Traded Izak Rankine traded to Adelaide with #46 & F4 (Freo) for #5, F3 & F4

[My_Username]

So.. you reacon the eagles, kanga’s, giants and Bombers are gonna pay Izak $700k or $800k or even $950k a year (depending on what media source you believe) to sit at home in Adelaide and not play a single game for them for 5 years?..

Big waste of Salary Cap space for absolutely no return.. and very good money for doing nothing if you can get it for young Izak!

Because thats what he could do if they ignored his wishes not to be picked after telling these non SA based clubs that he was only going home to SA and nowhere else.

I think theres only ever been Nick Steven’s that went into the PSD wanting to go to the pies but ended up being picked earlier by the Blues.. but that was a Victorian lad wanting to go home, and he ended up going home to Victoria, just not to the club he really wanted..

But like I said.. this wont end up in the PSD.. a trade will happen.

This Bigfooty and media PSD talk is all nonsense.

If he did that, he wouldn't be paid.

Contract requires players to train/play/etc.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Why should Crows cough it up? You honestly think we wouldn't just put the future 1st on the table and then when 4.55pm Friday 7th October comes around the Suns don't take it? Come on. We're a young team so it makes sense to try use future picks.

Just keeping in mind that a player (e.g. Jack Martin) can set their own contractual terms if they nominate for the PSD or the National Draft. Jack Martin did it and put his nominated terms as $1million per season for 2 seasons (and then once signed by Carlton re-jigged it to $3.1M over 5 seasons) . You honestly think if Rankine put those sort of $$'s up in his contract, not to mention other personal terms, that another club would waste their pick in the National draft on him and cough up that sort of money? It's highly doubtful it comes to that, but it will sit in the background and exist to force an actual trade to go through.

The deal will get done, but let's not live in fantasy land and pretend another club is going to take that risk. Gold Coast didn't even have to cough up a draft pick (in the PSD) for Jack Martin, and they still didn't do it.... (They then wasted a future Pick 10 which was sent to Geelong because they didn't have a 2nd round pick in that draft, one of 2 that Carlton were offering)

Crows will split this years pick if possible (potentially with GWS, who will have a LOT of 1st round draft capital after trading various players), and one will go to GC. Or it will be Pick 5 and something like a 2nd coming back to the Crows, or a straight offer of our 2023 1st.

All of this other talk of 3 x firsts, players like Rachele included are just sheer delusion being whipped up by Vic Media and 'Port-centric' commentators here in SA.

Most Vic media commentators I have read or heard have suggested your pick 5 should be enough to get the deal done.

Mind you I never watch any of the footy panel shows anymore (got better things to do with my Time)

And yes, I think Gold Coast are obliged to send you a 2nd round pick back for giving up such a high/juicy pick for Rankine.

 

[Frank Grimes]

Why should Crows cough it up? You honestly think we wouldn't just put the future 1st on the table and then when 4.55pm Friday 7th October comes around the Suns don't take it? Come on. We're a young team so it makes sense to try use future picks.

Just keeping in mind that a player (e.g. Jack Martin) can set their own contractual terms if they nominate for the PSD or the National Draft. Jack Martin did it and put his nominated terms as $1million per season for 2 seasons (and then once signed by Carlton re-jigged it to $3.1M over 5 seasons) . You honestly think if Rankine put those sort of $$'s up in his contract, not to mention other personal terms, that another club would waste their pick in the National draft on him and cough up that sort of money? It's highly doubtful it comes to that, but it will sit in the background and exist to force an actual trade to go through.

The deal will get done, but let's not live in fantasy land and pretend another club is going to take that risk. Gold Coast didn't even have to cough up a draft pick (in the PSD) for Jack Martin, and they still didn't do it.... (They then wasted a future Pick 10 which was sent to Geelong because they didn't have a 2nd round pick in that draft, one of 2 that Carlton were offering)

Crows will split this years pick if possible (potentially with GWS, who will have a LOT of 1st round draft capital after trading various players), and one will go to GC. Or it will be Pick 5 and something like a 2nd coming back to the Crows, or a straight offer of our 2023 1st.

All of this other talk of 3 x firsts, players like Rachele included are just sheer delusion being whipped up by Vic Media and 'Port-centric' commentators here in SA.

All this talk of threatening to go to the PSD is hyperbole. It very rarely gets to that point.

You pretty much can almost copy and paste the same threats of the PSD from the club a player wants to go to, and the same over expectation of the club losing a player (e.g. expecting two first rnd picks) in every trade thread.

I remember almost the exact same conversations about walking Prestia to the PSD when Richmond traded for Prestia (pick 6 was considered slightly overs for him at the time). And guess what....the trade got done. I'm pretty confident the same thing is going to happen here.

Obviously footy fans see this as if it's trading in the stock market, but the reality is no club ever threatens to take a player the the draft or PSD unless the club being traded with is being very unreasonable.

The are a lot of factors why the walking to the draft threats almost never happen.

As I said, my prediction is it will end up being something like the Cerra trade. If you think Adelaide isn't going to trade the pick 5 then I think you are going to be disappointed.

 

[MarcLocksCrustySock]

Most Vic media commentators I have read or heard have suggested your pick 5 should be enough to get the deal done.

Mind you I never watch any of the footy panel shows anymore (got better things to do with my Time)

And yes, I think Gold Coast are obliged to send you a 2nd round pick back for giving up such a high/juicy pick for Rankine.

He's worth 5 at least especially given how much they're offering. Just my opinion.

 

[Bearded Clam]

If he did that, he wouldn't be paid.

Contract requires players to train/play/etc.

Have you got a link to a current player contract to prove that this is actually the case?

And do you have any examples of this being tested in a court of law?..

 

[Bearded Clam]

He's worth 5 at least especially given how much they're offering. Just my opinion.

How much are they offering?..

None of us here even know.. do you?.. and how do you know?..

Its been reported as being $650k by some in the media and $950k by others..

If the Suns are only offering him $650k a year then thats what the suns value him at right..

So the Suns shoukd really only expect to get something back for him at what they value him at right?.. after all, this is using your very own logic correct?..

 

[MarcLocksCrustySock]

How much are they offering?..

None of us here even know.. do you?.. and how do you know?..

Its been reported as being $650k by some in the media and $950k by others..

If the Suns are only offering him $650k a year then thats what the suns value him at right..

So the Suns shoukd really only expect to get something back for him at what they value him at right?.. after all, this is using your very own logic correct?..

I just gave my opinion man don't need to get upset.

I prefer we value him off the contract you offered as it suits us better.

 

[Bearded Clam]

I just gave my opinion man don't need to get upset.

I prefer we value him off the contract you offered as it suits us better.

Not upset here at all mate..

Its you thats been working yourself up and getting all twisted in knots in this thread in the last week or so.

I simply asked you to back your comments up with some verifiable links..

Do you believe thats unreasonable?

 

[Cleric]

Issue being for the Suns is that we have possibly 3 academy players that are trending to be draftable in 2023 with 1 looking like a top 10 pick, so a future first really does nothing for us.

Adelaide arnt dicks. They want Rankine and they have pick 5 which they will part with for him. I think the issue will only come if the Suns try and beat their chest demanding two firsts.

 

[LoBu]

If he did that, he wouldn't be paid.

Contract requires players to train/play/etc.

It's illegal to force a person to move for work if doing so imposes unreasonable hardship on employees, such as being away from family - unless they sign a contract to do so which is what players do when they enter the draft.

The fact he has a contract offer from Adelaide means a deal must be done so the AFL doesn't end up in the industrial relations court.

Sending someone to the PSD only works if there are other clubs with picks from that same state in front, in this case if Port had finished below Adelaide.

In the meantime, the AFL is providing 3 academy players to Gold Coast next year for free (one a possible top ten which is good news for GC) as compensation for losing talent back to their home states. They also get Darwin talent such as Jeffrey who would probably have been a first round pick. There will be a lot more out of that pot in future.

 

[Cleric]

It's illegal to force a person to move for work if doing so imposes unreasonable hardship on employees, such as being away from family - unless they sign a contract to do so which is what players do when they enter the draft.

The fact he has a contract offer from Adelaide means a deal must be done so the AFL doesn't end up in the industrial relations court.

Sending someone to the PSD only works if there are other clubs with picks from that same state in front, in this case if Port had finished below Adelaide.

In the meantime, the AFL is providing 3 academy players to Gold Coast next year for free (one a possible top ten which is good news for GC) as compensation for losing talent back to their home states. They also get Darwin talent such as Jeffrey who would probably have been a first round pick. There will be a lot more out of that pot in future.

He just gets a letter from his Dr saying his mental health will be damaged if he can't get home to Adelaide. Worked for Bailey Smith, and the AFL didn't have an issue with it.

 

[MarcLocksCrustySock]

Not upset here at all mate..

Its you thats been working yourself up and getting all twisted in knots in this thread in the last week or so.

I simply asked you to back your comments up with some verifiable links..

Do you believe thats unreasonable?

Why do I need to back an opinion with facts? Am I not allowed to just have the opinion?

What an odd demand.

Perfectly happy here though my man don't mistake my fierce passion for any real mental anguish. It's just footy.

 

[Kenny Dee]

I've seen this argument a number of times. Yes Cameron went for Pick 12, but if you look at the key stats that a small forward would be judged on, Rankine clearly had a better season in the season they were traded (Cameron at the end of 2017 - remember that was in a losing GF team, compared to a team that didn't make finals).

Goal averages
Cameron - 1.2
Rankine - 1.6

Behind averages
Cameron - 1.0
Rankine - 1.2

Goal Assist
Cameron - 0.7
Rankine - 1.0

Score Involvements
Cameron - 5.3
Rankine - 6.2

So you say Cameron was traded for Pick 12 (which judging by Adelaide opinions on here was for unders), yet a player that has performed at a higher standard, shouldn't be traded for more??

Do you see the issue with that logic?

Didn't Charlie Cameron just kick 5 in a preliminary final that year and was contracted? Fwiw I thought 12 was overs and crows were going to get 18 (or there abouts) for him.

 

[LoBu]

He just gets a letter from his Dr saying his mental health will be damaged if he can't get home to Adelaide. Worked for Bailey Smith, and the AFL didn't have an issue with it.

Exactly, but he doesn't need to prove anything, he can just say it at this point.

 

[My_Username]

Have you got a link to a current player contract to prove that this is actually the case?

And do you have any examples of this being tested in a court of law?..

Not specifically, but just about every contract that gets written involves obligations by both parties.

What do you think the obligations for a player earning the best part of a million per year would be?

 

[My_Username]

It's illegal to force a person to move for work if doing so imposes unreasonable hardship on employees, such as being away from family - unless they sign a contract to do so which is what players do when they enter the draft.

The fact he has a contract offer from Adelaide means a deal must be done so the AFL doesn't end up in the industrial relations court.

Sending someone to the PSD only works if there are other clubs with picks from that same state in front, in this case if Port had finished below Adelaide.

In the meantime, the AFL is providing 3 academy players to Gold Coast next year for free (one a possible top ten which is good news for GC) as compensation for losing talent back to their home states. They also get Darwin talent such as Jeffrey who would probably have been a first round pick. There will be a lot more out of that pot in future.

"unless they sign a contract to do so which is what players do when they enter the draft."

the draft....you mean, like the PSD (Pre Season Draft)?

Entering the PSD would involve that obligation.

 

[LoBu]

"unless they sign a contract to do so which is what players do when they enter the draft."

the draft....you mean, like the PSD (Pre Season Draft)?

Entering the PSD would involve that obligation.

No, it clearly states when you enter the national draft that you must be willing to move to any state. This hasn't been tested yet, but is shady.

However, once you are out of contract and another club offers a contract, there is no obligation to move to another state, say WA, to play footy.

 

[arsene wenger1]

Issue being for the Suns is that we have possibly 3 academy players that are trending to be draftable in 2023 with 1 looking like a top 10 pick, so a future first really does nothing for us.

Top 20 academy players can be taken by any club as per the new rules. Or does this not apply to to GC/GWS?

 

[arsene wenger1]

Wont Adelaide be needing next years pick as currency when looking at JHF?

If there’s any hope of him coming home I guess they would, but I’m personally not expecting that to happen

 

[My_Username]

If there’s any hope of him coming home I guess they would, but I’m personally not expecting that to happen

Not really my concern, but I'd think you'd at least want to keep your options open there.

 

[Bearded Clam]

Why do I need to back an opinion with facts? Am I not allowed to just have the opinion?

What an odd demand.

Perfectly happy here though my man don't mistake my fierce passion for any real mental anguish. It's just footy.

Hang on..
You made a statement that “given how much he is being offered I think the Suns should get at least pick 5 for him…”

I simply asked you to tell us all exactly what it is he is being offered for you to come to this conclusion.

I mean… You’ve been on this thread for days now making wild claims, backing them up with absolutely nothing and telling crows supporters they are gonna be dissapointed at how much its gonna cost their club.. blah, blah, blah..

And now you are telling us this has all just been you making shit up in your head?..

Well… Thats a surprise.

 

[kreglze]

Top 20 academy players can be taken by any club as per the new rules. Or does this not apply to to GC/GWS?

Pretty sure that is just for Next Gen academies, the Northern ones across Syd, Bris, GWS and GC are unaffected by that.

 

[Bearded Clam]

Not specifically, but just about every contract that gets written involves obligations by both parties.

What do you think the obligations for a player earning the best part of a million per year would be?

I dont know the answers to these questions.. thats why I asked you.. because you seemed to be certain that its all in a players contract.. isnt that what you said?..

 

[Bearded Clam]

Wont Adelaide be needing next years pick as currency when looking at JHF?

JHF wont be coming home.. especially not this year.. I dont think North were ever gonna trade him this year even if the lad himself requested it.

And they certainly wont entertain it now that Clarko is there.. they will back Clarko to turn it all around and encourage the lad to stay long term.

And so they should. It would be totally irresponsible of them not to and its almost certain JHF will enjoy his time at north next year and stay.

 

[My_Username]

I dont know the answers to these questions.. thats why I asked you.. because you seemed to be certain that its all in a players contract.. isnt that what you said?..

Certain, no. Confident, yes.

Not sure who has the biggest/longest contracts at Adelaide, but if they decided to just not turn up any more, do you think your club would be required to pay them, at full value, for the rest of their contracts?

It's just common sense that there are requirements in place that a player needs to follow in order to earn his considerable paycheck.


Indeed, one that comes to mind is that a number of players have taken breaks for various reasons (death in the family, travelling home for a few days, etc.) and when announced, there is usually a comment about how they're doing it with the club's permission. Why do you think they needed that permission if they weren't required to attend their 'workplace' regularly?