| Welcome to Blue and Yellow Hoodoo. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Official Trade Week / Draft Topic | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 1 2011, 09:48 AM (3,761 Views) | |
| Nick | Oct 6 2011, 02:50 PM Post #101 |
|
In all honesty I can't see us getting any higher than Port's second pick (28), straight swap. It's a shame Port didn't finish higher, preferably just outside the top 8 then they would have had pick 15ish we probably could have used that against Ebert. Pick 30 for him is about right, he is probably worth early to mid-20's but seen as though that pick isn't in play we'll just have to settle for 28. |
![]() |
|
| Karlieee | Oct 6 2011, 03:09 PM Post #102 |
![]()
BITCH dunt b getting mouthy with me
|
clark?/? the guy wif the tats is ugly omg |
![]() LOVEEEEEEEEEEEE LIFEEE! ![]() Matthew Rosa #1 Rowingggggggg<3 | |
![]() |
|
| JustinGT | Oct 6 2011, 03:12 PM Post #103 |
![]()
|
It isn't in Adelaide's best interest to strengthen our squad. If they are any bit rational they will choose weakening our squad whislt making Port Adelaide's stronger. Port are far less likely to be any sort of realistic flag threat in the future. Mind you obviously there is a chance that Port will end up stronger than us in the short-medium term, after our older guys have all parted ways. |
Junior's secret ^ | |
![]() |
|
| Maddison | Oct 6 2011, 04:21 PM Post #104 |
|
How about Eagles lose Ebert, Lycett, Lynch and then one of Swift or Masten, picks 6/23/45 And we gain O'Meara, Clark and Pick 28 Doesn't seem even for us overall, 6 + Lynch for O'meara is a lot to pay, or is it? |
|
Drawingssssssssss | |
![]() |
|
| JustinGT | Oct 6 2011, 04:22 PM Post #105 |
![]()
|
That would be like the worst case scenario for us, we're losing out BIG time on that and we won't be able to get O'Meara anyways. |
Junior's secret ^ | |
![]() |
|
| JackH | Oct 6 2011, 04:23 PM Post #106 |
|
Clark would be a terrible replacement for Lynch... |
![]() |
|
| Maddison | Oct 6 2011, 04:23 PM Post #107 |
|
How ya figure that one? Elaborate.... |
|
Drawingssssssssss | |
![]() |
|
| JackH | Oct 6 2011, 04:24 PM Post #108 |
|
Clark isn't a forward in the slightest and Lynch plays CHF. |
![]() |
|
| Simmo | Oct 6 2011, 04:25 PM Post #109 |
|
Clark is a capable CHF. Subiaco is ideal for him, he needs space to run around in....He is Franklinesk |
![]() |
|
| Maddison | Oct 6 2011, 04:27 PM Post #110 |
|
Lets not start comparing Mitch Clark to Buddy Franklin lol. Look at the positives on acquiring Mitch Clark. Dean Cox won't be around forever. It's a testament to Coxy that he's been able to sustain the elite form for so long. Glass is in the same boat. West Coast players traditionally don't play far beyond 30, let alone ruckman or talls. There is no guarantee Lynch won't revert back to his usual frustrating self either. Clark can play CHF. He can easily float around CHF and play back up ruck when need be. He would provide relief to Naitanui and Lycett in a similar manner to Lynch backing up both Cox and Naitanui Plus he would complete the most badass set of talls the comp has seen in a while. In the mean time we draft another KPD either McIness or Lockyer and we would never need to worry about our talls again. |
|
Drawingssssssssss | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Our Team · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Zeta Original | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
3:06 AM Jul 12
|
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy











3:06 AM Jul 12