News Dan Houston traded to Collingwood

[Scodges]

][emoji6][emoji[emoji6][emoji6]][emoji[emoji6]]" data-quote="Schulzenfest" data-source="post: 0" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">

'Crows don't count' isn't a real argument and you know it. The Crows had much better picks than us though, so that's actually another great example of how JHF screwed North over.

No, the crows actually don’t count. Just ask JHF.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Schulzenfest]

The way he spoke to senior officials at the club whilst Cripps and co. were trying in good faith to negotiate a trade that would benefit all parties. I have not heard of JHF doing anything similar.

Oh yes I forgot about these unsourced unsubstantiated and unverified allegations. Meanwhile JHF literally had a domestic with Todd Goldstein on the middle of the field and disobeyed directions from the club.

Also, Houston owes his career to Port - with all key recruiting and coaching personnel still the same as when he was recruited - in a way that JHF didn't owe his career to North. That can't be ignored IMO.

You don't think ten years of excellent and underpriced service punctuated by two AA guernseys was sufficient recompense for that chance we took on him?

 

[Scodges]

Oh yes I forgot about these unsourced unsubstantiated and unverified allegations. Meanwhile JHF literally had a domestic with Todd Goldstein on the middle of the field and disobeyed directions from the club.

You don't think ten years of excellent and underpriced service punctuated by two AA guernseys was sufficient recompense for that chance we took on him?

So if we had picks 13 & 14, and Houston wanted to come to us, you’d be happy to offload both picks for him ?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[simba_]

Schulzenfest, the firestarter

 

[Jimmy Unchained]

Yeah I don't understand getting mad at Dan, if I were to guess his public openness to clubs was Port trying to manage the narrative as the only way that they were willing to entertain a trade, so I can't give Dan credit for that.

I also don't care that he had to put pressure on to get the trade through, you can't hang a player in limbo like that across the entire trade period and not expect them to try to make things happen.

At the end of the day Port treated him like a player with 1 year left on the contract and he acted like it, it's an own goal.

Priority of blame imo

1. Port for caving in on bad value
2. Melbourne for imploding and setting an expectation that Dan could get home and Port could get 2 first rounders
3. Port for not resolving the Lukosius trade before Houston nominated Collingwood and removing the leverage GCS could hold over us (We still would have to deal for Joe Richards, but I would optimistically think we would be stronger in that scenario)
4. St Kilda for acting in bad faith
5. Dan/Dan's Agent for scrambling when the Melbourne trade fell through
6. Perryman and Cumming for not distracting us with more new toys

 

[Schulzenfest]

So if we had picks 13 & 14, and Houston wanted to come to us, you’d be happy to offload both picks for him ?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

That doesn't even address the points I'm making, let alone counteract them.

But since you asked, if Ken Hinkley wasn't our coach, yes I would do that deal every day of the week. Dan Houston would be far more likely to contribute to this list winning a premiership than Joe Berry or (let's say) Murphy Reid would be.

 

[Imhotep]

This is tough because I couldn't care less about players leaving, you win some you lose some. Him picking Collingwood sucks because they didn't have any picks, that's not a Houston issue though that's an us issue. The second he chose Collingwood we should have just shut it down, that's what Geelong would have done. So any issue I have with this trade is on Port not Dan. Although I will laugh heartily if the team of geriatrics end up down the bottom of the ladder for the rest of his career like I think they will.

 

[Andre]

Thought experiment: Name one thing worse about the way Dan Houston conducted himself on his way out of his old club compared to the way Jason Horne-Francis did.

He was contracted! So was JHF
He nominated a club! So did JHF
The club he nominated didn't have sufficient picks to give us fair value! Neither did the club JHF nominated
He was petulant on his way out! Not half as petulant as JHF was.

JHF wanted to move home, to a club his step-father had played with. Sure he wasn't an official father-son, but he'd added to his own name to show his attachment. Like West Coast picking Brad Ebert he was always going to return home at some point. By it's nature that dictated there was only the one club he could nominate. There's a reason clubs don't generally nominate for Father/Son picks of other clubs early enough, that the club wouldn't match. They know they'd have burnt a high pick, for a player likely out ASAP.

Houston was moving for his girlfriend, there was no reason to limit the choices to one club. Heck, we'll even allow him to hate one club, as per someone moving to SA being adamant they won't go to Port or Crows and that still left 9 clubs to choose from, to give Port the best deal. He either really wanted to move to Vic for his GF, in which case he'd have been happy to go where Port got the best deal, or really wanted to go to Collingwood, in which case he should have stated that up front as the reason he wanted out and Port could have started from that.

 

[Scodges]

That doesn't even address the points I'm making, let alone counteract them.

But since you asked, if Ken Hinkley wasn't our coach, yes I would do that deal every day of the week. Dan Houston would be far more likely to contribute to this list winning a premiership than Joe Berry or (let's say) Murphy Reid would be.

I recon you’d be in the minority given how good the draft was this year and how bad it’ll be in the next few years at least.
There’s no way in hell any club were going to give up two firsts for Dan.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Chewy316]

The irony about all of this is that even if Melbourne did end up being the trade partner for Houston as originally planned, the Club would have ended up with pick 11 and used said pick on Berry anyway.

 

[johnnysix]

Completely wrong. Pure supply and demand doesn't apply here.

Trading isn't an open market, otherwise we'd have traded Houston to North. Or to a non-Victorian team. If we were trading him to the Gold Coast we might have got something close to the value of pick 1.

That only proves the point more... It just reduces the market.

 

[johnnysix]

I think you can blame Dan. He didnt get drafted into a shit show, he only just signed a contract extension by choice. He also said he wanted to get back to Melbourne but hemmed is in on the trade. My opinion has changed in him massively, he was one of my favourite players but he definitely screwed us over. Port for the best deal we could get. I love how people here think they know better than those inside at the tables dealing with the players and clubs. There's no reason to think Port didn't do the best deal for Port. Looking at the Houston deal.in isolation is a false economy. We WANTED in on this years draft and took the best deal we could giving the limitations Dan and his management put on us. Pointing to Geelong and Rat is dumb. Geelong clearly didn't need what we were offering at the time. Both clubs made the decision is their own club's interest giving the context at the given time.

 

[TradeDraft]

How will the trade look if Houston breaks up with his bird in 6 months time? Tibbs might be emotional.

His family is in Victoria so he still have his Family

 

[TradeDraft]

heck him now, time to move on from him, hope joe richards kicks 6 on him round 1

In a Collingwood Win

 

[Willsy10]

Apples and oranges with JHF.

Houston was at the top of his game at port, his footy peaking, dual AA, part of small carefully selected leadership group, seemingly loving his time at port. And most of all signed a long term deal by his own choice. And literally nothing other than the geographical location of his very new gf changing things. She could’ve easily come to Adelaide.

JHF chronically homesick and seemingly having an all round shit time at north trying to serve out a contract forced on him, his football suffering and the media hounding him.

As a result he requests a trade home and like port with Houston, north were happy to cut their losses. They were very well compensated for it too. I think it was a good trade for all parties in the end.

Crows had already hitched their wagon to rankine so I disagree that they would’ve been a better trade partner for north. North absolutely maxed their return for JHF. And came out of it with 2 gun footballers, albeit I don’t think either of them will end up as good as JHF at port. But they are sure as hell better than the JHF that was at north.

And ultimately, JHF had genuine family links to our club and it made sense that he wanted to come to us over the crows.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[WillemDaDrew]

In a Collingwood Win

Has Dan been down to the Chapel St Tattoo Parlor to get inked yet?

 

[Jimmy Unchained]

The irony about all of this is that even if Melbourne did end up being the trade partner for Houston as originally planned, the Club would have ended up with pick 11 and used said pick on Berry anyway.

Can you clarify what you mean by 'would have', is this an opinion or have you spoken to someone?

I might be misremembering previous posts of yours but I think every time you've talked about our other options they have all been worse than the deal we made.

Carlton was just pick 14
Melbourne was just pick 11
North was ??
Collingwood was 13 + Richards

If these were genuinely the offers I cannot understand how we went about it the way we did, just walk away man.

 

[Chewy316]

Can you clarify what you mean by 'would have', is this an opinion or have you spoken to someone?

I might be misremembering previous posts of yours but I think every time you've talked about our other options they have all been worse than the deal we made.

Carlton was just pick 14
Melbourne was just pick 11
North was ??
Collingwood was 13 + Richards

If these were genuinely the offers I cannot understand how we went about it the way we did, just walk away man.

Berry was high on their board - and whilst I haven't seen the entire draft board, I can make a fair assumption that if they had pick 11 from Melbourne instead of pick 16 from West Coast it still would have resulted in them taking Berry.

The offer from Collingwood was more than 13 + Richards. It essentially was 13, 29 and Richards for Houston.

It has turned into Berry, Whitlock and Richards for Houston. And bringing in 39 into 36 in the trade quite possibly ensured they got Moraes. Pick 50 was acquired by taking Atkins' contract, but it gave them the collateral they needed to trade up to guarantee they'd get Berry.

It's easy to say just walk away - so they wait 12 months and then what? They're not winning a flag in 2025 with Ken, and given his age, Houston's value would be less during that trade period as well. Given the upcoming drafts are compromised due to academy, F/S selections and Tassie, even a mid first round pick in the 2025 draft would blow out to being a pick in the 20s.

Whilst I think they could have extracted more in the trade itself, I don't believe they could have gotten a better deal in 12 months time, and doing the deal now means they can get some games into these young players to have the squad more ready to contend upon Ken's likely departure at the end of 2025.

 

[MrPower]

Has Dan been down to the Chapel St Tattoo Parlor to get inked yet?

the glass in the mouth would be a good tat

 

[Tibbs]

The irony about all of this is that even if Melbourne did end up being the trade partner for Houston as originally planned, the Club would have ended up with pick 11 and used said pick on Berry anyway.

I have mentioned this b4, that we had earmarked Berry & Whitlow, and would have probably taken with with the picks we got from Melbourne if that deal had of gone thru ... ended up with the same players, plus the extra nonsense.

 

[Chewy316]

I have mentioned this b4, that we had earmarked Berry & Whitlow, and would have probably taken with with the picks we got from Melbourne if that deal had of gone thru ... ended up with the same players, plus the extra nonsense.

They were earmarked in part because of where Port's position was entering the draft. They didn't expect to get Whitlock though once they took Berry. He really wasn't far from Berry on their board so it was a no-brainer to take him in the 2nd round.

Had the Melbourne trade gone through instead they would likely have used Berry with that first round pick, then they would have had Melbourne's future 1st, which they would have tried to get more picks in this year's draft. Ultimately, the return wouldn't have been much different.

 

[El_Scorcho]

That only proves the point more... It just reduces the market.

The point tibbs made was that a player is worth what someone is willing to pay, which clearly isn't true when a player nominates one club and can refuse to be traded elsewhere.

Players are worth different amounts to different teams based on their needs and draft capital. We'd have gotten closer to Houston's value from another club.

 

[El_Scorcho]

I love how people here think they know better than those inside at the tables dealing with the players and clubs.

By this logic none of us can criticise Hinkley because we aren't involved in the decision making process. It's silly. The Houston trade was considered poor by neutrals as well.

There's no reason to think Port didn't do the best deal for Port. Looking at the Houston deal.in isolation is a false economy. We WANTED in on this years draft and took the best deal we could giving the limitations Dan and his management put on us.

We had a natural pick in this draft that we traded for 2 players who won't start for us in Round 1 2025.

Maybe these experts aren't as infallible as you're suggesting.

Pointing to Geelong and Rat is dumb. Geelong clearly didn't need what we were offering at the time. Both clubs made the decision is their own club's interest giving the context at the given time.

Yeah if I was defending the Houston trade I wouldn't want to compare it to other trades either. Makes it really hard to defend.

 

[El_Scorcho]

It's easy to say just walk away - so they wait 12 months and then what? They're not winning a flag in 2025 with Ken, and given his age, Houston's value would be less during that trade period as well.

Not much less, certainly not less enough to have taken the loss we did on this year's trade. This year's trade is the sort of trade you make when the player is out of contract.

 

[Scodges]

Posters on here love to talk about how names like Farrell and Evans are going to 'replace' Houston like dual reigning All-Australian half backs just grow on trees.

And even if they somehow do, that still doesn't actually 'replace' Houston, because before we would have Houston and his replacement, and now we'll just have his replacement. The player who's actually 'replacing' Houston isn't our best half back, it's some Sinn/Burton/Williams type who wouldn't be getting a game if Houston was still here.

Oh man let the Houston thing go already, you’re next level obsessed. Accept it & move on.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com