Traded #22: Jake Carlisle - Pt.1 - Traded with some other stuff for pick 5, 24 and a Bird (cont in Part 2)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm more saying that if he did go to St Kidla they would more likely give us pick 6/7. If Carlton wanted him we wouldn't get pick 1 for him so we would be screwed over on that deal
Wouldn't get pick 6 for a player who is 1) Out of contract 2) Potentially faces a drug ban by WADA 3) Has a question mark on his character. At MOST 2015 2nd rounder + 2016 2nd rounder I would think.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I love it when opposition fans come into our threads and tell us our players are worth jack shit because of WADA.
I wouldn't call a second rounder this year and next year jack shit. You wouldn't give up pick 6 for a player who's 1) out of form 2) out of contract 3) might get a drug suspension.
 
This.

"He has a potential drug ban over his head we cant risk it but we still want him" ******* lol.
both sides are wrong, he isn't worth what both teams want.

i expect us to us to come out and offer 25 for carsile and a later round pick and then u guys to ask for 5.

most likey he's worth something like 8-15 but the team getting the best asset never pays full price and will most likey could be got for around the 15-25 range. and i personally wouldn't do it but thats doesn't have much to do with the fact its carsile but more that its outgoing draft picks.

other factor is it might be impossible to convince one of our players who were part of the futurefest campaign (where we signed 21 kids last year at the same time) to leave the group to play with the dons.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

both sides are wrong, he isn't worth what both teams want.

i expect us to us to come out and offer 25 for carsile and a later round pick and then u guys to ask for 5.

most likey he's worth something like 8-15 but the team getting the best asset never pays full price and will most likey could be got for around the 15-25 range. and i personally wouldn't do it but thats doesn't have much to do with the fact its carsile but more that its outgoing draft picks

Would probably take 25+next years second round or 25+player.
 
Would probably take 25+next years second round or 25+player.
"25+next years second round"
would be very hard to get that off us due to our strategic plan set out by the pelican (chris pelchin) whose plan was to increase our activity in the first 3 rounds for 3 years. i can't see us finding ways to get picks back but if u managed that trade off us it would a win given your need for picks and where we ail finish next year
"25+player."
as i edited my post above, it may be impossible to convince a best 30ish player on our list to leave after 21 of our kids signed on again all together. i doubt you guys even know who saunders, imchington, murdoch are and i don't blame you, but those would be the names you would have to settle for IMO.

i think if we deal it would just be picks with both clubs unwilling or unwanting to exit players
 
Risk lowers value, doesn't mean we don't want him. We do, just not at what he would cost without a potential drug ban over his head.

Didn't stop Dogs and Port in getting Crameri,Monfries and Ryder.

The whole Wada thing is a dirty tactic to get Essendons' good players on the cheap imo.
 
I wouldn't call a second rounder this year and next year jack shit. You wouldn't give up pick 6 for a player who's 1) out of form 2) out of contract 3) might get a drug suspension.
Raph Clarke was pick 6.

Jus' sayin
 
Didn't stop Dogs and Port in getting Crameri,Monfries and Ryder.

The whole Wada thing is a dirty tactic to get Essendons' good players on the cheap imo.
Of course it is, and don't think if the shoe was on the other foot we'd be doing differently.
 
both sides are wrong, he isn't worth what both teams want.

i expect us to us to come out and offer 25 for carsile and a later round pick and then u guys to ask for 5.

most likey he's worth something like 8-15 but the team getting the best asset never pays full price and will most likey could be got for around the 15-25 range. and i personally wouldn't do it but thats doesn't have much to do with the fact its carsile but more that its outgoing draft picks.

a better compromise can be had than that, The fact that we can now trade future picks means there really should be a lot less 'oh our first round pick is too high and our 2nd round pick is too low, we'll offer you the lesser because stuff you'.

Next year's first rounder and this year's 25 (which probably becomes more like 28) for Carlisle and something, or flip the years if you prefer, much more options, much more scope to actually get a fair deal done
 
Didn't stop Dogs and Port in getting Crameri,Monfries and Ryder.

The whole Wada thing is a dirty tactic to get Essendons' good players on the cheap imo.
but you didn't get fair value for any of them which was the point he was making

Raph Clarke was pick 6.

Jus' sayin
we have pick 5 now thanks to the dees :p:p
 
Actually no I wouldn't I believe in fair trading and pay the player what his worth.
Fair trading like telling Mal Michael to retire then get him PSD?

Yeah, we are the clean skins of the comp.

bomber4lyfe pls
 
but you didn't get fair value for any of them which was the point he was making


we have pick 5 now thanks to the dees :p:p

Pick 25 was fair value for Crameri. Carlisle is younger and a better player. Crameri contract was $350k plus - we're talking $700k for Carlisle which is double crameris market rate. The trigger for band one compensation under free agency is under $700k which would trigger a first round pick as compensation in this instance. It's a first round pick or tell your story walking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top