Mitch McGovern (please read OP)

[Cleric]

Gov hasn't nominated anyone yet right?

Seems to be waiting on swans/Maggies/Hawks.

Yeah it would appear that it isn't as simple as Carlton or bust.
The $ offered by clubs like Freo and GC might be more interesting than Carlton now.
We need a bidding war for him.

 

[Crouch#44]

I have a feeling carlton are putting all their eggs into shiel

 

[Samcro24]

Yeah it would appear that it isn't as simple as Carlton or bust.
The $ offered by clubs like Freo and GC might be more interesting than Carlton now.
We need a bidding war for him.

No such thing as a bidding war. Once he decides, we're stuck dealing with that club. It's only ever one club.

 

[Crows#1]

No such thing as a bidding war. Once he decides, we're stuck dealing with that club. It's only ever one club.

But the clubs can try and outbid for his services, then cough up for him to us.

 

[FAITH]

True, not even a whisper though of any of these clubs biting

Not true.
Swans are fully into him, and I expect the other 2 to show interest after they're knocked out.

 

[cfc4life]

Sorry to intrude, but this idea of keeping McGovern and playing him in the SANFL if he sooks and then trading him out in two years sounds a bit far fetched.

Wouldn't it be more valuable to send him off now for a mid-first rounder, perhaps turn that into a pick high enough for Rankine or Lukosius and call it a day?

If you go with the holding onto him tactic, don't you run the risk of him spudding it up for two years and then no one takes him for more than a pick in the 30s?

In comparison to the Gibbs situation, Gibbs was happy to stay another year until a deal was made and therefore his stock didn't fall due to bad form or sitting in the reserves. I think the McGovern situation isn't as cheery.

 

[FAITH]

Sorry to intrude, but this idea of keeping McGovern and playing him in the SANFL if he sooks and then trading him out in two years sounds a bit far fetched.

Wouldn't it be more valuable to send him off now for a mid-first rounder, perhaps turn that into a pick high enough for Rankine or Lukosius and call it a day?

If you go with the holding onto him tactic, don't you run the risk of him spudding it up for two years and then no one takes him for more than a pick in the 30s?

In comparison to the Gibbs situation, Gibbs was happy to stay another year until a deal was made and therefore his stock didn't fall due to bad form or sitting in the reserves. I think the McGovern situation isn't as cheery.

We want to trade him, games are being played ATM.

 

[Crows#1]

Sorry to intrude, but this idea of keeping McGovern and playing him in the SANFL if he sooks and then trading him out in two years sounds a bit far fetched.

Wouldn't it be more valuable to send him off now for a mid-first rounder, perhaps turn that into a pick high enough for Rankine or Lukosius and call it a day?

If you go with the holding onto him tactic, don't you run the risk of him spudding it up for two years and then no one takes him for more than a pick in the 30s?

In comparison to the Gibbs situation, Gibbs was happy to stay another year until a deal was made and therefore his stock didn't fall due to bad form or sitting in the reserves. I think the McGovern situation isn't as cheery.

While your post has some merit, I have to disagree. It is very much like the Gibbs situation, only in reverse. Whether it be Carlton or another club that he asks to be traded to, because he is a contracted player the Crows can hold out for the best possible deal.

 

[Samcro24]

But the clubs can try and outbid for his services, then cough up for him to us.

What difference does that make?
He picks Carlton, we trade with them.
He picks Freo, we trade with them.

We don't get to pick the one with the better trade bait.

 

[Bicks]

No such thing as a bidding war. Once he decides, we're stuck dealing with that club. It's only ever one club.

Might only be dealing directly with 1 club but there can also be other clubs involved in negotiations with player movements and pick swaps etc behind that.

 

[Crows#1]

What difference does that make?
He picks Carlton, we trade with them.
He picks Freo, we trade with them.

We don't get to pick the one with the better trade bait.

You said above that there is no such thing as a bidding war. I merely pointed out that if more than one club want him, there will be a bidding war, but not with us.

 

[cfc4life]

While your post has some merit, I have to disagree. It is very much like the Gibbs situation, only in reverse. Whether it be Carlton or another club that he asks to be traded to, because he is a contracted player the Crows can hold out for the best possible deal.

I definitely understand holding out for the best deal but what I'm worried about is you guys not getting sufficient bites this year and then ending up with a net loss by the time you trade him.

 

[Samcro24]

Might only be dealing directly with 1 club but there can also be other clubs involved in negotiations with player movements and pick swaps etc behind that.

Irrelevant to the post I first quoted

 

[Bicks]

I definitely understand holding out for the best deal but what I'm worried about is you guys not getting sufficient bites this year and then ending up with a net loss by the time you trade him.

You're worried about a net loss to Adelaide? LOL

 

[Crows#1]

I definitely understand holding out for the best deal but what I'm worried about is you guys not getting sufficient bites this year and then ending up with a net loss by the time you trade him.

So what you are suggesting is to take whatever is offered this year? I think we should only trade him this year if the deal is right for the Crows.

 

[Samcro24]

You said above that there is no such thing as a bidding war. I merely pointed out that if more than one club want him, there will be a bidding war, but not with us.

The premise was that a bidding war helps us. It doesn't.

 

[kulak]

What difference does that make?
He picks Carlton, we trade with them.
He picks Freo, we trade with them.

We don't get to pick the one with the better trade bait.

Correct

Last year, 3 players all nominated Essendon.

Then the 3 selling clubs had to fight like seagulls for a share of the Dons’ limited draft picks available for sale!

 

[Scorpus]

I definitely understand holding out for the best deal but what I'm worried about is you guys not getting sufficient bites this year and then ending up with a net loss by the time you trade him.

Yeah I'm sure you're genuinely worried about what the Crows will get, but not in that way

 

[jenny61_99]

I definitely understand holding out for the best deal but what I'm worried about is you guys not getting sufficient bites this year and then ending up with a net loss by the time you trade him.

You're worried? We don't get the right bites this year, he stays and plays. Just like Gibbs. No biggy.

 

[Samcro24]

Correct

Last year, 3 players all nominated Essendon.

Then the 3 selling clubs had to fight like seagulls for a share of the Dons’ limited draft picks available for sale!

They bloody got smith for a song too.

 

[jackster83]

I definitely understand holding out for the best deal but what I'm worried about is you guys not getting sufficient bites this year and then ending up with a net loss by the time you trade him.

We'd get more output from him in 2019 than a mid to late first round pick.

If we think we're still in a premiership window, we're best off keeping him for another 12 months.

 

[Crow_Magnon]

As I said I think its at least worth thinking about it. I dont think you can dismiss it , as ww did , by pointing to those teams that fail to develop etc.

You look at Richmond last year, and I was as guilty as everybody else , and nobody picks them to win. They did it on the back of Dusty (3), Reiwoldt (13) , Houli (42) and Rance (18) , Cotchin (2)

Dusty and Cotchin are their only 2 top 5 players to play in the GF. Dustin got the Norm and Cotchin 21 disposals. Do Richmond win that game without the 2 of them? I dont know .

I'm not saying top 5 picks guarantee you a Premiership but gee it would be nice to find out over the next few years

This is a fair point. Whilst we've done well with what we have I think we are missing some truly gun midfielders. Richmond have developed a more even bunch across the ground - and many of their players besides those you mention have been severely underestimated. Melbourne have such raw talent in their midfield - Oliver, Petracca, Brayshaw, Harmes, Salem - we seem miles behind in that area (and I've not mentioned their veterans to help out such as Jones and Lewis). We are more workmanlike - definitely need a couple more midfield guns to go with Sloane, MCrouch and Gibbs. We're pretty shallow from there on, especially with BCrouch always on the pine. That said, I do think we've got some handy picks in the next couple of drafts, so should we use them well, we may be able to jag a couple of A-graders.

 

[cfc4life]

You're worried about a net loss to Adelaide? LOL

From your perspective, yes.

 

[ams4crows]

I have a feeling carlton are putting all their eggs into shiel

Thats what we should be doing, if we got Shiel that's heaps more likely to win us a flag in the next 3 years than a top 5 draft pick.

 

[Kane Johnson]

Sorry to intrude, but this idea of keeping McGovern and playing him in the SANFL if he sooks and then trading him out in two years sounds a bit far fetched.

Wouldn't it be more valuable to send him off now for a mid-first rounder, perhaps turn that into a pick high enough for Rankine or Lukosius and call it a day?

If you go with the holding onto him tactic, don't you run the risk of him spudding it up for two years and then no one takes him for more than a pick in the 30s?

In comparison to the Gibbs situation, Gibbs was happy to stay another year until a deal was made and therefore his stock didn't fall due to bad form or sitting in the reserves. I think the McGovern situation isn't as cheery.

Why is it that everyone assumes if we don't trade him he will chuck a hissy fit and play shitty or be stuck in the seconds. He was disgruntled this year and still showed great passion when he kicked what should have been the winner in the first showdown. He won't want to waste years of his career either so if he loves playing the game and is stuck at Adelaide another year I am sure he would still play as best he could. He doesn't want to limit his own value by playing poorly or showing a poor attitude.

For the record I am sure a trade will be made eventually but the facts are he is contracted and if we don't like the proposed deal we don't have to trade him. This isn't new info for the Crows so I am sure they will end up with a deal they are happy with and both we and Mitch can go our separate ways.