List Mgmt. Dan Houston requests trade to Victoria - will stay if deal can't be done

Remove this Banner Ad

There's no way the Houston deal gets done today unless there is a massive backflip on both sides - and the odds of that happening are remote.

As of last night neither side was giving an inch and based on what I've been told it's not too dissimilar from the Nick Stevens negotiations in 2003.

Excellent to hear. I feel like i'm going insane reading the reports, but they all seem to be coming from the Collingwood side and Davies was pretty clear that we had to win a deal.
 
Reason 4356 On why the AFL sucks.

Trade Week.

Malbun "Footy Industry Experts" talk shit for 10 days about virtually nothing, over rate Victorian Players, Under rate Non Vic Players, claim to be "in the Know", arbutrary opinions on what a player is worth, their "draft currency", Future Picks, Points blah blah blah blah

Cal Twomey is actually a thing.

Bigfooty Mum's basement types coming up with ridiculous trade scenarios acting like Russel Crowe in A Beautiful Mind.

Its a massive pile of shit.
Why do Mums always cop shit
 
Collingwood's arrogance at the trade table is only matched by their ineptitude.

The fact they've tabled a 6 year deal to Dan, yet only want to give up John Noble and a second rounder to bring him in is ridiculous. Then playing it all out in the media trying to paint Port as being unreasonable and Dan coming across as fait accompli is mind blowing.

Fcuk 'em. Dan plays here next year or he can sit out for 12 months not earning a thing. If it is truly about going back to Vic deal exclusively with North, else everyone can suck eggs.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

So you are suggesting that Houston lied when he said he'd stay at Port if no trade could be done or am I interpreting your comment incorrectly?

Dan has no choice but to stay at Port if no trade can be done. So that's still true.
 
Why do Mums always cop shit

I think mums are wonderful for letting socially inept children have a safe place to interact with people without actual human contact.
 
There's no way the Houston deal gets done today unless there is a massive backflip on both sides - and the odds of that happening are remote.

As of last night neither side was giving an inch and based on what I've been told it's not too dissimilar from the Nick Stevens negotiations in 2003.
Why are we not talking to clubs outside of Carlton, Collingwood and Norf?

Is Melbourne permanently off the table?
 
The Burgoyne trade could have been ok but we blew it so badly with our draft picks.
John Butcher pick 8 - injuries and poor kicking technique cost his career among other things.

Andrew Moore pick 9 - too good for SANFL but not consistent enough for afl.

Jasper Pittard pick 16 - too many clangers and you could never know what he was going to do.

We really did screw up with those selections.
 
And then Jason Cripps made his move ... ;)

 
Thanks for the updates chewy. Do you think port will hold firm on the commitment to keep him or do you get the feeling we might be the ‘good guy’ as usual and take less than we deserve to maintain goodwill?
Do you know how stuff with North sits in this at all?

Port have set the price - it's up to Houston's management to find a team willing to pay the price. Also comes down to how desperate Houston is to get back to Melbourne, because getting a deal done with North is a much easier proposition than the Pies as it stands.


So you are suggesting that Houston lied when he said he'd stay at Port if no trade could be done or am I interpreting your comment incorrectly?

Definitely interpreting my comment incorrectly.

I'll be surprised if Houston is still at Port this time next week though.

Excellent to hear. I feel like i'm going insane reading the reports, but they all seem to be coming from the Collingwood side and Davies was pretty clear that we had to win a deal.

You have to remember that a large chunk of AFL media journos are Collingwood supporters (like Glenn McFarlane). So I wouldn't take anything they say seriously at all.

It's not a fair equation looking at pick 13 this year and putting the same value on it as next year's 1st round pick. Next year's draft is ridiculously compromised with academy players etc and the talent on offer is no where near the value of this draft. A pick in the late teens/early 20s this year is much more valuable than a future 1st in the eyes of many list managers right now.

Why are we not talking to clubs outside of Carlton, Collingwood and Norf?

Is Melbourne permanently off the table?

Can only talk to Clubs who are interested, and there needs to be a level of interest on Dan's side.

Carlton for all intents and purposes are out. Melbourne are also out. Down to Collingwood or North unless a team bobs up late.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

A pick in the late teens/early 20s this year is much more valuable than a future 1st in the eyes of many list managers right now.

This is way too vague and speculative. A "future 1st" could be pick 1. I very much doubt you'd rather a pick in the late teens/early 20s this year than pick 1 next year. So future 1sts do have value, it's just a question of where it lands.

I have no doubt this sort of thing will be used to justify selling Houston for unders though. Oh we got back into this year's draft which was a priority, we think these picks are really valuable in a strong draft, etc.
 
This is way too vague and speculative. A "future 1st" could be pick 1. I very much doubt you'd rather a pick in the late teens/early 20s this year than pick 1 next year. So future 1sts do have value, it's just a question of where it lands.

I have no doubt this sort of thing will be used to justify selling Houston for unders though. Oh we got back into this year's draft which was a priority, we think these picks are really valuable in a strong draft, etc.
100%
This isn't the NBA with the ability to put protections on futures (why the **** not I have no idea)
 
John Butcher pick 8 - injuries and poor kicking technique cost his career among other things.

Andrew Moore pick 9 - too good for SANFL but not consistent enough for afl.

Jasper Pittard pick 16 - too many clangers and you could never know what he was going to do.

We really did screw up with those selections.
I don’t think it’s a stretch to suggest that this draft that should have set us up post the 2007 GF helped to ruin us.
 
Last edited:
I don’t think it’s a stretch to suggest that the draft that should have set us up post the 2007 GF helped to ruin us.

Yes, if it wasn't a mess, it would do until the mess got here.

Butcher was absolutely the right pick at 8, who could predict how his career would burn out so quickly?

The other two were massive reaches for players with no real position. We could have taken Talia at 9 and had a 200+ game AA full back.

Nat Fyfe would have gone alright at 16. We looked closely at him too.

Even Melksham would have been a solid 200 gamer.
 
Remember when I said we'd only get a pick around 15 for Houston and y'all thumbs downed me ...
You said we should, not that we would. Big difference. We should be taking Collingwood to the cleaners, but we won't because we're a club of cucks.
 
It's not a fair equation looking at pick 13 this year and putting the same value on it as next year's 1st round pick. Next year's draft is ridiculously compromised with academy players etc and the talent on offer is no where near the value of this draft. A pick in the late teens/early 20s this year is much more valuable than a future 1st in the eyes of many list managers right now.
If this draft was so good, it makes the decision to sell our 1st round pick last year even worse.
So effectively we paid even more for Esava and chips....gross.
 
This is way too vague and speculative. A "future 1st" could be pick 1. I very much doubt you'd rather a pick in the late teens/early 20s this year than pick 1 next year. So future 1sts do have value, it's just a question of where it lands.

I have no doubt this sort of thing will be used to justify selling Houston for unders though. Oh we got back into this year's draft which was a priority, we think these picks are really valuable in a strong draft, etc.

A future 1 for Port is likely going to be in that 12-15 range. Once you take Academy and F/S picks into the equation it's likely to blow out to around pick 20 in what is seen as a pretty weak draft by comparison to this year's.
 
Yes, if it wasn't a mess, it would do until the mess got here.

Butcher was absolutely the right pick at 8, who could predict how his career would burn out so quickly?

The other two were massive reaches for players with no real position. We could have taken Talia at 9 and had a 200+ game AA full back.

Nat Fyfe would have gone alright at 16. We looked closely at him too.

Even Melksham would have been a solid 200 gamer.
Pretty sure Gawn was also an option at both 9 and 16
 

Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. Dan Houston requests trade to Victoria - will stay if deal can't be done

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top