yeah our first rounder and a first rounder from a few years ago = 2nd and 3rd rounders
wait what?
John Meesen was a 1st rounder once, so was Kane Pettifer -
"a few years ago" - 2001 ????
-
LIVE: Sydney v Brisbane Lions - 2:30PM AEST Sat
Squiggle tips Lions at 61% chance -- What's your tip? -- Ticketing Buy, Sell -- Teams on Thurs »
-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Grand Final
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Round PF Winner: Still Me
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Knights on the move?
- Thread starter bluesforever
- Start date
- Tagged users None
John Meesen was a 1st rounder once, so was Kane Pettifer -
"a few years ago" - 2001 ????
Probably just a second rounder.
Two players Radar has covered comfortably, my point stands. 13 + Reilly is worth far, far more than you give it credit for.
Skeptical about this to say the least. A three-way trade that just happens to see us landing the player the board has been salivating over since forever, at the expense of a merely serviceable midfielder/half-back and our first pick in a weak draft. Am I under/overselling someone or do we seem like really big winners out of this, with Carlton getting done over? Rumour broken by an Adelaide supporter who appears to have signed up specifically to talk about this rumour too. If it's false he has nothing to lose. Almost certainly BS.
- If your Carlton would you take a first rounder (seeing as you no longer have one) and a very skilled by foot player, for a headcase, though talented player, who you don't want infecting your youth? 60% yes, you get a great ball user to compliment the McLean addition as well as give someone other than Judd the abiltiy to deliver into the 50 (who to would remain a mystery).
- If you're the Dogs do you take a headcase FF coleman medalist who has 2-3 good years left for a player who hasn't found his position in your system? 70% yes, they get a target deep in the 50 to compliment Hall's CHF style. Though $ would be a problem, they have plenty of cap room. They only have 2 real years left at a shot before Aker, Johno etc go and they rebuild again.
- If you're the Crows do you trade away your first pick and a skilled player, though he hasn't really got a position in your team? 95% Yes, you geta player with toe, to coompliment the aging McLeod off HB, whilest not getting in the way on MacKay on the wing. Griffen, unlike Reilly, can play HBF Well.
.6*.7*.95 could be the equation.... 40% chance? Maybe.
- If you're the Dogs do you take a headcase FF coleman medalist who has 2-3 good years left for a player who hasn't found his position in your system? 70% yes, they get a target deep in the 50 to compliment Hall's CHF style. Though $ would be a problem, they have plenty of cap room. They only have 2 real years left at a shot before Aker, Johno etc go and they rebuild again.
- If you're the Crows do you trade away your first pick and a skilled player, though he hasn't really got a position in your team? 95% Yes, you geta player with toe, to coompliment the aging McLeod off HB, whilest not getting in the way on MacKay on the wing. Griffen, unlike Reilly, can play HBF Well.
.6*.7*.95 could be the equation.... 40% chance? Maybe.
According to hodra's postings on the Bulldogs board, getting Fevola means Hall moves out of the picture for them. So they would be getting Fevola instead of Hall (not both). I think this rumour will long have been forgotten by the time trade week ends and nothing of the sort eventuates.
And thats why this idea is total bullshit!
WB and Hall have agreed to deal in principle. They went after him and have put a lot of work to get to the point that they are at now. WB will not turn their back on Hall for Fev and neither should they, especially if they have to give up Griffen to get him.
Look at it this way, would you rather both Hall and Griffen in your team or just Fevola for pretty much the same amount of money per year.
You get 2 good players instead of one. I think its a no brainer from Doggies' perspective.
I very much doubt any of this is going to happen, but I do think from the Bulldogs point of view that Fevola is a vastly different proposition than Hall. Hall has been playing pretty average footy for the last two years and can't control himself on the field, but has seemed worth the risk for Footscray as they desperately need a forward and this was the only option and so they have agreed in principle with him. Fevola though if he is suddenly available is a genuine matchwinner at the peak of his powers with a few years to go, so I could well imagine them changing their mind and going after the Fev in preference, especially if they are resigned to loosing Griffen anyway. Make no mistake, the current Bulldogs side with Fev up forward is a genuine flag threat next year, with Hall... I doubt it.
Hodgy you seem to be an intelligent man. The logic you have used is what the whole trade will be based on. The Bulldogs know that there flag window is only going to be ajar for 2 years tops.
They would have made the GF (and possibly won 1 at least) in the past 2 years had they had a quality forward the calibre of Fevola.
None of this was on the cards until after the fall out from Fevola's actions at the Brownlow...Things change very quickly in Footy Clubs and it is a business now as we all know.
Fevola has upset everyone at Carlton, and would have been sacked already had the Bulldogs not contacted them to instigate a Trade.
Griffen wants to return to SA for Family reasons, so the Bulldogs can let him go as they will be getting what they so deseperately need in return...a power forward.
The Bulldogs have many players similiar to Griffen, but definatelynot an out and out goalkicker.
This deal is definately on the table, and all parties are aware.....
Whether Lake stays or goes at the Dogs would have to be a massive factor as well.
If he stays, I'd imagine Fev isn't on the cards for them; if he goes, then it becomes a lot more feasible.
If he stays, I'd imagine Fev isn't on the cards for them; if he goes, then it becomes a lot more feasible.
Macca it is on the table...I do have a very very good source on this one. I dont see how some posters on here think it is so unbelievable....time will tell I guess, but I expect a crate of scotch from all the doubters on here if the details can all be worked through by the end of next week!
Fevola is contracted for the next two years @ 700k a year. If Carlton sacked him they would still need to pay him his 1.4m. Do you really think they would piss 1.4m down the drain just to make a point?
Apart from that, great story. We'll see what happens in the real world soon enough.
You need to think about the reputation of the club a bit here. WB have established a reputation as a good, honest, family type club. If they walk away from their promise to Hall, there wouldn't be a player that would want to sign with them down the track. Its a similar knock that Collingwood got with Nick Stevens saga. Clubs and bigger name players are still reluctant to deal with Collingwood come trade time.
There is a LOT more to consider here than simply saying sorry to Hall and welcome to Fev.
For our sake, I hope the rumor is true because we walk away like bandits here!
If Lake leaves the Dogs, Carlton trade Fev to them and wear part of his salary (say $200k per annum), it'd make it bearable.
Plus, I'd be very surprised if there wasn't a clause in Fevola's contract about behavioural issues being grounds to terminate his contract?
Hall is borderline washed up - if I was the doggies I'd move heaven & earth or even Griffen
So true. Hall at the bulldogs is not scary at all.
Fevola at the bullies makes you sit up and take a bit more notice.
Except the Doggies would be robbing Peter to pay Paul. Lake IS their entire backline. He is their one tall defender that is a rock in that defence. You take him away from that team and they leak more goals than a 100 year old tin shed.
The point is that you take Lake and Griffen out of the Doggies line up and add Fev and in reality you are no closer to the flag than you were the last 2 years. In fact, could easily go backwards.
They wont need to pay him out. There were clauses put in his contract re behaviour that will get them out of that.They werent silly enough to give him a 2 year unconditional contact.
I'd imagine that even if they had those behavioural clauses, they'd still need a pretty good lawyer to enforce them.
The Dogs don't want to lose Lake, but the chat is that they're facing a real uphill battle to keep him. Just out of left field; Hall as a defender?
If they kept Lake, got Hall and Fev, I'd almost bet the farm on a flag for them next year. Griff is important to them, but nowhere near as important as Lake or Hall/Fev.
knights aint goin anywhere and there are almost 400 posts in this thread
Look on the bright side - the thought of him being traded has generated such a massive response; he's gone from whipping boy to highly valued.
Similar threads
