Dixon is worth Port's first round pick and that is where it ends. I can't see any reason why the Suns would need to give Port a pick. If they did then Port will be laughing all the way.
Traded Charlie Dixon [traded w/ #49 to Port for #10 and 2016 second round pick]
- Thread starter demondavey
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Leuy LongerCombo
Club Legend
Port have been very shrewd traders over the past years, which has helped them dramatically with their rebuild.
From Ebert, Monfries, Polec to Ryder the deals have all been in their favour.
Added to that, players coming out of contract very rarely see win/win scenarios at the time of trade.
If Port are going to trade a pick as high as 7, I think theyll be xpecting somethingelse back aswell.
From Ebert, Monfries, Polec to Ryder the deals have all been in their favour.
Added to that, players coming out of contract very rarely see win/win scenarios at the time of trade.
If Port are going to trade a pick as high as 7, I think theyll be xpecting somethingelse back aswell.
theteamtobeat
Premiership Player
They could downgrade there pick 7 like they did with the Polec deal.
They might expect or like something back doesn't mean the Suns will give it to them. Port's first pick is fair for Dixon. Getting something back totally rips the Suns off. You would be giving Port a pick for what? If Port want a pick back then give the Suns a middle tier player.
- Aug 16, 2010
- 10,062
- 6,947
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
I'd agree Beams was only worth a top 5 pick last yearAre you saying that every trade should only involve a single player for a single pick?
And any other factors should be ignored?
Are you saying that every trade should only involve a single player for a single pick?
And any other factors should be ignored?
No. That's not what he was saying at all.
He wasn't exactly specific about why port could not ask for a pick back with Dixon. Other then that is apparently ripping gc off.
I imagine when Dixon was linked to bris he was probably happy to suggest brissies 2nd rounder for Dixon though.
Prochard123
Norm Smith Medallist
- Jul 28, 2014
- 7,147
- 5,773
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Brisbane supporters like you are so cute c:
Are you saying that every trade should only involve a single player for a single pick?
And any other factors should be ignored?
What i am saying is if Dixon wants to go to Port then their first round pick is a fair trade. Why does their need to be a pick going back to Port? What have Port given to get a pick back? If you can manage that arrangement good for your club but i can't see why Suns would entertain it. In essence your saying give us your second pick back because we need it!
What other factors are you talking about? Why can't they just trade a player for their first round pick, been done before many a time.
Then we disagree. Anyway so you say you would be happy to trade pick 7 for Dixon. I defintely would not trade pick 7 for a player who has managed 63 games in five seasons unless I was certain the injury would not repeat. And that looks extremely unlikely.
Especially after it has flared back up 2 times in the last month. His ankle concerns me.
- Oct 20, 2012
- 2,320
- 1,285
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
would definitely not say they are shrewd traders, they have generally held all the other teams at ransom with off contract players choosing them (except Ryder who wasn't off contract but its much publicized his circumstances) and them low balling the other team until they give in due to the threat of the PSD
then drop out
Basically I think a few clubs now realise why the Suns aren't willing to up our offer.
Last edited:
![C4[2]Yo`DooR](https://www.bigfootycontent.com/avatars/m/21/21849.jpg?1449433755){kind=avatar}
- Dec 18, 2005
- 17,244
- 23,406
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- GAVROI MOUNIA... GAMW TON PIRAEA
He's off to Port.
I agree his ankles are very suspect. But if Port want him then that is not Suns problem. Just because their is concern about his fitness doesn't mean Suns have to give Port something back. If you guys want him you have to make the running otherwise he stays at the Gold Coast or another club gets involved.
Personally i think with every passing week the chances of him staying are growing. Clubs must be concerned watching him limp around half a game. Wouldn't surprise me if the money being reported is reduced. He is a massive risk.
That is a silly argument
So just because port want him , port should ignore any concerns about how many games he will play , and his history and give gc anything they want?
Malibu#27
Premium Platinum
It's well established through the AFL that draft picks at varying levels have different values. The following point system provides an indication of the relative values of picks (although its use it not for player trades at this point but for F/S bidding). What it shows is that while the value range of picks in varying ranges declines as you move through the ranges, the value spread across the first round is significant. What this says is saying a player is worth round X becomes less useful the higher the players value as the relative difference in value of each pick is larger.
Using Ryder from last year in the points below Ports first pick was 17, which was deemed not enough, pick 17 and 37 comes to a combined points value of 1508, which equates to about pick 8/9. Now the question is - is Ryder or Dixon worth more. If you look at ability to get on park and output its hard to argue Ryders not worth more given Dixons shown lack of ability to stay on the park his value is clearly effected. Players get de-listed due to injury concern, its stupid to assume therefore that injury doesn't impact on values.
The other factor to consider is what picks are worth to the respective clubs. Lets say Gold Coast only intend to use 3 picks, and given they have the end of round 1 priority, if they gain pick 7 from Port they would hold two first rounders, and end of first rounder and a second rounder - they won't value their 2nd rounder as highly as Port would who would want to stay in the first half of the draft.
http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/biddingsystemfeedback.pdf
In an earlier post you say "Dixon is worth a first round pick and thats where it ends". Playing the devils advocate, if Port offered pick 18 should Gold Coast accept it - because pick 18 IS a first round pick.
Alternatively, lets say the media is wrong and Dixon actually wants to go to Brisbane - are you going to give up your current only first round pick (pick 2) - because as you say - he's worth a first rounder?
Last edited:
Leuy LongerCombo
Club Legend
Pick 7 is looking a little steep for Dixon, and with out of contract players, it's a buyers market. Ports trading history shows they'll use this to their advantage too.
I think he's value is around that pick 12-15 range with his injury flaring up the past few weeks. It fit close with the pick downgrade value from father/son points.
I think he's value is around that pick 12-15 range with his injury flaring up the past few weeks. It fit close with the pick downgrade value from father/son points.
Dixon will go to Port. The Hinkley & Hart factor will convince him if they haven't already.
Suns will ask for Port's 1st pick, and I believe will offer our early 2nd Rd pick (#22) or worse case our late 1st Rd pick (#19) to ensure Port's #7'ish is obtained.
Zac Smith also looks very likely to move on for more senior opportunity (most likely Essendon) which should bring in a late Rd 1/early Rd2 pick which replaces the additional pick given to Port.
Eade stated at a members function last month he expects us to only take 2 kids in this years draft and then trade for a couple of mature players & upgrade rookies (Saad/Brooksby) with the remaining picks.
So ideally we pick up 2 talented kids with picks 3 & 7, and still have 2 reasonable picks to trade with for some experience, and then upgrade rookies with the left overs.
And keep our fingers crossed young 2M Peter steps up next season to fill Dixon's role.
Suns will ask for Port's 1st pick, and I believe will offer our early 2nd Rd pick (#22) or worse case our late 1st Rd pick (#19) to ensure Port's #7'ish is obtained.
Zac Smith also looks very likely to move on for more senior opportunity (most likely Essendon) which should bring in a late Rd 1/early Rd2 pick which replaces the additional pick given to Port.
Eade stated at a members function last month he expects us to only take 2 kids in this years draft and then trade for a couple of mature players & upgrade rookies (Saad/Brooksby) with the remaining picks.
So ideally we pick up 2 talented kids with picks 3 & 7, and still have 2 reasonable picks to trade with for some experience, and then upgrade rookies with the left overs.
And keep our fingers crossed young 2M Peter steps up next season to fill Dixon's role.
Experimental
Norm Smith Medallist
It's a real shame that Dixon's ability when he's not injured is worth a top 10 pick and a player, yet his worth due to his ankles is barely a first round pick. There's a balance that the Suns will have to agree upon should Dixon pack up and leave for a better offer.
I don't think there will be any ill will wished upon him by Suns supporters if he takes up an offer elsewhere of more money or a longer contract (unless it's the Lions, because it actually gives us a reason to dislike them), but it'll be a huge shame if he leaves. Again, I'm not convinced the offers elsewhere will be as big an increase as reported in the media, with Dixon still a possibility/probability to stay.
Remember, Suns are privy to his medical record and history which other potential clubs are not, which could very well be one of the reasons why his Suns offer is rumoured to be significantly lower than other clubs' despite Dixon playing such a massive role in our forward line.
The best possible scenario for the Suns should he leave would be what Corkie has mentioned, with the Suns picking up picks 3 and 7 in the ND.
I don't think there will be any ill will wished upon him by Suns supporters if he takes up an offer elsewhere of more money or a longer contract (unless it's the Lions, because it actually gives us a reason to dislike them), but it'll be a huge shame if he leaves. Again, I'm not convinced the offers elsewhere will be as big an increase as reported in the media, with Dixon still a possibility/probability to stay.
Remember, Suns are privy to his medical record and history which other potential clubs are not, which could very well be one of the reasons why his Suns offer is rumoured to be significantly lower than other clubs' despite Dixon playing such a massive role in our forward line.
The best possible scenario for the Suns should he leave would be what Corkie has mentioned, with the Suns picking up picks 3 and 7 in the ND.
IIRC the rumoured offer from the Suns was about 400k a year. That's a pretty conservative offer but you really have to be if you're in the Suns' shoes. You can't go breaking the bank for a guy that is injured for half of the season, especially when it's becoming increasingly obvious that Tom Lynch has more value to the team. Remember, Tom Lynch is coming off contract next year. Everyone wants bang for buck and here is a statistical comparison between Lynch and Dixon in 2015:
Lynch
Games: 17
Goals: 37
Behinds: 26
Dixon
Games: 14
Goals: 36
Behinds: 15
Charlie appears to be giving slightly more than Lynch at the moment and it is important to note that Dixon two years older than Lynch. What those stats don't show is the amount of times Dixon has been subbed off or time spent on the bench. So even though it says he has played 14 games (a personal best), he hasn't actually completed 14 whole games. If clubs were approaching this completely logically you would see a degree of buyer's beware but desperation is throwing that concept out the window.
Charlie is going to have a hard time convincing the supporters of a potential new club that he is worth the money if he does choose to leave. Supporters will likely look back on this situation and wonder why their club was stupid enough to offer him that sort of money when everyone is aware that he is extremely injury prone.
Experimental
Norm Smith Medallist
His upside is so much better than that. Missed early games in the season because of his ankle, and more often than not he plays well even with an injured ankle.
Since the bye, he's been subbed off twice due to his ankle, and missed one game because of it. In every other game, he's been limping after half time. In the Richmond game, he was in the rooms for 10+ minutes during the 2nd quarter getting checked out, but went back out after half time (albeit with a noticeable limp) and had little to no impact on the game.
Basically, the past 7/8 games he's been affected by his ankle injury in some form, yet still has those stats.
Imagine how he'd perform if he hadn't been subbed in those two games, didn't miss the GWS game, and was 100% for the rest of the games. Powerhouse.
It could be said your argument is silly. You only look at it through Port eyes. Sure he is a risk but if thats the case don't trade for him. You want your cake and eat it. As i have said you may well get something back but don't think for one minute that the Suns are going to just fold. Your talking like the Suns owe it to Port to give them something back? Why ? Because he has dodgy ankles? Again that's Port's problem if they want him.
Your talking like Port will say to the Suns look you can have our first pick but you better give us pick in the early 20's because we don't trust those ankles. Do you think the Suns will say yeah those ankles are bit dodgy we better give you our second pick as insurance for you guys. They couldn't care less about Port. If Dixon wants out the Suns need to do the best for the club not help Port out.
So you are saying if a player has an injury concern , that if a team is willing to trade for that player the injury concern , or the fact they only play around 13 games a season cannot be factored in by the teams at all
That is a bizarre argument.
Pick 7 is a bit too much for port to give up for Dixon in my opinion. Hence why I say instead of port offering a lower pick , of which would be too low in my opinion , that getting a pick back (and gcs 2nd rounder would be gcs 4th pick , it is hardly something inconceivably impossible to ask for) makes sense.
Otherwise port could trade that pick 7 for a later 1st and 2nd and and send the later first ie pick 10/11/12/13/14 to gcs. But that is more complicated and gcs would probably be happier with the first option.
In my opinion if it was a straight trade of pick 7 for Dixon port is too much at risk and should not gamble that amount. Regardless of what gcs would want port would be better served to walk away and leave gcs and Dixon to negotiate amongst themselves.
I also believe that gc would not push for pick 7 and reject anything else.
I also believe that even ignoring the premise that Dixon chooses port , no other team isn't going to blow ports offers out of the water to the point gcs have cause to complain about ports offers. Bris and freo likely would not come close to offering something like pick 7.
Doubtful that gc would want to go to war over this with port , and vice versa. I highly doubt port asking for a pick back is taken badly by gcs to the point they consider it a spit in the face and want to retaliate by shipping Dixon elsewhere in the psd.
The irony of this is if you take a stroll through every other trade thread here you will see 2nd round picks being offered for every player here or it's the psd being thrown around. I'm hardly spitting in the face of gcs supporters by suggesting a 2nd rounder back with Dixon for pick 7.
