Mitch Brown (WCE) asks for trade to St Kilda

[zero]

Against the risk you don't do a deal and then next year he walks for nothing

or hold on to him, convince him to stay on a long deal, and he becomes a vital cog in a premiership backline

not keen to see browny go, certainly not for cheap. while he hasnt been first 22 as yet at the eagles, he is a quality young player

 

[ziad]

or hold on to him, convince him to stay on a long deal, and he becomes a vital cog in a premiership backline

not keen to see browny go, certainly not for cheap. while he hasnt been first 22 as yet at the eagles, he is a quality young player

he may be worth more next year with a good season

 

[Falchoon]

Saints were pretty silly making offers to contracted players that they can't get.

hardly

Saints have been in the ear of at least 3 potential full backs.

They're never going to take all 3.

 

[TommyJay]

I wouldn't be surprised if you convinced him to stay and he stays.

I think it's more likely he'll end up leaving. Fortunately for St Kilda, everyone in the football (and business) world knows that stating they don't want to part with something is a good way to start a bargain. Nearly every deal begins this way. Also luckily for St Kilda, they don't have to deal with the few WC supporters who severely overrate their players.

I'm 60/40 he'll leave. Not that my opinion means anything. Fortunately, any WC supporters opinions stating that their club 'absolutely' won't take deal X are equally worthless.

 

[pantskyle]

I wouldn't be surprised if you convinced him to stay and he stays.

I think it's more likely he'll end up leaving. Fortunately for St Kilda, everyone in the football (and business) world knows that stating they don't want to part with something is a good way to start a bargain. Nearly every deal begins this way. Also luckily for St Kilda, they don't have to deal with the few WC supporters who severely overrate their players.

I'm 60/40 he'll leave. Not that my opinion means anything. Fortunately, any WC supporters opinions stating that their club 'absolutely' won't take deal X are equally worthless.

It has nothing to do with what the WC supporters feel he is worth. The club has been vocal enough about where we stand with Brown. The club says he isn't available. So you can be sure we won't trade him for the sake of it.

 

[TommyJay]

It has nothing to do with what the WC supporters feel he is worth. The club has been vocal enough about where we stand with Brown. The club says he isn't available. So you can be sure we won't trade him for the sake of it.

Again, after watching trades for years, it certainly wouldn't be the first time that a club has said someone isn't available before trading them.

Coupled with that, the vast majority (although, not all) of players that ask to leave are traded by their club, because it ends up being in the best interests of both parties.

And, honestly, you've almost been the most vocal in stating that your club 'won't do this' and that the Saints 'can't get Brown'.

I'm not sure if you're trying to convince other supporters or yourself... Either way, your opinion is as irrelevant as mine. I'm simply basing mine on what is historically likely.

 

[Allsainters66]

What is Mitch Brown really worth? Just based on talent and skill not wether his contracted or required player.

 

[pantskyle]

Again, after watching trades for years, it certainly wouldn't be the first time that a club has said someone isn't available before trading them.

Coupled with that, the vast majority (although, not all) of players that ask to leave are traded by their club, because it ends up being in the best interests of both parties.

And, honestly, you've almost been the most vocal in stating that your club 'won't do this' and that the Saints 'can't get Brown'.

I'm not sure if you're trying to convince other supporters or yourself... Either way, your opinion is as irrelevant as mine. I'm simply basing mine on what is historically likely.

Possibly guilty as charged. I'm trying to convince opposition supporters to be honest. I know we won't trade him cheaply and frankly if we did I would be hugely disappointed.

Anyway until either a trade is done or trade week finishes we won't know.

 

[TommyJay]

Anyway until either a trade is done or trade week finishes we won't know.

Exactly right.

 

[pantskyle]

Exactly right.

Should we meet up when it's decided and the loser buys the other a beer?

 

[Lyyynnnchy]

Again, after watching trades for years, it certainly wouldn't be the first time that a club has said someone isn't available before trading them.

Coupled with that, the vast majority (although, not all) of players that ask to leave are traded by their club, because it ends up being in the best interests of both parties.

And, honestly, you've almost been the most vocal in stating that your club 'won't do this' and that the Saints 'can't get Brown'.

I'm not sure if you're trying to convince other supporters or yourself... Either way, your opinion is as irrelevant as mine. I'm simply basing mine on what is historically likely.

Caddy last year
Tippet 3 years ago
O'Keefe

Plenty of examples where a player has asked to go but ultimately hasnt been traded

 

[Oh Darling]

Ohh stupid forum ! This is what I was going to say:
Brown wouldnt be our #1 defender he would be either #2 or #3. We won't give up our Goddard pick. It'll be cripps + pick 34 for brown. Which I think is a good deal.

I think if Mitch Brown was uncontracted that would probably end up being it.... although I think a proven Key Position young defenders Vs a dime a dozen young kid who has barely played a game for St Kilda and is unproven.... is hardly fair along with pick 34.

The fact he is contracted and a required player means the only chance of us trading him to St Kilda this year is if we get something we consider fair or above odds.... and Cripps + pick 34 won't cut it.

 

[4#Didak#4]

Whats the difference between Wellingham being uncontracted and Brown next year being uncontracted?

If we will get little or nothing for him next year why arent we getting Wellingham for little or nothing this year?

Well you probably will, they certainly will be getting him for less than if he was in contract. Being out of contract takes the leverage away from the original club - see Kurt Tippett.

 

[Lyyynnnchy]

Well you probably will, they certainly will be getting him for less than if he was in contract. Being out of contract takes the leverage away from the original club - see Kurt Tippett.

Tell that to 99% of the Collingwood supporters

 

[Lyyynnnchy]

Ohh stupid forum ! This is what I was going to say:
Brown wouldnt be our #1 defender he would be either #2 or #3. We won't give up our Goddard pick. It'll be cripps + pick 34 for brown. Which I think is a good deal.

What are you talking about? Your list manager came out and said you are missing that big key back and Mitch Brown is exactly that. Who would be the big key back in front of him?!

 

[eaglespremiers]

What is Mitch Brown really worth? Just based on talent and skill not wether his contracted or required player.

Taking nothing else into consideration, probably Cripps + later pick.
Something like that.

 

[ajsuperstar]

It has nothing to do with what the WC supporters feel he is worth. The club has been vocal enough about where we stand with Brown. The club says he isn't available. So you can be sure we won't trade him for the sake of it.

Maybe im just selective reading but vozzo said
"

Mitch is a contracted player and very much a required player and we see him as an important part of our future. We see him playing for us for the next six years and more"​

​

​

Nothing about being unavailable, merely required​

 

[Oh Darling]

What are you talking about? Your list manager came out and said you are missing that big key back and Mitch Brown is exactly that. Who would be the big key back in front of him?!

You know when you are using Beau Wilkes as a key backmen you are in trouble. Mitch Brown would instantly become their best key back... where at West Coast he was #4.

 

[Brettox]

I think if the Eagles are playing hardball, Brown for Cripps plus a swap of first round picks (Goddard Compo) might get it done

 

[bangko-bangko]

You know when you are using Beau Wilkes as a key backmen you are in trouble. Mitch Brown would instantly become their best key back... where at West Coast he was #4.

Not really fisher is a former all Australian but doesn't have the height to play on the monster ff's I.e. buddy, Hawkins.

Gwilt and Gilbert are also very good but also lack height. Browns height would see him play on those players but I don't think that automatically makes him our best Blackman.

 

[bangko-bangko]

You know when you are using Beau Wilkes as a key backmen you are in trouble. Mitch Brown would instantly become their best key back... where at West Coast he was #4.

Aah Wilkes was used as a forward, only played back when we had a run of injuries.

 

[zero]

the thing with this trade, of all the trades that have been mooted about eagles this year, this is the only one that actually significantly weakens our list.

structurally speaking, cripps or wellingham coming, or koby going for a nothing pick, they are all in the no big deal category really. they dont affect the first 22 so much

but with glass at the tender age of 31, losing mitch actually puts us in a very tough spot, list wise, and exposes a significant weakness if he goes. especially with lynch gone, we are short a KPP spare parts man that is AFL quality.

while its very rare in the history of the eagles for them to say "look you cant go" when a player asks for a trade, and its poor policy in general, i would be inclined to not trade mitch unless an extremely good deal is offered.

i would say to him, ok, we will keep you for another year, we will try to arrange a deal over the next year, you have one more year to bust your ass and prove your worth (inflating the deal you will get next year when you go home), in the meantime we will leave a long term deal on the table, so if you change your mind you can.

i wouldnt play hardball so much as just not play

 

[Brazen]

Maybe im just selective reading but vozzo said
"

Mitch is a contracted player and very much a required player and we see him as an important part of our future. We see him playing for us for the next six years and more"​

​

​

Nothing about being unavailable, merely required​

You mean nothing except this:

"Mitch is contracted, very much required and part of our future," Vozzo said. "We're not going to trade him, full stop.
"Through his management on Saturday he indicated that he wanted to seek a trade for more opportunity, but we're not interested. When he gets back from his holiday, we'll have a chat to him and move forward from there. He'll be fine."

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/a/-/afl/15067808/no-brown-deal-eagles-tell-saints/

 

[Saint4Life]

Cripps will be a good player, he's only 20, he was our first pick #24

A direct swap I'll take... I don't rate Brown that highlight tbh and I have concerns about his "good" knee.

If we give up a 2nd round pick + Cripps we are getting creamed.

I don't even think a 3rd round + Cripps is fair.

TBH, I don't think Brown is a Sam Fischer, or heck even Simpkin has come along heaps. We simply need a defender that plays well against those power forwards. Jumping jack from Richmond is one who always seems to kick 6+ goals against us.

 

[ajsuperstar]

You mean nothing except this:

"Mitch is contracted, very much required and part of our future," Vozzo said. "We're not going to trade him, full stop.
"Through his management on Saturday he indicated that he wanted to seek a trade for more opportunity, but we're not interested. When he gets back from his holiday, we'll have a chat to him and move forward from there. He'll be fine."

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/a/-/afl/15067808/no-brown-deal-eagles-tell-saints/

ok now i believe we wont get him