Rumour 2022 Rumour Discussion Thread

[Scorpus]

Keep up to date with the latest Crows rumors in our summary thread: Rumour - Rumours Thread for Rumors Only

If you post a new rumor here, let me know and I'll copy it over

 

[Hodgy]

Not sure why we'd be interested in Cox, unless he's determined to get back to SA. In that scenario we pay unders and it might be worth it. Otherwise, I just don't see a fit or how we get value for money. We play the most-difficult-on-defenders gameplan in the comp. That makes our defenders look worse than they are and others coming from outside our system would go from looking better to looking worse. Based on that I don't think Cox is a major upgrade on Butts nor Murray (given a few more years development for him). Along similar lines we play the hardest-on-forwards gameplan too, which makes our forwards look worse than they are, highlighting that Fog is indeed very good and Berg's prolly worth a bit more than people on here think (very late first to end of second for me for the record). The last thing I can think of is that maybe if Freo want Berg, Cox has been offered up, or vice versa, to take higher end picks out of the question and using players as covering some of the cost that allows late picks. If we did get Cox (and or another somewhat proven defender) at least we could be comfortable then letting go Frampton and McAsey.

What we paid for Dawson shows where its at when the recieving club holds all the cards (and they always hold all the cards - no one is going to attempt to sign someone who doesn't want to come to their club - its only been done once that I can recall - so you can forget PSD threat, it doesn't even come into play).

So my call for what we'll pay for Rankine is still a late first or early second.

I think we'll keep our first rounder and draft someone with that.

I doubt we'll get Francis, though I bet we'll keep feigning interest even if we arent a chance as that still serves as a big win for us costing North and or whomever gets him $ or picks or other collateral.

If list sizes expand, it could be quite handy for us. If they increase by say 2 does that mean adding 2 to fill those spots qualifies as one of the three compulsory list changes?? If they do (or even if they dont) it means we could probably attempt to recontract ppl like Berg and Frampton meaning other clubs have to trade if they want them. If they dont expand the list sizes, sux a little but still no biggie.

Spot on analysis.

 

[Scorpus]

and Berg's prolly worth a bit more than people on here think (very late first to end of second for me for the record).
[...]
So my call for what we'll pay for Rankine is still a late first or early second.

 

[StonesThrow]

I think Sanders has mentioned this before, but people really need to read about the endowment effect before posting about trade values.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Got to somehow replace JHF for next year.

He's cheap and they need experienced lads, so it makes sense on the side of the coin, but equally with Simpkin/Cunnington/LDU next year, it's not like North needs pure inside mids.

Cunnington could retire

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

If we had to give up Rachelle to land Rankine and JHF, similarly I wouldn't be happy but could live with it.

I'd obviously explore every other option first though.

What?!?

you need to think of it this way - Rankine is easily done - will be one of our firsts and perhaps some pocket change.

Which means what you’re saying is you would give up Rachele and the other first for JHF. No way you do that deal.

Use the first on a quality mid instead.

In all likelihood with what we know about Rachele and JHF at this point, we will be in front if we keep Rachele and add a mid with the first rather than take JHF.

 

[BunjiMC]

What?!?

you need to think of it this way - Rankine is easily done - will be one of our firsts and perhaps some pocket change.

Which means what you’re saying is you would give up Rachele and the other first for JHF. No way you do that deal.

Use the first on a quality mid instead.

In all likelihood with what we know about Rachele and JHF at this point, we will be in front if we keep Rachele and add a mid with the first rather than take JHF.

But what about a straight swap of Rachele for JHF?

 

[ams4crows]

But what about a straight swap of Rachele for JHF?

No because Rachele doesn't want to play for North and is very Happy in Adelaide.

 

[BunjiMC]

No because Rachele doesn't want to play for North and is very Happy in Adelaide.

But if he was happy to?

 

[Carmo]

I was nearly going to explain that since I was anticipating responses like this one. But I'll treat you like fairly knowledgeable footy person. Explain why it is. What's your first guess, chances are it'll be right.

 

[Scorpus]

I was nearly going to explain that since I was anticipating responses like this one. But I'll treat you like fairly knowledgeable footy person. Explain why it is. What's your first guess, chances are it'll be right.

There isn't a club in the league that would even briefly consider giving (as high as) pick 18 for an uncontracted depth forward at a bottom 4 club

 

[StonesThrow]

I was nearly going to explain that since I was anticipating responses like this one. But I'll treat you like fairly knowledgeable footy person. Explain why it is. What's your first guess, chances are it'll be right.

Sorry to say but it was a real shocker of a post.

 

[ABAB]

I never understand how guys like Kane Cornes suggest us trading a Rachelle as if they are a commodity. We’re not the same as America, a player here has to want to go somewhere for them to be part of any trade discussion, and Rachelle has 3 years left on a contract that we and him agreed to. How would you honestly have the discussion with him that you want him to go to GC when he appears to have fully bought into our team and culture. And even if you can get him to agree, what do the rest of the team, and his friends think of the process when you are trying to build good culture.

Players that are struggling to get a game are obviously different, but Rachelle is not in that category.

Surprised Cornes didn't bring up Soligo instead of Rachele.....well not surprise.

 

[Carmo]

I believe that Mitch Hinge is a like for like significant upgrade on Kelly. In reading back over the thread on Hinge, I came across an interesting little discussion. I quote Carmo, who I wouldn't know from a pair of socks, but think it is worth a bump considering the laughs that he received. He got to within a few picks of a very accurate prediction. I think such astuteness is worth acknowledging and celebrating on Bigfooty.com! It encourages us to stick by our judgements if we think they have substance rather than bowing to the herd mentality!

Sorry to say but it was a real shocker of a post.

You'll have to forgive me if I go with my own judgement and ignore that of others on this board that get them wrong. Time, after time, after time.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

Late first for Berg?

Wouldn't he just get picked up as a dfa?

 

[Scorpus]

You'll have to forgive me if I go with my own judgement and ignore that of others on this board that get them wrong. Time, after time, after time.

Odd post to quote given you overestimated Jake Kelly's value. You thought he'd get a mid 30s pick, ended up 3rd round compensation (pick 44) which was only that high due to us finishing bottom 4.

 

[1970crow]

Gollant can cover mcadam

Can do in the air, but McAdam, when on, is excellent at getting to opponents.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

You'll have to forgive me if I go with my own judgement and ignore that of others on this board that get them wrong. Time, after time, after time.

Your estimation of Berg's value is looney tunes stuff. Come on.

 

[Scorpus]

Your estimation of Berg's value is looney tunes stuff. Come on.

All you have to do is look at past trades.

Has a player similar to Himmelberg ever got even close to a first round pick in a trade?

 

[1970crow]

Matty Crouch in talks with Kangaroos.
(Apparently)

Our first, contracted Crouch, Berg, Billy and Rowie for JHF. They can take Jimmy as well.

 

[BunjiMac]

What?!?

you need to think of it this way - Rankine is easily done - will be one of our firsts and perhaps some pocket change.

Which means what you’re saying is you would give up Rachele and the other first for JHF. No way you do that deal.

Use the first on a quality mid instead.

In all likelihood with what we know about Rachele and JHF at this point, we will be in front if we keep Rachele and add a mid with the first rather than take JHF.

I didn't say I'd like it or prefer it, but the reality you need to give quality to get quality.

I'd prefer to keep a first round draft pick somehow which means you need to throw in a young talent or and an experienced talent like a Laird.

Otherwise, can't see how it gets done.

And yes, I know the player need to agree to go.

 

[1970crow]

I never understand how guys like Kane Cornes suggest us trading a Rachelle as if they are a commodity. We’re not the same as America, a player here has to want to go somewhere for them to be part of any trade discussion, and Rachelle has 3 years left on a contract that we and him agreed to. How would you honestly have the discussion with him that you want him to go to GC when he appears to have fully bought into our team and culture. And even if you can get him to agree, what do the rest of the team, and his friends think of the process when you are trying to build good culture.

Players that are struggling to get a game are obviously different, but Rachelle is not in that category.

It's not that difficult, you just ask the player's manager if they'd consider it. Not that you'd need to, the other club has already asked the same question and the manager is presently using that as leverage to renegotiate the existing deal up a cog or 2.

 

[Bearded Clam]

But if he was happy to?

North had the chance to pick Rachele.. they chose JHF instead.

Now that looks like it has completely backfired on them..

What we have seen from both Rachele and JHF so far in their first year is pretty even if you ask me..

And if you really want to look further you could actually argue that Rachele, due to the covid shit, missed a good chunk of two years of football, unlike JHF who was able to comtinue on playing in the SANFL, so his form this year would be expected to be a bit more hamstrung than JHF’s..

End of the day though.. North picked JHF.. that’s on them.. its not on Adelaide to have to somehow come to the party and offer up their young promising prospect so that north can right their wrong..

If north want rachele they can give us JHF and a pick for him.. not the flipping other way around!

At this point in time its not beyond the realms of possibility that Rachele may actually end up being a better player than JHF.

I definitely feel that Rachele has far more room for development left in him than JHF has and possibly a higher ceiling..

He certainly has a far better attitude to start with and to be honest I would rate Rachele’s skills a lot higher than JHF.. even last year I thought JHF’s skills were being far too overhyped by the media..

 

[Eagleboy2011]

Late first for Berg?

Wouldn't he just get picked up as a dfa?

Not a free agent. We have to wait to see if he's delisted.

 

[1970crow]

Surprised Cornes didn't bring up Soligo instead of Rachele.....well not surprise.

I'm no Kornes hater, but they've got to keep it basic for your types. Soligo is looking great, but he adds another layer of discussion due to being selected later in the draft. The maths is easy if Rachele is used. We offered the pick he was taken at plus next years plus the Swans pick last year. And for this with only basic football knowledge, keeping Rachele is the easiest way to paint the picture.

 

[1970crow]

Late first for Berg?

Wouldn't he just get picked up as a dfa?

Id imagine clubs would know we don't exactly have a lot of spots to fill, so if not currently contracted, they know we won't be inclined to keep.