List Mgmt. OFFICIAL: Dangerfield + Pick 50 for Picks 9, 28 and Dean Gore

[Art Vandelay_]

No, I meant the risk of him being picked up by another club in the draft before Geelong is only theoretical, there is almost zero chance of it happening in practice, particularly this year.

I'd say it's only theoretical because no one ever picks a player up.

Pretty sure that's what I said Fred

 

[FredLeDeux]

Pretty sure that's what I said Fred

You need to make it plainer for me.

 

[Wood_Duck]

No, I meant the risk of him being picked up by another club in the draft before Geelong is only theoretical, there is almost zero chance of it happening in practice, particularly this year.

Yes this is the 50000 dollar question. We have never seen a player of PD's caliber in the draft. Its a bit unprecedented. Its very much the argument Ive been having in the Adelaide board. Im not sure how either party could be completely confident.

If there is some unwritten rule or understanding to not pick players in these circumstances it could mean the end of fair trading when a player wants to swap clubs.

As it stands Im not sure clubs have the balls to to pick a player against his will particularly given he has just walked out on a club for no other reason than wanting to be closer yo his family.

 

[BIGANT]

Boobsie is the M-A-N!!!

"The Crows can let Dangerfield walk to Geelong — and then wait on the AFL to assign them a compensation draft pick, currently listed at No. 14. That is the draft pick in the hand, offered by the AFL and at no expense to the Cats, that Adelaide can then use for other deals.
Clubs have blinked before. Luke Ball made it from St Kilda to Collingwood even though the Magpies did not have a pick in the 2009 national draft until No. 30.
Kurt Tippett made it from Adelaide to Sydney on the Swans’ No. 11 call in the 2013 pre-season draft.
The Crows are about to start a huge game of poker with Connors and Geelong. And they don’t seem to have an ace up their sleeve."
http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...chelangelo-rucci/story-fnp04d6z-1227560680261

Geelong should just sit tight, Dangerfield can tell other clubs he only wants to play for Geelong, what are they going to do? Draft a player who doesn't want to be there + will leave at the end of next year's season?

I heard rucc say basically all that today on aa when he had his 1/2 slot.
Basically saying risk over reward of taking the compo.
terry wallace was a little more circumspect, when they had him on just now.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Yes this is the 50000 dollar question. We have never seen a player of PD's caliber in the draft. Its a bit unprecedented. Its very much the argument Ive been having in the Adelaide board. Im not sure how either party could be completely confident.

If there is some unwritten rule or understanding to not pick players in these circumstances it could mean the end of fair trading when a player wants to swap clubs.

As it stands Im not sure clubs have the balls to to pick a player against his will particularly given he has just walked out on a club for no other reason than wanting to be closer yo his family.

I'll explain what I meant.

1. It would be the National Draft, not the PSD.
2. The club drafting him would have to use its highly-valued pick between 1 and 8.
3. Unless he nominates his football payments, after he is drafted, he can insist on a 1-year contract.
4. He can insist on top dollar. If he doesn't like the club's offer, he has the right to arbitration. If he doesn't like the arbitrator's decision, he has the right to take it to the Appeals Board.
5. By the end of the season, the new CBA will be negotiated and in force.
6. Among the things the AFLPA have asked for in their 70-page submission are
- a reduction of Unrestricted Free Agency to 8 years, and
- portability of accrued Free Agency rights, ie they continue after a player changes clubs,
- no compo.
7. PD will be out of contract and have 9 years of service on the clock.
8. If the first 2 claims by the AFLPA get up (and you'd reckon they have to be a pretty good chance), PD will be an Unrestricted Free Agent and can go where he likes. If the third gets up, the club gets nothing for its high Rd 1 draft pick.

These are huge risks for a club to take.

 

[vinum coupe]

that would be were
Maybe you need to trot off to school

Were would be a hypothetical

 

[Wood_Duck]

I'll explain what I meant.

1. It would be the National Draft, not the PSD.
2. The club drafting him would have to use its highly-valued pick between 1 and 8.
3. Unless he nominates his football payments, after he is drafted, he can insist on a 1-year contract.
4. He can insist on top dollar. If he doesn't like the club's offer, he has the right to arbitration. If he doesn't like the arbitrator's decision, he has the right to take it to the Appeals Board.
5. By the end of the season, the new CBA will be negotiated and in force.
6. Among the things the AFLPA have asked for in their 70-page submission are
- a reduction of Unrestricted Free Agency to 8 years, and
- portability of accrued Free Agency rights, ie they continue after a player changes clubs,
- no compo.
7. PD will be out of contract and have 9 years of service on the clock.
8. If the first 2 claims by the AFLPA get up (and you'd reckon they have to be a pretty good chance), PD will be an Unrestricted Free Agent and can go where he likes. If the third gets up, the club gets nothing for its high Rd 1 draft pick.

These are huge risks for a club to take.

I dare you to post that on the Adelaide board.

 

[FredLeDeux]

I dare you to post that on the Adelaide board.

I did actually consider it early today, but then decided I couldn't be bothered posting on bigfooty on my Samsung 8.4 throughout the trade period.

 

[fpm84]

As it stands Im not sure clubs have the balls to to pick a player against his will particularly given he has just walked out on a club for no other reason than wanting to be closer yo his family.

They absolutely don't, particularly when you consider the type of clubs that have picks before us in the ND.

Brisbane - major issues with player retention, can't afford another player to stay for a year or two and then leave

Carlton - will use pick 1 on a young KPD and are seeking as many draft picks as possible (hence why they want our pick 9 for Henderson)

Melbourne - tried to trade for Dangerfield last year and were clearly rebuffed by him. After burning a number of high draft picks and with a new coach taking over in 2017 they can't afford to waste another one

St Kilda - reportedly set to land Carlisle on $650-700k and has also front ended a number of deals so they can land a big fish at the end of 2016/17, not now

 

[Pure_Ownage]

They absolutely don't, particularly when you consider the type of clubs that have picks before us in the ND.

Brisbane - major issues with player retention, can't afford another player to stay for a year or two and then leave

Carlton - will use pick 1 on a young KPD and are seeking as many draft picks as possible (hence why they want our pick 9 for Henderson)

Melbourne - tried to trade for Dangerfield last year and were clearly rebuffed by him. After burning a number of high draft picks and with a new coach taking over in 2017 they can't afford to waste another one

St Kilda - reportedly set to land Carlisle on $650-700k and has also front ended a number of deals so they can land a big fish at the end of 2016/17, not now

Melbourne is the only real risk, and even then Connors will try to scare them off with he won't do medicals with any club, won't talk to them, will live in Moggs and not Melb if they draft him etc. If we can get a pick higher than Melbourne's it is game over for Adelaide.

Now Smith has nominated us I would be trying to do with GC what I suggested earlier, trade pick 9 and our 2016 first rounder for pick 3 and Smith. This means Adelaide cant demand any picks because we dont have any and they know if they match they get nothing as we will get him at pick 3 in the ND, so they will have to accept the compo. If they do then we get to keep pick 3 for ourselves in the draft and if not we get Danger there anyway.

I would give Adelaide a chance to be reasonable first (i.e. accept pick 9 + small change and not any of this 2 first rounders + gregson crap) because I believe in giving everyone a chance to do the right thing. But given Danger is basically choosing us so that his kids can be raised around their grandparents, and is spurning clubs who are offering him twice as much money (so his motives are fair enough) if they are going to try and block him moving I think that would be a disgrace. So I would give them a chance and if they won't be reasonable then try and do alternate deals and get him in the draft anyway.

 

[thegerman]

Melbourne is the only real risk, and even then Connors will try to scare them off with he won't do medicals with any club, won't talk to them, will live in Moggs and not Melb if they draft him etc. If we can get a pick higher than Melbourne's it is game over for Adelaide.

Now Smith has nominated us I would be trying to do with GC what I suggested earlier, trade pick 9 and our 2016 first rounder for pick 3 and Smith. This means Adelaide cant demand any picks because we dont have any and they know if they match they get nothing as we will get him at pick 3 in the ND, so they will have to accept the compo. If they do then we get to keep pick 3 for ourselves in the draft and if not we get Danger there anyway.

I would give Adelaide a chance to be reasonable first (i.e. accept pick 9 + small change and not any of this 2 first rounders + gregson crap) because I believe in giving everyone a chance to do the right thing. But given Danger is basically choosing us so that his kids can be raised around their grandparents, and is spurning clubs who are offering him twice as much money (so his motives are fair enough) if they are going to try and block him moving I think that would be a disgrace. So I would give them a chance and if they won't be reasonable then try and do alternate deals and get him in the draft anyway.

Yep, try blocking a player going to a club for the most honest of reasons is not a good move

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

We know one thing's for certain... Adelaide won't be getting next years first round pick.

 

[evolutionbaby]

Here comes Smith. 2016 2ND round the deal apparently.

 

[vinum coupe]

I dare you to post that on the Adelaide board.

Duck. I'll ask you. Geelong has just committed a future pick for smith.

How would this affect any danger trade?
Ie you can't do 2 future trades correct!

 

[FredLeDeux]

Duck. I'll ask you. Geelong has just committed a future pick for smith.

How would this affect any danger trade?
Ie you can't do 2 future trades correct!

If a club trades a future first-round selection, it may not trade any other future selection from that same draft. But if a club keeps its future first-round selection, it can trade any of its future selections from other rounds.

 

[thegerman]

If a club trades a future first-round selection, it may not trade any other future selection from that same draft. But if a club keeps its future first-round selection, it can trade any of its future selections from other rounds.

Spoiler alert

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Duck. I'll ask you. Geelong has just committed a future pick for smith.

How would this affect any danger trade?
Ie you can't do 2 future trades correct!

If you trade next year's 2nd you cant trade next year's first and vice versa.

As I stated I reckon we will try to trade for pick 3 with GC now. Really snooker Adelaide.

 

[thegerman]

If you trade next year's 2nd you cant trade next year's first and vice versa.

As I stated I reckon we will try to trade for pick 3 with GC now. Really snooker Adelaide.

If we get pick 3 this year.......bugger me. We'd be blown away with how good the front office is. I would anyway.

 

[vinum coupe]

If you trade next year's 2nd you cant trade next year's first and vice versa.

As I stated I reckon we will try to trade for pick 3 with GC now. Really snooker Adelaide.

What on earth do we have to trade up to 3?

 

[Pure_Ownage]

What on earth do we have to trade up to 3?

I think we will try pick 9 and next year's first rounder for 3 and Smith. Might have to chuck in another player to get that though (hmm).

Might not be farfetched. We have traded future picks with GC before and the two clubs have a very good trading relationship.

 

[MattyB_76]

If you trade next year's 2nd you cant trade next year's first and vice versa.

As I stated I reckon we will try to trade for pick 3 with GC now. Really snooker Adelaide.

And what will you trade with GC for #3 and Smith? #9 and some "magical Geelong player" who isn't untouchable, but good enough to make up the difference in picks?

 

[vinum coupe]

I think we will try pick 9 and next year's first rounder for 3 and Smith. Might have to chuck in another player to get that though (hmm).

Might not be farfetched. We have traded future picks with GC before and the two clubs have a very good trading relationship.

Ok. I'm officially confused.

Instead of a second rounder for smith, we lose a round 1 pick.
Which we can't trade.

But end up with pick 3 that can be traded for danger?

 

[FredLeDeux]

I bet both clubs are now making frantic phone calls to the AFL to try and establish whether our RFA Offer does or doesn't put him in the top 15 players in the League.
It could really make a significant difference to negotiations and deals.

 

[vinum coupe]

I bet both clubs are now making frantic phone calls to the AFL to try and establish whether our RFA Offer does or doesn't put him in the top 15 players in the League.
It could really make a significant difference to negotiations and deals.

Our offer isn't in though. How can the afl even provide advice?

 

[Catatonic Shock]

I'm not sure what this even means.

Sigh.
Figured I was clear enough first time around...
Your list is your list, regardless of who is out of contract or not.
THEY ALL COUNT.