Wellingham - Traded to West Coast

[livnixon9]

Why is the president getting involved in trade matters? Perhaps they should also get Joffa involved in the talks as well. It is no wonder some clubs are loathed during trade week/fortnight/month. Most clubs just want to get the thing done with and move on.

He was asked a ? on a radio show and answered. No difference to Brayshaw indicating that the club had met with Travis Boak on TFS and commenting on his trade value to North.

 

[PieNSauce]

Any other president looks out for their own club. BIGFOOTY: Yeah no shit, that's his job he's president.

Eddie looks out for Collingwood (And is one of the best.) BIGFOOTY: Eddie is a sook, huff puff blah blah.

******* hell mate. Pick one and stick to it.

Exactly. Mind you, I do love how BF sometimes provides such fantastic comic relief. Some of the shit in this thread has had me rolling on the floor this morning.

 

[Tas]

He was asked a ? on a radio show and answered. No difference to Brayshaw indicating that the club had met with Travis Boak on TFS and commenting on his trade value.

Brayshaw indicated his trade value? I think all he said was that we would be very keen to get him here IF he decided he wanted to come back to Victoria and we would put an attractive offer to him and get the deal done. I don't think he made any indication of what we would need to give Port to make it happen, that isn't his department.

 

[Son of Skeletor]

I think this is where I stop taking you seriously. Scotland for unders huh? Our "current B&F winner" ... pfft! "First round pick" - by which you mean pick 17 in a shallow draft. Inflationary language like this only makes your argument less reasonable. You offered unders and were rightly knocked back. Fair enough though. You were under no obligation to trade if you didn't want to, but you were keen as mustard to land Stevens at the time.

You paid pick #35 (Brent Hall) for Scotland! He'll be a ten year player for you next season, is your current B&F.. that's a win for Carlton every day of the week! Mick Malthouse may not have rated him, but a lot of Collingwood fans did. Pffft yourself!

We offered pick 17 AND Scotland to Port for Stevens- how is that inflationary language? Port said "Didak or nothing", we said "no"- how does that make us bastards? We were keen on Stevens, but we weren't desperate..

* Ask anyone if they'd trade pick #35 for 10 years of Heath Scotland- you'd get 100% "yes" vote.
* Ask anyone if they'd rather take pick #17 and a young Heath Scotland for Nick Stevens, or insist upon Didak and let him (Stevens) walk- you'd get nearly 100% choosing the former option.
* Ask anyone if they'd trade Didak (four years after being drafted at pick #3) for an out-of-contract Nick Stevens? You wouldn't find many takers..

If West Coast had insisted upon Kennedy, Murphy and pick #1 for Judd, would Carlton have the deal? Probably not, and rightly so.

We offered St Kilda pick #21 for Ball (plus Wellingham to North).. if that constitutes the entirety of our recent 'history' of 'not playing nicely', then I think we'd be happy to stand by our record.

 

[Mateyman]

Firstly, so you think you kept Dawes on the list in order to ruck? Or that it was precognized that say Keefe would be injured. And you speak as though Dawes performances in the ruck, or elsewhere for that matter, this season were actually something good ... he was just a lump sent to get in the way. And why couldn't Reid or Cloke or Goldsack have had a crack.

Nope! Sorry. Not going to change my mind with those arguments. You could have got a first rounder for Dawes easy last year. Nuffie clubs, including my own, were genuinely interested and his price was premium. If Dawes walks out of the club now, you've really cost yourselves on that one.

Goldsack was tried but can't compete as a ruck man. Is only 193cm. When Cloke was meant to be in the ruck, who was meant to play forward without Dawes? Reid can't ruck either. Keeffe has also stopped playing the ruck role and hd we traded Dawes, he would've been the only player who could even try to play ruck. It would be very risky to go into a season with him as the ONLY back-up ruck man,

 

[September Action]

LOL. I think the Pies have shown when they have players they really don't want, they're prepared to make reasonable deals. Required players though are worth the world and then some.

The stupidity is strong in this one.

 

[Koki Freelander]

It will get it done and Collingwood are going to have to get used to the idea... He is not a star player and is not worth a first round pick. He is walking.... Collingwood will either accept the trade or he will get to us via the draft.

I think that is just great. So, when this doesn't happen and I come on here and abuse the shit out of you, how you will spin it to make it sound like you were still somehow right?

This is a dumbass thread starting my someone being deliberately inflammatory.

WC talks about second rounder
C'wood talks about 1st rounder and a player

and what, we are shocked/angry about this? Are you guys for real?

Using my amazing brain and my knowledge of what 'a negotiation' is, I am going to guess that something in between happens

School holidays always ruins BIg Footy

 

[Koki Freelander]

People should really stop using the Ryan O'keefe example. It is one example of a player not getting to where he wanted versus many that have ended up at their desired location.

Also, Mitch Clark had massive dollar signs in his eyes when he decided against going to Freo. Wellingham has seen the offer from Melbourne and he has chosen West Coast's offer over it.

A lot of Collingwood supporters seem to think they have the power in this trade but they really don't. Losing Wellingham to the draft for nothing isn't a win. Wellingham can't be traded to Melbourne unless he accepts it so it leaves Collingwood in a difficult situation.

Yes indeed - a difficult situation.

The problem is most of your WC mates are saying we have no choice but to bend over and take it. They are wrong

 

[Stax on the mill]

Regardless of WC involvement. A player wants to return home and Cwood are going to make it as hard as possible for him. Explodes any myth about how Cwood treat their players.

Naive, self serving humbug. This is not park footy. Wellingham is a pretty handy player, and West Coast have gone out of their way to play trading hardball with Collingwood in recent years.

 

[WCEbrody]

The problem with this trade is that both sets of supporters have some bloody delusional supporters on BigFooty and are either A. underrating him and calling him a dud or B. throwing around tags like ''premiership player'' and ''best 22 @ collingwood so must be at every club'' which essentially mean bugger all,take for instance Chris Dawes who is best 22 AND a premiership player...wouldn't be close to a game at West Coast.

Sharrod has the attributes to be an A-Grade player , but has not shown that consistently over his couple years at the magpies..he would be a nice addition to our 22 on a wing or Half forward with stints through the midfield but is he worth pick 17? we'll see.

 

[Mateyman]

The problem with this trade is that both sets of supporters have some bloody delusional supporters on BigFooty and are either A. underrating him and calling him a dud or B. throwing around tags like ''premiership player'' and ''best 22 @ collingwood so must be at every club'' which essentially mean bugger all,take for instance Chris Dawes who is best 22 AND a premiership player...wouldn't be close to a game at West Coast.

Sharrod has the attributes to be an A-Grade player , but has not shown that consistently over his couple years at the magpies..he would be a nice addition to our 22 on a wing or Half forward with stints through the midfield but is he worth pick 17? we'll see.

Yeah, I agree. What annoys me most is when people definitively state what WILL happen, when they haven't got the foggiest idea.

 

[frantelle]

The comparison to Ebert are ridiculous. Ebert averaged 13disposals in his last year at the Eagles which is what we are comparing Wellingham to because that's when the trade occurred. His last 5games for the Eagles returned 14, 9, 14, 14 & 12 touches whereas this year Wellingham averaged over 19 touches and 4 tackles per game. If anything the comparison to Ebert at the time Ebert was traded highlights Wellingham is worth substantially more then a second round pick

 

[Nostradumbass]

Run of the mill, average footballer, not sure what the fuss is about.

 

[Monkey King]

We offered pick 17 AND Scotland to Port for Stevens- how is that inflationary language?

Umm ... because you inflated these more raw facts by saying "first round pick and your current B&F winner". Sounds great, but remove the ambiguity of the statement and you're left with pick 17 in a poor draft and some player we didn't want and instead traded to someone else for pick 35.

* Ask anyone if they'd trade pick #35 for 10 years of Heath Scotland- you'd get 100% "yes" vote.

Hindsight is hindsight. How about if you asked them at the time? I reckon you'd get pretty close to a 100% saying evens trade. Now you're claiming unders. Total bullocks!

We offered St Kilda pick #21 for Ball (plus Wellingham to North).. if that constitutes the entirety of our recent 'history' of 'not playing nicely', then I think we'd be happy to stand by our record.

What you and Ball concocted was dodgy as shit and IMO against the spirit of draft and trading.[/quote]

 

[the distributer]

Umm ... because you inflated these more raw facts by saying "first round pick and your current B&F winner". Sounds great, but remove the ambiguity of the statement and you're left with pick 17 in a poor draft and some player we didn't want and instead traded to someone else for pick 35.



Hindsight is hindsight. How about if you asked them at the time? I reckon you'd get pretty close to a 100% saying evens trade. Now you're claiming unders. Total bullocks!



What you and Ball concocted was dodgy as shit and IMO against the spirit of draft and trading.

[/quote]

Maybe we should have cheated the salary cap.

 

[golazo]

Run of the mill, average footballer, not sure what the fuss is about.

He would fit in well at Richmond then.

 

[Monkey King]

Goldsack was tried but can't compete as a ruck man. Is only 193cm. When Cloke was meant to be in the ruck, who was meant to play forward without Dawes? Reid can't ruck either. Keeffe has also stopped playing the ruck role and hd we traded Dawes, he would've been the only player who could even try to play ruck. It would be very risky to go into a season with him as the ONLY back-up ruck man,

Dawes is also 193cm mate and he can't really ruck either btw and wasn't that great up forward either. As I said before, he's just a bigger lump to get in the way of the other ruck, hence more effective. Wood is a better ruck, just adds no value anywhere else. You could have got by with someone else IMO (I'd have suggested Brown aside from his knees) and certainly cashing in on his value last year would have left you better placed, particularly if he goes this year anyway.

 

[Monkey King]

Maybe we should have cheated the salary cap.

Erm ... who's to say you didn't. Most crimes go unpunished.

 

[Tas]

Run of the mill, average footballer, not sure what the fuss is about.

He has played some ripping games of footy, I think he has the ability to be more than he is, he has probably shone a lot more when Collingwood didn't have it's prime midfielders all in, perhaps a lack of opportunity is limiting his impact.

 

[the distributer]

Dawes is also 193cm mate and he can't really ruck either btw and wasn't that great up forward either. As I said before, he's just a bigger lump to get in the way of the other ruck, hence more effective. Wood is a better ruck, just adds no value anywhere else. You could have got by with someone else IMO (I'd have suggested Brown aside from his knees) and certainly cashing in on his value last year would have left you better placed, particularly if he goes this year anyway.

Dawes actually rucks well, i think you should stop making a fool of yourself, you clearly have NFI and you're bias towards Collingwood is legendary, just go away and stop clogging up a thread which doesn't concern you.

 

[Son of Skeletor]

Umm ... because you inflated these more raw facts by saying "first round pick and your current B&F winner". Sounds great, but remove the ambiguity of the statement and you're left with pick 17 in a poor draft and some player we didn't want and instead traded to someone else for pick 35.

Hindsight is hindsight. How about if you asked them at the time? I reckon you'd get pretty close to a 100% saying evens trade. Now you're claiming unders. Total bullocks!

What you and Ball concocted was dodgy as shit and IMO against the spirit of draft and trading.

[/quote]

Our first round pick was our first round pick- it's not like we had another to offer. Scotland IS your current B&F winner, and it's not as if he has been a late bloomer either. It was apparent to many people at the time, both inside and outside of Collingwood, that Scotland was a very capable AFL footballer. It surprised exactly nobody that he has gone on to have a distinguished career- he and Mick didn't see eye-to-eye, that was all. Pick 17 and Scotland for Stevens.. it sounded reasonable back then, and it sounds even better in 2012. Besides, Port went on record as saying "Didak or nothing".. we didn't want to do that deal (rightly so), so we gained nothing, lost nothing.

Pick 35 for Scotland considered evens at the time? Possibly.. look at the other recycled players you picked up at the time though. You didn't have a higher pick (bar #2) to offer us.. all I can say was that a lot of Collingwood fans raised their collective eyebrows at the time. Over time it's been conclusively proven that you paid unders- might be semantics, but if you're arguing that Collingwood has a 'history' of being bastards at the trading table, then.. I'm not seeing a pattern. Hindsight indicates that we've made several very fair offers for various players over the years, some of which were accepted, some of which were not..

I'd say statements like "Collingwood has a history and a bad reputation", or "Collingwood don't know how to play nicely" are more inflationary and inflammatory than anything I've said

 

[i_hate_scams]

i dont have to go to thailand to get ripped off, i can just come here.

 

[Mateyman]

Dawes is also 193cm mate and he can't really ruck either btw and wasn't that great up forward either. As I said before, he's just a bigger lump to get in the way of the other ruck, hence more effective. Wood is a better ruck, just adds no value anywhere else. You could have got by with someone else IMO (I'd have suggested Brown aside from his knees) and certainly cashing in on his value last year would have left you better placed, particularly if he goes this year anyway.

Dawes is much bigger (weighs more) than Goldsack. Why do you think Dawes was only dropped for 1 game despite his terrible form? Because there was nobody else whom could play his position properly

 

[i_hate_scams]

wellingham wants to go home, but WC is playing hardball and making it as difficult as possible for a suitable trade and transaction.

 

[Keys]

Naive, self serving humbug. This is not park footy. Wellingham is a pretty handy player, and West Coast have gone out of their way to play trading hardball with Collingwood in recent years.

I've read this perception about west coast playing hardball with collingwood in trades but have no idea what it is based on. What trades or potential trades have we been difficult to deal with?