Traded Adam Treloar [traded w/ #28 to Collingwood for #7, #65, 2016 first rounder]

What makes all this so clear? Are you aware of how much his offer from GWS was? If so, what was it?

He was reportedly offered the same as Shiel who accepted the contract. If he's complaining that he didn't get offered enough when he was offered the second most of the players re-signing this year (no way would any of Coniglio, Smith or WHE have contracts exceeding Treloar and Shiel) then the rest follows from that. For what it's worth I'm not against players maximizing their earnings. I just find it a bit funny that Blucher is going on about Treloar not being a "priority" while choosing to ignore any other reason GWS wouldn't increase their offer, e.g. disenchanting players who did accept less than they'd receive elsewhere to stay or not having the salary cap space. How many other clubs have to re-sign five players the calibre of Cameron, Treloar, Shiel, Coniglio and Smith in one year?
 

Two Eyes

Club Legend
Jun 22, 2007
2,604
2,689
east of eden
AFL Club
Collingwood
He was reportedly offered the same as Shiel who accepted the contract. If he's complaining that he didn't get offered enough when he was offered the second most of the players re-signing this year (no way would any of Coniglio, Smith or WHE have contracts exceeding Treloar and Shiel) then the rest follows from that. For what it's worth I'm not against players maximizing their earnings. I just find it a bit funny that Blucher is going on about Treloar not being a "priority" while choosing to ignore any other reason GWS wouldn't increase their offer, e.g. disenchanting players who did accept less than they'd receive elsewhere to stay or not having the salary cap space. How many other clubs have to re-sign five players the calibre of Cameron, Treloar, Shiel, Coniglio and Smith in one year?

When you watch a potatoe like Tom Scully earning $1mil year it's bound to mess with your expectations.
 
When you watch a potatoe like Tom Scully earning $1mil year it's bound to mess with your expectations.

That was several years ago when all GWS had was Scully, Ward, Davis, Palmer and a bunch of draftees and retirees. Scully's on chicken feed these days.
 
He was reportedly offered the same as Shiel who accepted the contract. If he's complaining that he didn't get offered enough when he was offered the second most of the players re-signing this year (no way would any of Coniglio, Smith or WHE have contracts exceeding Treloar and Shiel) then the rest follows from that. For what it's worth I'm not against players maximizing their earnings. I just find it a bit funny that Blucher is going on about Treloar not being a "priority" while choosing to ignore any other reason GWS wouldn't increase their offer, e.g. disenchanting players who did accept less than they'd receive elsewhere to stay or not having the salary cap space. How many other clubs have to re-sign five players the calibre of Cameron, Treloar, Shiel, Coniglio and Smith in one year?

If you look at the roles players play:
Shiel > Treloar
Coniglio (tagger)
Cameron (Cameron)
Smith (Fwd/Mid... better forward)

I can understand why Treloar was lower down. When you have the list that GWS does with kids, Steele & Hopper are going to be in the mids, I reckon you can understand. Also, except Cameron & Shiel, the rest would be on less money. So for team dynamics....

It is what the AFL wanted though, GWS to have a ridiculous team, every year trade out so they get the most first round picks. The AFL couldn't of scripted it any better.
 
Jan 7, 2011
35,108
71,501
Heaven. I mean Victoria.
AFL Club
St Kilda
He was reportedly offered the same as Shiel who accepted the contract. If he's complaining that he didn't get offered enough when he was offered the second most of the players re-signing this year (no way would any of Coniglio, Smith or WHE have contracts exceeding Treloar and Shiel) then the rest follows from that. For what it's worth I'm not against players maximizing their earnings. I just find it a bit funny that Blucher is going on about Treloar not being a "priority" while choosing to ignore any other reason GWS wouldn't increase their offer, e.g. disenchanting players who did accept less than they'd receive elsewhere to stay or not having the salary cap space. How many other clubs have to re-sign five players the calibre of Cameron, Treloar, Shiel, Coniglio and Smith in one year?
So you're basing it all off what was "reported"? Is this perhaps coming from the same GWS who just a couple of weeks ago denied that Cam McCarthy had asked to be traded, only to come out the very next day and essentially admit that they lied and that he had in fact asked to be traded?

By believing their side, you're essentially trusting an organisation that only a couple of weeks ago got caught out in a blatant lie. No surprise they did though, I've been of the belief for years that clubs lie all the time and I wouldn't take anything any of them say to the press (including mine) as gospel.

In this instance, I believe Treloar's camp. He sounded earlier in the year as if he genuinely wanted to stay (which has now been backed up by what was said today, which I doubt was made-up- it sounded genuine) and I reckon he would have, had he only received a genuinely reasonable offer. No-where near what the likes of Collingwood were offering him, but just more than the genuinely low-ball one I was told he had on the table.

Someone is lying here. I have a hard time believing GWS at this point in time. His camp only came out and said these things once GWS started to play hard-ball and threatening to trade him to clubs he doesn't want to go to. Blucher knew that he had to hit back and I reckon he did with the very thing that would hurt them the most, which is the truth, a card that he wouldn't have played unless pushed.

Just my opinion though.
 
So you're basing it all off what was "reported"? Is this perhaps coming from the same GWS who just a couple of weeks ago denied that Cam McCarthy had asked to be traded, only to come out the very next day and essentially admit that they lied and that he had in fact asked to be traded?

By believing their side, you're essentially trusting an organisation that only a couple of weeks ago got caught out in a blatant lie. No surprise they did though, I've been of the belief for years that clubs lie all the time and wouldn't take anything any of them say (including mine) as gospel.

No, GWS came out and said firstly that a trade hadn't been requested, and then the next day said that a request for trade had been put in that day. e.g. Young had told Barrett who went to air the night prior to Young approaching to GWS. Doesn't seem hard to follow.

In this instance, I believe Treloar's camp. He sounded earlier in the year as if he genuinely wanted to stay (which has now been backed up by what was said today, which I doubt was made-up- it sounded genuine) and I reckon he would have, had he only received a genuinely reasonable offer. No-where near what the likes of Collingwood were offering him, but just more than the genuinely low-ball one I was told he had on the table.

Someone is lying here. I have a hard time believing GWS at this point in time. His camp only came out and said these things once GWS started to play hard-ball and threatening to trade him to clubs he doesn't want to go to. He knew that he had to hit back and I reckon he did with the very thing that would hurt them the most, which is the truth, a card that he wouldn't have played unless pushed.

Just my opinion though.

I actually think they're both telling the truth. GWS made Treloar an offer in line with what they'd offered their other players they needed to re-sign and the pressures of their salary cap. Treloar wanted more and thought the offer unreasonable. GWS couldn't increase their offer without either or possibly both pissing off players who had already re-signed for unders or violating the salary cap. Blucher is now spinning Treloar leaving GWS.
 

F_therest

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 3, 2013
18,256
43,811
AFL Club
Carlton
No, GWS came out and said firstly that a trade hadn't been requested, and then the next day said that a request for trade had been put in that day. e.g. Young had told Barrett who went to air the night prior to Young approaching to GWS. Doesn't seem hard to follow.



I actually think they're both telling the truth. GWS made Treloar an offer in line with what they'd offered their other players they needed to re-sign and the pressures of their salary cap. Treloar wanted more and thought the offer unreasonable. GWS couldn't increase their offer without either or possibly both pissing off players who had already re-signed for unders or violating the salary cap. Blucher is now spinning Treloar leaving GWS.

Any idea how much GWS' offer was and how much Collingwood is offering?
 
Mar 20, 2002
24,079
24,761
Mosman Village
AFL Club
Carlton
I think Carlton supporters wouldn't be so bravo if they knew the full picture of how tight their salary cap currently is.

What ??

We have just shed Carrazzo, Judd, Ellard plus flung a couple of young'uns. Add to that Henderson, Yarran & Bell via trades plus the rumoured Casboult leaving as well and I'm expecting Armfield and/or Warnock to be shown the door so its hard to understand how your comment stacks up ??
 
Any idea how much GWS' offer was and how much Collingwood is offering?
Only rumours, so take the figures with a grain of salt but it was meant to be $600k vs $700k+. If someone offered me half a million more to do the same job, I'd take it too.
 
Only rumours, so take the figures with a grain of salt but it was meant to be $600k vs $700k+. If someone offered me half a million more to do the same job, I'd take it too.
Herald Sun reported $4 million over 6 years, so roughly $666k per year. Whether or not the figure is accurate is anyone's guess.
 
Sep 28, 2006
11,415
7,081
QLD
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
LA Lakers,NE Patriots,Liverpool FC
Our reported offer is $4M over 6 years + up to $100k from Holden as part of our ASA.

$670k p.a. That's really not a lot of money for a top liner. I wonder if GWS's trade demands will be commensurate with their money offer.

You can't keep them all. They'll start flooding out soon, purely because of how highly rated they were and the number of opportunities they'll be given.

Paul Ahern will be 1st cab off the rank in 2016. GWS's cleverly extended his contract by a year. Nice work.:thumbsu:
 
Sep 14, 2005
18,420
18,659
AFL Club
Collingwood
image.jpeg
 

Pdid

All Australian
Sep 22, 2015
661
593
AFL Club
Collingwood
Carlton has means to do the trade - will force Collingwood to bet the farm on one player. GWS will be winners in the end.

No they dont. Pick 1 will not be traded - stupid to do so. Blues need to get that key position prospect to set up next 10+ yrs. Wont go and sell the farm for treloar and thus getting rid of valuable picks in a rebuild.
 

Pdid

All Australian
Sep 22, 2015
661
593
AFL Club
Collingwood
Yeah can see where you are coming from but proven players like Adam who are in their prime now and still young are a much safer bet than taking a punt on a kid who is unproven at AFL level.

If Adam was in this draft right now at his current age he would be a Top 3 pick easily depending on the need of the teams with the top picks! Everyone says draft kids / draft kids etc etc but they fail a lot regardless where they are selected in the draft and no club is immune from drafting a dud player high who just does not cut it at the elite level while dominating the under 18's.

Adam is a NO brainer IMO if you can get him right now if he fits your player structure regarding to what the team needs and the drafting strategy.

Being young and a high draft pick prospect is grossly over rated on this forum with many thinking or adhering to the chain of thought that cause your team is young the future is bright but those young players need to have talent and a mix of experienced heads to guide them so the talent can be shown and not wasted.

Only on Big Footy is it more important to have a young list than to actually have talent. :cool:

No - now theres blues supporters talking out of their a****. Carltons list atm is a disgrace save for a few players. Need picks to rejuvinate list. Throwing 2x 1st rounders for treloar would waste picks and honestly waste his talent (say that because realistically blues wont be contending for 5-6). It would jeopardise a rebuild in which otherwise you would be getting constant 1st rounders every yr. Look at doggies the last 4 years - amazing the players theyve picked up 1st rnd
 

Pdid

All Australian
Sep 22, 2015
661
593
AFL Club
Collingwood
Call it what you like, I don't give a rat's a... mate.
While Collingwood says that they have their player and Treloar himself says that Collingwood is his preferred destination the fact remains that GWS will not rule anyone out.
They stated that today.
As I said before, I don't give a ..... where he goes but I wouldn't rule out a raid from another club.
It's not like clubs haven't lost out in this situation before.

Why is this line persisted with? You literally say that because blues have been mentioned ( albeit in a rumour proven to be c***). Same thing happened with tigers when KB went nuts. There is nothing in it unfortunately - even though you really want there to be something in it.
 
Mar 1, 2010
23,158
16,560
AFL Club
Richmond
So you're basing it all off what was "reported"? Is this perhaps coming from the same GWS who just a couple of weeks ago denied that Cam McCarthy had asked to be traded, only to come out the very next day and essentially admit that they lied and that he had in fact asked to be traded?

By believing their side, you're essentially trusting an organisation that only a couple of weeks ago got caught out in a blatant lie. No surprise they did though, I've been of the belief for years that clubs lie all the time and I wouldn't take anything any of them say to the press (including mine) as gospel.

In this instance, I believe Treloar's camp. He sounded earlier in the year as if he genuinely wanted to stay (which has now been backed up by what was said today, which I doubt was made-up- it sounded genuine) and I reckon he would have, had he only received a genuinely reasonable offer. No-where near what the likes of Collingwood were offering him, but just more than the genuinely low-ball one I was told he had on the table.

Someone is lying here. I have a hard time believing GWS at this point in time. His camp only came out and said these things once GWS started to play hard-ball and threatening to trade him to clubs he doesn't want to go to. Blucher knew that he had to hit back and I reckon he did with the very thing that would hurt them the most, which is the truth, a card that he wouldn't have played unless pushed.

Just my opinion though.

I reckon someone did the dirty on GWS.

Blind Freddy would see one would trade McCarthy for 2 firsts before letting Treloar go. Mathew Lloyd virtually confirmed this from his quick analysis on footy classified one episode.

Some bigfooty posters at GWS knew of Freos interest months ago to!
 
Last edited:
Sep 14, 2005
18,420
18,659
AFL Club
Collingwood
Ridiculous money. Probably more than Fyfe next year...

Hes a great player but nowhere near that great.
Fyfe would definitely be on that much already. Also, if Fyfe was on the market, he'd be cracking the mil a year mark at a new club. Would think this is common knowledge by now re stars being on the market and moving to new clubs.
 

PendlePie

Cancelled
Sep 30, 2007
6,451
4,770
Australia
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Arsenal FC
Worst case, we part with two first rounders for Treloar. Worst case, we cough up two high second rounders for Aish. With Kennedy, Freeman, Seedsman and possibly Oxley moving, the idea we won't have the currency is ridiculous.

Supposedly losing Josh Thomas also doesn't equate to us having cap space.

Nor letting go of Dale Thomas and Dayne Beams - instead of securing them both on 550-600k+ contracts.

Shrewd list management by Hine & co has opened up a ****load of space for us.

And LOL at suggestions Aish is worth a first rounder. Treloar for 2 first rounders, with a second coming back, and one or two second rounders then traded for Aish. Can easily be done.
 

Mick39

Club Legend
Suspended
Sep 18, 2015
1,213
825
AFL Club
Collingwood
Now that's an uneducated comment.

Get back to me when Carlton announce they have a tight cap in the trade period. They are loading the reminder of Daisy's contract so they can get his contract off the books next year. They are also doing the same for Liam Jones.
 
Aug 15, 2011
23,780
8,380
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Port Adelaide
I feel sorry for Richmond at times.

Collingwood say they will only give up their first and a 2nd rounder.

Gws say they want more and due to this will look at other destinations for treloar

Richmond offering 2 first rounder and maybe Griffiths potentially on top this whole time.
 
Back