News Dan Houston traded to Collingwood

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

jakson68 said:
So you think Port would say no to 13, 23 and Richards?

Seriously, what are you expecting then?
Click to expand...
Richards should not be even part of the conversation as he is out of contract.
 
jakson68 said:
So you think Port would say no to 13, 23 and Richards?

Seriously, what are you expecting then?
Click to expand...

I don’t know what port will do, but our fans would be pretty annoyed.

And the ****ing arrogance to come here and act like we’re expecting too much.


Rioli is expected to fetch 6 and 23
Bolton 10 and 18
Barrass 15 and a 2nd rounder

Explain how port fans should be happy taking 13 23 and Richards ffs?
 
jakson68 said:
Again, I am curious to what you are expecting to get.
Click to expand...

You don't go into a Ferrari dealership and ask how much. If you have to ask you can't afford it.

Your club unfortunately don't have the draft capital (first round PICKS) for a 2xAA game winner who's the best kick in the comp.
 
jakson68 said:
Again, I am curious to what you are expecting to get.
Click to expand...
Again, two firsts, or a good top 10 pick. North could definitely facilitate the latter whether it’s pick 2 or splitting pick 2. Carlton could cough up their first and a future, but are reluctant to do so, so aren’t serious about getting Houston.

If Collingwood could facilitate 13, Lukosius and Richard for Houston (no F1) then that could work.
 
jakson68 said:
Again, I am curious to what you are expecting to get.
Click to expand...
Ideally we would have dealt with NM. They would have split pick 2 into a couple of mid-range 1R picks between 9-13. We would have taken one of those and their future 1R next year for a consecutive 2x AA who is in our best three players and in the top 10 Champion Data rated players in the comp, not to mention contracted.

We would have got Richards in a separate exchange with you for a third round pick which is what his 9 game, 6 goal status at 25 years of age is worth.

We would get back a F2R pick for Soldo, for whom we paid more than that a year ago.

And finally, we would deal directly with Gold Coast giving them a F1R for Lukosius and getting pick 23 back.

None of these deals is objectively unreasonable although the Lukosius one is generous toward us.

We would lose Houston, Soldo, F1R, 3R, and get in

NM 1R, NM F1R, pick 23, StK F2R, Lukosius, Richards.
 
Schulzenfest said:
Richmond are getting two first rounders for a worse player than Houston but sure, we're 'setting ourselves up for disappointment' by wanting ****ing one.

Pick 13 for F1 is not an upgrade, it's sideways. You have us trading out a contracted dual AA and getting zero additional first rounders in return. None. I'll burn the ****ing club down if we do that.
Click to expand...
I don't think you are giving luko enough credit here. I think he is a good pick up, and an important one considering it was Georgiades or bust at times this year.
 
EskimoPAFC said:
We're talking about a reigning back to back AA

13, 23 and Richards is massive unders.
Click to expand...
Reigning, back to back AA
Top 10 Player in the league (Champion Data)
Top 2 Kick in the league (Champion Data)
Contracted for 3 more years.

Middling first and a token second, I reckon. Or a spud with delusions of grandeur.

Not both, though.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

jakson68 said:
Again, I am curious to what you are expecting to get.
Click to expand...

Richards is effectively worthless at the trade table, he's a 4th round pick. Don't get me wrong, i'm happy enough to add some small forward depth, but he's a 25yo who has kicked 6 goals in 9 games.

For Houston, a mid first rounder, a 2nd rounder and a late pick is unders, especially given Houston has 3 years on his contract and the value at which other, lesser players are being traded this year.

If you're only offering 1 first round pick as part of your package, it would need to be in the single digits. I've regularly said that my standard would be 2 picks that add up to less than 30.

Given he's stated that he'll stay if we don't get a deal done, we have no reason to take unders for him.
 
El_Scorcho said:
Richards is effectively worthless at the trade table, he's a 4th round pick. Don't get me wrong, i'm happy enough to add some small forward depth, but he's a 25yo who has kicked 6 goals in 9 games.

For Houston, a mid first rounder, a 2nd rounder and a late pick is unders, especially given Houston has 3 years on his contract and the value at which other, lesser players are being traded this year.

If you're only offering 1 first round pick as part of your package, it would need to be in the single digits. I've regularly said that my standard would be 2 picks that add up to less than 30.

Given he's stated that he'll stay if we don't get a deal done, we have no reason to take unders for him.
Click to expand...
For Collingwood lurkers this ^ is precisely how it should play out

You’ve got to make the running here, Davies has said he doesn’t want a fair deal he wants a “good” deal

If Daniel Farking Rioli is going for 6 and another top 30 pick Houston’s value can’t be less than that

Why you might ask well because Dan hasn’t declared you to be the leaders and North will offer that otherwise he stays and honestly that isn’t a bad situation for us
 
Schulzenfest said:
Abso****inglutely.

As has been several times, 13, Luko and Richards. Which Collingwood could easily get while still getting a good deal for Houston.
Click to expand...

I even think 13, Luko and Richards is slight unders for us and i'd be a little bit disappointed with that deal. Is Luko worth a pick in the mid teens?
 
El_Scorcho said:
I even think 13, Luko and Richards is slight unders for us and i'd be a little bit disappointed with that deal. Is Luko worth a pick in the mid teens?
Click to expand...
13, Luko and Richards is like a 51% scraped in pass. It's the absolute minimum we should even consider accepting. Any less than that is a massive fail.
 
FYI History of trades: (https://www.draftguru.com.au/trades)



El_Scorcho said:
Richards is effectively worthless at the trade table, he's a 4th round pick. Don't get me wrong, i'm happy enough to add some small forward depth, but he's a 25yo who has kicked 6 goals in 9 games.

For Houston, a mid first rounder, a 2nd rounder and a late pick is unders, especially given Houston has 3 years on his contract and the value at which other, lesser players are being traded this year.

If you're only offering 1 first round pick as part of your package, it would need to be in the single digits. I've regularly said that my standard would be 2 picks that add up to less than 30.

Given he's stated that he'll stay if we don't get a deal done, we have no reason to take unders for him.
Click to expand...
^This is precisely correct.


What's interesting to me is that Dan is contracted for 3 more years, he has flagged he is happy to stay, and he's effectively created a bidding war as he'll accept any pathway to Victoria.

It's literally the perfect scenario for a maximum return for Port. To think the fans will accept a limp wristed cave in on a shit deal is just nuts.


This is a literal test case for what the perfect position for Port to be in is.


For Collingwood to do the deal, I'd expect 13, Future 1st and Richards minimum , but they aren't allowed to trade their future first? I'd even be happy to throw back a future 3rd.
 
Last edited:
Coobk001 said:
FYI History of similar trades: (https://www.draftguru.com.au/trades)




^This is precisely correct.


What's interesting to me is that Dan is contracted for 3 more years, he has flagged he is happy to stay, and he's effectively created a bidding war as he'll accept any pathway to Victoria.

It's literally the perfect scenario for a maximum return for Port. To think the fans will accept a limp wristed cave in on a shit deal is just nuts.


This is a literal test case for what the perfect position for Port to be in is.


For Collingwood to do the deal, I'd expect 13, Future 1st and Richards minimum , but they aren't allowed to trade their future first? I'd even be happy to throw back a future 3rd.
Click to expand...
They don’t have a future first… that’s how they are getting 13. Which is why I can’t see how they get a deal done unless we give in for unders.
 
Coobk001 said:
FYI History of similar trades: (https://www.draftguru.com.au/trades)




^This is precisely correct.


What's interesting to me is that Dan is contracted for 3 more years, he has flagged he is happy to stay, and he's effectively created a bidding war as he'll accept any pathway to Victoria.

It's literally the perfect scenario for a maximum return for Port. To think the fans will accept a limp wristed cave in on a shit deal is just nuts.


This is a literal test case for what the perfect position for Port to be in is.


For Collingwood to do the deal, I'd expect 13, Future 1st and Richards minimum , but they aren't allowed to trade their future first? I'd even be happy to throw back a future 3rd.
Click to expand...

They need their future 1st to acquire that pick 13.
 
HHHAMMERtime said:
I have a real solution here. And just bear with me….. hold him to his contract unless we get a top 10 + teens pick. Has anyone floated that suggestion to the powers that be?
Click to expand...

I would say the only club that can put a deal to Port that Port will accept is North.

It's all up to Dan.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Jojay
Toast Tom Jonas Retires
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
128
Views
8K
raptalia
raptalia

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top