Author Topic: Trade targets 2017  (Read 216809 times)

Offline one-eyed

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 98251
    • One-Eyed Richmond
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1170 on: October 19, 2017, 02:16:50 PM »
We've made another trade/swap of picks.

Richmond swap picks 15 & 52 for Brisbane's picks 20 & 25.

https://twitter.com/AFL_PKeane

So we now have picks 17, 20, 25, 53, 55, ...

Offline Diocletian

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19434
  • RWNJ / Leftist Snowflake - depends who you ask....
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1171 on: October 19, 2017, 02:16:58 PM »
stupid.... seriously - stuff Naish..... :thumbsdown
"Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good...."

- Thomas Sowell


FJ is the only one that makes sense.

Offline Owl

  • Magnificent Bastard
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 7012
  • Bring me TWO chickens
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1172 on: October 19, 2017, 02:19:34 PM »
oh ffs you are kidding me
Lots of people name their swords......

Offline Diocletian

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19434
  • RWNJ / Leftist Snowflake - depends who you ask....
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1173 on: October 19, 2017, 02:22:01 PM »
All so we can get an overrated outside skinny flanker....Wallace & Miller would be proud.... :clapping
"Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good...."

- Thomas Sowell


FJ is the only one that makes sense.

Offline Owl

  • Magnificent Bastard
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 7012
  • Bring me TWO chickens
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1174 on: October 19, 2017, 02:23:32 PM »
so why the stuff didn't we just keep 15 and use that on him if we needed to.  What is the strategy here, we don't want to trade for players and cunningly we trade away our best pick on top of that.  This better be good. >:(
Lots of people name their swords......

tony_montana

  • Guest
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1175 on: October 19, 2017, 02:27:19 PM »
20 and 25 for 17 is good business. At best we’ll have 3 picks inside the top 25 at worst we’ll have 2 and Naish. Better than just using 15 or 17 on naish

Offline Fluffy Tiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 2450
  • Yes I was realy born in Richmond
    • Canning A.R.T.S.
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1176 on: October 19, 2017, 02:32:27 PM »
We've made another trade/swap of picks.

Richmond swap picks 15 & 52 for Brisbane's picks 20 & 25.

https://twitter.com/AFL_PKeane

So we now have picks 17, 20, 25, 53, 55, ...

You can see why they did it as it gives them greater flexibility given they obviously rate Naish.

If he was picked before 15 we would have to give up 15 and only have 17 and then 50something.  Now we give up 17 and have picks 20, 25, 53,55 if he is picked before our pick. Also if he is not picked before 17 we have a huge number of options. Im not saying it is the correct call as I only know what I have read here about Naish but you can see why they have done it.
Here , kitty kitty. Here , kitty kitty.   AAAUGH!

Offline Diocletian

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19434
  • RWNJ / Leftist Snowflake - depends who you ask....
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1177 on: October 19, 2017, 02:32:58 PM »
so why the stuff didn't we just keep 15 and use that on him if we needed to.  What is the strategy here, we don't want to trade for players and cunningly we trade away our best pick on top of that.  This better be good. >:(

Must've got word there will be an ealy bid on Naish so now we can match that bid with 17 and still have two picks in the top 30 with20 & 25 instead of our next pick after him only being 52 I'd say .....

...which would be at odds with all the talk that we weren't going to match if there was a bid on him before ether of  our firsts....

.

20 and 25 for 17 is good business.

In a strong, deep draft maybe - in a weak, shallow draft and for the sake of a skinny flanker, I beg to differ...
"Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good...."

- Thomas Sowell


FJ is the only one that makes sense.

Online Loui Tufga

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4851
  • Beaver BLT
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1178 on: October 19, 2017, 02:35:52 PM »
so why the stuff didn't we just keep 15 and use that on him if we needed to.  What is the strategy here, we don't want to trade for players and cunningly we trade away our best pick on top of that.  This better be good. >:(

Must've got word there will be an ealy bid on Naish so now we can match that bid with 17 and still have two picks in the top 30 with20 & 25 instead of our next pick after him only being 52 I'd say .....

...which would be at odds with all the talk that we weren't going to match if there was a bid on him before ether of  our firsts....

.

20 and 25 for 17 is good business.

In a strong, deep draft maybe - in a weak, shallow draft and for the sake of a skinny flanker, I beg to differ...

Is that you Claw ;D

Offline Diocletian

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19434
  • RWNJ / Leftist Snowflake - depends who you ask....
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1179 on: October 19, 2017, 02:41:08 PM »
Our dynasty has been undermined already....next flag 2054..... :thumbsdown
"Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good...."

- Thomas Sowell


FJ is the only one that makes sense.

Online Damo

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4499
  • Member of famed “Gang Of Four”. Ground the airbus!
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1180 on: October 19, 2017, 02:41:49 PM »
15 is worth 1112 points
52 is worth 246 points

In return we get

20 is worth 912 points
25 is worth 756 points

We made out like bandits and probably think who we want will still be available at a later pick

Online Francois Jackson

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14049
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1181 on: October 19, 2017, 02:44:28 PM »
NAISH Must be really poo if this joints anything to go by

never seen him play so i wouldnt know, but surely cant be that bad

Currently a member of the Roupies, and employed by the great man Roup.

Offline TigerRocket

  • Future Richmond star
  • **
  • Posts: 38
  • Tigers 4 Ever
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1182 on: October 19, 2017, 02:45:52 PM »
Can I suggest we wait for the draft before passing judgement. I am not sure as to what the clubs in front of us want (prior to 17) but I think Naish will most likely will get through to pick 20. I would consider Oscar Allen to be a really good fit for our forward line needs, competitive mark (yes not 200cm) but is a pressure beast and would really compliment Jack and the amigos. (Just my opinion guys, but I think moving 15 to 20+25 is a smart move).

Offline Diocletian

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19434
  • RWNJ / Leftist Snowflake - depends who you ask....
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1183 on: October 19, 2017, 02:48:56 PM »
NAISH Must be really poo if this joints anything to go by

never seen him play so i wouldnt know, but surely cant be that bad



A quicker version of Corey Ellis, which essentially makes him a poor man's Menadue....
"Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good...."

- Thomas Sowell


FJ is the only one that makes sense.

Offline one-eyed

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 98251
    • One-Eyed Richmond
Re: Trade targets 2017
« Reply #1184 on: October 19, 2017, 02:54:10 PM »
FINAL TRADE

Port trade two separate on-traded 2018 Future Rd3 picks to NMelb for rd3 (46) and 2018 Future rd3.

https://twitter.com/AFL_PKeane