News Dan Houston traded to Collingwood

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

I understand why they traded it last year - because they legitimately believed Ratugolea would be the answer to their fullback issue (freeing up Aliir in the process) whilst also delivering them a #1 ruck. It obviously hasn't turned out that way, but I don't necessarily think those deals last year were horrendous given the circumstances at the time.
Nah blind Freddy could see that giving up our future first for Rats and Soldo was a bad move. Was widely criticised at the time of the trade.
 
Take out all of the players and picks that don't mean anything and essentially it's Houston and our future 1st for Lukosius and pick 13. It's a bad deal.
Come in peace , Port have not received fair or equitable compensation here for losing a 2 X AA. Heck , Freo gotta a better deal from the Pies for a solid player in Schultz. We paid overs there , albeit that was with Wright doing the dealing. When it comes to dealing all clubs should feel like they have come out winners.
 
People on this board were incredibly vocal about not wanting to trade our future 1st for Ratugolea and Soldo last year. A lot of us did NOT WANT Ratugolea and thought it was dumb we were letting Geelong absolutely destroy another team, this time us, in a trade like they always do. We were also happy getting JUST Sweet and no Soldo, because our record with Hayes is 9 wins, 2 losses so we could have just given him another year to see if Sweet could lead us and still have three rucks plus Finlayson. The trade last year was absolutely AWFUL. We hated it then and we hate it even more now.

Because now it's made us get destroyed in a trade again to try and get BACK into the draft we traded out of for miserable returns last year.

HOUSTON IS CONTRACTED. RIOLI IS ABOUT TO GET PICK 6 and 23.

People should have to fall on their swords for this debacle if it goes through. It's ridiculously unacceptable list management.
 
So Dan Houston doesn't want to play for Norf.

Guess what, who gives a rats arse. You're contracted - you have no say in this mate. You want to get to Melbourne, you deal with whoever gets us the best deal.

F*** dealing with collingwood. This sets a terrible precedent.
 
I don't think we should trade the F1, i dont understand the reason for doing so.

But it's obvious that every team is rating the draft picks this year much higher then next year. I only say this for context, not that I like this trade.

If the F1 was off the table it is palatable though
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Also giving Houston to a premiership contender for this deal is laughable, good luck with winning the Grand final Hinkley. Collingwood have Houston and you’re stuck with Ratkins and an 18 year old you picked at like pick 15
But our team will be even younger!
 
I understand why they traded it last year - because they legitimately believed Ratugolea would be the answer to their fullback issue (freeing up Aliir in the process) whilst also delivering them a #1 ruck. It obviously hasn't turned out that way, but I don't necessarily think those deals last year were horrendous given the circumstances at the time.
My main issues I have with what happened last year are:

1 Geelong seemed to think they were happy with screwing us but at no stage did we publicly say that Rat could go to the PSD which is what we should have leveraged to get a better deal.
2 Aliir appeared to be playing full back in many games and Rat the intercept defender which I wouldn't have thought would have been the plan.
3 You didn't have to be Einstein to realise that Rat and BZT were not going to move the needle significantly

Far too many risks and if this is the deal that we end up with like I think its going to be, we have been screwed 2 years in a row. I would much sooner see Houston having to suck it up and have another go next year.
 
Far too many risks and if this is the deal that we end up with like I think its going to be, we have been screwed 2 years in a row. I would much sooner see Houston having to suck it up and have another go next year.

Yep. We'd be pissing away 2 F1s in a row, while also getting way unders for our 2xAA star halfback.

We surely can't be giving the F1. It's insanity. Just keep Houston to his contract.
 
For what purpose do we need ratkins?

we don't, we will do it so that Collingwood can get p13 to give us for Houston, which is something we said we wouldn't do last week, but now we will but by giving up more.
 
Maybe a few of you should try your hand at list management. I don't think it's as easy as many of you make it out to be.

This doesn't mean you have to accept losing star players on long contracts for unders. Why would we not just hold Houston to his deal?

Ratkins has negative value because he's a poor player on a bad contract. Richards has 0 value. If we're giving up that F1, this is a shockingly bad deal that we simply don't have to do at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top