List Mgmt. Trade Hypotheticals (opposition posters post here)

[Ichabod Noodle]

Is it just me, or have we become far more sarcastic in these threads lately?

 

[IanW]

Is it just me, or have we become far more sarcastic in these threads lately?

We have, because we're tense about playing finals while other teams supporters are in offseason mode

 

[ghostdog]

Only if there was a once in a generation player rated at pick 1. There isn't so that's why your club wants to sell it but pick 1 isn't worth more than 2 picks in the teens. Not 2 picks in the top 10

I would have thought that an easier question to answer once GWS's finals campaign is finished, if you don't finish as premiers. Then you may find yourselves wanting to draft the best available to fill a need that may have been exposed. No?

 

[coniglio_number1]

I would have thought that an easier question to answer once GWS's finals campaign is finished, if you don't finish as premiers. Then you may find yourselves wanting to draft the best available to fill a need that may have been exposed. No?

So he can sit with WHE, Pickett and Ahern as top 10 picks that don't get games and inevitably walk out ala marchbank citing homesickness? Nah I'd rather just take academy boys.

We have Charlie spargo who is basically a better McGrath to draft next year.

Also I'm not sure many first year players are the key to filling a hole in a grand final loss. With the depth we have we could solve that hole with what we already have.

 

[peters17]

So he can sit with WHE, Pickett and Ahern as top 10 picks that don't get games and inevitably walk out ala marchbank citing homesickness? Nah I'd rather just take academy boys.

We have Charlie spargo who is basically a better McGrath to draft next year.

Also I'm not sure many first year players are the key to filling a hole in a grand final loss. With the depth we have we could solve that hole with what we already have.

McGrath and Spargo are completely different players

 

[coniglio_number1]

McGrath and Spargo are completely different players

I thought I read he plays as a small fwd

 

[Andre the Giant]

So he can sit with WHE, Pickett and Ahern as top 10 picks that don't get games and inevitably walk out ala marchbank citing homesickness? Nah I'd rather just take academy boys.

We have Charlie spargo who is basically a better McGrath to draft next year.

Also I'm not sure many first year players are the key to filling a hole in a grand final loss. With the depth we have we could solve that hole with what we already have.

Spargo is a small forward who is buzzy and quick and has nice skills. He is very small about 172 cms and very lightly framed.

McGrath is a half back / mid who is a super athlete (elite runner) and a very athletic rebounding defender - 179 cms in height. Although he's been mentioned as a Heath Shaw replacement he's 5 cms shorter and probably more dynamic but without some of Shaw's other attributes. From the tapes looks more Zac Williams to me.

 

[peters17]

I thought I read he plays as a small fwd

Spargo is a small forward, McGrath is not a forward. Midfielder + (running) half back.

 

[ghostdog]

Spargo is a small forward who is buzzy and quick and has nice skills. He is very small about 172 cms and very lightly framed.

McGrath is a half back / mid who is a super athlete (elite runner) and a very athletic rebounding defender - 179 cms in height. Although he's been mentioned as a Heath Shaw replacement he's 5 cms shorter and probably more dynamic but without some of Shaw's other attributes. From the tapes looks more Zac Williams to me.

Commiserations on the result yesterday. GWS will be a scary unit next year.

Thought Nick Haynes was good yesterday. How many seasons do you think Shaw has in him? ...and is Zac Williams an academy player you'd take rather than a shot at McGrath? Just trying to get some take on what might pry Patton away... It was difficult to see any glaring weaknesses in the Giants game last night, except perhaps Palmer and Griffen, who seemed to go missing.

 

[coniglio_number1]

We will never let patton go. You could offer Daniher and we would say no

Also if your questioning if we would trade Williams then that is a big fat no

 

[Andre the Giant]

Commiserations on the result yesterday. GWS will be a scary unit next year.

Thought Nick Haynes was good yesterday. How many seasons do you think Shaw has in him? ...and is Zac Williams an academy player you'd take rather than a shot at McGrath? Just trying to get some take on what might pry Patton away... It was difficult to see any glaring weaknesses in the Giants game last night, except perhaps Palmer and Griffen, who seemed to go missing.

I think Patton moving this off season is highly unlikely. If we had won the flag the contract bonuses might have resulted in a move but with us already losing McCarthy and Stewart and possibly Lobb (either end 16 or end 17) we would be foolish to thin out our tall forward depth further.

We clearly like McGrath and have interviewed him but he is a long way from a consensus number 1 pick. He's like a luxury car, nice to have but not essential.

I doubt you will part with the number 1 pick. Its such a valuable thing for a club and for a team like Essendon which has been through so much it would really benefit from the positive PR.

Dodoro is a known nightmare to deal with and I can't see us being happy with anything proposed.

I see you keeping the pick and taking McCluggage (gun) and us possibly securing pick 5 from Carlton (trading Marchbank and Tomlinson) and maybe trading up to get pick 3 from Freo via a separate deal and using it on McGrath.

We will clean out a lot of cap space in this years trade season and I'd anticipate a lot of movement but our core spine players will stay put unless something crazy is offered.

Shaw can play for another 2 years, he is fit, injury free and doesnt rely on pace. Haynes is our MVP and a Giant for life. Williams is happy, settled and staying.

 

[BigBen_JRC]

Sorry for the intrusion guys and gals but there is mention of Patton over on our board, any backbone to this? Could involve the #1 pick?

 

[Ichabod Noodle]

Sorry for the intrusion guys and gals but there is mention of Patton over on our board, any backbone to this? Could involve the #1 pick?

not a snowball's chance in hell.

 

[coniglio_number1]

I had a read. Why are done supporters convinced that we are going to package up Patton AND pick 7 for pick 1.

We stood by Patton during his knee recos and now he is healthy and hitting form so now they think we are looking to sell??

 

[BarryAglett]

Patton is finally getting a clear run and will hit the pre season hard. He's more or less said the group has unfinished business so can't see him going. Holding on to Lobb would be the priority. He gives us so much aerial power that can't be replaced.

 

[Andre the Giant]

All the chatter is because he bought an investment property in Essendon at the start of this year.

We are going to shed some players we love but I dont think he goes, his comeback from the knees has been inspirational and he's really important to structure.

 

[reload141]

Yeah I think Patton stays for sure... McCarthy will end up at Freo this offseason you imagine so his spot is secure.

I would be putting in all the effort into ensuring Lobb stays and doesn't get homesick. He is just amazing!

Is there any more rumblings on him? I imagine he would stay for success for sure but some big offers will come from Freo/WC $$ wise...

 

[combaning]

Lobb and Patton are contracted for 2017. End of story, move on.

 

[Zephiisdaman]

Lobb and Patton are contracted for 2017. End of story, move on.

Hardly, have you forgotten McCarthy and Griffen. It is better to trade a player whilst they still have a year to go on their contract as you have a position of power, if the player is out of contract your options become far less.
If the player intends to leave after next year, you are almost better off doing the deal this year to maximise player value.
Just my opinion really.

 

[OrangeDuck]

I would be legitimately shocked if we trade out Patton or Lobb.

 

[Bokonon]

Hardly, have you forgotten McCarthy and Griffen. It is better to trade a player whilst they still have a year to go on their contract as you have a position of power, if the player is out of contract your options become far less.
If the player intends to leave after next year, you are almost better off doing the deal this year to maximise player value.
Just my opinion really.

Nothing is forgotten, it justs shows we wont be trading out contracted players, unless we get a ridiculous offer, then maybe.

 

[Andre the Giant]

Hardly, have you forgotten McCarthy and Griffen. It is better to trade a player whilst they still have a year to go on their contract as you have a position of power, if the player is out of contract your options become far less.
If the player intends to leave after next year, you are almost better off doing the deal this year to maximise player value.
Just my opinion really.

I disagree, you sound like a player manager.

The McCarthy case was extreme because nobody expected him to sit out the year. Let's face it that was a pretty unusual and rare move.

If Rory said "I'm not coming back next year so you need to trade me" then I would trade him but if he said "I'm feeling homesick if you can facilitate a deal it would be great but otherwise I'll go next year" then you keep him and hope he changes his mind after hopefully winning a flag.

It's not easy to find players the calibre of Lobb and Patton. No matter what you get in the draft it is rarely as good and even if it is it often takes years to see it and our window is now.

The ugly part of all this and the part that isn't made public is the maneuvering of the player managers. They can deny it all they like but they love creating friction because they know it leads to movement and ultimately if they can agitate the situation it is going to lead to a pay off for them whether the player stays or goes.

If anybody in their right mind think that McCarthy's Manager did not have something to do with that situation they have rocks in their heads. The fact is that player's values are constantly fluctuating. Lobb might currently be on $350K but will be offered minimum $700K to go "home", now that is bound to make anybody a little homesick.

This is exactly what precipitated the McCarthy move although its not denied he did also want to get back but knowing you are under contract for 2 more years at less than half what you can get brought things to a head.

Patton is under contract until the end of 2017, in my mind nobody should be able to speak to him until the mid point of next year unless both the player and the club he is contracted too mutually agree to an earlier date.

The AFL players in Australia are spoilt, they take the best parts of free agency but don't embrace it fully. In the USA they have a genuine free agency and can move about as they please but not all their money is guaranteed and they can be cut or moved on at any time.

If changes aren't made here soon enough to bring parity back and take some power away from the players then I would favour the AFL bringing these changes in for the clubs. If the players don't like it and want to go on strike then let them, it never does anybody any good and its not like they can change sports.

I'm a bit tired of clubs acting like vultures in trying to induce contracted players out of other clubs. It is tampering and creates major issues for all concerned.

Rant over.

 

[Colonial]

Hardly, have you forgotten McCarthy and Griffen. It is better to trade a player whilst they still have a year to go on their contract as you have a position of power, if the player is out of contract your options become far less.
If the player intends to leave after next year, you are almost better off doing the deal this year to maximise player value.
Just my opinion really.

Except who says they want to leave except for flogs in wa and vic?

 

[Zephiisdaman]

Except who says they want to leave except for flogs in wa and vic?

Makes sense

 

[Zephiisdaman]

I disagree, you sound like a player manager.

The McCarthy case was extreme because nobody expected him to sit out the year. Let's face it that was a pretty unusual and rare move.

If Rory said "I'm not coming back next year so you need to trade me" then I would trade him but if he said "I'm feeling homesick if you can facilitate a deal it would be great but otherwise I'll go next year" then you keep him and hope he changes his mind after hopefully winning a flag.

It's not easy to find players the calibre of Lobb and Patton. No matter what you get in the draft it is rarely as good and even if it is it often takes years to see it and our window is now.

The ugly part of all this and the part that isn't made public is the maneuvering of the player managers. They can deny it all they like but they love creating friction because they know it leads to movement and ultimately if they can agitate the situation it is going to lead to a pay off for them whether the player stays or goes.

If anybody in their right mind think that McCarthy's Manager did not have something to do with that situation they have rocks in their heads. The fact is that player's values are constantly fluctuating. Lobb might currently be on $350K but will be offered minimum $700K to go "home", now that is bound to make anybody a little homesick.

This is exactly what precipitated the McCarthy move although its not denied he did also want to get back but knowing you are under contract for 2 more years at less than half what you can get brought things to a head.

Patton is under contract until the end of 2017, in my mind nobody should be able to speak to him until the mid point of next year unless both the player and the club he is contracted too mutually agree to an earlier date.

The AFL players in Australia are spoilt, they take the best parts of free agency but don't embrace it fully. In the USA they have a genuine free agency and can move about as they please but not all their money is guaranteed and they can be cut or moved on at any time.

If changes aren't made here soon enough to bring parity back and take some power away from the players then I would favour the AFL bringing these changes in for the clubs. If the players don't like it and want to go on strike then let them, it never does anybody any good and its not like they can change sports.

I'm a bit tired of clubs acting like vultures in trying to induce contracted players out of other clubs. It is tampering and creates major issues for all concerned.

Rant over.

My exact point. If a players manager is shopping player x around, then obviously the player has no loyalty to club z. If that is the case, if a player has a go home mentality then the club is entirely within their rights to trade player early. Why risk a lesser deal when contract has run out?
You are correct in regard to the USA comparison, the players have the best parts of FA but haven't got the parts where the club can trade them to wherever. I am sick of clubs being screwed over, we should have mid- season trading and clubs should be able to trade wherever and whoever they wish. The contract gets taken over by another franchise.
Players and managers have far too much say in the changing landscape, all I would like is for clubs to have an equal ability to do the same.