Traded Luke Jackson [Traded with #44 and #67 to Fremantle for #13, F1 and F2]

[theunknown23]

You must be new around these parts…

Or maybe because you’re a freo supporter you see Jackson as with so much less to.

So let’s say it’s Caleb Serong end of next year and he’s out of contract. Your happy with 2 late 1st round picks?

 

[Tony_Clifton]

Or maybe because you’re a freo supporter you see Jackson as with so much less to.

So let’s say it’s Caleb Serong end of next year and he’s out of contract. Your happy with 2 late 1st round picks?

Yes but not as to much so less.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Or maybe because you’re a freo supporter you see Jackson as with so much less to.

So let’s say it’s Caleb Serong end of next year and he’s out of contract. Your happy with 2 late 1st round picks?

Just take a quick trip back in time to see. Cerra was worth the world just 12 months ago despite being out of contract.

 

[Cobbler]

Or maybe because you’re a freo supporter you see Jackson as with so much less to.

So let’s say it’s Caleb Serong end of next year and he’s out of contract. Your happy with 2 late 1st round picks?

My comment was in response to you saying not much difference between contracted and not contracted if they both want out.

It’s literally a massive difference.

The shift in power is huge and although we’d all like to think teams are fair it’s not the case.

Put it this way. Do you think Melbourne accept 2 low firsts if Jackson had a year to run? Of course they don’t and we’d be stupid to only offer that.

My thoughts of worth are irrelevant and you missed the point of my first reply.

 

[Boak10]

Who says no?….

GET
Freo: Luke Jackson

9

Luke Jackson

Age

23

Ht

199cm

Wt

102kg

Pos.

F/R

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.3

2star

K

3.3

1star

HB

5.0

4star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

3star

G

0.3

3star

D

8.3

2star

K

3.3

1star

HB

5.0

3star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

2star

G

0.3

3star

D

8.3

3star

K

3.3

2star

HB

5.0

4star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

3star

G

0.3

3star

,27
Port: JHF, 41
Melbourne: F1 (Freo), F1 (Port), Grundy
North: 8,13,F2 (From Freo, tied to NM)
Collingwood: 33, Bonner

GIVE
Freo: F1, 13, F2 (tied to NM)
Port: F1, 8, 33, Bonner
Melbourne: Luke Jackson

9

Luke Jackson

Age

23

Ht

199cm

Wt

102kg

Pos.

F/R

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.3

2star

K

3.3

1star

HB

5.0

4star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

3star

G

0.3

3star

D

8.3

2star

K

3.3

1star

HB

5.0

3star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

2star

G

0.3

3star

D

8.3

3star

K

3.3

2star

HB

5.0

4star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

3star

G

0.3

3star

, 27
North: JHF
Collingwood: Grundy, 41

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Who says no?….

GET
Freo: Luke Jackson,27
Port: JHF, 41
Melbourne: F1 (Freo), F1 (Port), Grundy
North: 8,13,F2 (From Freo, tied to NM)
Collingwood: 33, Bonner

GIVE
Freo: F1, 13, F2 (tied to NM)
Port: F1, 8, 33, Bonner
Melbourne: Luke Jackson, 27
North: JHF
Collingwood: Grundy, 41

Hopefully Freo, definitely Collingwood if the top 25 pick is too be believed

 

[theunknown23]

My comment was in response to you saying not much difference between contracted and not contracted if they both want out.

It’s literally a massive difference.

The shift in power is huge and although we’d all like to think teams are fair it’s not the case.

Put it this way. Do you think Melbourne accept 2 low firsts if Jackson had a year to run? Of course they don’t and we’d be stupid to only offer that.

My thoughts of worth are irrelevant and you missed the point of my first reply.

It’s really not a massive difference anymore contracted or not. The players have the power to pick where they want to go wether they are contracted or not. Sure clubs can hold out and not trade them but it doesn’t do them any justice.

For what it’s worth my post is less about what Jackson will be traded for, and more about what North are asking for a kid who clearly wants out.

North have said even if they were offered pick 2, they’d want more. Which is fine is principal really but a pick 2 for a pick 1 who clearly wants out isn’t that bad of a deal.

Then you look at Jackson, an offer of pick 13 and a future first. Apparently Melbourne are holding out because they want a top 10 pick instead of 13. Freo don’t have a top 10 pick, so they should just take the 13 and future 1st. Freo are getting a good deal for a former pick 3, and Melbourne are still getting some return on there investment that they took the risk with knowing he wanted to go home.

 

[Cobbler]

It’s really not a massive difference anymore contracted or not. The players have the power to pick where they want to go wether they are contracted or not. Sure clubs can hold out and not trade them but it doesn’t do them any justice.

For what it’s worth my post is less about what Jackson will be traded for, and more about what North are asking for a kid who clearly wants out.

North have said even if they were offered pick 2, they’d want more. Which is fine is principal really but a pick 2 for a pick 1 who clearly wants out isn’t that bad of a deal.

Then you look at Jackson, an offer of pick 13 and a future first. Apparently Melbourne are holding out because they want a top 10 pick instead of 13. Freo don’t have a top 10 pick, so they should just take the 13 and future 1st. Freo are getting a good deal for a former pick 3, and Melbourne are still getting some return on there investment that they took the risk with knowing he wanted to go home.

You kind of contradicted yourself, answered your own question then provided balanced view all in one response. Impressive!

I also think North should just take whatever, but they’re well within their rights to demand overs. It sets a precedent for them as a club and sadly for all kids that get picked up.

As an industry we need to avoid players doing 1 year and them just leaving.

I’d go so far as to say the 2 years is mandatory, should be 3 and any players that can’t fulfil that can renter the draft after a 1 or 2 year suspension. Harsh, but so is a kid leaving the worst side in the comp after 1 year.

 

[Dockeroo]

You kind of contradicted yourself, answered your own question then provided balanced view all in one response. Impressive!

I also think North should just take whatever, but they’re well within their rights to demand overs. It sets a precedent for them as a club and sadly for all kids that get picked up.

As an industry we need to avoid players doing 1 year and them just leaving.

I’d go so far as to say the 2 years is mandatory, should be 3 and any players that can’t fulfil that can renter the draft after a 1 or 2 year suspension. Harsh, but so is a kid leaving the worst side in the comp after 1 year.

I’d agree with this. Would need to be exceptional circumstances to deviate from it too, not just “I’m homesick”

 

[rabidcrow]

Where have you read this?

https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/rumour-swirling-afl-rising-star-offered-105m-by-rival-club/news-story/34b471badb51d1ce4df659b79aefd38a

How minor details in rival deals can unlock the two major trades of the AFL exchange period

Revealed: The under the radar trades set to unlock blockbuster deals for $1.9m duo

www.foxsports.com.au

Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[tonygeeks]

Desperation is probably more appropriate

You don’t have any of those old Freo’s trade/GF week jokes lying around that we could use after a bit of a polish up do you ?

 

[eastfreo75]

Or maybe because you’re a freo supporter you see Jackson as with so much less to.

So let’s say it’s Caleb Serong end of next year and he’s out of contract. Your happy with 2 late 1st round picks?

We weren’t happy with the Logue deal or the Langdon deal but when uncontracted you lose hand.

The reality is Jackson is out of contract and pick 13 and F1 isn’t nothing.

Melbourne doesn’t have hand.

How many trades have two first round picks with nothing coming back?

 

[Joao]

https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/rumour-swirling-afl-rising-star-offered-105m-by-rival-club/news-story/34b471badb51d1ce4df659b79aefd38a

How minor details in rival deals can unlock the two major trades of the AFL exchange period

Revealed: The under the radar trades set to unlock blockbuster deals for $1.9m duo

www.foxsports.com.au

Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

The "source" of that figure is Peter Sumich. It couldn't be less reliable unless Snuffaluphagus was responsible.

 

[Eagletime]

How on Earth are West Coast going to end up with ports F1???


North turned down 8 and F1 for JHF yet you think they'll end up only taking 2? Ports F1 will have to be at north

Port need to get serious and give up some players. Bergman to North and then traDe Bonner and Hayes for picks and that goes to North

Pick 2 + Bergman + Future pick for JHF

 

[Eagletime]

Who says no?….

GET
Freo: Luke Jackson,27
Port: JHF, 41
Melbourne: F1 (Freo), F1 (Port), Grundy
North: 8,13,F2 (From Freo, tied to NM)
Collingwood: 33, Bonner

GIVE
Freo: F1, 13, F2 (tied to NM)
Port: F1, 8, 33, Bonner
Melbourne: Luke Jackson, 27
North: JHF
Collingwood: Grundy, 41

Every livin entity that’s doesn’t support Port says no to that

Even my plant on my kitchen table is nodding no

 

[tonygeeks]

Just take a quick trip back in time to see. Cerra was worth the world just 12 months ago despite being out of contract.

While you’re there you may as well swing by and watch you guys screwing us with an out of contract Ed Langdon

 

[theGav56]

It’s really not a massive difference anymore contracted or not. The players have the power to pick where they want to go wether they are contracted or not. Sure clubs can hold out and not trade them but it doesn’t do them any justice.

For what it’s worth my post is less about what Jackson will be traded for, and more about what North are asking for a kid who clearly wants out.

North have said even if they were offered pick 2, they’d want more. Which is fine is principal really but a pick 2 for a pick 1 who clearly wants out isn’t that bad of a deal.

Then you look at Jackson, an offer of pick 13 and a future first. Apparently Melbourne are holding out because they want a top 10 pick instead of 13. Freo don’t have a top 10 pick, so they should just take the 13 and future 1st. Freo are getting a good deal for a former pick 3, and Melbourne are still getting some return on there investment that they took the risk with knowing he wanted to go home.

This trade period it is likely the Jackson deal is done for around Fremantle's offer.

Last year that offer would not have been considered and Melbourne's current asking price would have been probably more than reasonable in the unlikely event they considered a trade.

Not long ago Weller was traded for pick 2. Without that Fremantle does not release a contracted player. The pressure is on to pay a higher price.

Happens every year. If a contracted player is required by a club the trade price will be high. Lobb is in this situation.

Uncontracted players have other means of getting to another club, which puts the pressure on to accept a trade offer. The clock is ticking because by the end of trade week the club has lost all negotiating power. The pressure is on to accept a lower price. Jackson is in this situation.

Contracted players don't have other means to get to another club and need to be released from their contracts. There is a cost attached.

It's not complicated.

 

[WilloTree]

https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/rumour-swirling-afl-rising-star-offered-105m-by-rival-club/news-story/34b471badb51d1ce4df659b79aefd38a

How minor details in rival deals can unlock the two major trades of the AFL exchange period

Revealed: The under the radar trades set to unlock blockbuster deals for $1.9m duo

www.foxsports.com.au

Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I am extremely impressed!!!

You read an article on Monday, that didn't come out until Wednesday.

That's some quantum shit right there.

 

[Ge3ks]

 

[Brian McGee]

Port need to get serious and give up some players. Bergman to North and then traDe Bonner and Hayes for picks and that goes to North

Pick 2 + Bergman + Future pick for JHF

This just isn’t realistic mate.

 

[Ge3ks]

This Port trade talk is insidious.

 

[eastfreo75]

Just take a quick trip back in time to see. Cerra was worth the world just 12 months ago despite being out of contract.

Oh dear.

Certainly went for pick 6 and F3. Let’s say it’s pick 5.

13 and F1 is about pick 4.

Pick 4 for Jackson isn’t lowballing.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Oh dear.

Certainly went for pick 6 and F3. Let’s say it’s pick 5.

13 and F1 is about pick 4.

Pick 4 for Jackson isn’t lowballing.

So that means we get access to the 4th best player in the draft?

 

[Scythe94]

Repeat after me.

stopusingpointsasarealistic indicatoroftradevalue,theyaremeaninglessinthatcontextandtheirsolepurposeistorationaliseacademyandfatherson bidding

 

[s_wd6]

Repeat after me.

stopusingpointsasarealistic indicatoroftradevalue,theyaremeaninglessinthatcontextandtheirsolepurposeistorationaliseacademyandfatherson bidding

Nah