Loyalty vs Premiership hunger

[daddy_4_eyes]

There's dozens of trade threads popping up in the forums, with the common theme being that we will give up crap for quality (e.g. Chambers + 3rd pick for Barker/Rawlings, etc). People also cringe at suggestions of giving up a Fletcher or a Wirrpunda in order to secure that one player we need to take the next step.

My question is, how many of you would give up a club idol (e.g. Wirrpunda, Kerr, Fido, etc) for a player who would virtually all but guarantee us a premiership? And how many would prefer to be loyal to the players who have been loyal to the club?


P.S. No fence sitting in this thread plz ;)

[Mr Q]

Interesting question. I think I've got a picket stuck up my arse on that one though :).

OK, like the supporters of every club we overrate our players abilities, but I can't see that trading quality for quality will move us up to sudden premiership likelihood, as while we gain something on one hand, we lose on another.

I'd rather stick with what we have, and personally don't think it was a coincidence our worst ever year on the field (2001) followed our most active trading period in 2000. Historically our most successful immigrants (people returning to WA in '87 excluded) are Peter Wilson, Andy Lovell and Scott Cummings - as good as they may have been they weren't premiership winners off their own boots. We as a club have always developed from within and I think we do that best.

IMO the core of any good side is built mostly from within. The Kangaroos in the late 90s, whilst having some great recycled players had a core of great players (Carey, Stevens, Archer et al) who were there from the beginning. The big names at Brisbane have mostly been there from the dark days of the Bears, and even those who they recruited (Lynch, Johnson) have been there for years now.

[Mead]

Every club does this. Look around.

St Kilda think Heath Black and a 2nd Rounder will net them any player in the competition, from White, to Wirrpunda to Cox.

And Geelong, its Bartel, Carlton, Houlihan, for us, its Chambers or Morrison, Fremantle, Troy Longmuir. There are probably about 6 hard and fast rules of trading.

1.) You can't get quality without giving up quality.
Except when homesickness intrudes, players tend to go for their market value- if you aren't prepared to trade what a player is
worth, someone else will.

2.) One man's trash is another man's trash.
If a player is not getting a regular game for your team, there's no reason to expect other teams will be prepared to take him off your hands except for another scrubber. Teams don't make trades for the sake of it.

3.) Mediocre Player + Mediocre Player does NOT = one good player
Chambers + Munro + Morrison + Humm + Wooden would beat Jonathan Hay if asked to play 5 on 1 with him, but that doesn't mean that they are worth him. A crap player + a crap player = 2 crap players and a hole in your salary cap.

4.) Age talks. Any player over 27-28 has effectively nil trade value.
Carey was an exception to this, but one Adelaide will be spitting about this time next year, when Wayne has hung up his boots and Wells is a star.

5.) Any trade is automatically two steps backwards before you even recieve the player.
When you trade, you mess up your team chemistry, give away team stalwarts upset those who are left, or mortgage your future by giving away potential superstars in the form of draft picks. Champion teams are generally settled teams, and trading upsets that balance. Therefore, any trade is going to be an enormous gamble. Effectively, you're hoping that a player taken out of his previous environment, is going to be so much better than what you gave up that he will overcome all the above detriment.

Draft picks are chances at getting a player of a certain calibre, and their value reflects this.
A late first round pick has a pretty good chance of netting your team a decent, established, 'good' player if you draft well with it. That means that its value is slightly less than a decent, established 'good' player aged less than 25- he's a ready made talent, the draft pick is a chance of getting a similar player. The same applies across the board. A high first rounder, has a value a fair bit less than an established star, because its speculation rather than reality. The balance swings the other way when a player gets on in years.
A 2nd round pick is worth a bit less than an average, young talent (think Kasey Green), or maybe an average player who is getting on in years. Therefore, to get a player like Rawlings or Hay by trading draft picks, we'd probably need a high first round and something else- maybe a late first round or 2nd rounder.

So anyway, back to the question, what would i be prepared to give up- as i said, not trading is usually a better choice than trading, but to get Rawlings or Hay, I would be prepared to give up Cox and our first round draft pick, or Wirrpunda and a 2nd round pick. Wirrpunda is about our best player who i wouldn't class as untouchable, partly because melbourne clubs seems to have a very inflated opinion of his worth. One of Haynes, Chambers, Wooden and Morrison would be likely sweeteners, although all have minimal value.

Above that, Kerr, Fletcher, Gardiner, Matera, Embley, Cousins, Judd, Sampi and McDougall are required players, i think. They fulfill their roles perfectly, are all relatively young, and within reason, nothing that we could get for them would replace their value to the side. Trade Fletcher for Hay, and we will have blown a gaping hole in our midfield to shore up our defence- that wouldn't put us forward as a team.

[The Chemist]

i'd be prepared to give up cox or seaby and our first pick for Hay.

[ozzult]

How is any one player going to "all but guarantee a premiership" ?

[daddy_4_eyes]

Originally posted by ozzult
How is any one player going to "all but guarantee a premiership" ?

Its called a hypothetical

[bunsen burner]

Cousins is the only player that I wouldn't give up due to loyalty. All the others have a price.

[Voice of Reason]

Originally posted by daddy_4_eyes
My question is, how many of you would give up a club idol (e.g. Wirrpunda, Kerr, Fido, etc) for a player who would virtually all but guarantee us a premiership? And how many would prefer to be loyal to the players who have been loyal to the club?

Each trade decision has to be made on its merits and the good of the club outweighs sentiment towards an individual.

But your question doesn't work. There's no such thing as a player who would virtually all but guarantee us a premiership (hello, Wayne) and by shafting players who have been loyal, you screw up a club.

[daddy_4_eyes]

Originally posted by Voice of Reason
But your question doesn't work. There's no such thing as a player who would virtually all but guarantee us a premiership (hello, Wayne) and by shafting players who have been loyal, you screw up a club.

I was originally going to ask "if the trade definately improves the team", but that wasn't really extreme enough. Too many people would have stuck to the loyalty argument as a premiership wouldn't have entered the discussion.

But on the Wayne example, I imagine Adelaide saw him as the guy who would lift them to the premiership. They most probably believed getting Carey would almost guarantee them a premiership, so my hypothetical easily applies to their frame of mind.

[Black Thunder]

EVERY player has their price.

There are three players on their list who I wouldn't want us to give up unless offered something well over their market value - those three being Cousins, Gardiner and Judd.

But even those three have their price. If we were offered Riewoldt and a top 3 pick for Cousins, somehow I don't think we're going to reject this offer......


but you do have to show loyalty to your players, but in a lot of circumstances, a trade can be good for a player. Most people know my view on trading Cox - I think it would be good for both player and club, because Cox isn't going to enjoy he's football living in Gardy's shadow till he's 28 at which point Gardiner will retire, and Cox's career is all but just about over.......

If you wanna get quality into your club, you have to trade quality, and if your trading quality away, most of the time that quality is a club hero.....

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Black Thunder
If we were offered Riewoldt and a top 3 pick for Cousins, somehow I don't think we're going to reject this offer......
I don't think I'd go for it. Anyone else in a flash, but Cousins - no. Trading our club captain and franchise player would have some negative effects. The player group certainly wouldn't be happy, the supporters wouldn't be happy (unless we won the flag in the next season). Too risky.

[carlyp]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
I don't think I'd go for it. Anyone else in a flash, but Cousins - no. Trading our club captain and franchise player would have some negative effects. The player group certainly wouldn't be happy, the supporters wouldn't be happy (unless we won the flag in the next season). Too risky.

I can't believe this but I actually agree with you. No way in hell should we ever trade Cousins for anyone.