- Sep 6, 2010
- 32,284
- 54,211
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Swamprats
- Banned
- #301
We're already paying overs.
-
LIVE: Carlton v Melbourne - 7:30PM Thu
Squiggle tips Demons at 59% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Round 9
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Round 8 Winner: bearweger
News Charlie Dixon - Traded to . . . ?
- Thread starter Sunny_
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Donble
Club Legend
By offering Dicko a 3 million dollar contract ?
Hartlett for Dixon last call.
Donble
Club Legend
If pick 10 is not on the table , Dicko will be staying , that is a cold hard fact.
Donble
Club Legend
As in traps you mean bigfooty ? ive read the circle jerk that is currently going on about Dixon on the Port board , amusing stuff .
- Sep 6, 2010
- 32,284
- 54,211
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Swamprats
- Banned
- #309
There's no need to be disrespectful, we're trying to work this through like adults with fair trade suggestions.
- Nov 6, 2014
- 61,141
- 75,301
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
It'll probably be a 3 club deal anyway
- Nov 6, 2014
- 61,141
- 75,301
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Yeah, can't argue with that comment, they've been pretty disappointing this year.
Donble
Club Legend
We have a new player in the discussion , who will be the 3rd club ?
- Nov 6, 2014
- 61,141
- 75,301
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Possibly Schulz to Freo
- Sep 6, 2010
- 32,284
- 54,211
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Swamprats
- Banned
- #314
Cam O'shea to St Kilda
Shane Savage and St Kilda's 2nd rounder to Gold Coast
Charlie Dixon and Gold Coast's 3rd rounder to Port Adelaide
Donble
Club Legend
Dude , your not gonna get much for Schulz , if anything.
- Nov 6, 2014
- 61,141
- 75,301
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
mmmm The O'Shea - Richardson link I have heard before but would hate to lose him. He is such a flexible defender.
Why would Savage want to change clubs again? Stop with theses stupid trade ideas.
- Nov 6, 2014
- 61,141
- 75,301
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
But, but, we are bored
- Nov 6, 2014
- 61,141
- 75,301
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
I think he has played injured this year and didn't get good delivery. Was high up in the Coleman last year and a great shot at goals. Freo need to replace Pav. That being said, we want Schulz to stay.
alright, we've had our fun. this isn't the bay.
we're still over 2 months out from the trade period even starting, let's save the silly trade propositions until then, yeah? i know everyone loves to fantasize about ripping off other clubs by getting in star players with dream trades, but it's not even worth entertaining at this stage of the year.
so with that said... opposition supporters, if you come into this thread with the old bigfooty classic "fringe player + 2nd round pick" offer for dixon, or any discussion regarding said trades, enjoy your week ban from this thread. repeat offenders won't return.
we're still over 2 months out from the trade period even starting, let's save the silly trade propositions until then, yeah? i know everyone loves to fantasize about ripping off other clubs by getting in star players with dream trades, but it's not even worth entertaining at this stage of the year.
so with that said... opposition supporters, if you come into this thread with the old bigfooty classic "fringe player + 2nd round pick" offer for dixon, or any discussion regarding said trades, enjoy your week ban from this thread. repeat offenders won't return.
- Sep 6, 2010
- 32,284
- 54,211
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Swamprats
- Banned
- #321
Pick 10 for Benell (he is a risk as he could be a bad influence).
Andrew Moore, Aaron Young (two hardened mids) and our 4th round pick for Charley Dixon (injury-prone) and your 4th round pick.
- Nov 6, 2014
- 61,141
- 75,301
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Sheesh touchy but Ok I get the point. I guess we wouldn't like it if the tables were turned. We all get attached to our stars. All the best and IF any trades occur between our clubs let's hope it's a fair outcome for all. That's usually the Port way to do things. See youalright, we've had our fun. this isn't the bay.
we're still over 2 months out from the trade period even starting, let's save the silly trade propositions until then, yeah? i know everyone loves to fantasize about ripping off other clubs by getting in star players with dream trades, but it's not even worth entertaining at this stage of the year.
so with that said... opposition supporters, if you come into this thread with the old bigfooty classic "fringe player + 2nd round pick" offer for dixon, or any discussion regarding said trades, enjoy your week ban from this thread. repeat offenders won't return.
supernova_
Premiership Player
Fact of the matter Dixon is easily in our top 10 players of importance. A fair deal is someone who is of top 10 importance for the recipient. GCFC actually have the luxury of quite a few key positions, and any suitors will have to pay up handsomely as they are typically some of the highest paid players in the game. Case in point some of Dicko's reported offers around the 3mil mark.
Personal opinion, hope we offer about a 500k deal over 3 years. I can certainly understand the bloke trying to get the best deal he can for himself.
Opposition supporters can't keep offering up fringe 22, when one of the top key positions is available on the wage he is on. E.g. From Port, I would hope one of their top 10 players is in the conversation that is excess to Ports list management needs. Hartlett, Boak, Wines, Wingard, Gray, Ebert, Westhoff, Lobbe, Ryder. If the shoe is on the other foot what would be required? You get the idea... I know most people in life expect something for nothing, but that usually doesn't get them very far. End rant.
Personal opinion, hope we offer about a 500k deal over 3 years. I can certainly understand the bloke trying to get the best deal he can for himself.
Opposition supporters can't keep offering up fringe 22, when one of the top key positions is available on the wage he is on. E.g. From Port, I would hope one of their top 10 players is in the conversation that is excess to Ports list management needs. Hartlett, Boak, Wines, Wingard, Gray, Ebert, Westhoff, Lobbe, Ryder. If the shoe is on the other foot what would be required? You get the idea... I know most people in life expect something for nothing, but that usually doesn't get them very far. End rant.
Chad WinGOAT
Senior List
Sorry for the intrusion. Just coming for some insight/ discussion from Gold Coast's point of view on the current Dixon saga. I hope your mods don't think I'm trolling "lol 2nd rounder plus fringe for Dixon." This is genuinely what I believe is going to happen. But I could be totally wrong. Who knows. I'm trying to piece it together still myself. No ban pls.
Looks like Port's list management has planned to increase Wines' and Wingard's salary in their new contract (most likely to be signed around December 2015. We do most of our contract announcements around December.) Schulz is out of contract this year and his salary was considered as well during this list management process to remain within the salary cap. We offered Schulz a contract and he refused. Schulz didn't agree the fee he'd receive was fair (around 300-400k). Schulz has decided to pursue other options and Freo are willing to pay more since they're most likely losing Pavlich at the end of the year and have been throwing cash at Full Forwards for years now.
Source: http://www.triplem.com.au/adelaide/shows/rush-hour-adelaide/podcast/tuesday-25-august-2015/
Hence our interest in Dixon. We will need to offload Schulz and one or more player(s) to fit Dixon in our salary cap. Butcher, Moore, Young and O'Shea looking the most likely candidates (in order of likelihood). Hence Port fans wishfully thinking we can package one or more of them to get Dixon in the trade in a kill 2 birds with 1 stone kinda way. Also Lobbe is in the mix given his recent drop in form. But Hinkley (at least publicly) seems stubborn on this issue. Not willing to trade him for anything right now. Even if it costs us finals (like it did this year.)
If it was my guess, we'll probably trade Schulz and our 2nd for Freo's 1st (and maybe Freo's 2nd - we'll see how desperate they are for a ready made Full Forward). In which case, that first rounder (pick 17-20 roughly) would most likely be sent your way for Dixon. Maybe packaged with a player. I'm not sure. But I know Port are super keen to hold their first round pick (roughly pick 10) this season since we traded away our first round pick the past 2 seasons consecutively to get Polec and Ryder. But it is wishful thinking on our (the fans) part.
Honestly not sure if I even want Dixon. Very fearful of his ankles breaking down. But he clearly has talent. He's a Full Forward unlike Schulz too. Schulz is a good forward but doesn't command the Forward 50. I feel Dixon would command our forward line. Will be super depressed when he's injured though.
Edit: After doing some research, I think it's actually illegal for Port to trade it's first round pick given the restrictions provided by the AFL in regards to trading future picks. You need to have 2 first round picks in a 4 year period according to the following link (2nd dot point): http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-08-06/future-trading-given-goahead-but-with-restrictions
Port has traded away 2 of its last 3 first rounders. That means pick 10 is off the table unless we get another first round pick. Making the Schulz theory not necessarily true, but more likely than a straight swap for pick 10.
Looks like Port's list management has planned to increase Wines' and Wingard's salary in their new contract (most likely to be signed around December 2015. We do most of our contract announcements around December.) Schulz is out of contract this year and his salary was considered as well during this list management process to remain within the salary cap. We offered Schulz a contract and he refused. Schulz didn't agree the fee he'd receive was fair (around 300-400k). Schulz has decided to pursue other options and Freo are willing to pay more since they're most likely losing Pavlich at the end of the year and have been throwing cash at Full Forwards for years now.
Source: http://www.triplem.com.au/adelaide/shows/rush-hour-adelaide/podcast/tuesday-25-august-2015/
Hence our interest in Dixon. We will need to offload Schulz and one or more player(s) to fit Dixon in our salary cap. Butcher, Moore, Young and O'Shea looking the most likely candidates (in order of likelihood). Hence Port fans wishfully thinking we can package one or more of them to get Dixon in the trade in a kill 2 birds with 1 stone kinda way. Also Lobbe is in the mix given his recent drop in form. But Hinkley (at least publicly) seems stubborn on this issue. Not willing to trade him for anything right now. Even if it costs us finals (like it did this year.)
If it was my guess, we'll probably trade Schulz and our 2nd for Freo's 1st (and maybe Freo's 2nd - we'll see how desperate they are for a ready made Full Forward). In which case, that first rounder (pick 17-20 roughly) would most likely be sent your way for Dixon. Maybe packaged with a player. I'm not sure. But I know Port are super keen to hold their first round pick (roughly pick 10) this season since we traded away our first round pick the past 2 seasons consecutively to get Polec and Ryder. But it is wishful thinking on our (the fans) part.
Honestly not sure if I even want Dixon. Very fearful of his ankles breaking down. But he clearly has talent. He's a Full Forward unlike Schulz too. Schulz is a good forward but doesn't command the Forward 50. I feel Dixon would command our forward line. Will be super depressed when he's injured though.
Edit: After doing some research, I think it's actually illegal for Port to trade it's first round pick given the restrictions provided by the AFL in regards to trading future picks. You need to have 2 first round picks in a 4 year period according to the following link (2nd dot point): http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-08-06/future-trading-given-goahead-but-with-restrictions
Port has traded away 2 of its last 3 first rounders. That means pick 10 is off the table unless we get another first round pick. Making the Schulz theory not necessarily true, but more likely than a straight swap for pick 10.
Last edited:
Yet you bandy your "whispers" around as if they were facts.
None of us know what is going to happen but the club has stated they will play hard ball and I fully expect them to
- Status
