Speculation Deven Robertson

Remove this Banner Ad

From a players perspective you would be more inclined to chase success short term term over a longer contract that would be in a developing side. Sure 4 years is great but at the time when he signed he was starting / cusp of a formidable side.

Footy is about moments and if it had paid off this season, he could have been a premiership player instead of having an early trip to Bali.

He still is a great midfielder who will have to wait his chance, but inevitably it would be best in another side.

Dev still has to be still in front of Lashcroft and Marshall, who as great as they sound are still kids not yet proven in the AFL.

Many teams would be interested in his services.
From a player's perspective, you should really be looking to bank an extra $1 million out of your career, because the average length is 4 years.
 
They asked about him. Brisbane wanted too much (or clearly more than any other club was willing to pay)

He's out of contract next year and we'll do this dance again most likely

I’m not doubting you but how do you know the Eagles asked about him? More importantly, do you know if they made an offer and what it was?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I’m not doubting you but how do you know the Eagles asked about him? More importantly, do you know if they made an offer and what it was?

Our paper (up to you how reliable that is) said we offered pick 73

It's a little unclear whether we went cold or Brissy didn't accept

Link to the pay walled article:

 
I have no issue with people saying perhaps Dev would have been better served to take the Eagles offer last season but I don’t understand the subtext to the discussion on this trade period that we’ve somehow done the wrong thing by Dev…it’s not like Dunkley, McRae or Daniher where they’ve asked for trades for multiple seasons…he chose to sign with us a year ago, had an injury-interrupted season in 24 and then we said we want him but we’re happy for him to explore his options too…where have we done the wrong thing? Literally…can someone explain the saltiness?
 
Our paper (up to you how reliable that is) said we offered pick 73

It's a little unclear whether we went cold or Brissy didn't accept

Link to the pay walled article:


Thank you…I appreciate you sharing that because I hadn’t seen that…do you know if they were willing to take on 100% of Dev’s salary in that offer?
 
I have no issue with people saying perhaps Dev would have been better served to take the Eagles offer last season but I don’t understand the subtext to the discussion on this trade period that we’ve somehow done the wrong thing by Dev…it’s not like Dunkley, McRae or Daniher where they’ve asked for trades for multiple seasons…he chose to sign with us a year ago, had an injury-interrupted season in 24 and then we said we want him but we’re happy for him to explore his options too…where have we done the wrong thing? Literally…can someone explain the saltiness?

Admittedly haven't read the whole thread, but not sure anyone (reasonable) thinks that at all

Brissy has to do what's right by them and Dev signed the contract. Most are thinking his manager must be advising him terribly, nothing at all against Brissy

I just don't think he's worth all that much but if Brisbane want him for depth that's entirely their choice
 
Thank you…I appreciate you sharing that because I hadn’t seen that…do you know if they were willing to take on 100% of Dev’s salary in that offer?

Have no idea but I'd guess yes given we just traded out Barrass and Darling (who were both on big money) and were willing to take Dev last year on a longer contract
 
They asked about him. Brisbane wanted too much (or clearly more than any other club was willing to pay)

He's out of contract next year and we'll do this dance again most likely
Dev was contracted and I wouldn't have accepted pick 73 either.

Eagles have take a fair bit of the blame on this. If Eagles really did want him, perhaps in the first week of trade period, you split picks or do something in that absurd Baker trade when you gave up way more than you had to, that you get a pick back that satisfies Brisbane in the 30's or 40's.

Clearly West Coast left it all too late or just didn't prioritize him when we all know pick 73 was an insulting offer and if I'm Dev, I'd be pretty pissed at WCE IF in fact they had committed to him (which I acknowledge that we just don't know if that's the case).
 
Admittedly haven't read the whole thread, but not sure anyone (reasonable) thinks that at all

Brissy has to do what's right by them and Dev signed the contract. Most are thinking his manager must be advising him terribly, nothing at all against Brissy

I just don't think he's worth all that much but if Brisbane want him for depth that's entirely their choice
Torching 500k on a guy who isnt needed isnt a good idea by them though. Get a guy on minimum deal, punt Dev and save yourself 350k
 
Dev was contracted and I wouldn't have accepted pick 73 either.

Eagles have take a fair bit of the blame on this. If Eagles really did want him, perhaps in the first week of trade period, you split picks or do something in that absurd Baker trade when you gave up way more than you had to, that you get a pick back that satisfies Brisbane in the 30's or 40's.

Clearly West Coast left it all too late or just didn't prioritize him when we all know pick 73 was an insulting offer and if I'm Dev, I'd be pretty pissed at WCE IF in fact they had committed to him (which I acknowledge that we just don't know if that's the case).

I'm not really sure what your angst is all about here. Blame for what? Dev's stalled career? That's solely on him (and his manager)

Brissy did the right thing by them, holding a contracted player whos worth more as depth than any offers they got.

WC offered him a juicy deal last year that he rejected. He spent a year in 2s and is worth less than last year because of it. Clearly he wasn't a priority for WC and in the end they weren't willing to pay whatever Brissy wanted.

Neither were any of the 16 other clubs which kinda shows how hes valued now. Unless something extraordinary happens this year, I'm tipping it'll be much lower again when he's out of contract next year.
 
Dev was contracted and I wouldn't have accepted pick 73 either.

Eagles have take a fair bit of the blame on this. If Eagles really did want him, perhaps in the first week of trade period, you split picks or do something in that absurd Baker trade when you gave up way more than you had to, that you get a pick back that satisfies Brisbane in the 30's or 40's.

Clearly West Coast left it all too late or just didn't prioritize him when we all know pick 73 was an insulting offer and if I'm Dev, I'd be pretty pissed at WCE IF in fact they had committed to him (which I acknowledge that we just don't know if that's the case).
Lol, Dev has nobody to blame but himself.

Was out the door last year for a 4 year contract before backflipping last minute and taking the 2 year one Brisbane offered instead.

WCE aren't giving up a second rounder for a bloke who can't get a game, considering our 3rd would've easily done it last year and he played more games then.

If Brisbane wanted a 2nd rounder, that's on them.

Personally, I'd rather the club dropped chasing Dev altogether. That ship has long sailed.
 
Lol, Dev has nobody to blame but himself.

Was out the door last year for a 4 year contract before backflipping last minute and taking the 2 year one Brisbane offered instead.

WCE aren't giving up a second rounder for a bloke who can't get a game, considering our 3rd would've easily done it last year and he played more games then.

If Brisbane wanted a 2nd rounder, that's on them.

Personally, I'd rather the club dropped chasing Dev altogether. That ship has long sailed.
I wasn't talking your pick 26 and its spurious to say I or anyone here or the club were; that is just fanciful, but I suspect the Lions wanted something in and around late 30's to high 40's minimum. Hence why I said that perhaps WCE should have split picks to get something in that mark prior to the Baker trade reducing you to only picks12, 26 (rightly WCE wouldn't give that up) and 73 (which Brisbane wouldn't accept), effectively killing any trade.

Anyway, I reckon Dev will surprise this year and play way more than the two games he did in 24 after actually having a pre season unlike last and wanting to prove the AFL world doubters wrong including the Lions.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I wasn't talking your pick 26 and its spurious to say I or anyone here or the club were; that is just fanciful, but I suspect the Lions wanted something in and around late 30's to high 40's minimum. Hence why I said that perhaps WCE should have split picks to get something in that mark prior to the Baker trade reducing you to only picks12, 26 (rightly WCE wouldn't give that up) and 73 (which Brisbane wouldn't accept), effectively killing any trade.

Anyway, I reckon Dev will surprise this year and play way more than the two games he did in 24 after actually having a pre season unlike last and wanting to prove the AFL world doubters wrong including the Lions.
I don't think it was worth changing their strategy just to accommodate Dev, after he changed his mind last minute last year

If he was serious about going to WCE, he'd have done it last year.

Can't really see him getting a look in next season with Levi on the way. Kid will be afforded more opportunities than Dev.

More likely he ends up on the delist pile and heads elsewhere at the end of the season.
 
Can't really see him getting a look in next season with Levi on the way. Kid will be afforded more opportunities than Dev.

I think he'll only get games if we cop injuries to our inside mids, but you never know what happens over the pre-season. He didn't have a pre-season this year.

Levi probably starts at HFF I reckon.
 
I don't think it was worth changing their strategy just to accommodate Dev, after he changed his mind last minute last year

If he was serious about going to WCE, he'd have done it last year.

Can't really see him getting a look in next season with Levi on the way. Kid will be afforded more opportunities than Dev.

More likely he ends up on the delist pile and heads elsewhere at the end of the season.
Yep delist is most likely. In his 2 games this year he had 6 and 10 disposals also being subbed out in the second game. Not sure how lions think he has any trade value whatsoever. But like others have said, fair enough for them to hold him to his contract as backup if 4 or 5 other mids get injured. This was year 4 for Dev and looks to spend year 5 in the 2s as well. It's a shame as he could have been a handy inside mid fot a side that needs one
 
I think the issue for him is how many sides need an inside midfielder with suspect kicking.

You can barely carry one these days. They have to offer something else, be it supreme ball-winning ability, speed, size, aerial ability etc. Dev is quicker than you think and offers decent pressure but isn't elite at any of it.

He's fine and I'm happy enough for him to stay as a backup. Personally I'd have taken a future third but don't have a clue whether that was on the table, and club probably wouldn't have loved that as third round picks have almost no bid matching value from next year.
 
He gets paid 500k salary.

I have zero doubt brisbane will extend his contract for the same amount

Really? Why are you so sure? We need some depth this year but unless he comes on this year I’d say we’d be happy to try to get him to a new home in 2026
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Speculation Deven Robertson

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top