Traded #25: Jake Stringer - 📦 Traded to GWS for Pick #53 - 16/10

Remove this Banner Ad

A pity about Stone but we should be all over O'Halloran.

I'm not sure if he was brought up in other threads, but XOH is the type of runner we need IMO.
Come in peace. XOH has a deal supposedly from the Dogs, and we aren’t moving on that. Would take a hell of an offer to get him out this year. Stringer/Shiel wouldn’t do it.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

LOL, it wouldn't be ideal, it wouldn't be pleasant for us, but it would end Jakes career and he wouldn't ever get another AFL contract ever again if he spent a year not playing senior football.

Obviously, his trade value is low, I'm not expecting the world for Jake, I just think it's important to understand that the Club have all the power here and to be frank we are under no obligation to help Jake prolong his career elsewhere or help a rival improve their list without adequate compensation. As Jake is currently contracted we can set the price with almost no drawback to another club not being willing to pay that price.
On the other hand, it doesn’t really help anyone if he spends the year rotting away in the VFL.
 
Can you stop being annoying? Thanks.

View attachment 2137147
Animated GIF


I thought both parties had to agree to the trigger. I was wrong, I'm fine with that. :)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

“All I’ve heard the last week is what he doesn’t do and that’s mainly from the Essendon camp. He doesn’t chase, he doesn’t pressure, he doesn’t help us with his preparation, he’s not professional enough, he’s not fit enough,” King began.
Is this legit? Why would the club relate these things to David ****ing King?
 
I read we might pay some of Jake's wage to see IF GWS would then give us #37.

I would have thought we have to pay at least 75% of his wages for GWS to even consider that.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Traded #25: Jake Stringer - 📦 Traded to GWS for Pick #53 - 16/10

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top