2022 Trade Period. (COMPLETED)
Moderator: bbmods
- thesoretoothsayer
- Posts: 1109
- Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2017 8:15 am
- Been liked: 23 times
- Dave The Man
- Posts: 45001
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 2:04 pm
- Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
- Has liked: 2 times
- Been liked: 21 times
- Contact:
That’s also quite a win amongst all the player acquisitions.Jezza wrote:Yep you're right.eddiesmith wrote:Saw that on Fox Footy but didn’t Hawthorn get 41 and 50?Jezza wrote:Our draft hand has improved, so credit to Wright here.
Originally it was 16, 42, 47, 48
After the trade period it's 16, 25, 27, 41, 50, 51
After the trade period it's 16, 25, 27, 51
Just for balance, we moved out our future second and third but that’s easily improved on over the next off season, if required.
- magpieazza
- Posts: 2306
- Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 10:27 am
- Location: Griffith N.S.W
Apart from identifying Frampton, McStay and Hill as players that hopefully will flourish under the new coaching unit we grabbed Mitchell for a decent trade.
Im not fussed about Henry now bc we got Mitchell and #25.
Grundy is a loss but like Wrighty said its all about the future and we definitely cleared the cap space.
This has pretty much fixed the mistakes from the past and its all about a bright future.
Plus we kept DeGoey too and who wouldnt want to stay at Collingwood now.
Bring on 2023 I say!!
Im not fussed about Henry now bc we got Mitchell and #25.
Grundy is a loss but like Wrighty said its all about the future and we definitely cleared the cap space.
This has pretty much fixed the mistakes from the past and its all about a bright future.
Plus we kept DeGoey too and who wouldnt want to stay at Collingwood now.
Bring on 2023 I say!!
Carpe diem quam minimum credula postero.
Thanks DTM for posting Wrighty's post trade interview.
Interesting he said they weren't going to let Henry go, but something happened late in the piece around the Mitchell situation which changed the thinking.
Did I interpret this right? - maybe someone here can interpret better what he's saying with this.
I thought we'd been looking at Mitchell for ages?
Interesting he said they weren't going to let Henry go, but something happened late in the piece around the Mitchell situation which changed the thinking.
Did I interpret this right? - maybe someone here can interpret better what he's saying with this.
I thought we'd been looking at Mitchell for ages?
- What'sinaname
- Posts: 20101
- Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 10:00 pm
- Location: Living rent free
- Has liked: 4 times
- Been liked: 30 times
- daics aka the ruckman
- Posts: 391
- Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 10:06 am
- Location: Scoreboard Hill @ Vic Park
- Been liked: 3 times
I agree. We made significant improvements to our list.What'sinaname wrote:Hard to be disappointed.
Tall forward, tall backman, midfielder and quick small forward. Filled four needs.
We lost a ruckman (one of three) and an under-sized tall forward who was playing VFL.
The loss of Henry and Grundy can be covered, and were covered for most of the season.
go pies