deficit after using 2 picks and they fail to make up the points needed to match walker's bid?

That's Ports strategy with Cochrane. They say they don't need Butters firsts to get their man Cochrane. They will use theri 2 picks and go into deficit in 2027.

Re the mid season draft. Talk was to put O’Farrell on the Long term injury list and shelf him for the year. That’s what was said in an article i read.

Pretty sure the rules still refer to ‘next’ pick.

Trading our way to a second top 10 pick wouldn’t see that pick wasted. It would cop a slight haircut & slide down the order. Using picks 3 & 10, for example, to match a bid at #1 would give us the player, plus pick #21 in return.

Thanks, that's what the podcasters were getting at. So at least in the short term, it means trading H for pick 21 or worse. I understand there will be points deficits down the line if we traded 3 & 16-18 or whatever, but it is still far less appealing than nabbing a top 10 player this year. So I agree with the boys that this is a bad year to trade out a big piece (which from a list perspective I think we can ill afford to do in any case).

Edit: I've overlooked the fact we would retain the Sydney first. Hmm, maybe not so bad, then. But I still wouldn't do it

They’re also overlooking the fact that we can trade a player for future picks & park the return value there until after the bid is matched.

Pretty sure the rules still refer to ‘next’ pick.

Trading our way to a second top 10 pick wouldn’t see that pick wasted. It would cop a slight haircut & slide down the order. Using picks 3 & 10, for example, to match a bid at #1 would give us the player, plus pick #21 in return.

Good point Sidey.

What we really need is a couple of winners on the board. Not the current collection of floppy-dicked fly in fly out losers.

Big difference between Lobbying and Fighting.

One is to make their case and wait timidly for the response.
The other is to stand up to them with the threat of legal proceedings.

BALLS to show conviction and fight for what's right and in what you believe

It aint over till its over. I hope there's another chapter.

Riley Beveridge is convinced GW wants "more picks" [than the 2 1sts for Walker]
That's Riley's interpretation of what GW said.
Hence, he is expecting a fire sale and thinks there's only 6 untouchables:

O'Farrell (2027)
Dean (2028)
Walker (2029)
Smith (2020)
Weitering (2031)
Walsh (2034)

Therefore, he states potentially the following are of Value:

Cripps (2027) imo too old
Hewett (2027) imo too old
Cowan (2028) maybe will go to Tassie
Cerra (2030) ??
McKay (2030) ??

Sydney 1st (2026) only if Carlton don't end up with spoon and we receive end of round 1 Compo Pick
Carlton 2 x 2nds (2026)
Carltons 1st 2nd (2027)
Carltons 1st 2nd (2028)
Sydney 1st (2027)

How do we get Van Hatton and Walker? .... oh year ... as the Spooner