List Mgmt. OFFICIAL: Dangerfield + Pick 50 for Picks 9, 28 and Dean Gore

[Jhye Clark 13]

Eddie would be very convincing , and P4 would start to look good the the Crows.

How did Collingwood get pick 4?

 

[thegerman]

How did Collingwood get pick 4?

Beams to bris, p4 to pies

 

[Commando]

I saw Ricky Ponting, he's not so big

Ive actually met him this year too, true he is actually smaller than I thought.

 

[OzeSparky]

Ive actually met him this year too, true he is actually smaller than I thought.

My mate bowled to him in the nets at MCG, they had 5-6 young fast bowlers hurling them down at Ricky. He has ran in hurled one down and Ricky just went whack and carted the shit out of it over his head, then he told the boys to stop, walked down the practice wicket and drew a new crease about 1metre past the actual crease looked at my mate and said "you can bowl from there buddy".

 

[Partridge]

Duncan's gonna be a gun but he didn't exactly stand up in this years final series after such a promising second half to the year. Was virtually left to Selwood to carry the load again.
Dangerfield is also a natural forward. He could quite comfortably become a 50 goals-per-year forward like Johnson was. Duncan could too but he doesn't have the lateral mobility of Dangerfield, nor is he as assured on the left foot when kicking for goal.

True but he wasn't poor either. 22 touches against Hawthorn, 20 against North. Sure in the mid-30s would have been better, but Selwood was the only other player we had who recorded 20+ disposal tallies in both finals. Unfortunately he played solid without being brilliant.

Having said that though, have changed my tune wherein I suggested giving up a Murdoch + a GHS + our 1st rounder was too much for one A grader. I think the club would consider it when you think of the requirements we need heading forward.
Duncan is an outside midfielder we can't afford to lose, whereas Jansen could fill Horlin-Smith's role on the inside with Selwood & Guthrie next year and beyond.
Murdoch could be absolutely anything.

He would want to start showing a bit more improvement then next year.

 

[Partridge]

nope, didn't say he was poor but he certainly had very little influence in both finals. You would have had Varcoe, Blicavs and quite a few others well ahead of him in the first final but he was decent in the second one.
Was expecting him to do what Caddy did in the semi final but perhaps next year he'll start doing so?

Fact is, Dangerfield has had half as many finals appearances and managed to impact a couple of them like a Selwood. Those types don't come around all that often.

Ultimately, it all depends on how much of the farm Geelong are willing to part with to get him.

 

[Supercats]

Duncan and 1st Rounder for Dangerfield. Would do it in a heartbeat.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

Guthrie and a pick for Dangerfield? I wish! I doubt even Duncan and a first rounder would get it done, unless he really wants out now. And if that is the case Collingwood will get him as they can pass on p4 and will let go a serious player as well. Surely they (COLL) will need to give more than just p4. P4 is still a young, undeveloped hypothetical. Dangerfield, on the other hand, is among the best half-dozen mids in the league, just a touch behind Ablett, Selwood, Pendlebury, etc. Should he remain uninjured, and carry the same form through 2015, he will be worth about 1-1.5 million a season by 2016.

FWIW, you would think he stays at ADE until his contract expires. Then if he wants to leave ADE we may have an advantage in getting him given his background. But should that occur, he will be our highest paid player. I say that as some in this thread are under-estimating his market value just a tad (and by that I mean a lot).

 

[catempire]

Guthrie and a pick for Dangerfield? I wish! I doubt even Duncan and a first rounder would get it done, unless he really wants out now. And if that is the case Collingwood will get him as they can pass on p4 and will let go a serious player as well. Surely they (COLL) will need to give more than just p4. P4 is still a young, undeveloped hypothetical. Dangerfield, on the other hand, is among the best half-dozen mids in the league, just a touch behind Ablett, Selwood, Pendlebury, etc. Should he remain uninjured, and carry the same form through 2015, he will be worth about 1-1.5 million a season by 2016.

FWIW, you would think he stays at ADE until his contract expires. Then if he wants to leave ADE we may have an advantage in getting him given his background. But should that occur, he will be our highest paid player. I say that as some in this thread are under-estimating his market value just a tad (and by that I mean a lot).

I don't see anyone underestimating his market value. Rather, the market has been moved by free agency. If this was five years ago Dangerfield would command a Judd-like trade. Now that clubs can secure him for free under FA the goalposts, so to speak, have moved significantly.

 

[catempire]

I'd add that there's a crucial difference between market value and what is "fair". In a trade, market value is always achieved, by definition. Fairness is another matter altogether and free agency has made it more difficult for clubs losing players to get what is fair.

 

[dazbroncos]

I'd add that there's a crucial difference between market value and what is "fair". In a trade, market value is always achieved, by definition. Fairness is another matter altogether and free agency has made it more difficult for clubs losing players to get what is fair.

And with FA now its kind of like double jeopardy for the current club. Hold and hope he stays or trade now in the face of lesser potential compensation later as FA comp….

Makes valuations even more murky…

GO Catters

 

[FelixTheCat]

sorry but I'm more than happy to disagree with you on this one Son of God because not only is Dangerfield a 2 x All Australian and made the 40 man squad yet again in season 2014, he's had to contend with a tag for a good season and more throughout his career.
This is something Duncan has yet to endure given he's had a quality midfield to play alongside since debut.
Dangerfield almost helped Adelaide pinch the game from Hawthorn in the 2012 preliminary final (see below)


there's not too many that can burn off Rioli, let alone twice in the one game

Duncan's gonna be a gun but he didn't exactly stand up in this years final series after such a promising second half to the year. Was virtually left to Selwood to carry the load again.
Dangerfield is also a natural forward. He could quite comfortably become a 50 goals-per-year forward like Johnson was. Duncan could too but he doesn't have the lateral mobility of Dangerfield, nor is he as assured on the left foot when kicking for goal.

Having said that though, have changed my tune wherein I suggested giving up a Murdoch + a GHS + our 1st rounder was too much for one A grader. I think the club would consider it when you think of the requirements we need heading forward.
Duncan is an outside midfielder we can't afford to lose, whereas Jansen could fill Horlin-Smith's role on the inside with Selwood & Guthrie next year and beyond.
Murdoch could be absolutely anything.

sorry but I'm more than happy to disagree with you on this one Son of God because not only is Dangerfield a 2 x All Australian and made the 40 man squad yet again in season 2014, he's had to contend with a tag for a good season and more throughout his career.
This is something Duncan has yet to endure given he's had a quality midfield to play alongside since debut.
Dangerfield almost helped Adelaide pinch the game from Hawthorn in the 2012 preliminary final (see below)


there's not too many that can burn off Rioli, let alone twice in the one game

Duncan's gonna be a gun but he didn't exactly stand up in this years final series after such a promising second half to the year. Was virtually left to Selwood to carry the load again.
Dangerfield is also a natural forward. He could quite comfortably become a 50 goals-per-year forward like Johnson was. Duncan could too but he doesn't have the lateral mobility of Dangerfield, nor is he as assured on the left foot when kicking for goal.

Having said that though, have changed my tune wherein I suggested giving up a Murdoch + a GHS + our 1st rounder was too much for one A grader. I think the club would consider it when you think of the requirements we need heading forward.
Duncan is an outside midfielder we can't afford to lose, whereas Jansen could fill Horlin-Smith's role on the inside with Selwood & Guthrie next year and beyond.
Murdoch could be absolutely anything.

"Murdoch could be absolutely anything". Hmmm....is it just me who sees the numerous turnovers due to poor skills and decision making when under pressure?

 

[BlakeyNoFlakey]

So the scenario I was being shitcanned for suggesting the other day by Fred is playing out it seems. http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-09-25/roos-happy-to-play-danger-game

Trading impending free agents before their contracts expire is a trend that Roos sees becoming more commonplace in the next few years.

“You are going to see as early as this year or next year with someone like Dangerfield, clubs trading them a year before free agency," the Melbourne coach said.

so there ya go.

 

[Beanstalk]

Duncan and 1st Rounder for Dangerfield. Would do it in a heartbeat.

 

[thegerman]

As supercat put it. I'm not a big Duncan fan. He is quality, but, I think outside mids are a dime a dozen.

If it meant that we trade him to get danger, that would suit us I think. Getting another ball magnet contested gorilla in his prime would outweigh the loss of Duncan.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

I don't see anyone underestimating his market value. Rather, the market has been moved by free agency. If this was five years ago Dangerfield would command a Judd-like trade. Now that clubs can secure him for free under FA the goalposts, so to speak, have moved significantly.

I see what you are saying, but while he remains contracted next season Adelaide will aim to – and have some leverage to get– something commensurate with his market value. That value, at this time, is greater than only p4 (what Collingwood might offer if Beams goes), or in our case something like Duncan and a pick.

I understand that the new world of FA will see clubs potentially trading a year before a contracted player actually becomes a free agent. Though the club would need to be very sure the player is definitely out the door, or the relationship really soured. With regard Paddy, perhaps two first rounders would get it done - so a STK or Melbourne. Anything less and they would be better off having him give another stellar years service and then walking for free.

 

[catempire]

I see what you are saying, but while he remains contracted next season Adelaide will aim to – and have some leverage to get– something commensurate with his market value. That value, at this time, is greater than only p4 (what Collingwood might offer if Beams goes), or in our case something like Duncan and a pick.

I understand that the new world of FA will see clubs potentially trading a year before a contracted player actually becomes a free agent. Though the club would need to be very sure the player is definitely out the door, or the relationship really soured. With regard Paddy, perhaps two first rounders would get it done - so a STK or Melbourne. Anything less and they would be better off having him give another stellar years service and then walking for free.

I still think you are misconstruing (slightly) what "market" value is. It is, at the end of the day, what someone is willing to pay. Now, nobody is going to give two first rounders for a player who is FA next year. I'm certain of that. There's also the fact that Dangerfield will never agree to go to those clubs that could (albeit, stupidly) afford to pay that much. He will only go to clubs without those means because they are successful and that is what he seeks.

But as I've stressed many times now in this thread, the only chance of a trade getting done with anyone is if He tells Adelaide now he is definitely going either this year through trade or next year as FA. At this stage, that appears unlikely.

 

[Strangled Cat]

that's it and unless we bottom out for a couple of years in order to secure some top 10 picks, we won't be getting players of Selwood's ilk for a very longtime to come so these opportunities may be few and far between.

Nat Fyfe was pick #20 in the same draft as Menzel at #17. They are still around after the first round, albeit a lot less frequently.

 

[Daniel McL]

Not my man Duncan I don't even want to think about him leaving.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

I'd add that there's a crucial difference between market value and what is "fair". In a trade, market value is always achieved, by definition. Fairness is another matter altogether and free agency has made it more difficult for clubs losing players to get what is fair.

True, good point. Actually, the discrepancy between market value and what is "fair" is a general characteristic of a free market economy. We need look no further than the Bangladeshian sweat shop worker who makes a dollar a day making shoes that are sold for upward of $200. But I digress, and back the matter at hand.....

 

[Nankervis brothers]

Now, nobody is going to give two first rounders for a player who is FA next year. I'm certain of that.

Well, it seems Roo's at least hasn't ruled it out:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...rick-dangerfield/story-fn69a32t-1227069523689

But as I've stressed many times now in this thread, the only chance of a trade getting done with anyone is if He tells Adelaide now he is definitely going either this year through trade or next year as FA. At this stage, that appears unlikely.

And if he does so, and a trade occurs, I'll be very curious to see what his market value is / what people are willing to pay. Still don't see how we would have what is required in such circumstances, sadly.

 

[Partridge]

As supercat put it. I'm not a big Duncan fan. He is quality, but, I think outside mids are a dime a dozen.

If it meant that we trade him to get danger, that would suit us I think. Getting another ball magnet contested gorilla in his prime would outweigh the loss of Duncan.

Perhaps. If it's so easy to find one, how come he's the only one we've got who actually gets on the park every week, and has improved every year since his debut?

 

[thegerman]

Perhaps. If it's so easy to find one, how come he's the only one we've got who actually gets on the park every week, and has improved every year since his debut?

Sure, agreed. But he isn't Dangerfield.

 

[MotleyLemon]

Duncan would benefit if Danger were to come to town.

Selwood, Danger, Caddy inside just farming it out to him.

It'd be magnificent.

Maybe a package of Kersten, GHS and our first pick, or something along those lines.

But obviously you have to give up something to get something...

 

[Partridge]

Sure, agreed. But he isn't Dangerfield.

Well, I'm in the minority, but I'm actually perfectly happy for him to continue to be Mitch Duncan.