-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Would You Trade Bailey Smith?
- Thread starter Lavender Bushranger
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Banned
- #477
Well we turned Issac Smiss into Issac Norm Smith so it makes sense for Bailey Sniff to come on down.The 10% of people who tell you to GAGF being Darcy Parish so you resort to someone that was good 2 years ago.
Good argument
- Thread starter
- #479
Dude, you left your web cam on...
But regardless, that's the most sensible thing you've ever said on this site.
craffles
Brownlow Medallist
Agreed, dogs fans just can’t handle the hard hitting truths so playing the man. If only their players were this physical
- Thread starter
- #482
So.... do we move this thread back to Main Board where it has always belonged?
TheCatStevensExperience
Footballl Oracle
- Jul 28, 2023
- 2,610
- 3,010
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- BigBigSounders2023 Kansas City Chefs
The 10% of people who tell you to GAGF being Darcy Parish so you resort to someone that was good 2 years ago.
Good argument
Not everyone plays footy for success. Some people hold their club to ransom for cash
TheCatStevensExperience
Footballl Oracle
- Jul 28, 2023
- 2,610
- 3,010
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- BigBigSounders2023 Kansas City Chefs
We smith Smiths
- Moderator
- #485
I knew this was incoming, as Smith had a kick he mucked up badly in Q4 when the game was in the balance, I thought, 'wonder how long it'll take ol LB to bump that thread'
- Thread starter
- #486
Well to be fair to me, this thread wasn't necessarily ever about bagging Smith, per se.
It was simply calling out that he clearly has limitations, and that it was likely that he didn't have much, if any, scope for improvement. But given the ridiculous hype about him, largely due to his social media presence, it was seemingly going unnoticed.
And therefore, I felt that if the Bulldogs were to trade him, they would get massive overs on him.
And let's be honest, I was right all along.
But regardless of whether I was right or not, the thread was always 100% reasonable. It was a perfectly reasonable, and logical question to pose.
Have you ever come across an afl club, who puts 3 years into a kid, who looks the goods, decides to then trade him out whilst his value is “high”?
To make matters worse, he actually thinks he’s correct and hops on here every poor game. Embarrassing stuff. And that’s coming from someone who’s been very critical of Baz.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #488
The thing is though, he didn't look the goods. That was the whole point.
Didn’t look the goods but we should sell high and could be part of getting Ben King to the club?
This is why your shi* thread remains in bay13.
- Thread starter
- #490
Exactly.Didn’t look the goods but we should sell high and could be part of getting Ben King to the club?
This is why your shi* thread remains in bay13.
To those of us with a clue, it was clear that Smith didn't have much upside.
The footy public however, including the likes of David King who declared that he would be the best player in the comp this year - couldn't see past the media hype.
If the Bulldogs were smart, they would have sold high like I suggested.
Remember when North paid $800k to that Port spud? Or when Essendon outbid everyone for Shiel?
Smart clubs know their players' limitations, and trade them out before the rest of the footy world sees it.
Perhaps Beveridge's love for him clouds his judgement?
Polec left port for money. Port wanted to keep him but not on that money. He stated that the length of the deal wasn’t sufficient (they offered him 2 years).
He wasn’t traded out “due to limitations before the footy world could see it”. His money at North Melbourne is not even relevant to the topic.
Shiel was somewhat pushed out basically due to cap issues at gws. They even tried to keep him towards the end by clearing other players. He also wanted to get home.
He again, was not pushed out due to limitations.
None of these trades back up your fantasy idea that clubs trade players out based on “limitations” and to trade high.
All coaches have a love for their players.
Bizarre posting.
Last edited:
Elmer_Hauser
Celtics 7-2
The Dogs would still get a pretty good haul of picks if they decide to trade Smudger
I think Smith is battling some off field issues and demons (mainly surrounding his anxiety and mental issue problems which he has bravely opened up about)
Nothing wrong with Bevo trying to lift the kid's spirits when he and the team are in a downhill spiral.
- Thread starter
- #493
You're a very, very naive person.
- Thread starter
- #494
Of course not.
But if he really does have over the top emotional connections with players, instead of just run of the mill professional ones - then that could very easily cloud his judgement.
And let's be honest, Beveridge's judgement has been very questionable in regards to selection and player positioning.
TheCatStevensExperience
Footballl Oracle
- Jul 28, 2023
- 2,610
- 3,010
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- BigBigSounders2023 Kansas City Chefs
Dogs board are all for it.
If Geelong's first round pick gets pushed back to the mid teens due to the hairy hand of Gil's priority picks then I might do the trade.
Response that I expected.
Using Polec and Shiel did you no favours. Both clubs actively tried to keep them and goes completely against your fantasy ideas about clubs selling high and trading when they see limitations.
At least do some research when trying to make those claims
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #497
As I said, you're very naive.
Polec:
The Power was understood to have offered the 25-year-old a three-year deal before North Melbourne tabled a five-year multi-million dollar contract.
Polec tells Port he’s on the way out
Winger Jared Polec has officially told his AFL club Port Adelaide that he wants a trade to a Victorian rival.
thewest.com.au
Shiel:
“They were adamant they were going to keep him,” Dodoro told Fox Footy’s The Trade Lowdown.
“They had actually cleared out a few players over the last couple of days, and it was well documented they had a salary cap issue, but they cleared the money and said right, we want to keep him.
In the end it was GWS holding firm on its demands, given they were willing to hold onto Shiel with the belief he could fit under their salary cap.
“We’re really sorry to see him go - he’s a foundation member of the Giants family, but he wanted to come home and was a free agent next year,” GWS GM of football Wayne Campbell told Fox Footy’s The Trade Lowdown.
“So we thought the two first round picks were appropriate for a player of that calibre.”
AFL trade: How Dylan Shiel got to Essendon with just 10 minutes to spare, Bombers and Giants explain trade
Just in time: Final offer in Shiel deal came in seconds before agreement
www.foxsports.com.au
Please, for the love of god, do some research.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #499
Oh dear.
There's two things here...
The first being that clubs that are losing players, for whatever reason, never talk down that player and their value. That would be idiotic. Even more idiotic if they're a free agent the following year! Haha. Hence me commenting on your child-like naivety.
'Research' isn't Googling some media grabs. Fair dinkum.
But secondly, regardless, the point is that clubs pay overs for ordinary players. It happens a lot. In most cases, there's a peak value where the footy world for whatever reason, is blind to that players limitations and they are overhyped. Shiel and Polec are both examples of overhyped players that were overpaid and had clear limitations.
GWS were smart to sell high.
That is when you will get your highest return on them and when smart clubs sell.
Waiting to sell until that player's limitations are obvious to everyone is not smart.
The Bulldogs are not smart.
Good god. You’re beyond help.
If a club wanted to trade a player out, why would they offer a 3 year contract?
Shiel was traded a year before he was a free agent, so yes, smart by GWS to trade before that occurred as they got more at that stage then they would have at free agency. Doesn’t take much of a brain to work that one out. Hence the article I sent.
No club has ever traded a player out, whilst he’s been playing well/looking the goods, to get the highest value possible when contracted.
Now, I know what your dumb reply will be, you have already said it, you said:
And if he didn’t look the goods, then what the * do you think we’d even get for him when you posed the question? A third rounder?
