Traded Patrick Dangerfield [traded w/ pick 50 to Geelong for 9, 28 and Gore]

[PACatter]

This will sound stupid ......in three years when danger is 29 -30 his body will be stuffed

No, what you said certainly sounds stupid.

Why is 29-30 treated as some magical "Best By" date?

Remind me how old Priddis is again, with his first Brownlow last year and first AA selection this year? Priddis, Mitchell, and Mundy are all in the top 6 for Brownlow expectations, and they're all 30+. Boomer has turned in his best years after the age of 30.

You really want to tell me how Danger, who probably has a better physical acumen than all of them, will be stuffed at 29?

 

[PAFC_1870]

To any Crows fan defending their midfield....

Sloane plays in the HB line.
Crouch isn't fit.
Thompson is old end of story.
You have no pace there.
You have no elite kick there.

That has the makings of a disaster. Sure the other ends are good. But the fwd line will dry up and if Tahlia went down you suddenly go bottom 6 without a doubt, especially with a harder draw coming.

If you don't bring in some quality mids this year you are in shit.

Midfields need to bat 10 deep. It was already a weakness even with Danger.

 

[Long Shanks]

To any Crows fan defending their midfield....

Sloane plays in the HB line.
Crouch isn't fit.
Thompson is old end of story.
You have no pace there.
You have no elite kick there.

That has the makings of a disaster. Sure the other ends are good. But the fwd line will dry up and if Tahlia went down you suddenly go bottom 6 without a doubt, especially with a harder draw coming.

If you don't bring in some quality mids this year you are in shit.

Midfields need to bat 10 deep. It was already a weakness even with Danger.

There used to be a saying, You can't argue with results.

I guess that doesn't apply anymore.

 

[Jack McKraken]

Is this the best player traded since Judd?

I was thinking something similar last night- how often does a top 5 player in the comp move clubs? Then I realised Ablett, buddy (granted those two not traded) and danger within 5 years! Bloody hell. That's not even reaching back to Judd.

 

[irish]

Go for it crows ! Make the cats pay market value , they will have to sell the farm , worth two first round picks easy and a player , too bad if they Carnot do the deal , he either stays or someone else will pay up

 

[Catfish Alley]

Yeah, that's fine. It's basic free market principle. Cats won't put themselves in a position where they harm their future though.

 

[grassrootsfooty]

Go for it crows ! Make the cats pay market value , they will have to sell the farm , worth two first round picks easy and a player , too bad if they Carnot do the deal , he either stays or someone else will pay up

The decision for dangerfield moving was known before it was announced the decision for Adelaide matching is already known. If you lived in Adelaide it's on the front page this morning about the intention to match, talk back radio had every crows supporter in Adelaide requesting Adelaide hold firm with the response that they don't care if that get nothing. If Adelaide don't match supporters are threatening not to renew their membership.

No point in talking about the matching, there can only be two outcomes goes in the PSD where Dangerfield loses his FA eligibility if he goes to another club, and another club would be down right stupid not to pick him up. He is a traceable asset after getting his services for a couple if years as he is no longer an FA. Or Geelong trade.

Which is the most likely, if it's not a sufficient trade as indicated earlier he will go PSD

 

[Unknown Identity]

Yeah, that's fine. It's basic free market principle. Cats won't put themselves in a position where they harm their future though.

You're kidding yourself..

If the home grown product of Moggs Creeks doesn't land at the Cattery the masses will riot.

If Adelaide match, you'll pay what he's worth as it just becomes like any other trade negotiation.

PSD is not a leverage point for Geelong because you can bet your bottom dollar Melbourne or Carlton will take him.

In saying that I wouldn't discount the AFL stepping in with their secret herbs and spices handing Adelaide 2 x First round selections to keep their record of no clubs matching any offers.

 

[Catfish Alley]

So, the Cats are in a bad position because one of the best players in the league wants to join them? Ok.

 

[Unknown Identity]

So, the Cats are in a bad position because one of the best players in the league wants to join them? Ok.

Not at all.

But the price will be 2 x First Round picks.

Just depends if you believe that 2 first rounders is "mortgaging your future"..

 

[Catfish Alley]

Personally, I don't. I'd rather the proven player now.

 

[scalesofjustice]

Yeah, that's fine. It's basic free market principle. Cats won't put themselves in a position where they harm their future though.

Yes they will, as they will have no choice.

Dangerfield will end up being to your club what Judd was to Carlton. And look at them now.

 

[Catfish Alley]

Of course they have a choice.

 

[cryptor]

 

[DangerSloane]

I can't see Crows not matching $800k.

Uh why not?
We have that and a stack more spare.

 

[Catfish Alley]

Uh why not?
We have that and a stack more spare.

What happens then? He stays or nominates for draft and most likely still goes to Victoria?

 

[DangerSloane]

What happens then? He stays or nominates for draft and most likely still goes to Victoria?

No we match and trade him.
Simple.

This surely would have all been discussed in the past few months.
The clubs have both been fully aware for weeks and somewhat aware for months.

He is not going to risk nominating for hte draft and ending up at Carlton. Thats a lose for Danger a lose for Adelaide and a lose for Geelong and eventually a lose for Carlton when he sits out the year.

 

[cdcanman]

Not sure if this will ever work. Because the trend so far has been for players to move to strong teams under free agency. So far it has had less to do with money and more to do with players moving to clubs in flag/finals contention. Give it a few more years and it will continue to be the same. As such there needs to be compensation, otherwise the gap between the bottom and top of the ladder will get way too big.

This is such a fallacy.
I've written about it before. Sorry for sounding like a broken record.

When it comes to players chasing premierships, wanting to go to teams in contention, naturally this is going to be the case at times. Wouldn't you do the same? But the football world is cyclical. The draft and salary cap will ensure this to be the case. A team like Hawthorn are experiencing a sustained period of success right now, but no more so than North Melbourne of the late 90's, or Brisbane of the early 2000's, who both did that prior to FA. Hawthorn's period of success will come to an end soon enough. They'll fall down the ladder and have their period towards the bottom, just like everyone else. When this happens, teams on their way up will pick over Hawthorn's list, acquiring players who still have something left in the tank. Then when these teams have their period at the top contending, they will become the new destination clubs for free agents. Cyclical. These same arguments that you are putting forth regarding the onset of free agency have been made in every country and every sport around the world when FA has been introduced. In each of those countries and each of those sports, without fail, those arguments have disappeared within 10 or so years (only exception is MLB, but they have no salary cap). It won't continue to be the same clubs benefitting as you are suggesting. 'Give it a few more years' and you'll see how FA doesn't discriminate, it's a level playing field for all clubs. Each team will have their time in the sun, as long as they make good decisions along the way.

With regards to your point about players wanting to move to strong teams or big clubs, the teams that are doing well in the new player movement landscape are far more varied than what some people are willing to admit. The evidence shows success during this time of year has little to do with the size and wealth of a club, or their relative success, but seems to have more to do with being willing to make bold moves, take risks, and think outside the square. Those teams that have embraced player movement, and have been willing to make things happen are the ones who are excelling.

Some examples:

St Kilda: Seem to be doing quite well out of the new player movement landscape, despite being a smaller club, and being towards the bottom of the ladder at the moment. They have been willing to think outside what is conventional or traditional football thinking and really embrace the new player movement rules to hasten their rebuild. They have allowed older established players (Dal Santo and Goddard) to walk, benefitting from what they received in return. They have been willing to trade established players to contenders (McEvoy to Hawthorn for a young player and draft pick) to access more top-end draft talent. They acquired Bruce by offering greater opportunity, not a premiership. They are making the new rules work for them, and on their terms.
Western Bulldogs: Also seem to be doing quite well under the new system. They acquired Crameri from Essendon despite being a 'lowly' club at the time. They turned a potential disaster in their captain wanting to leave into a wonderful opportunity by acquiring Tom Boyd, the No.1 draft pick from just one year prior. They have traded established talent (Higgins, Lake) to improve their draft selections. They will be in the market for significant FA's in the coming years now as they have built a platform for success, despite being a smaller club.
North Melbourne: Have benefitted from the new rules perhaps more than any other club. Dal Santo, Waite and Higgins, enough said.
Hawthorn: One of the bigger clubs, sure, and they have used player movement to their advantage better than most, agreed. But don't ignore the fact that they also lost one of the best, and arguably the most marketable player in the game the year after they won the premiership. Could only afford Frawley after losing Franklin the year before.
Collingwood: Also using player movement very well, but not necessary to bring in ready made talent. The best moves they have made have been about bringing in high end draft picks. They got Jesse White with the offer of greater opportunity/role. They got Levi Greenwood because they were willing to offer more money than NM. They got Jack Crisp but only after losing a far superior player in Dayne Beams. They are in the market for Treloer and Aish this year because they have managed both their salary cap and their list rebuild well. They didn't even make the 8 this year don't forget.
Sydney: Yes they secured Buddy and Tippett, but broke no rules to achieve this. They took massive risks and were willing to make something happen. Good on them. The sanctions applied to them are completely ridiculous. And let's not ignore the fact that they lost Shane Mumford as a result. A top 5 ruckman in the league. Not an insignificant departure. They also lost Malceski, premiership player, All-Australian, who signed with one of the expansion franchises no less.
Adelaide: Acquired Betts ahead of interested teams far more advanced than they were at the time (NM, Richmond).

 

[Catfish Alley]

So, you match money and Geelong and Adelaide try find a deal? Ok. Wasn't entirely sure. If a deal can't be done he can just walk though, right?

 

[DangerSloane]

So, you match money and Geelong and Adelaide try find a deal? Ok. Wasn't entirely sure. If a deal can't be done he can just walk though, right?

A deal would be done.
I would say that the crows wouldnt be daft enough to match unless the parties werent too far away on a deal.

 

[Catfish Alley]

True. I think they'll work something out. Not much you can do when a guy wants to go. I wonder what Geelong would have done with Ablett if they could have possibly matched.

 

[Suma Magic]

I was thinking something similar last night- how often does a top 5 player in the comp move clubs? Then I realised Ablett, buddy (granted those two not traded) and danger within 5 years! Bloody hell. That's not even reaching back to Judd.

They weren't trades though.

 

[Mego Red]

Their midfield is cooked. Danger gone. Thompson is 35. Crouch can't get on the field; who is left? Weak backline. Decent ruck but good forward line.

Cats have a forward built around Hawkins, great midfield with Danger and up and coming backline anchored by AA Q9.

I don't know if the rest of the league would agree with you about Hawkins. I think changes in the game and his body could mean his best has past.

Crows midfield will include Sloane, both Crouches, Richie Douglas and probably two players we get this offseason. Our defense includes three all Australian quality players in Talia, Brodie Smith and Laird and the best young defender in the league in Lever. Forwards and Ruck is obviously excellent.

We improve the mix of our list this off season and we could actually go further next year.

 

[Catfish Alley]

You'll be up there again. Good team and culture. Who knows? Maybe it will be like what the Cats did in 2011.

 

[Mego Red]

Sorry for causing offence there ironman.

Things have changed since Judd style trade. That showed giving up 2 strong picks (pick / Kennedy) is not such a smart move.

What you might be forgetting is that he has already played 2/3 of his best seasons like Judd had. You think what he produces now is what he will produce at 29...Based on odds, delusional. Geelong's recruiters...a lot smarter than you... will bank on 3 years of hot form. They will pay for three years hot form in their trade negotiations. They will hope he produces after that...hope. Judd at 29/30 was no Judd at 24/25.

Treloar (3 years younger) is 'arguably' worth more on the trade table not because he is as good as Danger but because he has more 'peak' years left. I'm not sure if you can understand that. Your Dangervision glasses are blinding you. Danger couldn't make Adelaide win a flag and will only be one of several pieces required to win Geelong a flag.

Except there's only three years difference and Treloar may never be the player Danger is, or be able to move forward later in his career like Danger will

Geelong will be better with Danger than Collingwood will be with Treloar.