Re point 2, no you’re not listening to what I’m saying Turk. More, not equivalent or less. We couldn’t/wouldn’t do that and get the value to them. So it falls over. We get outbid in other words. Getting outbid can have positive or negative ramifications. I’m saying that in this case it presented a negative outcome visa v what we tendered on and paid for elsewhere.Sorry mate
1. I am not arguing with myself at all , Im sure i made my point clear in the last post
2. You want Doggies to wait for us to get organised to offer them the same or less ?
3. If we are not giving them a bigger uplift then why should they and if we are then your argument is even worse as its an ever bigger mistake
4. You appear to be stuck on giving way points , The situation this year appears to be to move up you have to pay a premium and the reason for this could be that not many teams are rating players after 30 and are clammering to get inside.
fact remains that we did not have a good enough hand at the time to complete the deal and bulldogs rightfully got it done to move onto other things. The only other choice we had after this is to carry the picks into the draft and live trade or select players.
Maybe a good idea to give this a rest now as no point in arguing and best put our efforts to thinking about which players we now prefer with
7.15.26.27.28
Point 3 Huh ? How is giving up for example a 546 point payout from our Draft capital for 17 “worse or even bigger mistake“ v 522 for 27 ? It’s the other way around. And to be honest, if you can’t get that, then there’s no point continuing you’re right.
The fact remains, and history will show, that using the DVI (which is an index to assign some sort of value on picks as opposed to ambit or argued values) it was 499 to get 17 and 522 to get 27.
Last edited: