Traded Josh Dunkley - [Traded with F3 (Melb), F3 to Brisbane for #21, F1, F2, F4 (Geel)]

[Lore]

If you don't have the self-discipline not to attack other posters and derail the thread with crap every other time you post, thread bans will be applied.

Mods are not here to babysit.

Reporting bad posts instead of replying to them would also be extremely helpful if you wish to continue posting here.

 

[mpal6]

Ah yes you’re right, the Lions have in no way played a part in offering him $4.5m over 6 years to fill a position they are desperately lacking. Pickers and Dunks just went to the GABBA and presented Brissy with the terms of the contract and they were bound by it!

Again, if he's out shopping himself for the best deal - we will definitely get in the queue to offer whatever is our best possible offer. He fills a need for us in the midfield and we are going to bid in the same way as the rest of the clubs. We didn't sneak around behind the scenes and "entice" a contracted Dunkley to come out and nominate us. It was pretty clear he was openly considering his options with clubs other than Dogs. He has done it before too 2 years ago.

He's your best n fairest after all, maybe pay him what he wants and you keep him. Job done and none of the other clubs matter anymore.

 

[mpal6]

F you had offered pick 15 & F1, the trade would have been completed.

You wanted other picks from us too. We need picks for other trades,so we rejected your trade request as completely unreasonable. It was deliberately designed to be rejected as you asked us for a future third rounder, which isn’t required for points this year. How is our future third required for the Lions?

As you saw later we worked a future pick from GWS back into Tom Berry trade to get the picks for this year back from Gold Coast. Gold Coast would be always after future picks as they have 2-3 academy kids next year and need the points. And they are our best candidate to get points this year considering the stack of second/third rounders they had at the start.

 

[Mofra]

Sounds like we've shifted from picks and started talking to player managers with Brisbane clients.
Not sure how successful that will be if we're starting so late in the piece.

 

[Nathan Barley]

F you had offered pick 15 & F1, the trade would have been completed.

You wanted other picks from us too. We need picks for other trades,so we rejected your trade request as completely unreasonable. It was deliberately designed to be rejected as you asked us for a future third rounder, which isn’t required for points this year. How is our future third required for the Lions?

Maybe the article like 90% of trade articles was wrong.... maybe

 

[TiAn_]

Sounds like we've shifted from picks and started talking to player managers with Brisbane clients.
Not sure how successful that will be if we're starting so late in the piece.

Always tough unless there's been some discourse during the year. But the Dogs are obliged to do it given the trade is dragging out.

 

[Mofra]

Always tough unless there's been some discourse during the year. But the Dogs are obliged to do it given the trade is dragging out.

I'm sure there would have been, however it sounds like it's ramped up given the first Brisbane offer then trading out of pick 15.
Interesting whispers...

 

[LittleG]

Dunkley got offered a contract by us for a correct valuation to us. It was long term and wasn’t for base salary…. IF we were paying him significantly below market, there would have been St Kilda, Bombers, Hawks and North; all interested in getting Dunkley. They all decided to not pursue him….

Port Adelaide offered the same contract as us…. The Lions decided that they wanted to pay him over $100k more per year, knowing that they would also have to trade for him….
Then it’s time to pay up.

Taranto and many others previously have set the market.

It is your choice to target Dunkley. IF you didn’t chase him with more money, he would have signed with us. We would rather keep him at his correct valuation and have refused to overpay.

It’s like going to a shop and begging poor. Either pay up the market rate OR don’t go shopping in the first place.

 

[iameviljez]

Neither camp have come out publicly with anything to say that negotiations are as bad as what's being reported. None of the reports have contained any direct quotes, just anonymous "sources", which is just garbage journalism. Until such time that either camp comes out and says there is an issue, it's just puff pieces by journos trying to create fizz in trade week.

So? Nobody EVER comes out during trade week and publicly slanders the other side - and to do so would be a one-way ticket to unemploymentsville for unprofessionalism. The negotiators know they'll have to face each other across the table year after year; public slander is a very silly idea.

Waiting for a named source is just an expectation that won't get fulfilled.

 

[Mofra]

So? Nobody EVER comes out during trade week and publicly slanders the other side - and to do so would be a one-way ticket to unemploymentsville for unprofessionalism. The negotiators know they'll have to face each other across the table year after year; public slander is a very silly idea.

Waiting for a named source is just an expectation that won't get fulfilled.

Correct - although with anything that comes from an SEN journo regarding a client of Pickering (also on SEN) and it's not hard to work out the source.

 

[iameviljez]

Correct - although with anything that comes from an SEN journo regarding a client of Pickering (also on SEN) and it's not hard to work out the source.

In this case, Pickering wouldn't be in on the discussions so far as I'm aware. I'm pretty sure these chats are usually the two clubs, and then they'll both converse with Pickering. So he would have heard it from a Dogs negotiator.

 

[Milanista28]

It's over, the skipper goes bang!!!

 

[Golden_6]

It's over, the skipper goes bang!!!

Sign me up!

 

[Bulldogs85]

It's over, the skipper goes bang!!!

If that is true that’s actually not a bad offer

 

[Foxman98]

It's over, the skipper goes bang!!!

Makes deathriding Essendon even better

 

[Nathan Barley]

If that is true that’s actually not a bad offer

Why would you even entertain it being true?

Bulldogs fans need to get a grip

 

[Northernsoul74]

F1 and 21 for Dunkley, 30 and 39 is apparently Brisbanes current offer. Very poor again from Brisbane.

 

[mpal6]

Finally !

Good time for us to head off and invite bomber fans over so you can haggle with them now.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Sounds like we've shifted from picks and started talking to player managers with Brisbane clients.
Not sure how successful that will be if we're starting so late in the piece.

this is kind of like buying a house and then not checking your finance is approved rofl.

 

[Nathan Barley]

I said IF it’s true

I hear North want to replace JHF and will offer Dunk $2mil a year and trade you guys pick 1, F1 and LDU

 

[mpal6]

Sounds like we've shifted from picks and started talking to player managers with Brisbane clients.
Not sure how successful that will be if we're starting so late in the piece.

May be your plan has always been to keep Dunkley just like last time.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

If that is true that’s actually not a bad offer

ESSENDON EASIY TOO DEAL WITH!

 

[Leuy LongerCombo]

F you had offered pick 15 & F1, the trade would have been completed.

You wanted other picks from us too. We need picks for other trades,so we rejected your trade request as completely unreasonable. It was deliberately designed to be rejected as you asked us for a future third rounder, which isn’t required for points this year. How is our future third required for the Lions?

It makes sense for us to try and obtain some late future pick as were limited by list spots. Were not going to be able to carry 3000+ points into this draft with only 5 list spots.

With your interest in our F1 means we won’t be able to trade any other futures, without obtain additional matching. We match Ashcrofts bid, trade any additional futures into this draft to minimize the deficit we potentially face matching Fletcher.

Could allow us to potential trade back into the draft of the Fletcher bid comes later than expected too. Meaning we’re not required to fill 3 list spots in a draft where others are actively move out of late.

 

[iameviljez]

If that is true that’s actually not a bad offer

Admittedly, given everything Essendon has gone through in the last two months, I would just about rather sign up for Port Melbourne.

 

[Northernsoul74]

It makes sense for us to try and obtain some late future pick as were limited by list spots. Were not going to be able to carry 3000+ points into this draft with only 5 list spots.

With your interest in our F1 means we won’t be able to trade any other futures, without obtain additional matching. We match Ashcrofts bid, trade any additional futures into this draft to minimize the deficit we potentially face matching Fletcher.

Could allow us to potential trade back into the draft of the Fletcher bid comes later than expected too. Meaning we’re not required to fill 3 list spots in a draft where others are actively move out of late.

We all get your situation. It’s not the Bulldogs job to trade Dunkley for unders to help you get points though. Your latest offer is worse than the one already rejected.

 

[chef]

We all get your situation. It’s not the Bulldogs job to trade Dunkley for unders to help you get points though. Your latest offer is worse than the one already rejected.

Yep. You can't eat your cake and have it too and it's up to Brisbane to be creative and come up with a solution we are satisfied with.

They'll have to move on a player they want to keep to get some currency.