List Mgmt. 2020 Trade Thread - Part III

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tom Browne reckons for a 2nd round pick and paying $600k of the $900k (Collingwood contributing $300k) you could have Treloar.
Who wouldn't want him for that?

It sounds like it's not beyond the realms of possibility that we could have Crouch and Trelaor running around for us next year.
Not saying it's likely or even that we are interested, but we have the capacity to make it happen if it suited all parties.
Now that would be an interesting development.
 
Tom Browne reckons for a 2nd round pick and paying $600k of the $900k (Collingwood contributing $300k) you could have Treloar.
Who wouldn't want him for that?
It will only be for next year. Means you need to find 300k for year 2 if you have a tight cap.
 
Whether we get Bert Couch or not, the Adelaide thread is delightful reading. Another doozy;

“Time for the club to ask for Jack Steele or Hunter Clark...and also their first round pick”

Remind me what tops delusions of grandeur? Haha
 

Log in to remove this ad.

There was a thread on this a few players been at 4 clubs, Dale Kickett 5 different lists
yep, but not in 4 different states
 
Thats why stuv, Bruce and acres left for less than should be expected. Especially when you consider similar outcomes at other clubs.

If we can't get crouch to our club using very little collateral then there's rightfully going to be questions asked on why the contract was structured the way it was which meant it was going to be pushed down a trade path when they were not prepared to play hard ball on a trade.

I get a sneaky suspicion that the contract is structured pretty sagely ... if Adelaide blink, and we "win", we're given some insulation in the event that we can't keep Crouch on the field ... if they match and we "lose", Adelaide likely end up paying more years than they want, with incentives/triggers/performance clauses they might not have wanted.

Could also be the play that if Crouch was prepared to agree to such terms from us, given they could disadvantage him significantly were he not to meet them, that it shows a significant indication he really is happy to move on, and that the value in retaining him might not be what you'd expect from a former B&F who wants to be elsewhere (we can call it the 2019 Stuv Effect, if we like) ... lower guaranteed money (apparently significantly lower than AFC tabled earlier in the season) suggests there's more than money on Crouch's mind.

Very much prepared to worship at Satan's altar on this one, because I suspect he has a special place in Hell set aside for the AFC management, who are likely damned if they do, and if they don't ;)
 
Last year was about getting an outcome even if it meant paying slight overs on each trade.

Thats why stuv, Bruce and acres left for less than should be expected. Especially when you consider similar outcomes at other clubs.

Stating that doesn't mean the trade period wasn't a success. It was a resounding massive win. To get all those players in one trade period was phenomal.

But the situation is completely different this year. We are not having to juggle as many outcomes and we do not have to get deals done with contracted players atleast not in crouches situation.

If we can't get crouch to our club using very little collateral then there's rightfully going to be questions asked on why the contract was structured the way it was which meant it was going to be pushed down a trade path when they were not prepared to play hard ball on a trade.
Crouch contract is structured exactly how it should be for someone that has missed the footy that he has
I’m so glad we stuck to our guns and didn’t offer stupid money,
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Crouch contract is structured exactly how it should be for someone that has missed the footy that he has
I’m so glad we stuck to our guns and didn’t offer stupid money,
Remember how we went all in for Mitch Brown from West Coast..in hindsight he should have taken it and in hindsight we were lucky he didn’t.
Was that Pelican? He would have offered Crouch 900k plus our first.
 
25 likes and I'll tell you the next big name to nominate the Saints

On Pixel 2 using BigFooty.com mobile app
Tom Hickey
 
Tom Hickey
I’m not believing this until I see a tweet from Tom Browneye
 
Is he definitely gone?

I like battle down back tbh
I'm not confident he'll be there next year my bruz, I hope we get a deal done but I just feel like there's more to it than meets the eye. Yeah, I'd take Battle down back if we didn't grab anyone - more so just happy for Battle to be on the park TBH
 
Crouch contract is structured exactly how it should be for someone that has missed the footy that he has
I’m so glad we stuck to our guns and didn’t offer stupid money,
Then why have such a low games played trigger if you are worried about his injury history?
 
It gets funnier
Hard pass on Ross and Billings. Top 10 pick or pick 15 and Hunter Clark. I guess what I’m saying is you should have offered enough for band 1 so pay up or GTFO.

5F11B025-FC81-4BEC-AE06-EEEFEAC43B80.gif
 
Anyone worried we'll end up 'losing' this Crouch trade. We showed last year on Hill, Stuv and Bruce that we are prepared to 'lose' a trade to get it done. On all three trades we expected a better deal than what happened. I wonder if Adelaide know this and will just wait until we inevitably give up our first round

If Lethlean says we aren’t trading our first round draft pick I believe him and Crows prob should too.

They should only match if they are genuinely
okay keeping Crouch.

Not saying we don’t end up trading a couple of players and and you trading Crows a couple of 2nd rounders or a player and a 2nd rounder, but I doubt pick 15 (17 at the moment) is involved.

....and if by ‘we’ expected a better outcome for each trade you mean us Bigfooty posters, well we are tier 5 nuffies so our expectations mean fk all. Ask the Crows fans if you don’t believe me 😬.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top