Patrick Dangerfield?

Remove this Banner Ad

Peter J said:
If we did a Judd deal comparison - 3, 20, Kennedy ;

So 4 (3), Aish (Kennedy) , ????? (20).

Where this deal would differ is Noble would want a player @ 20 value.

Does that make sense?
Click to expand...
I don't think we could do that deal. Maybe 4, 22, 24 or players we can get from those picks. Kennedy just signed so we can't trade him. If we could somehow get Aish. Does 4 and Aish trump Melbourne's 2,3? It might not matter because Danger has to agree.

Edit: it would be 5 if Melbourne ended up with pick 3' which might not happen.
 
Pleasedontfail11 said:
I don't think we could do that deal. Maybe 4, 22, 24 or players we can get from those picks. Kennedy just signed so we can't trade him. If we could somehow get Aish. Does 4 and Aish trump Melbourne's 2,3? It might not matter because Danger has to agree.
Click to expand...
He was referring to J. Kennedy from the Judd trade not our Kennedy.
 
We have to remember we can offer something to Dangerfield if he requests a trade to us otherwise waste of time till we are like the rest and chase him next year. If we have another crappy year next year no way he would want to come over to us but if we make the 8 good chance
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I'm all for Danger, I think he'd be the best acquisition this club has received since Bucks but I dunno, I'd really like us to load up on draft picks and really put a solid base down so we can contend in 3 years time as I don't think we have enough quality youngsters yet to do so.

Patty is the same age as Beams. I'd much prefer to get picks this year and guarantee that he joins us as a free agent next year, despite how hard it would be.

Also wondering where this would leave Freeman, considering he is Dangerfield mark 2.
 
Would be fantastic to land a big fish.
This is exactly what the club needs (some good news, as Bucks stated the other day).
Physiologically important for the members/supporters.
We land Moore with pick 8 & Danger...something to get excited about.

NB even better if he came over for 2016 (RFA) & we get to use pick 4 to load up on young talent this draft.
 
A lot might hinge on Darcy and Melbourne compo.

If Darcy goes second round (yes big if) then we have picks 4 and 8 to play with.

If Melbourne don't get pick 3 compo for Frawley (another big if) they cannot out bid us.

We could then package 4 and 8 and other player if needed. Yes it is a dream but probably the only way it could happen.
 
Jombob1986 said:
We should have freed up salary cap after Daisy left, now Beams, Lumumba, Ball and Maxwell gone we could offer a decent salary to Danger to tempt him. Pies have to make a big play!

Dayne Beams and Josh Thomas to the Lions (Thomas the sweetener to let Aish go)
Pick 4 and Aish to Adelaide (Is it enough to let Danger go?)
Dangerfield to the Pies (We need to make a huge play and land a big fish)

I think all teams would entertain this idea as Brisbane get two midfield gems from Queensland that will play every game in the midfield for them. Adelaide get their prodigal son and a top quality pick in the draft. The Pies get their ready made replacement for Beams.

If anything we may need to sweeten the Adelaide deal, maybe for a Round 2 pick we get for Lumumba and ontrade that to the Crows to get it over the line.

As a Pies supporter i would do this and think it makes it fair for all.
Click to expand...

To be honest, Danger might walk the year after through free agency. Club may as well get rid of him for something in return.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

For people asking my assessment or for any inside information re this person: out of respect to the lad and his family I will not comment at all on this topic until its resolution. I hope people understand the reasons for my silence and cease asking my opinion (especially in private messages here) The correct decision (for Patrick) will be made at the appropriate time. Thankyou.
 
Robroy22 said:
For people asking my assessment or for any inside information re this person: out of respect to the lad and his family I will not comment at all on this topic until its resolution. I hope people understand the reasons for my silence and cease asking my opinion (especially in private messages here) The correct decision (for Patrick) will be made at the appropriate time. Thankyou.
Click to expand...

Huh? Do you know Pat personally or something?
 
Adelaide are in a really tough spot and do feel sorry for the poor old Crows being on the end of some nasty player movements from the expansion clubs to the Tippett fiasco and losing guys like Gunston. So the prospect of losing Dangerfield this year is a terrible one.

However I think the clubs need to shelve the emotion and supporter angst to make sure the best results are achieved.

We had a similar experience last year with the whole RFA Dale Thomas saga. In retrospect the indications were there at the end of 2012 that Thomas was not fully committed and was going to test the free agency waters. The alarm bells were there but we refused to acknowledge them enough. The last year of his contract was injury plagued but he also was not switched on and his attitude stunk.

If we had our time over again I think the club would have taken a harder line if he refused an early contract and looked to see what we could have traded him for at the peak of his powers. I think we could have really made a killing had we traded him to GWS. by the end of 2013 we were happy with the pick we got but at the end of 2012 we would have been very upset with that pick at that point. We could have perhaps got a first round pick & player from GWS but the club would have been howled down by the supporter base still.

I think a lot of clubs will begin looking more than 12 months ahead with regards to trades & RFA. Restricted free agency compo is at times unfair and also likely to be scrapped anyway. I think the clubs will need to go to players 12 months before hand and say if you cannot commit before trade period then we need to explore trade options. It puts the ball in the players court to see if they are truly committed or not rather than have a foot in each camp and unsettling everything.

Is it worth the gamble to retain a guy who won't commit to your club? Not only is there risk of missing out via a poor pick in the RFA system but a player demanding those big bucks throws your entire list management out as you cannot commit to any other players until that guy says yes. It also restricts your ability to recruit other players until you know what you have in the kitty to offer them. If the offer is reasonable and opposition clubs are not trying to screw you then you must not rule it out. The same will apply with Beams although not an RFA problem.

I respect the players right to maximise contracts etc. but the players also must respect the clubs right to control its own destiny. I think Port is doing this well with Boak last year and Gray this year.

With the coach being sacked it makes it even trickier for Adelaide to know what to do. However I think they really should approach him and present their best offer now. He will have one of three answers: Yes, no or come back next year with that offer. If the answer isn't yes (coach or no coach) it would be time to shop him around and see what they can get.

Adding to their problems is the convergence next year of Sloane & Walker RFA's on top of Danger, they need to be careful about juggling too many balls at once as if they get it wrong it could be disasterous.

Interestingly it can work the other way too. Melbourne for instance will have done better by holding Frawley than trading him last year - even if they knew he wanted out - as RFA is delivering a better pick than they could have hoped had they traded him.
 
Robroy22 said:
For people asking my assessment or for any inside information re this person: out of respect to the lad and his family I will not comment at all on this topic until its resolution. I hope people understand the reasons for my silence and cease asking my opinion (especially in private messages here) The correct decision (for Patrick) will be made at the appropriate time. Thankyou.
Click to expand...

 
Want Danger!
He is a gun and would win games for us.
If you look back through the crowd close games he has had some huge 4th quarters to get them over the line.
 
millsy29gopies said:
I'm all for Danger, I think he'd be the best acquisition this club has received since Bucks but I dunno, I'd really like us to load up on draft picks and really put a solid base down so we can contend in 3 years time as I don't think we have enough quality youngsters yet to do so.
Also wondering where this would leave Freeman, considering he is Dangerfield mark 2.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding me.
You don't think 2 Dangerfields in the team is a good thing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top