Brad Ebert

[philthy05]

apparently its not that bad a draft but the depth of alot of other drafts just isnt there.

from what has been said 33 is whats on offer, port has said 6 and 28 are off the table this year.

it remains whether to be seen if we can bring something else into it or budge on the not trading 28 thing, the short of it is any hope you have of gaining 28 and 33 is not going to happen.

i can understand eagles fans wanting to see their team get a good deal here. i do find it funny that he was the whipping boy on your boards 12 months ago, more of you joined in rather than defended him. the only difference between now and then is your team had a good year and eberts kicking improved from horrific to just being slighty less horrific playing more off a flank.

 

[Galileo9]

Well if your so happy to see him move accept 33.

you do realise BF posters have no influence in what the club does. You really think Rhode and Daniher log on here and get fans' approval for trades?

 

[_Christoh_]

GWS and GC wont make the same mistake WCE did.

 

[Adz2332]

you do realise BF posters have no influence in what the club does. You really think Rhode and Daniher log on here and check for approval?

Lol you never know! As im sure some more ummm 'lazy' jurnos have had a read through this site.....

 

[Obeanie1]

Its not an upgrade, its an extra pick.

I think that West Coast will draft more than 2 players this year, and that its not Port's responsibility to account for West Coast acting idiotically if they choose to.

Once you get #33, you can do whatever you want with it. I'm sure other clubs will be interested if your scenario is genuine, and if it is, then settling earlier in trade week makes more sense.

How is it idiotic for a club to only use 2 picks in a weak and compromised draft?

Idiotic is finishing bottom 2 and trying to rebuild right now.

The situation is Ports current offer is not worth very much to the Eagles at all. Port want to secure Ebert, get him into pre season training and get on with preparing for next year, so does Ebert.

PSD isn't until November and Ebert can't train with Port until he is released.

GWS pass on their last pick in the draft and then you have Gold Coast and GWS with PSD picks ahead of Port.

I just can't see the Eagles accepting loose change for Ebert.

 

[One PAFC]

How is it idiotic for a club to only use 2 picks in a weak and compromised draft?

Idiotic is finishing bottom 2 and trying to rebuild right now.

The situation is Ports current offer is not worth very much to the Eagles at all. Port want to secure Ebert, get him into pre season training and get on with preparing for next year, so does Ebert.

PSD isn't until November and Ebert can't train with Port until he is released.

GWS pass on their last pick in the draft and then you have Gold Coast and GWS with PSD picks ahead of Port.

I just can't see the Eagles accepting lose change for Ebert.

Better Pick 33 than nothing.

 

[Portia]

The situation is Ports current offer is not worth very much to the Eagles at all.

Yet Port's offer has worth, and is the most easily on-traded thing in the world - a draft pick. You're the guys with the massive football department, go make a deal happen - trade it for a first round upgrade or something.

Port want to secure Ebert, get him into pre season training and get on with preparing for next year, so does Ebert.

PSD isn't until November and Ebert can't train with Port until he is released.

Here's the tip. Port are going to be shit again next year. One more player having a compromised pre-season is no big deal.

I just can't see the Eagles accepting lose change for Ebert.

And apparently the difference between 28 and 33 is the difference between deal done and `loose change'? Get some perspective.

 

[Blue since 72]

Pick 33 on its own is nothing, its a 12 pick upgrade on our 3rd rounder in a weak draft.

Very good chance the Eagles will only upgrade Hams and use two picks this year, currently picks 23 and 45.

So you think we should accept a 12 pick upgrade (less than half a 2nd round pick) for Ebert and go shake hands with Port and head down the pub?

This is why the Eagles should hold their ground and let him go to the PSD if Port try and shaft us. A 12 pick upgrade for Ebert is worth losing simply to make a point.

28 + 33 for Ebert + 45 is the bare minimum we should accept.

Really?

How could this thread have got to almost 1000 posts if the Eagles posters are happy to get nothing for Ebert?

 

[Schulzenfest]

Very good chance the Eagles will only upgrade Hams and use two picks this year, currently picks 23 and 45.

28 + 33 for Ebert + 45 is the bare minimum we should accept.

This post fails hard. If you're only using 2 picks, then you wouldn't use pick 33 and there's no point in us trading it to you.

 

[NSLK]

This post fails hard. If you're only using 2 picks, then you wouldn't use pick 33 and there's no point in us trading it to you.

We're hoping to offload our first pick in a deal for Clark.

 

[Schulzenfest]

And Clark wants to go to Fremantle. Wow, the Eagles really do like screwing players out of getting where they want to go, don't they?

28 is fair value, or at worst slightly unders, and getting slightly unders for an uncontracted player who's nominated one and only one club as his home when that club could probably take him in the PSD isn't too bad a deal. If Port offer that and the Eagles don't accept, then they're just being stubborn. But I think they will accept if it comes to that. Port definitely shouldn't be forced to give up 28 and 33 to help the Eagles out with a deal that probably won't happen anyway.

 

[greennick]

Its not an upgrade, its an extra pick.

I think that West Coast will draft more than 2 players this year, and that its not Port's responsibility to account for West Coast acting idiotically if they choose to.

Once you get #33, you can do whatever you want with it. I'm sure other clubs will be interested if your scenario is genuine, and if it is, then settling earlier in trade week makes more sense.

So, did Port act idiotically with Nick Stevens?

 

[greennick]

GWS and GC wont make the same mistake WCE did.

Why not? They could pick him up for free, use a small amount of their overblown salary cap and then offload him for a second rounder next year to you in a much stronger draft.

 

[greennick]

No it is a foregone conclusion if he goes to the PSD, as we've seen many times before. Ebert says "I'm going to live in Adelaide" or Port Adelaide front-load his contract and that's game.

I'm still not certain Ebert will go to the PSD, but I guess if West Coast supporters think so it is highly likely.

We have no idea what will happen, it is all pure speculation.

 

[Portia]

Or we could wait for the PSD then also. Port isn't going to be top 4 in 2012, remember?

 

[Portia]

So, did Port act idiotically with Nick Stevens?

Given Collingwood were a direct top 4 rival at the time, and Nick had been our #1 midfielder in 2003, absolutely not. In terms of pure list management, probably. Nick Stevens going to Carlton in the PSD resulted in a Port 2004 premiership, and nothing much for Nick.

So unless you think Port are going to contest with West Coast for the premiership next year, and that you can't afford to give up Brad Ebert, your #1 midfielder, for a second round pick, then yes, what you have proposed is idiocy.

Is Brad Ebert better than Luke Ball? I seem to recall St Kilda being offered a second round pick, turning it down, and then seeing Collingwood draft Ball at that pick. You want to take your list management cues from St Kilda?

 

[greennick]

And Clark wants to go to Fremantle. Wow, the Eagles really do like screwing players out of getting where they want to go, don't they?

28 is fair value, or at worst slightly unders, and getting slightly unders for an uncontracted player who's nominated one and only one club as his home when that club could probably take him in the PSD isn't too bad a deal. If Port offer that and the Eagles don't accept, then they're just being stubborn. But I think they will accept if it comes to that. Port definitely shouldn't be forced to give up 28 and 33 to help the Eagles out with a deal that probably won't happen anyway.

WC always try and allow players to go where they want to. However, WC is trying to convince Clark to come here if no deal can be worked out with Fremantle. As for Ebert, if Port wasn't trying to screw us so bad, the deal would already be done. It is not WC being ****sticks in this trade, it is Port.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

So do Port. And we're offering draft position, at #33, which is significantly better than you currently have for a second round pick.

Eberts worth more than 28 and you think Westcoast will accept an upgrade on a second rounder?
You can want 28 but you also want Ebert and to ensure you receive just compensation should any player want to return home.

OK then, no worries.

Well we picked up an AA half back in last years PSD so it's not all bad and you will want to be extra careful when drafting West Australians.

 

[Portia]

Yes, because the litany of `this guy sucks' that West Coast fans have thrown out in his time there speaks volumes for Brad's trade value.

 

[Portia]

Eberts worth more than 28 and you think Westcoast will accept an upgrade on a second rounder?

Its not an upgrade you moron, its an actual pick that you can readily trade on to someone else. Turn it into an upgrade on a first rounder if thats better. Not sure how many more times this needs to be pointed out.

Well we picked up an AA half back in last years PSD so it's not all bad and you will want to be extra careful when drafting West Australians.

Why exactly? Because now you'll be extra mean to us? Oh no!

Remind me the last time Brisbane poached a Queenslander off you mob, and then look at the lowball offers Freo & WCE are throwing their way for Clark.

 

[greennick]

Given Collingwood were a direct top 4 rival at the time, and Nick had been our #1 midfielder in 2003, absolutely not. In terms of pure list management, probably.

So unless you think Port are going to contest with West Coast for the premiership next year, and that you can't afford to give up Brad Ebert, your #1 midfielder, for a second round pick, then yes, what you have proposed is idiocy.

Is Brad Ebert better than Luke Ball? I seem to recall St Kilda being offered a second round pick, turning it down, and then seeing Collingwood draft Ball at that pick. You want to take your list management cues from St Kilda?

They offered pick 30 in a much stronger draft and Wellingham, a far better deal than pick 28 alone in this draft. And St Kilda didn't take it because they considered it far from fair. This is no different to what you did with Stevens. And it would be no different to if we did the same.

It is not about your position compared to ours, it is about, **** you, you can't screw us over and expect us to just play along. Still, I expect our club to fold as they would probably just prefer to get something and it is unlikely to send a message as he'll probably just end up going to Port anyway. I wish we would just throw him in the PSD though. **** him.

I wish their was some form of arbitrator for this stuff, where a club can't pick up a player if they don't offer a fair trade.

 

[NSLK]

Remind me the last time Brisbane poached a Queenslander off you mob, and then look at the lowball offers Freo & WCE are throwing their way for Clark.

Lowball? Brisbane's list manager have said we've come out and are reasonable and on the same page as them. We're waiting til we figure out what we get for Ebert until we know what we can offload - we don't want to use pick 45, but we do want to use two of picks 23, 28 and 33, with the other (23 - our best pick) being sent to Brisbane, ideally.

 

[greennick]

Remind me the last time Brisbane poached a Queenslander off you mob, and then look at the lowball offers Freo & WCE are throwing their way for Clark.

We're not doing low ball offers for Clark, we've been trying to work out a deal with them. We have a good relationship with Brisbane (see our trade of Dalzeill for Staker a few years ago). We worked out something that was beneficial to each club.

 

[greennick]

What was the reason Ben Newton isn't being discussed? Was he in our list of players we didn't want or Port's list of players that were not to be traded?

 

[WCE_phil]

Its not an upgrade you moron, its an actual pick that you can readily trade on to someone else. Turn it into an upgrade on a first rounder if thats better. Not sure how many more times this needs to be pointed out.

Why exactly? Because now you'll be extra mean to us? Oh no!

Remind me the last time Brisbane poached a Queenslander off you mob, and then look at the lowball offers Freo & WCE are throwing their way for Clark.

well if you consider lowball offers to include our first rounder plus a player then yes that would be correct.