Recruiting Trade & Free Agency VI

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Personal opinion, whilst I do consider Shiels value to be closer to this years 1st and next years second, I'd pay two firsts to get the deal done; solely for good business and the fact that our list in in a good state; we could probably afford to go without a first round next year given the return we get with Shiel.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Personal opinion, whilst I do consider Shiels value to be closer to this years 1st and next years second, I'd pay two firsts to get the deal done; solely for good business and the fact that our list in in a good state; we could probably afford to go without a first round next year given the return we get with Shiel.

Absolutely... considering next years 1st will be 18 - later after the priority picks they'll have to hand out to the Blues...
 
Trealor was 22

Shiel will be 26 before round 1 next year

Good point and I understand the valuable nature of first round draft picks. Presumably we wouldn't even be in the running for Shiel if we didn't have our first rounder this year in tact. I still think we need to give up 2 first rounders for Shiel this year however, for a few reasons:

1. Will detract from players wanting to club in the future if they think we're hard to deal with.
2. How flat would the players and supporters feel after letting slip the opportunity one of the games best mids.
3. Backing ourselves that we will still attract free agents next season, without the need for draft picks.

I know that GWS has basically given away Scully and Setterfield for free, but we did also get our reigning best and fairest from last year for a second round pick.
 
Personal opinion, whilst I do consider Shiels value to be closer to this years 1st and next years second, I'd pay two firsts to get the deal done; solely for good business and the fact that our list in in a good state; we could probably afford to go without a first round next year given the return we get with Shiel.
With our talent pool growing, we will suffer the challenge of playing players capable of 1st 22 footy in the reserves for extended periods, who will no doubt want to explore their options over the next 1, 2 or 3 years.(read Lloyd from Richmond)

Come that time Adrian's team will become the hunted, rather than being the hunters. Then we will see his worth when the boots on the other foot, for trades, pick and upgrades. This could happen as early as next year as players accustomed to games, have opportunities that dry up.
 
Good point and I understand the valuable nature of first round draft picks. Presumably we wouldn't even be in the running for Shiel if we didn't have our first rounder this year in tact. I still think we need to give up 2 first rounders for Shiel this year however, for a few reasons:

1. Will detract from players wanting to club in the future if they think we're hard to deal with.
2. How flat would the players and supporters feel after letting slip the opportunity one of the games best mids.
3. Backing ourselves that we will still attract free agents next season, without the need for draft picks.

I know that GWS has basically given away Scully and Setterfield for free, but we did also get our reigning best and fairest from last year for a second round pick.
Re #1.

Why would players care if we are "hard to deal with"?

They say I want to go here and then its up to everyone else to facilitate.
 
Re #1.

Why would players care if we are "hard to deal with"?

They say I want to go here and then its up to everyone else to facilitate.

More the fact that they see Dylan Shiel nominate Essendon, then have to go back to GWS, tail between his legs, because we couldn't get the deal done. Happened with Gibbs at Carlton/Adelaide I guess, but still not a great look for the club.
 
More the fact that they see Dylan Shiel nominate Essendon, then have to go back to GWS, tail between his legs, because we couldn't get the deal done. Happened with Gibbs at Carlton/Adelaide I guess, but still not a great look for the club.
"not a great look for the club"

It depends on who is being unreasonable, we don't know what is being discussed, the managers probably do.

For all we know it is GWS that has an unreal valuation of Shiel
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

"not a great look for the club"

It depends on who is being unreasonable, we don't know what is being discussed, the managers probably do.

For all we know it is GWS that has an unreal valuation of Shiel

For all we know the AFL has told Dodoro and SOS (who are mates) to have a bit of fun making this seem like a big ordeal to give them something to televise, whilst the actual deal was agreed to days ago and it's just haggling over which pick from next year we throw in with this years first. Essendon has the currency to get the trade done, Shiel wants to move, and GWS are willing to let him go - when was the last time a trade like that didn't get done?
 
Good point and I understand the valuable nature of first round draft picks. Presumably we wouldn't even be in the running for Shiel if we didn't have our first rounder this year in tact. I still think we need to give up 2 first rounders for Shiel this year however, for a few reasons:

1. Will detract from players wanting to club in the future if they think we're hard to deal with.
2. How flat would the players and supporters feel after letting slip the opportunity one of the games best mids.
3. Backing ourselves that we will still attract free agents next season, without the need for draft picks.

I know that GWS has basically given away Scully and Setterfield for free, but we did also get our reigning best and fairest from last year for a second round pick.
If hard to deal with means pay fair value for a player, every club is hard to deal with unless they are stupid.
 
This time last year many would have relented and given up our future first rounder for Stringer - if that had happened, this year we're not in the running for Shiel.
Dodoro is practical, but we're building our future not mortgaging it.

The bulldogs shot themselves in the foot by making their relationship with stringer untenable (toxic), and public before the trade period even started. Sheil nominated Essendon at the expense $2m. I'm a lurker, so correct me if I'm missing something. But I would take that to mean he's the sort of person that if we started ****ing his previous team on a trade as a reason to reconsider. We may have to pay overs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top