Trade Requested Bailey Smith

Remove this Banner Ad

Kobe Gryant said:
There hasn't been reports of that.

Whether Morris, Ralph, & Cleary are actually right is another matter entirely, but the "reports" are he's requested a trade to Geelong.
Click to expand...
Well, yes they are the reports, reported by those Journos, and yes obviously Geelong seem to be the front runner, but the Dogs won’t be bent over the table and only you think otherwise because it involves your club. If he goes to Geelong, you’ll pay market value.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

SweatOnMySkin said:
Love how people seem to think there is no onus on the club trading the player in to make a realistic deal and can just offer up whatever crap they want. Those WA clubs must have rocks in their heads thinking about trading a first rounder for Baker when they can just offer Richmond a future 4th.
Click to expand...

They've definitely got rocks in their head if they give up a first rounder for a scragger like Baker
 
beerbandit said:
I tend to agree with the poster you’re responding to.

Why get bent over by a team that is in the same bracket as you and potentially a Premiership rival next season ?

Geelong will need to give up either this years 1st or next years 1st plus most likely another late pick if they want Smith, otherwise teams like Hawthorn & Collingwood may pounce with a better deal and by reports Bailey might not care who he plays for out of those 3.
Click to expand...

How does Hawthorn or Pies get the deal done?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Kobe Gryant said:
What are you on about? I didn't say anything about Smith's value.

I just disputed your claim on the reports, which you now clearly agree with.
Click to expand...
What is there to dispute?

There has always been 3 clubs linked to Bailey Smith with Geelong the front runner. The other two were Hawthorn & Collingwood, you can dispute that all you like, but you’re wrong.

Until Bailey speaks, it’s all speculation. He could want to play for Sydney for all you know.
 
beerbandit said:
Can’t speak for Hawks, but Pies could offer F1.

Sounds like also magic beans could get it done.
Click to expand...

Dogs probably wouldn’t accept Pies f1. There’s a lot of risk involved with that, as pies are every chance to be good again next year.

It’s safer just to take both Geelong’s firsts even they will be picks in the 20s after academies.
 
PurpJuice said:
Dogs probably wouldn’t accept Pies f1. There’s a lot of risk involved with that, as pies are every chance to be good again next year.

It’s safer just to take both Geelong’s firsts even they will be picks in the 20s after academies.
Click to expand...
I don’t think he is worth 2 x first rounders though.

He is coming off an ACL, so as you say there is risk of Pies F1 but there is also a risk of recruiting Smith now that he has had a significant injury. Risk for a risk I say!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Pacman82 said:
Most overrated peanut going around, couldn't hit a target before his ACL.
Click to expand...

Yup and was a professional contest shirker. Dogs should do well out of this, already replaced him with a better midfielder in Ed Richards and should get a decent draft / player haul.
 
_Cerberus_ said:
I am not buying that save face BS last year from Geelong, that they were not talking to him last year when the rumors were going around. It is obvious as that they were in his ear, and had him as their long term target 18 months ago. If you're trying to unsettle a player from another team / take advantage of one with mental health issues, whilst offering a long deal. You don't have the right to play super hard ball and offer unders. The length and cost of a deal offered will be factored into any discussions as well.
Click to expand...

The massive projection from this post to claim a club was using mental health to drive a player out is disgusting.
Not on dude.
 
_Cerberus_ said:
I am not buying that save face BS last year from Geelong, that they were not talking to him last year when the rumors were going around. It is obvious as that they were in his ear, and had him as their long term target 18 months ago. If you're trying to unsettle a player from another team / take advantage of one with mental health issues, whilst offering a long deal. You don't have the right to play super hard ball and offer unders. The length and cost of a deal offered will be factored into any discussions as well.
Click to expand...
Absolutely Cats were talking to him last year but its definetely not taking advantage of his mental health. There's more to the picture of him leaving. Geelong have something to offer him and both parties can achieve a positive and mutual partnership.
Was Geelong bringing in Tyson Stengle taking advantage of Stengle?
But yes if the shoe were on the other foot i'd be annoyed about him leaving too.

And actually the deal itself will have very little to do with him leaving or negotiations.
 
Oisin_the_Goat said:
Absolutely Cats were talking to him last year but its definetely not taking advantage of his mental health. There's more to the picture of him leaving. Geelong have something to offer him and both parties can achieve a positive and mutual partnership.
Click to expand...

There's a difference between saying a club was in a player's ear (happens all the time with every club and player) and then someone conflating that to abusing mental health for personal gain.

First one is a normal custom of professional sports, the second one is just an unjustified emotional response over a bunch of guys kicking a ball around a field, totally uncalled for.
 
FootyLad0 said:
The massive projection from this post to claim a club was using mental health to drive a player out is disgusting.
Not on dude.
Click to expand...
Okay, I admit that part was in poor taste in wording. I know all about mental health, have lived on anxiety pills and depression pills for years. And a long term plan to off myself well before I get anywhere near old. So I view anything with scepticism, given my own negative experiences from others when dealing with it myself.

But my main point stands. It is clear the Cats were in his ear long ago. I am not buying it that they were not. If my club was in Holmes ear 18 months ago, and he wanted out, then I'd expect us to lose a little leverage on any deal. If you have been working behinds the scenes for over a year.
 
Last edited:
I don't know why Cats fans are even hesitant on paying the two (very late) firsts. If there's any club that can bet a future 1st comfortably, it's the Cats who basically make a prelim every year. ACLs don't seem as career threatening as they used to, particularly when done youngish.

At least this one will keep trade radio busy for the full two weeks.
 
_Cerberus_ said:
Okay, I admit that part was in poor taste in wording. I know all about mental health, have lived on anxiety pills and depression pills for years. And a long term plan to off myself well before I get anywhere near old. So I view anything with scepticism, given my own negative experiences from others when dealing with it myself.

But my main point stands. It is clear the Cats were in his ear long ago. I am not buying it that they were not. If my club was in Holmes ear 18 months ago, and he wanted out, then I'd expect us to lose a little leverage on any deal. If you have been working behinds the scenes for over a year.
Click to expand...

It's fine man we all have gone through our struggles at some point just want to make it clear that I don't think we should be making projections about what team's are/are not doing without evidence, especially if they've shown no indication of doing things to give precedence to it.

The second part i totally agree with you, the difference is Holmes re-signed up with the club. Bailey didn't.
I'm not saying Cats won't have to pay or get creative either, just that you have way more leverage with contracted player over OOC players. Cats went through same thing with multiple players too so it's not just a one way thing. All clubs deal with it. I totally get the frustration.
 
Trying not be bias, I know that’ll get groans being a Cat support



Cons

ACL / injury time away from the game

OOC

Off field issue, might be random incident

Mental issues (I know that shouldn’t be a factor but it didn’t work out for the cats with Stevens. Not trying to be disrespectful in any way towards anyone with health issue but it will be part taken into consideration I would imagine )

Apparently contract offer isn’t huge (in the media, I’m sure everyone has read the article or some info on it), in form of asking price due to contract price





Pros

Gun when fully going
Hasn’t stated a side yet

Alleged contract size, by report most clubs could afford it
Onus is on the club chasing the player to make a fair offer


Arguments on trade value

At peak, 2 1st

At worst, 1 1st



Expected outcome from a Geelong perspective imo is 1 1st & fringe player or future 2nd

Until Geelong is nominated, it could be a few teams that come at him hard - no one knows the future
 
FootyLad0 said:
It's fine man we all have gone through our struggles at some point just want to make it clear that I don't think we should be making projections about what team's are/are not doing without evidence, especially if they've shown no indication of doing things to give precedence to it.

The second part i totally agree with you, the difference is Holmes re-signed up with the club. Bailey didn't.
I'm not saying Cats won't have to pay or get creative either, just that you have way more leverage with contracted player over OOC players. Cats went through same thing with multiple players too so it's not just a one way thing. All clubs deal with it. I totally get the frustration.
Click to expand...
Yes, thank you. And once again I apologize for my poor choice and use of words.

You do have a point. But there is another thing that I always question when people say this player is out of contract. Contract or no contract, they are not a free agent and still needed to be traded for true?

So I don't think it hurts the value as much as some think, or as much as the ACL would affect his value perhaps. I think the biggest debates will come down to his age, potential, and also come down to the Cats contract offer. If its a long deal on decent coin, thats when the Dogs will be like "hey hang on! you say he is worth only this trade wise, but your offer to him indicates otherwise". You're right, no team likes losing players. A lot more happens behind the scenes than we ever hear of. I have no issue of other clubs talking to players, just not a fan when it feels like it was a long term thing. Either way, I hope both teams work out a positive conclusion. And I think they will, despite the differing opinions on here. Clubs normally do fair deals.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Trade Requested Bailey Smith

Similar threads

Elmer_Hauser
Recommitted Bailey Smith [OOC 2024]
26 27 28 29 30
Replies
740
Views
44K
Lore
Lore
Cursedsword02
Bailey Banfield - Signs 2 Year Extension [UFA 2026]
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
CatToTheFuture
CatToTheFuture
The Nostradamus
Recommitted Bailey Williams [signs 4 year deal]
2 3
Replies
57
Views
7K
Foxman98
Foxman98

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top