Ultimate Glory 2023 Trade speculation and Shinbeggars discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I feel like the Hawks would have got a deal done had he nominated us.
But he didn't so its not our problem.
Could be a case of us telling him not to nominate us as we won't pony up what Freo wants.
 
Given our current list and the amount of players we have coming through the system what role will he play if he comes to Hawks? Is he a real need?
Unlike a lot of our current small forwards (Bruest excepted of course) he is a natural goal kicker.

We have quite a few players like Moore and MacDonald who are very hard working high forwards but they don't seem like natural goal kickers like Gresham.
 
F1+29 + Sis Apology for Naughton & 36


Compo rules need to change. Should be based on last rejected offer from current club & not offer from new club.

Clubs can match but once matched, they need to trade or player goes to PSD on terms he sets. Then we won't have this drama with FA.

When you argue from first principles, this makes sense for AFL argument on why clubs are being compensated. If not clubs like Saints who don't want to keep Gresham get compensated(same with Mckay & North). Just need to give soundbites on "needed player"
There shouldn’t be any compo for losing a free agent. The risk is totally with the player and they should be rewarded with a generous contract not the club not offering a contract.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

1. Why would the dogs trade Naughton?

2. If they were going to for some reason, why would they do it for anything less than a massive haul? 2x1st rd picks + , and/or A grade player(s).


Fantastic mark and great to watch him fly, can’t kick, I think posters are dreaming thinking the dogs would give him up for a first round pick.
 
There shouldn’t be any compo for losing a free agent. The risk is totally with the player and they should be rewarded with a generous contract not the club not offering a contract.
the reasoning for Compo is that Clubs have put time into developing a player and if they can choose another club even when they want to keep player, then original club needs to be compensated for time/effort.

But then based on that reasoning, clubs need to offer a contract if they want to keep player. Not these verbal games of "needed player".

Without compo, clubs are more likely to pull the pin on players if they don't see solid output by yr 3 or 4. But we know KPP's take time. So if there is no compo, it could ret@rd development of KPP's across the league.

My suggestions, reduce FA rules to 6 yrs and compo based on offer given by current club. Also compo picks start from outside top 8 or 10.

Band1 pick is pick 11 before finals team.
Band 2 after Round 1.
Band 3 again before 2nd rounder of finals team and so on.
 
1. Why would the dogs trade Naughton?

2. If they were going to for some reason, why would they do it for anything less than a massive haul? 2x1st rd picks + , and/or A grade player(s).


Fantastic mark and great to watch him fly, can’t kick, I think posters are dreaming thinking the dogs would give him up for a first round pick.
Our pick 3 is worth 2x1st rd picks. I’m sure we could trade it to gws for their picks 6 and 12 for example.
 
the reasoning for Compo is that Clubs have put time into developing a player and if they can choose another club even when they want to keep player, then original club needs to be compensated for time/effort.

But then based on that reasoning, clubs need to offer a contract if they want to keep player. Not these verbal games of "needed player".

Without compo, clubs are more likely to pull the pin on players if they don't see solid output by yr 3 or 4. But we know KPP's take time. So if there is no compo, it could ret@rd development of KPP's across the league.

My suggestions, reduce FA rules to 6 yrs and compo based on offer given by current club. Also compo picks start from outside top 8 or 10.

Band1 pick is pick 11 before finals team.
Band 2 after Round 1.
Band 3 again before 2nd rounder of finals team and so on.
Clubs need to renegotiate prior to the final year if they value the player. Other than that the player is taking a huge risk in putting the contract on hold and should be rewarded. I’m fairly certain the contract put towards Doodee looks different post injury.
 
Or maybe Gresham has had a frank discussion with Lyon about club(s) that have shown interest and Ross the Boss has his eye on a certain player as part of a trade. Could be Hawthorn and I have an inkling on who that may be. If I am correct, I hope we pass.
We do not need to trade and I don’t think the saints value Gresham that highly since they didn’t present a contract.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Why would a 23yo KPP that can play at either end of the ground very well not be worth pick 3 to us? He is exactly the player we need in the right age bracket for our rebuild and is proven at AFL level.
I think I need to clear things up that it's not that I don't value Naughton and what he brings. I'd love to have him but I just don't think we're in the position to be offering up pick 3. Our F1 sure I'd be offering that 100% but it seems like the general consensus in here is that the WB will want more and rightfully so. The main point I was trying to make is that yeah we need a player like Naughton but we also have other holes that need to filled just as badly and the best way to do that is by taking pick 3 to the draft and then revisit trading for a KPP like him next season. Ideally we'll be a more attractive option for a KPP free agent that nominates us. My opinion is that all this needs to be done patiently rather than blowing our load in a big trade of all our draft assets which ends up handcuffing us from bringing in more talent the following offseason.
 
I think I need to clear things up that it's not that I don't value Naughton and what he brings. I'd love to have him but I just don't think we're in the position to be offering up pick 3. Our F1 sure I'd be offering that 100% but it seems like the general consensus in here is that the WB will want more and rightfully so. The main point I was trying to make is that yeah we need a player like Naughton but we also have other holes that need to filled just as badly and the best way to do that is by taking pick 3 to the draft and then revisit trading for a KPP like him next season. Ideally we'll be a more attractive option for a KPP free agent that nominates us. My opinion is that all this needs to be done patiently rather than blowing our load in a big trade of all our draft assets which ends up handcuffing us from bringing in more talent the following offseason.
CHF has to be our biggest gap. Brandon ryan, kozi and Fergus Greene are borderline afl level at best.
 
I think I need to clear things up that it's not that I don't value Naughton and what he brings. I'd love to have him but I just don't think we're in the position to be offering up pick 3.
I honestly don't know why people keep bringing up pick 3 with just about every discussion. We have stated that we'll only deal pick 3 to move up the draft order, not for another player. Not for Naughton, not Smith, no-one.
 
I honestly don't know why people keep bringing up pick 3 with just about every discussion. We have stated that we'll only deal pick 3 to move up the draft order, not for another player. Not for Naughton, not Smith, no-one.
It's the highest pick we've had for 18 years. It's going nowhere.
 
Bell wants pick 12 and a player from the Saints for Henry.

Tells you why we walked.
It's like how Essendon won Shiel and paid 2x first rounders.
Not to mention Carlton taking him on a private jet hahahaha

If we're staying away from offers like that then I'm happy.
 
F1+29 + Sis Apology for Naughton & 36


Compo rules need to change. Should be based on last rejected offer from current club & not offer from new club.

Clubs can match but once matched, they need to trade or player goes to PSD on terms he sets. Then we won't have this drama with FA.

When you argue from first principles, this makes sense for AFL argument on why clubs are being compensated. If not clubs like Saints who don't want to keep Gresham get compensated(same with Mckay & North). Just need to give soundbites on "needed player"

I agree on the compensation though I would go a step further and eliminate all first round compensation. We can call it the ‘Buddy’ rule.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top