Traded Matthew Kennedy: To Dogs p/of 4-way trade: B. Smith (WB) & pick 45 to Geel / pick 38 to Carl / Macrae (WB) to StK / pick 17 & Kennedy (Carl) to

[Doggy]

I'd still take him over Macrae.

I wonder what it would take for Kennedy and Kemp. Probably more than we'd be willing to part with.

You're not getting Kennedy. Would be lucky to get Kemp

 

[Pencil case]

Pick 25 for Kennedy with a future 3rd going back

Gotta make the Eagles Owies for Pick 3 trade look slightly less shite for their fans.

lol

 

[Pencil case]

I'd still take him over Macrae.

I wonder what it would take for Kennedy and Kemp. Probably more than we'd be willing to part with.

Macrae would be worth more than Kennedy, so I don’t see why Saints can’t just go for Kennedy instead to be honest.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

Macrae would be worth more than Kennedy, so I don’t see why Saints can’t just go for Kennedy instead to be honest.

Back in the day sure, nowadays Macrae is playing half his games in the 2s or as sub and has a monumental contract hanging over his head.

Kennedy would be bang on par if not more valuable than 30 year old Macrae

 

[Falchoon]

Macrae would be worth more than Kennedy, so I don’t see why Saints can’t just go for Kennedy instead to be honest.

worth more in contract value, but less in trade value.

 

[Pencil case]

Back in the day sure, nowadays Macrae is playing half his games in the 2s or as sub and has a monumental contract hanging over his head.

Kennedy would be bang on par if not more valuable than 30 year old Macrae

Either way, at best it’d be a 3 way trade with Dogs essentially getting Kennedy, Saints Macrae, and Blues a pick in the 40s.

Personally that sounds terrible for the Dogs but if Darcy, Richards, Bont etc will be on 1mil+ after next year, I can see the logic as Kennedy will be on half Macrae’s salary.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

Either way, at best it’d be a 3 way trade with Dogs essentially getting Kennedy, Saints Macrae, and Blues a pick in the 40s.

Personally that sounds terrible for the Dogs but if Darcy, Richards, Bont etc will be on 1mil+ after next year, I can see the logic as Kennedy will be on half Macrae’s salary.

That is an awful deal for Carlton. Won't happen.

 

[Pencil case]

That is an awful deal for Carlton. Won't happen.

So Saints are the only winners in that trade? It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out. Glad I’m not a list manager.

 

[adammania9]

This is true but his stats also reflect that he's been the jack-of-all-trades and as a full-time mid they'd be higher/better.

Think you're correct about his place in the pecking order though

Is he going to get that opportunity before Treloar’s and Libba’s abilities drop below his? Richards was great in his first year as a midfielder, and Sanders is firming for a long-term future in the centre.

The Bulldogs aren’t trading for the 25 touch, highly skilled mid that Kennedy has never been, they’re trading for the same player he is at Carlton.

 

[Jacks Seething Rage]

Macrae would be worth more than Kennedy, so I don’t see why Saints can’t just go for Kennedy instead to be honest.

Why? Macrae has 250 games on the clock and is contracted for 3 years at higher dollars. The risk profile is much higher.

 

[Foxman98]

Why? Macrae has 250 games on the clock and is contracted for 3 years at higher dollars. The risk profile is much higher.

Macrae is also a 3 x AA what's Kennedy ever been other then a nice role player?

 

[Jeremias]

Macrae is also a 3 x AA what's Kennedy ever been other then a nice role player?

Macrae was AA in 2019, 2020 and 2021.

We’re now in 2024 and the earliest Macrae plays for his new club is 2025.

What he has been is completely irrelevant. What he will be is the only consideration.

 

[McIvor]

Great get for the Doggies if they can make it happen and a definite upgrade on McRae and more consistent than Smith.

Shrewd acquisition giving the Dogs a top line midfield which they kinda had anyway.

 

[Foxman98]

Macrae was AA in 2019, 2020 and 2021.

We’re now in 2024 and the earliest Macrae plays for his new club is 2025.

What he has been is completely irrelevant. What he will be is the only consideration.

Yes 3 years in a row he was AA as a full time mid which is what he will play at the Saints,

Kennedy has never gone close to reaching the same heights hence his value is less

 

[Jeremias]

Yes 3 years in a row he was AA as a full time mid which is what he will play at the Saints,

Great. It’s still not relevant.

Reckon St Kilda are thinking he’s going to get back to his All Australian level?

Everyone knows how good a player he was and I dare say everyone also knows the likelihood of reproducing that level of performance.

Kennedy has never gone close to reaching the same heights hence his value is less

Yes, quite clearly Macrae has been a better footballer over their respective careers.

I don’t believe anyone has said or would say differently.

But clubs obviously trade with a focus on what a player will produce at their club going forward.

Will Jack be a better player than Kennedy over the next 3-5 years?

Maybe, maybe not - nobody can be certain. But what we can be certain of is that prior selections in the AA team have exactly zero bearing on that.

 

[Jacks Seething Rage]

Macrae is also a 3 x AA what's Kennedy ever been other then a nice role player?

And if St Kilda were considering a 25/26/27 year old Macrae that point would be damn near relevant.

 

[Foxman98]

Great. It’s still not relevant.

Reckon St Kilda are thinking he’s going to get back to his All Australian level?

Everyone knows how good a player he was and I dare say everyone also knows the likelihood of reproducing that level of performance.



Yes, quite clearly Macrae has been a better footballer over their respective careers.

I don’t believe anyone has said or would say differently.

But clubs obviously trade with a focus on what a player will produce at their club going forward.

Will Jack be a better player than Kennedy over the next 3-5 years?

Maybe, maybe not - nobody can be certain. But what we can be certain of is that prior selections in the AA team have exactly zero bearing on that.

Playing as a full time on baller at the Saints no doubt Macrae will be better,

Playing a hybrid Half forward/onball role we have Kennedy hence the trades will be done in a 3 way however on face value Macrae would have a slightly higher value given Kennedy also only has 1 year left on his contract compared to Macraes 3

 

[Foxman98]

And if St Kilda were considering a 25/26/27 year old Macrae that point would be damn near relevant.

Correct they'd be paying significantly more for him in his prime,

Kennedy has never been anymore then a nice role player hence his value isn't that high

 

[aussierulesrules]

You're not recruiting Macrae as a forward though you are as a midfielder and Macrae is significantly better in that position

Yes that’s correct but the exact same thing could be said of Kennedy. If we were recruiting him instead, we’d be recruiting him to play in the midfield and he’s significantly better in that position.

And while it’s not the be-all-and-end-all obviously as a guide, Macrae not only didn’t receive a Brownlow vote this year (when played mostly out of position, and coming off an interrupted preseason) he didn’t receive a single one the previous year either, so chances are, both he and Kennedy would be about on par if played predominantly on the ball as well.

So given their respective ages and the contracts they bring with them, I would definitely prefer Kennedy, if they were the same cost in a trade.

 

[Jacks Seething Rage]

Correct they'd be paying significantly more for him in his prime,

Kennedy has never been anymore then a nice role player hence his value isn't that high

Your getting the bit where Kennedy is on a much lower contract and likely to play twice as many games though right?

 

[Jeremias]

Playing as a full time on baller at the Saints no doubt Macrae will be better,

Maybe, maybe not. Let’s wait and see.

I don’t believe Macrae will be playing full time mid for the entirety of that period.

 

[Foxman98]

Your getting the bit where Kennedy is on a much lower contract and likely to play twice as many games though right?

How have you worked that out? Kennedy averages 13 games a year Macrae averages closer to 21

 

[Pencil case]

There’s no way Dogs would pay more for Kennedy than what they get for Macrae.

 

[CarnTheScray]

Great get for the Doggies if they can make it happen and a definite upgrade on McRae and more consistent than Smith.

Shrewd acquisition giving the Dogs a top line midfield which they kinda had anyway.

Our midfield’s been living off the 2021 hype. Have never found a replacement for Dunkley.

 

[Jacks Seething Rage]

How have you worked that out? Kennedy averages 13 games a year Macrae averages closer to 21

Well I attributed more weighting to recent history...as a list manager might do. They have both had a clear run in recent years.

Kennedy's injury plagued years are as much a factor as Macrae's AA years going forward IE a minor one

I don't think its outlandish to say Kennedy is as likely to play 220 games as Macrae is 320.