Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Yeah I haven't popped out for champagne or anything.

It's possible Danger is not available.

And while being about right for Beams, 5 and Aish might be slight unders for Dangerfield.

I'd love Danger but will happily take 5 and 10, and begrudgingly take 5 and 25 which is probably what happens

Wokko wrote:Your sentiments seem to come from wanting to screw the Lions rather than trying to get a good deal. if Pick 5 + Redden who wasn't even in Brisbane's B&F top ten would get it done, but pick 5 + Norfs equal 2nd in the B&F wouldn't be enough then something here doesn't add up.

Missed one third of the season this year with injury.
Top 5 for the previous 4 seasons.
The boy can play. 25 touches a game and about 5-7 tackles.

It would seem if Melbourne aren't prepared to hand over pick 23 for Lumumba we might be forced to accept 5 and 25 in order to get a pick suitable for Greenwood.

Surely Lumumba and our 3rd rounder for pick 23 would get the deal done and stop us having to take the minimum for Beams.

So the mystery deal is a 3 way to get Varcoe to Collingwod involving the Clark & Lumumba deal.......NO FKG way!!!!!!!!!!!


According to Gleeson.

swoop42 wrote:

AN_Inkling wrote:

swoop42 wrote:A pure hypothetical.

Beams, pick*34 to Brisbane.

Pick 5, Lumumba and Merrett to Melbourne.

Pick 2 and 25 to pies.

*Pick received for Mitch Clarke

Rejected .

Personally i think this is a fair trade for all parties and pick 2 shouldn't be sniffed at.

It would either land us Petracca or give us the option between Brayshaw or McCartin.

Bribane lose pick 5, 25, Merrett
Brisbane gain Beams, pick 34

Melbourne lose pick 2, 34
Melbourne gain pick 5, Lumumba, Merrett

Collingwood lose Beams
Collingwood gain pick 2, 25

and we lose Lumumba...... effectively that is pick 25 for Lumumba and pick 2 for Beams. not enough....

swoop42 wrote:I prefer the unlikely scenario doing the rounds over at bigfooty.

Aish to Adelaide.

Pick 10 to Collingwood.

Beams to Brisbane.

Pick 5 to Collingwood.

That would be a better deal though it would have to be total BS.

This deal actually seems to be about right. I would think that Adelaide need to wither throw in a second rounder or a mid tier player to get that done. People forget that Beams is about the enter the prime of his career and he in one of the best 10 mids in the entire competition. 5 and 10 nets us two chances to replace that player in 3-5 years time.

this is finally a deal that makes a little sense.

swoop42 wrote:I can't spell on a $500,000 a year contract

True. And false. In that order.

Ok, so of the three scenarios I can see floating around here:

Scenario 1:

COLLINGWOOD receives Greenwood from North Melbourne and pick No. 5 from Brisbane.

BRISBANE receives Beams from Collingwood.

NORTH MELBOURNE receives pick No. 25 from Brisbane.


Scenario 2

Bribane lose pick 5, 25, Merrett
Brisbane gain Beams, pick 34

Melbourne lose pick 2, 34
Melbourne gain pick 5, Lumumba, Merrett

Collingwood lose Beams
Collingwood gain pick 2, 25


Scenario 3

Aish to Adelaide.

Pick 10 to Collingwood.

Beams to Brisbane.

Pick 5 to Collingwood.



Scenario 1 - Pies Lose
Scenario 2 - Bears Lose (disagree with 'E' - pick 2 is far more valuable than 5)
Scenario 3 - I would argue is fair - agree with 'E' - but Bears won't see it that way

Any other ideas being floated out there team?!?!

Cant see this being sorted on Wednesday

Meddler80 wrote:Ok, so of the three scenarios I can see floating around here:

Scenario 1:

COLLINGWOOD receives Greenwood from North Melbourne and pick No. 5 from Brisbane.

BRISBANE receives Beams from Collingwood.

NORTH MELBOURNE receives pick No. 25 from Brisbane.


Scenario 2

Bribane lose pick 5, 25, Merrett
Brisbane gain Beams, pick 34

Melbourne lose pick 2, 34
Melbourne gain pick 5, Lumumba, Merrett

Collingwood lose Beams
Collingwood gain pick 2, 25


Scenario 3

Aish to Adelaide.

Pick 10 to Collingwood.

Beams to Brisbane.

Pick 5 to Collingwood.



Scenario 1 - Pies Lose
Scenario 2 - Bears Lose (disagree with 'E' - pick 2 is far more valuable than 5)
Scenario 3 - I would argue is fair - agree with 'E' - but Bears won't see it that way

Any other ideas being floated out there team?!?!

Cant see this being sorted on Wednesday

scenario 3 can get done if adelaide kicks in more (second rounder?). Aish is a well performed pick 7. for him to be worth pick 10 now, people would hav eto think this is an exceptional draft!

I would rather have Aish instead of pick 10 every day of the week. He has proven his value as a top 10 draft pick with 1 year under his belt. Pick 10 is an unknown quantity.

Meddler80 wrote: Aish to Adelaide.
Pick 10 to Collingwood.
Beams to Brisbane.
Pick 5 to Collingwood.

Nope.

For Brisbane, Aish is worth more than Pick 10. As a young, already-proven top 10 pick, he's worth something like Pick 4 or 5, or 10 + 25ish, or 10 + a good ordinary player such as Greenwood. Why would they do that? They lose Pick 5 and Aish and only gain Beams, who is an upgrade on Aish but not all that much of one when you consider the age difference. Why not just keep Aish and the pick? They aren't trading to go backwards.

For Adelaide, it's a steal. They'd be all over that like a rash.

For Collingwood, yeah, it's not exactly what we want - we'd rather a high pick plus a mature ready-made player of quality - but it's good value just the same, probably a bit more than evens.

For this to happen, Adelaide would have to throw in a good second round pick or a decent player, and we might have to make up the small change with a third round pick.

Tannin wrote:

Meddler80 wrote: Aish to Adelaide.
Pick 10 to Collingwood.
Beams to Brisbane.
Pick 5 to Collingwood.

Nope.

For Brisbane, Aish is worth more than Pick 10. As a young, already-proven top 10 pick, he's worth something like Pick 4 or 5, or 10 + 25ish, or 10 + a good ordinary player such as Greenwood. Why would they do that? They lose Pick 5 and Aish and only gain Beams, who is an upgrade on Aish but not all that much of one when you consider the age difference. Why not just keep Aish and the pick? They aren't trading to go backwards.

For Adelaide, it's a steal. They'd be all over that like a rash.

For Collingwood, yeah, it's not exactly what we want - we'd rather a high pick plus a mature ready-made player of quality - but it's good value just the same, probably a bit more than evens.

For this to happen, Adelaide would have to throw in a good second round pick or a decent player, and we might have to make up the small change with a third round pick.

I think i have now said this a few times. Brisbane are trying to get a player that automatically goes to the best on their list and will be so for the foreseeable future. Take away the clubs involved, in any other context is it reasonable to expect to "pay" anything less than your 1st rounder and a player ranked between 4-8 on your list to get that ?
It should only be pick 5 and Redden or Aish who currently sit in that bracket. This is not about potential it is about now. If Brisbane don't see this then "No Bingo".
The Greenwood deal is irrelevant to the outcome.

jdpie1970 wrote:

Tannin wrote:

Meddler80 wrote: Aish to Adelaide.
Pick 10 to Collingwood.
Beams to Brisbane.
Pick 5 to Collingwood.

Nope.

For Brisbane, Aish is worth more than Pick 10. As a young, already-proven top 10 pick, he's worth something like Pick 4 or 5, or 10 + 25ish, or 10 + a good ordinary player such as Greenwood. Why would they do that? They lose Pick 5 and Aish and only gain Beams, who is an upgrade on Aish but not all that much of one when you consider the age difference. Why not just keep Aish and the pick? They aren't trading to go backwards.

For Adelaide, it's a steal. They'd be all over that like a rash.

For Collingwood, yeah, it's not exactly what we want - we'd rather a high pick plus a mature ready-made player of quality - but it's good value just the same, probably a bit more than evens.

For this to happen, Adelaide would have to throw in a good second round pick or a decent player, and we might have to make up the small change with a third round pick.

I think i have now said this a few times. Brisbane are trying to get a player that automatically goes to the best on their list and will be so for the foreseeable future. Take away the clubs involved, in any other context is it reasonable to expect to "pay" anything less than your 1st rounder and a player ranked between 4-8 on your list to get that ?
It should only be pick 5 and Redden or Aish who currently sit in that bracket. This is not about potential it is about now. If Brisbane don't see this then "No Bingo".
The Greenwood deal is irrelevant to the outcome.

Yes, spot on.
100% agree

So any deal yet?

LOL.