Luke Ball "Officially" Walks..

[HFF]

he might not even get picked up. i hope he does. this year he looked like a run down olf man. i still think he is carrying op

Don't be stupid.

Collingwood are guaranteed to take him at pick 30 if he's there, particularly as they were keen to trade for him.

 

[Gilbo19]

so to summarize the feeling of stkilda posters....................ball is a mercenary hack with no future and peake is a superstar.

For your sake I hope this was a pathetic attempt at a troll..

To summarise -
Luke Ball is a good player who could greatly improve Collingwood's chances by bringing an elite ability in an area that they struggle with (grunt work)
He is a mercenary and should be treated accordingly, Judd has to cop these claims so why shouldn't Ball, at least Judd ensured West Coast get fair compensation.

Peake is a depth player, who I don't want to see get a game next year.

 

[smiddaz123]

he might not even get picked up. i hope he does. this year he looked like a run down old man. i still think he is carrying op

So Collingwood were happy to trade Pick 30 + a player for Ball, but if given the chance to use just pick 30 on him, we may pass?

If he's there, we'll take him.

 

[mdc]

Pendles wants out, pick 48 and raph is all you can get, would you rather take Raph and 48 or let Pendles walk out... I would have thought it's a pretty simple question...

Pendles is our best player at 22 years of age. Ball, by your admission, is your 21st or 22nd best player at 25 years of age.

Therefore, as you can see, it's a pretty stupid question.

A simple question would be whether we'd take pick 30 + Clarke for Fraser (vice captain, former no.1 pick, etc) rather than seeing him walk for nothing. In which case, the answer is yes.

 

[St DAC]

he might not even get picked up. i hope he does. this year he looked like a run down olf man. i still think he is carrying op

He'll get picked up. By Collingwood, if no-one else, just so they can maintain some credibility if for no other reason. But he'd improve their side IMO.

I wish him well at where ever he ends up. He gave us 8 years of top class effort, and was unable to play at the level he initially promised due to debilitating injuries. Hopefully he can play some good footy for his new club.

As for all the bickering about the non trade it's all just mindless posturing. A deal coudn't be reached by the clubs involved; not the first time, and won't be the last.

We'll miss Luke, but his playing spot will be covered adequately by a young bloke who wants the gig; Armitage, Jack Steven, Geary all come to mind.

 

[Hanis]

he might not even get picked up. i hope he does. this year he looked like a run down olf man. i still think he is carrying op

I'd would be suprised if he is still playing in 3 years time - if he is then he would have happily ripped 1.5 mill out of some clubs coffers for a couple of tackles per week and a few 30m up and unders

I think Luke realises that his time in the AFL is nearing an end and he has made the decision to get the most out of it financially - good luck to him - bad luck to the club that gets sucked in

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Are you sure?

I don't recall that.

I said he wasn't in our best 20, but I thought he and Raph Clarke were the last two players picked in our starting team....

Whatever. Best 22, best 20, makes very little difference to the argument. Pick 30 and a young talent is more than adequate compensation for a player with chronic injury - a player you agree is only barely in your starting lineup.

Scott Pendlebury is in Collingwoods best 3 - and injury free - and younger than Ball - so making up random scenarios about trading him for a third round pick and Raph Clarke is simply not worthy of a response.

 

[damochandler]

if collingwood can get something out of him. good luck too him and them. i hope can stay fit. because tbh he looks like he is struggling with op

 

[Gilbo19]

Pendles is our best player at 22 years of age. Ball, by your admission, is your 21st or 22nd best player at 25 years of age.

Therefore, as you can see, it's a pretty stupid question.

A simple question would be whether we'd take pick 30 + Clarke for Fraser (vice captain, former no.1 pick, etc) rather than seeing him walk for nothing. In which case, the answer is yes.

OMG, it has nothing to do with the comparisons between the two players, but collingwood supporters have been claiming something is better than nothing.

So prove it -
Pendlebury wants out, if Collingwood wont trade him to St Kilda he will go into the PSD, for some reason all St Kilda are willing to offer is pick 48 and Raph Clarke, I want to know, is somthing better than nothing? or would you rather see Pendles walk out for nothing.

Jeez, it's not hard, I have no idea why some people just don't have the cognitive functioning capabilities to comprehend these kinds of hypotheticals...

 

[mdc]

My cognitive functioning capabilities comprehend that you're pulling ludicrous scenarios out of thin air to prop up a piss-weak argument.

 

[Gilbo19]

Whatever. Best 22, best 20, makes very little difference to the argument. Pick 30 and a young talent is more than adequate compensation for a player with chronic injury - a player you agree is only barely in your starting lineup.

Scott Pendlebury is in Collingwoods best 3 - and injury free - and younger than Ball - so making up random scenarios about trading him for a third round pick and Raph Clarke is simply not worthy of a response.

Well there actually is a difference between not being in the best 22 and not being in the best 22, for starters you actually get on the field...

Put shortly this is a no, you are backing away from your previous comment as there are situations where it is more beneficial for your club to take nothing rather than something worthless.

Another Collingwood supporter who can't comprehend a simple question...

 

[AFaiL]

Good luck to him, but I'm not about to yell and scream and cry that he's gone.

Fan favourite, but seriously lacking the body and ability these days. 500k a year, no thanks.

Armo, that spot is yours. Any kick of 25m is an imporvement,. Hitting targets optional

 

[mattys123]

If you don't consider the likes of Jarryn Geary, Jack Steven, Ben McEvoy and Robert Eddy to be good young depth players then you either don't know who they are or know SFA about footy.

Interesting how that list of "young depth" shrunk to 4 players very quickly.

 

[witsend]

He played his heart out, but was it for the club or was it for himself?
We didn't burden him with the captaincy, we gave him the honour of the captaincy.
What did he get from us? about 600k and the opportunity to play in a GF this year alone.
Put yourself in the same situation with Joel Selwood and tell me you'd trade him for pick 30 and Goldsack.

You paid him market value...he gave you everything he had and some.
I feel St Kilda Supporters are being pretty hard on Luke.
There is STILL debate on the Geelong Board about letting King and a great kid like Prismall go for nothing, but generally we understand that they had limited opportunity with us, which seemed to be Luke's problem, and that given we couldn't guarantee that if they played to the best of their ability they would be in our best 22, then the club would do all it could to facilitate a trade, even if it was to our disadvantage. Which we did.
Luke Ball didn't want to leave St Kilda...he wanted to play AFL footy and be respected.
The Selwood scenario is moot.
He is in our top 3-4 players and is perfectly happy at the Cats. Different scenario altogether.

 

[Hanis]

Jeez, it's not hard, I have no idea why some people just don't have the cognitive functioning capabilities to comprehend these kinds of hypotheticals...

You're dealing with Collingwood supporters remember

 

[HFF]

OMG, it has nothing to do with the comparisons between the two players, but collingwood supporters have been claiming something is better than nothing.

So prove it -
Pendlebury wants out, if Collingwood wont trade him to St Kilda he will go into the PSD, for some reason all St Kilda are willing to offer is pick 48 and Raph Clarke, I want to know, is somthing better than nothing? or would you rather see Pendles walk out for nothing.

Jeez, it's not hard, I have no idea why some people just don't have the cognitive functioning capabilities to comprehend these kinds of hypotheticals...

Your hypothetical is crap.

MDC is correct.

Pendles is virtually our best player.

Luke Ball is nowhere near the Saints' best.

Therefore a far better comparison would be someone like Josh Fraser who is a former #1 pick, VC, gave terrific service etc.

In which case, if all we got offered was pick 30 or pick 30+fringe player, I would do the deal for the pick alone really.

Something is ALWAYS better than nothing.

 

[Gilbo19]

My cognitive functioning capabilities comprehend that you're pulling ludicrous scenarios out of thin air to prop up a piss-weak argument.

My argument is piss weak is it?

I'm sure that a majority of people would believe that there are instances when it is better to let a player walk out then trade him for nothing...

The fact that you and the other bloke keep comparing Ball to Pendlebury is irrelevant, yet you can't realise this basic fact.

 

[ragtop]

OMG, it has nothing to do with the comparisons between the two players, but collingwood supporters have been claiming something is better than nothing.

So prove it -
Pendlebury wants out, if Collingwood wont trade him to St Kilda he will go into the PSD, for some reason all St Kilda are willing to offer is pick 48 and Raph Clarke, I want to know, is somthing better than nothing? or would you rather see Pendles walk out for nothing.

Jeez, it's not hard, I have no idea why some people just don't have the cognitive functioning capabilities to comprehend these kinds of hypotheticals...

your profile say's........... 'St Kilda...........with my ladies', finally you have acknowledged what nick and the boys are.

 

[AFaiL]

You paid him market value...he gave you everything he had and some.
I feel St Kilda Supporters are being pretty hard on Luke.
There is STILL debate on the Geelong Board about letting King and a great kid like Prismall go for nothing, but generally we understand that they had limited opportunity with us, which seemed to be Luke's problem, and that given we couldn't guarantee that if they played to the best of their ability they would be in our best 22, then the club would do all it could to facilitate a trade, even if it was to our disadvantage. Which we did.
Luke Ball didn't want to leave St Kilda...he wanted to play AFL footy and be respected.
The Selwood scenario is moot.
He is in our top 3-4 players and is perfectly happy at the Cats. Different scenario altogether.

He was respected and was given chances to play. But there are no free rides because you "play your heart out" - sometimes, you need to impant a game, for a whole game.

Goldsack and 30 is as good as nothing, so happy he went for that. We tried to keep him, he bailed. Such is life.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

We are not going to get suckered into your inane scenarios, Gilbo.

Pick 30 and Goldsack is something.

Your ridiculous scenario is nothing.

Did you not see the list of names of players drafted recently at around the 30 mark?

StKilda have blown the chance to draft the next Dayne Beams or Kurt Tippett as well as a quality young running defender. It might not hurt the Saints this year or the next but eventually this decision will catch up with them.

 

[Gilbo19]

Your hypothetical is crap.

MDC is correct.

Pendles is virtually our best player.

Luke Ball is nowhere near the Saints' best.

Therefore a far better comparison would be someone like Josh Fraser who is a former #1 pick, VC, gave terrific service etc.

In which case, if all we got offered was pick 30 or pick 30+fringe player, I would do the deal for the pick alone really.

Something is ALWAYS better than nothing.

LUKE BALL IS IRRELEVANT TO THIS HYPOTHETICAL!!

Scott Pendlebury wants out, he will not be playing for Collingwood ever again, he is only willing to go to one club, that club offers an absolutely insulting trade and is not willing to budge, do you take the steak knives or do you let him walk out?

You say that something is always better than nothing, by this logic you MUST accept the deal.

Pendlebury's playing abilities are not relevent as he will not be playing for Collingwood and the only club he is willing to accept a trade from offered nothing but steak knives...

So you're given a choice -
Do you want nothing or do you want Raph Clarke and pick 48?

Obviously you aren't capable of processing such a complex scenario so I will answer it for you. You would rather Pendles walk out for free. As you would be happy that your club took a stand and wouldn't be bullied. You would also turn your back on Pendlebury.

 

[Gilbo19]

your profile say's........... 'St Kilda...........with my ladies', finally you have acknowledged what nick and the boys are.

Despite the fact that Essendon don't have a playe ron their list fit to polish Roo's boots, I'll pay that

But if you ever find yourself in St Kilda on a Saturday night, I think you;ll understand what i'm referring to

 

[EOP26]

Think about it this way, your local team just lost the grand final and one of your best players, who you believe to be one of your good mates decides he wants to go to another club to get paid a bit of money, how would you feel?, would you be doing everything in your power to make sure that he got to where he wanted to go.

Nick Davies lied to all about staying with Collingwood, Played in a 2002 grand final and told the club he wanted to go to Syndey. Collingwood did the trade with Sydney. Syndey went on to win the 2005 flag.. We still got something for him .

Something is still better then nothing.

 

[Wokko]

OMG, it has nothing to do with the comparisons between the two players, but collingwood supporters have been claiming something is better than nothing.

So prove it -
Pendlebury wants out, if Collingwood wont trade him to St Kilda he will go into the PSD, for some reason all St Kilda are willing to offer is pick 48 and Raph Clarke, I want to know, is somthing better than nothing? or would you rather see Pendles walk out for nothing.

Jeez, it's not hard, I have no idea why some people just don't have the cognitive functioning capabilities to comprehend these kinds of hypotheticals...

Of course it has to do with comparisons. Is a fringe player worth a 2nd round pick and another fringe player, not the team's best player worth a spud + 3rd rounder.

So lets make the comparison a little bit more valid.

If Josh Fraser wanted out because Mick wasn't playing him now that Jolly and Wood are on board and he nominated St Kilda. St Kilda offered pick 31 (after losing another Grand Final) and Zac Dawson (fringe defender, potential). If it came down to 15 minutes to go and the Saints then say they'll trade up to pick 25 and still give Dawson then yes i'd take it. Also take the Pick 30 + Dawson (insert another spud if you think he's too good).

 

[Hanis]

Luke Ball didn't want to leave St Kilda...he wanted to play AFL footy and be respected.

Luke knows that there are younger players at St Kilda knocking the door down to take his place and there was absolutely no doubt that it would have happened at some stage next year .... he saw the writing on the wall however instead of taking up the challenge he walked .... throw in the fact that there are some clubs happy to throw him silly money it was a no brainer

It has nothing to do with being respected if it was he would have stayed