Rumour 2024 Hypothetical trade and FA Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

We can't pass him up because we promised. We're people of our word unlike the unscrupulous West Cost
We promised to do our best to do a fair trade for Barrass.

I can not see MM or Sam promising to sell the farm for him.

For the love of footy, all involved know the deal and are professionals.

Plus at Hawthorn we are bigger than one player.
 
Think Clarke thought McKenzie would rollover and have his belly tickled.
MM is much more shrewd than his persona , as Clarke found out today.

Now Clarke’s scrambling to get Barrass & Baker deals done to appease everyone, especially his employer (Eagles). Don’t get me wrong Hawks want Barrass but it takes two to do the ‘horizontal lambada’
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Think Clarke thought McKenzie would rollover and have his belly tickled.
MM is much more shrewd than his persona , as Clarke found out today.

Now Clarke’s scrambling to get Barrass & Baker deals done to appease everyone, especially his employer (Eagles). Don’t get me wrong Hawks want Barrass but it takes two to do the ‘horizontal lambada’
I've heard MM is viscious in negotiations with other clubs.
 
Maybe I'm too cynical but can't help but think the "hawks blowing up trade week" trade dropping on a Friday afternoon after a week of sweet FA happening has AFL/media written all over it.

Seems logical to me that Tigers want to spread picks over two drafts. Hawks trading out of 2024 for 2025 and picking up an extra 2nd rounder gives options for Tigers and therefore Eagles/Barrass.

Bigger question for me is what do we plan to do with the future first and future second that don't go to the Eagles for Barrass. Cats throwing out pick 17 for Smith, I wonder if dogs would bite at f1 and f2?
 
It boils down to one thing - Barrass turned down massive overtures from Sydney a few years back to stay at West Coast with an agreement that he'd be looked after with the increase in TPP. West Coast reneged on that, and so he looked elsewhere.


That's why West Coast's position is unreasonable. You can't act like that internally and then pretend the player holds an unbelievable amount of value externally, we sure didn't with Tom Mitchell.

Sometimes it's a bitter pill to swallow that you'll get less for Barrass than he might otherwise be worth, but that it is your club's fault. If you wanted to keep him, you'd have paid him and he'd be off the market. You didn't.
It is insane that the majority of the eagles board are unwilling to acknowledge this. Much easier to just sit there and claim that we came out of nowhere and brainwashed him mid season
 
First up there is no 14

Second - you have got really defensive when I asked a simple question and there was no malice in it - so I'll ask again.

do you think Barass and Baker are of equal value?

I completely agree that Barrass and Baker are not of equal value....what you are overlooking here is the mere possibility that both West Coast and Richmond are being unreasonable.

In my view 14 was perfectly reasonable for Barrass. I would be pissed if we gave anything better than an early second rounder for Baker.
 
In all likelihood what we have done is traded 14 for TB, just with an extra step.
I'd like for us to be able to move back into the first round this year some how, or maneuver things so that next year we manage to stay jn the top 10 of the draft.
If our goal is to nab Reid in a year or two, our ability to shift bulk first round picks will help WC massively as they'll want to get Warner to make up the loss.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

This won’t be a bigger trade. Carlton’s future first and a shuffle of picks.
ok so not even Carlton's future second ? wow, that means we pay even less than pick 14 ?
someone suggested to me West Coast may not have wanted to give up pick 14 for Baker, so now they say to Richmond, sorry we can't now.
So west coast take Carltons future 1st and 2nd from us for Barrass
They offer up Carltons future 1st to Richmond for Baker

We get Barrass for pick 14 and nothing more
West Coast get Baker and a future second for Barrass
Richmond gets to spread out rebuild picks over multiple years

thoughts ?
 
I do wonder what other clubs would think is more valuable next year between our future 1st or Carltons? I'd imagine ours.
Really. Why? We sailed past them this year and it’s hard to see why we wouldn’t push further in front. God I hope we trade out our F1st and keep Carlton’s F1st.
 
ok so not even Carlton's future second ? wow, that means we pay even less than pick 14 ?
someone suggested to me West Coast may not have wanted to give up pick 14 for Baker, so now they say to Richmond, sorry we can't now.
So west coast take Carltons future 1st and 2nd from us for Barrass
They offer up Carltons future 1st to Richmond for Baker

We get Barrass for pick 14 and nothing more
West Coast get Baker and a future second for Barrass
Richmond gets to spread out rebuild picks over multiple years

thoughts ?
This is what I thought when I saw the trade. Improved outcome for WC by addung a 2nd to Baker (who they were giving 14 up for). Lets see.
 
Just for the giggles:
Hawks: Hawks future first and future 3rd
WCE: Barrass

Hawks: Carlton future first and Hawks future 2nd
Wb: bailey smith and future 3rd

Premiership
 
Does anyone know exactly what TBs back problem is? Has HFC club had a medical examination done?
Yes. It's pretty well documented at this stage:

“It was a compression fracture to my T8 (vertebrae) and I’ve wedged about five of my other vertebrae a bit shorter."

Something that will require long term management but he did not get surgery, nor has he suffered any major long term issues because of it.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Rumour 2024 Hypothetical trade and FA Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top