Mitch Brown (WCE) asks for trade to St Kilda

[JackOutback]

Don't get carried away, Mckenzie one of the best young defenders in the game, wtf!

Most eagles supporters didn't rate him at all until late this season when he put together some solid games. he was given plenty of opportunities to cement a spot despite playing some pretty poor games. The same opportunity has not been given to brown and he has already been told he won't get a chance next year unless there is an injury.

Understandably he would like to leave for a team that has said they will give him the opportunity to cement a starting spot. I think the eagles will trade in the end but fair enough to push for the best deal they can.

I'm sure you don't understand why Glass was named AA captain either. Watch some Eagles games and you would realise that McKenzie is an excellent young defender and massively underrated outside of Perth.

 

[West Coast 06]

Many of the posts on here reinforce the views that many have of AFL players merely being chattels for the clubs to trade, barter as to their whim... in general we accept that as we think that it overall allows a system which creates a possibility for all clubs to have a crack at the big prize, and not just the wealthy... but there is a flip side to this, which is that an individual ought to have some say in where and by whom he is employed.

Of course they have a say in it. Mitch had a say in it about 12 months ago when he signed a contract with West Coast. He knew the score then, and it is the same as it is now, he is behind Glass and Mackenzie in the pecking order. Nothing has changed from then to now, except St Kilda now think they should be able to poach him if they want to.

I am sure that organisations such as West Coast and the AFL don't enter into contracts that aren't enforceable by law. If they weren't binding contracts, what is the point of having them at all? I am thinking there is a reason why no player (or club for that matter) has ever tried to break such a contract in the courts. They are legal and binding and are entered into by two parties of their own free will is my best guess.

 

[TommyJay]

He definitely is a required player.
Minimum deal required to allow him to walk would be.
1. Cripps plus pick 24 for Brown.
2. Pick 13 for Brown plus pick 38.
Anything less, why would we let him go.

Your first suggestion is, I think, right on the mark. If it is just a straight WCE-Saints trade, this is what I think will end up happening (and probably the fairest deal).

But knowing trade week, they'll probably end up in a 4 club trade with players and picks flying around in every direction so you can barely work out what you've lost and what you've gained.

 

[Oh Darling]

Seems to me Mitch is contracted and staying and St Kilda will still not have a defender they need. They should have just swallowed their pride and paid up the 1st round pick that he is worth.

 

[The Finger]

Seems to me Mitch is contracted and staying and St Kilda will still not have a defender they need. They should have just swallowed their pride and paid up the 1st round pick that he is worth.

They'll just keep Blake who's better than Brown for an extra year then just take Brown fir stuff all next year.

 

[TOA.]

Mods, honestly, what is this doing in this thread?

 

[JackOutback]

Now this thread is about Mitch Brown, not Ben Cousins, who to my knowledge is not up for trade.

 

[Jab]

Mitch Brown asking for a trade is the topic of this thread...

 

[Jab]

Given how many times the debate has gone around in circles in 26 pages, the other topics have been a refreshing change

Maybe we should just wait until Brown returns from OS before going over everything again.

We would be more lenient if people could learn to play the ball and not the man Debate away, but personal attacks or trolling will change our tolerance levels.

 

[new breed]

FWIW , Vosso said this afternoon that Brown was going NOWHERE !

 

[Wilburbia20]

OK. You said it.

I thought you were all about facts?

In reality, it's all just guesswork, isn't it?

Well, he was on drugs at the time so let's assume he was high during the grand final, even though, as you admit, there is no evidence to suggest this. For a guy who is all about facts, I would have thought this presents a bit of a problem.

What does this actually mean?

I've asked you three times and you haven't offered any kind of explanation.

People are welcome to their opinions, but I don't see how these perceptions actually change anything.

where is the evidence to suggest he was not high during the GF?

 

[Jab]

You have been warned, many times. This is the Drafts and Trading board, the topic; "Mitch Brown (WCE) asks for a trade to St Kilda".

We asked that you post according to the topic and we asked that you play the ball and not the man. This hasn't seemed to have worked. This is a very lenient bunch of mods, and we avoid using the iron fist at all costs. I am locking this thread for a while so everyone can cool down and so we can clean out the rubbish.

Please take this as a general warning to behave.

 

[Jab]

Let's see if this thread can stay on topic

 

[TheLastEmperor]

WCE and St Kilda remaining firm and not batting an eye lid in regards to both Cripps and Brown is what I'm hearing. I'm not so sure WCE are as desperate for Cripps as St Kilda is with Brown so it'll be interesting to see how it pans out.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Let's see if this thread can stay on topic

Hopefully it can.
The thread probably suffers from the two club stalemate.
Hence the large amount of circle work in this thread (and others on team boards).
Usually this results in vitriol being throw between the two supporter bases.

 

[Jab]

Hopefully it can.
The thread probably suffers from the two club stalemate.
Hence the large amount of circle work in this thread (and others on team boards).
Usually this results in vitriol being throw between the two supporter bases.

Which, in turn, results in people being given a rest

 

[eaglespremiers]

Which, in turn, results in people being given a rest

I'm actually surprised you reopened it so early.
Looks like this particular trade may take some time.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Unless something pretty significant changes, there will be no trade done. I believe we have no intention of putting pick 13 on the table, which I believe is fair enough, because I hear in the industry he is not considered worth anywhere near that much (if he hadn't been drafted at 16, then I doubt anyone at all would be suggesting that someone who has been on an AFL list for 6 years, played just 50 games and has a family and personal history of knee reco's was worth a pick like 13 (in a strong top 15 draft) and where he was drafted at 6 years ago has no relevance 6 years on- would Andrejs Everitt be worth a top 15 pick because he was drafted at 11 that year? Hell no!).

The fact he is contracted is neither here nor there, as far as we're concerned (as far as what we're prepared to give up to get him goes), so him being contracted won't make us willing to pay way more than we believe he is worth. (I hope!).

I believe we also have plans to use pick 24 for other uses, so I don't think that is on offer either. Even if West Coast were open to trading him (which I think would rely on them being able to get someone like Hooker, in a 3 way deal- perhaps sending Koby Stevens, plus a DP or two, to Essendon and Cripps to West Coast, so that they have FB/CHB cover for next year), then it is still an extremely remote chance of happening, as we won't be paying massive "overs" for him (I hope!).

 

[TheLastEmperor]

Unless something pretty significant changes, there will be no trade done. I believe we have no intention of putting pick 13 on the table, which I believe is fair enough, because I hear in the industry he is not considered worth anywhere near that much (if he hadn't been drafted at 16, then I doubt anyone at all would be suggesting that someone who has been on an AFL list for 6 years, played just 50 games and has a family and personal history of knee reco's was worth a pick like 13 (in a strong top 15 draft) and where he was drafted at 6 years ago has no relevance 6 years on- would Andrejs Everitt be worth a top 15 pick because he was drafted at 11 that year? Hell no!).

The fact he is contracted is neither here nor there, as far as we're concerned (as far as what we're prepared to give up to get him goes), so him being contracted won't make us willing to pay way more than we believe he is worth.

We also have plans to use pick 24 for other uses, so I don't think that is on offer either. Even if West Coast were open to trading him (which I think would reply on them being able to get someone like Hooker, in a 3 way deal- perhaps sending Koby Stevens to Essendon and Cripps to West Coast) then it is still an extremely remote chance of happening, as we won't be paying massive "overs" for him.

From what I can gather from Pelchen's interview on SEN we are only offering (at this stage) a straight swap Cripps for Brown and that won't go close to happening from what WC have come out and said.

Do you see us using pick 24 on Hickey still or perhaps Ben Jacobs or someone else?

 

[ziad]

WCE and St Kilda remaining firm and not batting an eye lid in regards to both Cripps and Brown is what I'm hearing. I'm not so sure WCE are as desperate for Cripps as St Kilda is with Brown so it'll be interesting to see how it pans out.

a supprising statement

Cripps is on offer. WC have not sought him out, may not see and need for him at all, may consider him as he is sitting there, etc - the use of the term desperate is completely out of context.

 

[ziad]

From what I can gather from Pelchen's interview on SEN we are only offering (at this stage) a straight swap Cripps for Brown and that won't go close to happening from what WC have come out and said.

Do you see us using pick 24 on Hickey still or perhaps Ben Jacobs or someone else?

why open this is such posts are to be made

 

[pantskyle]

Let's see if this thread can stay on topic

Mod culture.

 

[pantskyle]

When do the compo picks get released?

 

[TheLastEmperor]

a supprising statement

Cripps is on offer. WC have not sought him out, may not see and need for him at all, may consider him as he is sitting there, etc - the use of the term desperate is completely out of context.

You took me out of context. St Kilda 'seem' desperate for Brown, WC not as keen on Cripps as St Kilda are on Brown. Anyway just semantics, lets try not to get this thread closed...Again.

WC have come out in the media saying they want Cripps BTW:

"We obviously would like to get Jamie to our club and he's expressed strongly that that's what he wants.

"So we're hopeful that St Kilda will work with us to achieve that in a mutually acceptable outcome for both parties.

"We'd certainly look at that (Stevens for Cripps). We're not happy we're losing Koby Stevens, we think he's going to have a bright future in the AFL and we're disappointed he's decided to leave.

"It's very similar to the Cripps situation, except we're on the reverse end of it, so that would be something we'd look at."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/dep...ping-mitch-brown/story-fn69a32t-1226495005316

 

[eaglespremiers]

Unless something pretty significant changes, there will be no trade done. I believe we have no intention of putting pick 13 on the table, which I believe is fair enough......

I believe we also have plans to use pick 24 for other uses, so I don't think that is on offer either. Even if West Coast were open to trading him (which I think would rely on them being able to get someone like Hooker, in a 3 way deal- perhaps sending Koby Stevens, plus a DP or two, to Essendon and Cripps to West Coast, so that they have FB/CHB cover for next year), then it is still an extremely remote chance of happening, as we won't be paying massive "overs" for him.

This is interesting because St Kilda were very specific in targeting him (even though he was in contract).
Did they not imagine they'd need to put something sub-30 on the table to make West Coast interested?