Steve_C7 wrote:
The Duke wrote:
I see it as going either way. He could quite conceivably be FF in our 17th flag which will drive the young blokes on to more success after he retires to the brewry. On the other hand we could trade him for 2 top 10s which would ensure success for 10-15 years - how many flags in that period remains un-known but there'd be more than one I'd suspect.
Really?
I must have missed the bit where it states that 2 top ten picks equals 2 elite players, but then again you might get lucky and get 1 elite player that you will lose 4 years developing to replace 1 proven elite player.
All make sense top me. Rob Peter to pay...... Peter

Just on this, it never ceases to amaze me how people think that trading a superstart for 2 top 10 picks is logical in any shape way or form. You "do not" trade away quality.
For example lets have a look at what Hawthorn (Hay/Thompson) and Collingwood (Tarrant) traded and compare them to Fevola. Now the only person close to him would be Thommo and even he was coming up to his used by date, both physically and mentally. All other aren't close. Fev isn't done and has atleast 5 years of quality left.
You don't trade away quality like Fev for just draft picks that we all sit around and keep everything crossed that they can come through and play 100 games before even getting back some interest.
Wake up people, unless it's a Jonathan Brown for a Brendan Fevola trade, it ain't and nor should it happen. Fev is quality and he only lets himself down at times which he can fix.
Time to build a forward line around him and not vice versa.