Trade week - the wash-up thread

FiveStrings said:

Continued from earlier thread.

Trades:
McKinley to North for pick 86 (won't be used)
Pick 45 to Collingwood for Josh Fraser compensation pick (to be taken after Collingwood's third round pick in any of the next 5 drafts)

Senior list changes:
Out: Glass (vets list)*, Embley (vets list)*, McKinley (North), Wilkes (delisted), Notte (delisted), Spangher (delisted)*
In: pick 4, pick 26, pick 28, pick 62 (Jacob Brennan, f/s), Strijk (promotion), Wilson (promotion)

Click to expand...

WCErevival said:

So what exactly happened to Stevenson? Didnt get upgraded and havent heard of a delisting?

Click to expand...

WCErevival said:

So what exactly happened to Stevenson? Didnt get upgraded and havent heard of a delisting?

Click to expand...

sdb4884 said:

Another wasted week for us, will we ever snap out of this slump? in comparison Fremantle continue to move up and up.

Click to expand...

Pat_Footy said:

That's your opinion. I think any trades would have been purely to please supporters and not have been in the best interest of the club. There are experienced people in place to make these decisions

Click to expand...

sdb4884 said:

Another wasted week for us, will we ever snap out of this slump? in comparison Fremantle continue to move up and up.

Click to expand...

footballfreak said:

Why are B Jones, A Hansen, Q lynch, Nicoski still on the list????

Click to expand...

Jafa said:

Be interested in hearing what you would have done.

Click to expand...

Patronij1 said:

I woulda bin very active in trade week if i was the eagles management.

Click to expand...

Patronij1 said:

I woulda bin very active in trade week if i was the eagles management.

Click to expand...

WCErevival said:

So can we assume that one of Nicoski or Hansen will get paid out to make room for Stevenson then?

Click to expand...

Geoffe_Miles said:

This is in response to posts other people made in the old trading thread.

I am very disappointed in the clubs behaviour at trade week. I am not disappointed that we didn't come away with anything because that is always possible. You don't want to do deals just for the sake of it if they are not advanatageous. But i am disappointed that the club looks like it put in the cue in the rack before trade week had even begun. Mark Readinsg said that the eagles contingent flew back to Perth on the second day of the trade week. maybe they went back towards the end of the week. But i think it shows the complete lack of energy and activity we displayed.

People say i am negative etc etc. I have another theory - how about it's the people saying lets not even try to get players from other clubs interested in coming to our club who are negative. Lets not bother. Why even try. We don't have anything to trade out, etc etc. How defeatist is that? How about we get out there and shake the trees and try and create something. Try and get somebody to want to come and then bend the other club over and get them on the cheap. And if you can't do a deal at the price you wnat at the end of the day then walk away. But at least try. Maybe there would only be a 1 in 4 or 5 chance of it coming off but you know what - a 20% chance of creating a positive trading opportunity that results in a quality player on the cheap for us is better than the 0% chance we have if we don't even try. The club smacks of complacency.

Another thing i would say, and this is not a personal dig at Worsfold, but i think he should have been removed from the process. You can not ask a bloke who's career is on a knife edge and can't look out longer than 12 months to make decisions with a 3-5 year time horizon. That is a massive conflict of interest. Worsfold is only human and 99% of human beings in his situation would be pushing for what is good for the continuation of their career rather than whats good for the club in 3-5 years time. Any club in the stage of the cycle that we are in, unless they have made a definate decision that the current coach will be there for 5 years, should let the footy dept make the call and dilute the role of coach in the decision making process because the coach wil almost always push for shorter term option. The role of the coach should only become more prominent in trading decisions when entering a flag window. When you are in a rebuilding phase the footy dept should make the calls.

Click to expand...

Geoffe_Miles said:

This is in response to posts other people made in the old trading thread.

I am very disappointed in the clubs behaviour at trade week. I am not disappointed that we didn't come away with anything because that is always possible. You don't want to do deals just for the sake of it if they are not advanatageous. But i am disappointed that the club looks like it put in the cue in the rack before trade week had even begun. Mark Readinsg said that the eagles contingent flew back to Perth on the second day of the trade week. maybe they went back towards the end of the week. But i think it shows the complete lack of energy and activity we displayed.

People say i am negative etc etc. I have another theory - how about it's the people saying lets not even try to get players from other clubs interested in coming to our club who are negative. Lets not bother. Why even try. We don't have anything to trade out, etc etc. How defeatist is that? How about we get out there and shake the trees and try and create something. Try and get somebody to want to come and then bend the other club over and get them on the cheap. And if you can't do a deal at the price you wnat at the end of the day then walk away. But at least try. Maybe there would only be a 1 in 4 or 5 chance of it coming off but you know what - a 20% chance of creating a positive trading opportunity that results in a quality player on the cheap for us is better than the 0% chance we have if we don't even try. The club smacks of complacency.

Another thing i would say, and this is not a personal dig at Worsfold, but i think he should have been removed from the process. You can not ask a bloke who's career is on a knife edge and can't look out longer than 12 months to make decisions with a 3-5 year time horizon. That is a massive conflict of interest. Worsfold is only human and 99% of human beings in his situation would be pushing for what is good for the continuation of their career rather than whats good for the club in 3-5 years time. Any club in the stage of the cycle that we are in, unless they have made a definate decision that the current coach will be there for 5 years, should let the footy dept make the call and dilute the role of coach in the decision making process because the coach wil almost always push for shorter term option. The role of the coach should only become more prominent in trading decisions when entering a flag window. When you are in a rebuilding phase the footy dept should make the calls.

Click to expand...

Geoffe_Miles said:

This is in response to posts other people made in the old trading thread.

I am very disappointed in the clubs behaviour at trade week. I am not disappointed that we didn't come away with anything because that is always possible. You don't want to do deals just for the sake of it if they are not advanatageous. But i am disappointed that the club looks like it put in the cue in the rack before trade week had even begun. Mark Readinsg said that the eagles contingent flew back to Perth on the second day of the trade week. maybe they went back towards the end of the week. But i think it shows the complete lack of energy and activity we displayed.

People say i am negative etc etc. I have another theory - how about it's the people saying lets not even try to get players from other clubs interested in coming to our club who are negative. Lets not bother. Why even try. We don't have anything to trade out, etc etc. How defeatist is that? How about we get out there and shake the trees and try and create something. Try and get somebody to want to come and then bend the other club over and get them on the cheap. And if you can't do a deal at the price you wnat at the end of the day then walk away. But at least try. Maybe there would only be a 1 in 4 or 5 chance of it coming off but you know what - a 20% chance of creating a positive trading opportunity that results in a quality player on the cheap for us is better than the 0% chance we have if we don't even try. The club smacks of complacency.

Another thing i would say, and this is not a personal dig at Worsfold, but i think he should have been removed from the process. You can not ask a bloke who's career is on a knife edge and can't look out longer than 12 months to make decisions with a 3-5 year time horizon. That is a massive conflict of interest. Worsfold is only human and 99% of human beings in his situation would be pushing for what is good for the continuation of their career rather than whats good for the club in 3-5 years time. Any club in the stage of the cycle that we are in, unless they have made a definate decision that the current coach will be there for 5 years, should let the footy dept make the call and dilute the role of coach in the decision making process because the coach wil almost always push for shorter term option. The role of the coach should only become more prominent in trading decisions when entering a flag window. When you are in a rebuilding phase the footy dept should make the calls.

Click to expand...

Geoffe_Miles said:

This is in response to posts other people made in the old trading thread.

I am very disappointed in the clubs behaviour at trade week. I am not disappointed that we didn't come away with anything because that is always possible. You don't want to do deals just for the sake of it if they are not advanatageous. But i am disappointed that the club looks like it put in the cue in the rack before trade week had even begun. Mark Readinsg said that the eagles contingent flew back to Perth on the second day of the trade week. maybe they went back towards the end of the week. But i think it shows the complete lack of energy and activity we displayed.

People say i am negative etc etc. I have another theory - how about it's the people saying lets not even try to get players from other clubs interested in coming to our club who are negative. Lets not bother. Why even try. We don't have anything to trade out, etc etc. How defeatist is that? How about we get out there and shake the trees and try and create something. Try and get somebody to want to come and then bend the other club over and get them on the cheap. And if you can't do a deal at the price you wnat at the end of the day then walk away. But at least try. Maybe there would only be a 1 in 4 or 5 chance of it coming off but you know what - a 20% chance of creating a positive trading opportunity that results in a quality player on the cheap for us is better than the 0% chance we have if we don't even try. The club smacks of complacency.

Another thing i would say, and this is not a personal dig at Worsfold, but i think he should have been removed from the process. You can not ask a bloke who's career is on a knife edge and can't look out longer than 12 months to make decisions with a 3-5 year time horizon. That is a massive conflict of interest. Worsfold is only human and 99% of human beings in his situation would be pushing for what is good for the continuation of their career rather than whats good for the club in 3-5 years time. Any club in the stage of the cycle that we are in, unless they have made a definate decision that the current coach will be there for 5 years, should let the footy dept make the call and dilute the role of coach in the decision making process because the coach wil almost always push for shorter term option. The role of the coach should only become more prominent in trading decisions when entering a flag window. When you are in a rebuilding phase the footy dept should make the calls.

Click to expand...

Geoffe_Miles said:

This is in response to posts other people made in the old trading thread.

I am very disappointed in the clubs behaviour at trade week. I am not disappointed that we didn't come away with anything because that is always possible. You don't want to do deals just for the sake of it if they are not advanatageous. But i am disappointed that the club looks like it put in the cue in the rack before trade week had even begun. Mark Readinsg said that the eagles contingent flew back to Perth on the second day of the trade week. maybe they went back towards the end of the week. But i think it shows the complete lack of energy and activity we displayed.

People say i am negative etc etc. I have another theory - how about it's the people saying lets not even try to get players from other clubs interested in coming to our club who are negative. Lets not bother. Why even try. We don't have anything to trade out, etc etc. How defeatist is that? How about we get out there and shake the trees and try and create something. Try and get somebody to want to come and then bend the other club over and get them on the cheap. And if you can't do a deal at the price you wnat at the end of the day then walk away. But at least try. Maybe there would only be a 1 in 4 or 5 chance of it coming off but you know what - a 20% chance of creating a positive trading opportunity that results in a quality player on the cheap for us is better than the 0% chance we have if we don't even try. The club smacks of complacency.

Another thing i would say, and this is not a personal dig at Worsfold, but i think he should have been removed from the process. You can not ask a bloke who's career is on a knife edge and can't look out longer than 12 months to make decisions with a 3-5 year time horizon. That is a massive conflict of interest. Worsfold is only human and 99% of human beings in his situation would be pushing for what is good for the continuation of their career rather than whats good for the club in 3-5 years time. Any club in the stage of the cycle that we are in, unless they have made a definate decision that the current coach will be there for 5 years, should let the footy dept make the call and dilute the role of coach in the decision making process because the coach wil almost always push for shorter term option. The role of the coach should only become more prominent in trading decisions when entering a flag window. When you are in a rebuilding phase the footy dept should make the calls.

Click to expand...

Pat_Footy said:

I'm sure if the clock is wound back you'd find that the top clubs kept their picks when they were rebuilding. Only time will tell though.

Carlton just come across as desperate as soon as trade week hits. It hasn't served them well. They are way off a premiership.

Click to expand...

sdb4884 said:

I would have traded Ebert to Port Adelaide for their first rounder or worked out a three way trade with them an another club. I would have waited for a better pick for McKinley, work harder to trade Spangher and traded for Josh Hill (who would have come this way as Hawthorn couldn't offer a trade). I would have shopped Kerr around and I would have quizzed Gold Coast on a trade for one of their listed players.

Click to expand...