TOPIC: Trading to #61

blockerhall Trading to #61 2 weeks 1 day ago #1

Just trying to revisit the late live trade we did, to make a bit more sense of it. I can't find actually when it was executed, which matters a bit- although I thought I saw it go through on the draft tracker, I can't find it today. It makes a bit more sense now, as it turned out to be our last slot, which I wasn't aware of at the time. So we may have just positioned ourselves for the best slot available, which is laudable. Or as Shane put it, they just wanted to knock off early.

But as per the below, I presume it was prior (pun intended) to pick 58, as of the 17 live trades, it is listed before West Coast trading up to 58. At that point, Jaxon Prior was still on the boards, he later confirmed our interest in an interview, but Brisbane took him at 59, and kyboshed that. Can't really complain, the live trade was obviously friendly. But we may have been still looking at him to that point.

15. FREMANTLE gains Pick 61. BRISBANE LIONS gain a future fifth-round pick.
16. WEST COAST EAGLES gain Pick 58. ESSENDON gains a future fourth-round pick.
17. WESTERN BULLDOGS gain Pick 62. HAWTHORN gains a future fourth-round pick

As per the original draft order below, (numbers aren't really relevant, it's the order) we shifted ahead of Hawks and Port with that live trade, whom were both 'confirmed' in the media as interested in Frederick. Both teams subsequently passed after our selection, with Hawks still having a slot on their list. In fact, Hawks traded 62, but I can't tell if that was after our selection.

63. Hawthorn
64. Essendon
65. Port Adelaide
66. Fremantle
67. Carlton
68. Brisbane Lions

So mission accomplished.
Login to reply,
shane, pollyanna, slammen, themagoos, OGS said You Beaut

vicmont Trading to #61 2 weeks 22 hours ago #2

The only reason I can think of is that it got us a pick before Port Adelaide, who might have been going to pick Monaro to join his twin brother, who is on their list. Just a theory...
Login to reply,
Corporal Agarn said You Beaut

shane Trading to #61 2 weeks 21 hours ago #3

I know it was a longer post to read than most but you could have tried.
Login to reply,
slammen, Raglan Matt said You Beaut

DocDocker Trading to #61 2 weeks 13 hours ago #4

Was it a good idea to shaft Port like that after they helped us with getting Henry?
Login to reply,
hypen said You Beaut

shane Trading to #61 2 weeks 13 hours ago #5

So you're suggesting corruption?
Login to reply,

DocDocker Trading to #61 2 weeks 12 hours ago #6

Not at all, just that Port might have long memories and may not be so willing to come to the party next time freo need help.
Login to reply,

purple kit Trading to #61 2 weeks 12 hours ago #7

purple kit
We paid a very handsome price to port for their two picks in the 50s, you could argue they shafted us! All fair in love and live trading
Login to reply,
DocDocker said You Beaut

shane Trading to #61 2 weeks 11 hours ago #8

If Fremantle had not acted in their own best interests as a way of getting favourable treatment later, then it's corruption. Port Adelaide agreed to a trade. If they needed assurances of another pick then they would have included that in the pick.

It would be different if we helped another club to take a player Port wanted but Fremantle did was try their best. Which is expected. Nobody shafted anyone.
Login to reply,

SteveShafta Trading to #61 2 weeks 9 hours ago #9

I dunno Shane - there's a lot of it going on!
Login to reply,

shane Trading to #61 2 weeks 9 hours ago #10

Well that's fine then. I didn't realise saying we should play to win was going to be controversial. Tank away.
Login to reply,
Raglan Matt said You Beaut

Matebe Trading to #61 2 weeks 45 minutes ago #11

Maybe Port still owed us one after we didn’t jump above them in the mid-season rookie draft to grab Cam Sutcliffe.
Login to reply,

Raglan Matt Trading to #61 1 week 6 days ago #12

Raglan Matt
I think we owe Port on that one, Matebe.
Login to reply,
Corporal Agarn said You Beaut