Traded Brad Hill [traded with future 3rd to St Kilda for Acres, #10, #58, future 2nd and 4th]

[freocuz]

Brad Hill = Tim Kelly?

Did you seriously just say that!?

Bwahahahahaha!!!!

Last year it was widely reported that we offered the inferior Dylan Shiel $1.4mil PA over multiple years.

If that's correct you can imagine how much we would have been offering Kelly, had he for instance been wanting to return to Vic, instead of to WA.

If we were willing to pay Shiel $1.4mil PA, it's hard to imagine we wouldn't have been willing to pay Kelly at least that much (given the fact he's clearly better than Shiel), which is at least 50% more than we've reportedly offered Hill.

Kelly- as someone who can play both inside, outside and kicks goals, not to mention being younger- is much more valuable than Hill. Much.

And would you have expected to have gained Kelly with pick 6? Or Shiel?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Quokka]

Hey Freo supporters, out of interest what would you have preferred (if could choose hypothetically):

Option A) Pick 6 this year plus next years 3rd round pick from saints (assuming saints miss finals and factoring in 2 early GCS concession picks, somewhere in range of 40 to 50); or

Option B) Pick 12 plus next years 2nd round pick from saints (per above assumption but somewhere in range of 21 to 31)?

It’s interesting. I have no idea what is better if you believe what you hear about this year’s draft being very even after picks 1 and 2...

Perhaps some saints bias, but I think either is pretty fair value. Later certainly preferable

For me I don't think either get it done. I do think 6 and a second round pick this year should have been enough. Or 12 and another similar first round pick. Two much risk with next year picks, there's some good wa talent in this draft and Freo need improvement and good stories now to help Longmuir get a positive start.

 

[Hawk Dork]

And would you have expected to have gained Kelly with pick 6? Or Shiel?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Pick 6 could end up being a better player
Though there is a pick 6 curse
Except for Wingard and Macrae

AFL Draft: Pick 6 - who has been the best and who will be selected this year?

Gold Coast Suns hold NAB AFL National Draft pick six and could take Ben King or Connor Rozee

www.sportingnews.com

Whole point of trading is to make your team better giving away 2 firsts for a non superstar doesnt seem to fit that criteria

 

[aussierulesrules]

Well he's either going to be annoyed at Freo, or annoyed at Saints for offering him a huge deal and not doing what it takes to get it done.

$900K is not a "huge" deal though.

Something closer to the $1.5mil that we've offered Shiel and would presumably have offered the likes of Kelly are "huge" deals.

$900K PA from next year onwards is literally approximately the equivalent of a $740K PA contract two years ago (before the 20% salary cap increase, which has gone up again slightly since and goes up again next year).

Was $740K PA two years ago "huge" and worthy of a top 6 pick, potentially another top 6 pick, AND a 3rd rounder?

**** no!!!

 

[Hawk Dork]

$900K is not a "huge" deal though.

Something closer to the $1.5mil that we've offered Shiel and would presumably have offered the likes of Kelly are "huge" deals.

$900K PA from next year onwards is literally approximately the equivalent of a $740K PA contract two years ago (before the 20% salary cap increase, which has gone up again slightly since and goes up again next year).

Was $740K PA two years ago "huge" and worthy of a top 6 pick, potentially another top 6 pick, AND a 3rd rounder?

fu** no!!!

Theres a price for mids and KPFs then the scale drops a little for KPBs ,but wings and HFF HBF drop to the next scale down again,this would be the norm.
If your paying wingmen nearly a mill whats everyone else on ?

 

[raffrox]

https://player.whooshkaa.com/episode?id=445306

Listen from 12:35 onwards.

(@Puzzinbootz originally posted this on the Freo board).

 

[aussierulesrules]

There is no way it was the first one, especially considering everyone bar Morris has since said it was 6 and a future 3rd. No club does a 3 for 1.

We couldnt have been asking for the 2nd one since you cant do that trade so its wrong or missing a large part of the equation - we'd have to send a future 1st back at minimum

No way it was the first one (pick 6 and our future 2nd), when the two biggest AFL media bodies are reporting exactly that (The AFL website and the Herald Sun)? With none of the articles I just read on it written by Morris?

OK then.

The only place I've seen it written or said that it was a future 3rd is in this thread.

As for your 2nd point, stating that you'd have to give back a future first "at a minimum" is also completely false, to the best of my knowledge.

You're perfectly within your rights to trade a future 1st and a future 3rd, as long as you for instance get back a future 2nd, or future third.

So you could trade your current first, future first and future third, for say Hill and a future 3rd.

 

[Quokka]

Joey montagna,, wouldn't know the difference between a Football
And a ******* enchilada

I'm going to make an assusmption and claim that Montagna's 16 years as a player, 287 games and two AA stack up pretty well compared to anyone here.

 

[Demons09]

Joey montagna,, wouldn't know the difference between a Football
And a ******* enchilada

Just a bit more than a keyboard warrior like yourself

 

[Hogwild]

I'm going to make an assusmption and claim that Montagna's 16 years as a player, 287 games and two AA stack up pretty well compared to anyone here.

Don't underestimate guruisatiger's quals mate

 

[TheShardMan]

St Kilda never fails to amuse me. For the first time in their history they're actually relevant this time of year, numerous players wanna join them, discussed in 80% of all possible trades, every 2nd article or talkback caller is about them, etc...

but still with no idea how to get any of their deals done.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Committing 8% of your salary cap to one player isn't a whim that may or may not come off.

The contract being offered dictates the trade. Go down to AFL House, ask any of the player managers.

No it doesn't, far more comes into it than that and we need to only look back 12 months where we gave Hannebery a reported $800K PA contract, over 4-5 years, yet only paid something like pick 39 for him.

That is INDISPUTABLE PROOF that what you keep trying to convince us of is untrue.

The contract is a guide only.

We're not going to pay more for Brad Hill than West Coast paid for the much better and more valuable Tim Kelly!!

 

[triggering bro]

St Kilda never fails to amuse me. For the first time in their history they're actually relevant this time of year, numerous players wanna join them, discussed in 80% of all possible trades, every 2nd article or talkback caller is about them, etc...

but still with no idea how to get any of their deals done.

FFS there is still five days to go & only THREE trades have been completed thus far. Does that mean ALL clubs that are yet to complete their trades also have no idea?

 

[abbeorse]

St Kilda never fails to amuse me. For the first time in their history they're actually relevant this time of year, numerous players wanna join them, discussed in 80% of all possible trades, every 2nd article or talkback caller is about them, etc...

but still with no idea how to get any of their deals done.

It's funny isn't it. The good blokes of St Kilda's list management team have about 8 trades to sort out and the trade period devil Peter Bell only has 2 trades at this point to sort out, yet Saint Kilda haven't completed one but Freo have traded langdon and Melbourne got a bargain. It's almost as if it could be Saint Kilda being the unreasonable ones

 

[Demons09]

It's funny isn't it. The good blokes of St Kilda's list management team have about 8 trades to sort out and the trade period devil Peter Bell only has 2 trades at this point to sort out, yet Saint Kilda haven't completed one but Freo have have traded langdon and Melbourne got a bargain. It's almost as if it could be Saint Kilda being the unreasonable ones

You know what’s really funny their supporters lapping up articles as verbatim by Morris and Ralph.

 

[Groater]

Freo have have traded langdon and Melbourne got a bargain. It's almost as if it could be Saint Kilda being the unreasonable ones

It's almost as if someone wanted to get a trade executed quickly to cover up their embarrassment

 

[Groater]

You know what’s really funny their supporters lapping up articles as verbatim by Morris and Ralph.

Haven't heard any denials from the Freo camp... surely if is was false they would have set the record straight by now?

 

[abbeorse]

It's almost as if someone wanted to get a trade executed quickly to cover up their embarrassment

Or maybe it's almost as if when you offer a player a massive deal to poach them out of 2 years on a contract you are expected to then cough up excessively at the trade table as well

 

[Peel67skin]

No way it was the first one (pick 6 and our future 2nd), when the two biggest AFL media bodies are reporting exactly that (The AFL website and the Herald Sun)? With none of the articles I just read on it written by Morris?

OK then.

The only place I've seen it written or said that it was a future 3rd is in this thread.

As for your 2nd point, stating that you'd have to give back a future first "at a minimum" is also completely false, to the best of my knowledge.

You're perfectly within your rights to trade a future 1st and a future 3rd, as long as you for instance get back a future 2nd, or future third.

So you could trade your current first, future first and future third, for say Hill and a future 3rd.

St Kilda fan here is all over the places in this year trade, instead of getting their trade done this year , they talk about Ben King as 2020 target. Most probably end up with Jones with pick 18, Butler and Ryder.

 

[Demons09]

It's almost as if someone wanted to get a trade executed quickly to cover up their embarrassment

Your list manager would be getting pretty worried how’s he going to fit all these players in , promised the world to. Billy lol.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

No way it was the first one (pick 6 and our future 2nd), when the two biggest AFL media bodies are reporting exactly that (The AFL website and the Herald Sun)? With none of the articles I just read on it written by Morris?

OK then.

The only place I've seen it written or said that it was a future 3rd is in this thread.

As for your 2nd point, stating that you'd have to give back a future first "at a minimum" is also completely false, to the best of my knowledge.

You're perfectly within your rights to trade a future 1st and a future 3rd, as long as you for instance get back a future 2nd, or future third.

So you could trade your current first, future first and future third, for say Hill and a future 3rd.

Every reporter on trade radio reported it was actually a 1st and future 3rd. From my understanding, Tom Morris himself clarified later on twitter saying it was a a future 3rd.

I was under the impression you need one in each round if you were to trade out a 1st, ie out a 3rd, in a 3rd, not a 2nd, but that might be wrong. Wouldnt be much point swapping future 3rds. Main point is that there was clealy one side of the equation being left off that one to make it look like a much more grandiose request then it actually was, we wont know what that is unless Freo come out and confirm

 

[Groater]

Or maybe it's almost as if when you offer a player a massive deal to poach them out of 2 years on a contract you are expected to then cough up excessively at the trade table as well

Nah, Bell got greedy demanding 2 firsts, plus. That's alright, still have 12 available.

 

[Groater]

St Kilda fan here is all over the places in this year trade, instead of getting their trade done this year , they talk about Ben King as 2020 target.

This isn't the Ben King thread mate. If you like to talk about trading him, thwn you should go to the appropriate thread.

 

[harbs187]

Haven't heard any denials from the Freo camp... surely if is was false they would have set the record straight by now?

Why would fremantle feel the need to explain themselves to anyone.
This would be approval seeking behavior and come across as weakness.
Weakness is the last thing you would show in negotiation

 

[Hogwild]

Haven't heard any denials from the Freo camp... surely if is was false they would have set the record straight by now?

No - they just don't give a toss