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

[The Ironist]

So it's OK for you campaigners to go banging on about the Cats but when the shoe is on the other foot? Your defence has routinely been smashed this year; the end.

... Wha! I can't take someone who calls themselves "manboob" seriously. I never said anything about the Cats list. You need to pick your targets better big boy! Our defence has been found wanting because they are young, our game play is aggressive and open, and our midfield was not defensive enough and would not commit to two-way running.

You are stating they are rubbish! This is incorrect and this is what I disproved to you. I have no idea why you think its unreasonable that you actually trade for a player who is restricted to the Crows. You are getting a top 3 AFL player for peanuts even if it's only 2 first round picks. Be happy!

 

[dlanod]

This year after free agency compos it will be about pick 20 this year. And you'd assume with Dangerfield we'd be at least making a preliminary final again so pick 20 (2015) + pick 17-20 (2016) + Hartung (who due to endurance running power is worth a lot more with interchange cap).

How is pick 15 getting knocked back to pick 20? Who are the other four players getting $600k+ per year other than Dangerfield?

 

[Suma Magic]

I've seen that argument before and don't buy it.

To lose something, you must first have it.

What we have to "lose" is the chance - and only the chance - to get a great player.
It is only Dangerfield's reported desire to move close to family that makes Geelong's chance any greater than a bunch of other clubs.

This accident of geography is a hope and a dream, but nothing more substantial than that.
If he goes somewhere else, then the sun still rises in Geelong. The supporters already banking on it will eventually get over it. The club will invest it's draft picks in promising youth and we go on from there.

Opportunity cost isn't something you can choose to believe in or not.

It's reality.

 

[Tig22]

Even you own CEO acknowledges he has nominated the pies!

Gale says they haven't given up hope on getting Adam Treloar to Punt road, despite the young mid-fielder nominating Collingwood as his club of choice.

"All he's done is indicated he's preferred to go to Collingwood. If Collingwood and GWS can't come to terms I'd imagine he'd be a player of interest."



Read more at http://www.sen.com.au/news/09-15/its-tiger-time-brendon-gale#yWkLAsUJs8jSiyI6.99

I know it is very very likely he's going to Collingwood, but I haven't heard him or his manager say it. I don't actually care about where he goes! My post about it was in response to something else entirely, where someone asked if any uncontracted players had publicly nominated clubs.

 

[Linda_Lovelace]

Going to get nasty by the look of it.

Crows saying they will consider offers from any Vic club. Might be posturing to keep fans happy as danger has to agree to the trade and the crows would need to be prepared to get nothing and lose him in the draft.

On my phone so can't post link but it's on the Hun website.

 

[Linda_Lovelace]

I know it is very very likely he's going to Collingwood, but I haven't heard him or his manager say it. I don't actually care about where he goes! My post about it was in response to something else entirely, where someone asked if any uncontracted players had publicly nominated clubs.

Argue with an idiot you end up being one.

 

[cryptor]

How is pick 15 getting knocked back to pick 20? Who are the other four players getting $600k+ per year other than Dangerfield?

I'm being optimistic and working it out based on us not losing tomorrow night.

 

[Moggy]

You don't buy what? Danger has said he's gone. Therefore crows have already lost him. What we have to lose if he goes to the draft is the compo pick.

Geelong are the preferred destination, they have him if they trade for him. They lose him if he goes to the draft.

So, you're saying (in the text I bolded) that GFC have "Dangerfield minus what we trade for him", which equals zero in the case of a fair trade.

So what we lose is zero, and what we could gain is also zero - in market terms.

Adelaide on the other hand, have Dangerfield and/or the compensation pick to lose.

That's why I believe Adelaide have more to lose.

 

[Moggy]

Opportunity cost isn't something you can choose to believe in or not.

It's reality.

Opportunity cost is the cost of not taking alternate opportunities when you take a course of action. It's real but doesn't apply here.

Let's look at what happens if Geelong decide not to offer "2 x 1st rounder + player" or whatever Adelaide fans here are demanding...
In that case then you can compare the cost of not having PD versus the cost of not having 2 x 1st rd picks + player. There's not much in that.

In my view, the only cost you could argue for is that PD might deliver a flag in the next 3 years. What are the chances of that? 10% maybe?
In that scenario you also have to factor the damage it does medium-long term to give away those picks.

Personally, I would keep the picks/player. I think the chances of a flag are higher that way.

 

[The Ironist]

Opportunity cost is the cost of not taking alternate opportunities when you take a course of action. It's real but doesn't apply here.

Let's look at what happens if Geelong decide not to offer "2 x 1st rounder + player" or whatever Adelaide fans here are demanding...
In that case then you can compare the cost of not having PD versus the cost of not having 2 x 1st rd picks + player. There's not much in that.

In my view, the only cost you could argue for is that PD might deliver a flag in the next 3 years. What are the chances of that? 10% maybe?
In that scenario you also have to factor the damage it does medium-long term to give away those picks.

Personally, I would keep the picks/player. I think the chances of a flag are higher that way.

This is what the club is looking at from what i've been told - One pick between 6-10 and another between 11-15. Or if alternatively the Cats include a player it would be the Cats first and a second round pick (2016) (inside 30) - plus one of the SA lads (Murdoch or Gregson I was lead to believe... Not George HS)

 

[SA HAWK]

This is what the club is looking at from what i've been told - One pick between 6-10 and another between 11-15. Or if alternatively the Cats include a player it would be the Cats first and a second round pick (2016) (inside 30) - plus one of the SA lads (Murdoch or Gregson I was lead to believe... Not George HS)

Gregson would be a good get if he wants to come home.

 

[SA HAWK]

Don't get me wrong I would love for Hawks to get Danger but if it comes to trading for him then I doubt we will even still be chasing him

We need young mids.

Should be looking at someone like o'meara.

 

[Lethality]

So, you're saying (in the text I bolded) that GFC have "Dangerfield minus what we trade for him", which equals zero in the case of a fair trade.

So what we lose is zero, and what we could gain is also zero - in market terms. .

You lose Dangerfield, who your club apparently wants.

 

[Moggy]

You lose Dangerfield, who your club apparently wants.

aaaaand, we keep all our picks and players. We can live with that.

You can't miss what you never had, as they say. Even the Danger-to-Cats tragics will forget this within a few months.

 

[Bay Pie]

Crows compo pick is currently pick 14. Academy kids Mills, Kennedy, Keays and Hipwood all a decent chance to be obtained with picks that fall after this pick but with bids before this pick. Likely this pick will become pick 16 at least.

So By matching a Geelong bid, they are risking pick 16 in a shallow draft. Pffffft. Geelong are dreaming.

Geelongs 1st Rounder is a certainty. Minimum would be a 2nd rounder on top of that or a very good player.

Dangerfield is a gun. No way Geelong don't trade for him no absolutely. No way, Dangerfield risks everything in the ND or PSD. Melbourne reportedly offered him $1.2M a year over 5 years.

 

[Lethality]

aaaaand, we keep all our picks and players. We can live with that.

You might be able to, but the supporters and club seem to have penciled him in for 2016 already. Steve Johnson's exit in particular would've been with Dangerfield in mind.

 

[manboob]

No way, Dangerfield risks everything in the ND or PSD. Melbourne reportedly offered him $1.2M a year over 5 years.

And he told them to get ****ed.

 

[Moggy]

You might be able to, but the supporters and club seem to have penciled him in for 2016 already. Steve Johnson's exit in particular would've been with Dangerfield in mind.

Lot of assumptions there, mate

The club have said nothing, thankfully.
The supporters are a diverse group. No-one speaks for them as a whole.

 

[KennyP#42]

Is it really the best look for the crows matching any offer.... Doesn't exactly advertise the club in a positive light to potential new players.... Come to the crows - we won't put your interests first?

 

[Lethality]

Lot of assumptions there, mate

The club have said nothing, thankfully.

The supporters are a diverse group. No-one speaks for them as a whole.

 

[Goats]

No, I'm thinking of Hartung.

Then as usual Motley you're just pretending to know what you're talking about.

 

[Moggy]

No way to prove anything when it comes to this question: i.e. will the Cats supporters get over it?

but, any rationale analysis of human behaviour would suggest that 99% of people would cope just fine... People have coped with a lot worse and survived.

 

[Suma Magic]

Opportunity cost is the cost of not taking alternate opportunities when you take a course of action. It's real but doesn't apply here.

Let's look at what happens if Geelong decide not to offer "2 x 1st rounder + player" or whatever Adelaide fans here are demanding...
In that case then you can compare the cost of not having PD versus the cost of not having 2 x 1st rd picks + player. There's not much in that.

In my view, the only cost you could argue for is that PD might deliver a flag in the next 3 years. What are the chances of that? 10% maybe?
In that scenario you also have to factor the damage it does medium-long term to give away those picks.

Personally, I would keep the picks/player. I think the chances of a flag are higher that way.

Good post.

So what your saying, is that Danger is worth more than pick 14 in a trade scenario.

I agree - and I think that's why matching is inevitable.

 

[NTRabbit]

And he told them to get stuffed.

I don't think they'll really care about that if he's in the draft tbh.

 

[Moggy]

Good post.

So what your saying, is that Danger is worth more than pick 14 in a trade scenario.

I agree - and I think that's why matching is inevitable.

Well, that's not really what I am saying , but I do agree. More than one club would trade 14 for PD, no doubt.

But that doesn't make matching inevitable, IMO, because matching also brings fresh risk to Adelaide who then could push him into the draft - which is the cut off your nose to spite your face option.

I was more trying to make a point about GFC position if they don't put up a massive trade, but I am not sure I did that very well