Recruiting Targets Summary

Remove this Banner Ad

Yeah, tending to think it's no chance, but still nice to dream.

Is Butcher still worth a late first rounder for someone in Melb? Package that and our first round pick, plus Clurey (or Bobby if they want experience). Clurey becomes our KPD a year or two earlier than expected and we target 195cm+ KPDs in the draft.

Happy days!
 
Forzaport said:
The way I see it, every destination club would have the same problem trying to trade Cameron in. He's simply worth too much for any reasonable trade to happen. GWS will have to accept a haircut in the deal because the best they can hope for is probably 2 first rounders or 1 first rounder and a high second rounder and given it'll probably be Port Adelaide, Adelaide or Geelong dealing, they won't be getting high first rounders. Otherwise Cameron walks at the end of 2015 goes into the PSD to the highest outrageous Buddy style contract offer.
Click to expand...
I agree, I can't see this trade happening anyway you look at it. If they pull it out the bag they are geniuses! Hopefully Shaw develops next year to AFL standard like Marcus Bontempelli has from the Doggies and Butch also gets his mojo on and we can have 2 extra talls to select from and like you said we can take our luck in the PSD at the end of 2015.
 
It comes down to what we would be prepared to give up for Cameron.It will be the 1st round pick, that's a given, now player wise you can take out anyone of our leadership group, they will never be traded.Then add Wines, Wingard, White, Polec, Broadbent, Pittard and anyone who plays in our best 22, Kenny and co won't trade them no matter what the prize on offer is I feel.So that leaves players like Butcher, O'Shea (I doubt we'd move him given his close friendship with Boak etc) Clurey and the rest of our list.I'd prefer to keep our key 22 and get a 3/4 way trade happening if Cameron came availible which I highly doubt.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

i know people will hate me saying but chances are Melb will be getting pick 3 for being rubbish and pick 4 for Frawley when he leaves on a huge stupid contract.....

Id get into melbs ear about pick 4......
and a number of player to choose from apart from the skipper boak, wingard and well thats just about it....

go to GWS with pick 4 and our pick....
 
Adz2332 said:
i know people will hate me saying but chances are Melb will be getting pick 3 for being rubbish and pick 4 for Frawley when he leaves on a huge stupid contract.....

Id get into melbs ear about pick 4......
and a number of player to choose from apart from the skipper boak, wingard and well thats just about it....

go to GWS with pick 4 and our pick....
Click to expand...

they're definitely the third party club of choice. they would probably be looking to split pick 4 (or even pick 10 or so if they get mid round compo) into multiple mids. However the best i can see us providing to GWS is 2 first round picks which is still probably short. i just can't see us facilitating a trade without losing large amounts of depth ie 4 players for just Cameron or losing a player thats too integral to the club. if Adelaide do end up getting him i wouldn't be against catching the player that falls out of Lynch, Cameron, Jenkins, Walker though. normally in these big deals it's handy to get involved as a third party just to rotate picks and players.
 
Powerade 08 said:
lmao. Are you people serious.

These are the guys who would be reasonable trade bait - Butcher, Clurey, Shaw, Broadbent, O'Shea.

If we had a competent list manager Lobbe, Westhoff, Carlile, Hartlett, Pittard would be perfect trade bait, but they are either too important to the team (Lobbe) or are under contract for another 2 or 3 years.
Click to expand...

Why the * would we not want guys like Hartlett to be on long contracts? You think a 'competent' list manager should offer young gun players who are locks in our best 10, let alone our best 22) perpetual one year contracts just in the off-chance that we might want to trade them? If that was our club policy, especially when we were struggling to get players to re-sign in recent years, then our club would be revolving door feeder club trying to re-sign 30 players and fit all their new contracts under the salary cap every year. Absolutely idiotic post.
 
Schulzenfest said:
Why the **** would we not want guys like Hartlett to be on long contracts? You think a 'competent' list manager should offer young gun players who are locks in our best 10, let alone our best 22) perpetual one year contracts just in the off-chance that we might want to trade them? If that was our club policy, especially when we were struggling to get players to re-sign in recent years, then our club would be revolving door feeder club trying to re-sign 30 players and fit all their new contracts under the salary cap every year. Absolutely idiotic post.
Click to expand...

come on mate. A list manager's job is to make trade bait not best 22 players.....:rolleyes:
 
i say we trade hitchcock for the saints first rounder and then on trade that to GWS. there ya go, job done. at a stretch id maybe...maybe throw in achee too.
 
i-mark said:
i say we trade hitchcock for the saints first rounder and then on trade that to GWS. there ya go, job done. at a stretch id maybe...maybe throw in achee too.
Click to expand...

Excellent first post troll.
 
raman said:
Excellent first post troll.
Click to expand...

Could have been better, though. Should have put Pittard in the place of Ah Chee and trolled Rick at the same time. :D
 
Forzaport said:
The way I see it, every destination club would have the same problem trying to trade Cameron in. He's simply worth too much for any reasonable trade to happen. GWS will have to accept a haircut in the deal because the best they can hope for is probably 2 first rounders or 1 first rounder and a high second rounder and given it'll probably be Port Adelaide, Adelaide or Geelong dealing, they won't be getting high first rounders. Otherwise Cameron walks at the end of 2015 goes into the PSD to the highest outrageous Buddy style contract offer.
Click to expand...
If he stretches it to any SA or Vic club then several of the clubs in the bottom eight from Vic would happily trade out a good player and have a high pick to tempt GWS. They aren't in contention anytime soon and could afford to give up a key midfielder or defender to land him.

We're only in the race to be fair if it is only Port, Adelaide and Geelong. And then we need certain conditions to be met to be in the box seat.

1. Geelong don't accept to get to the top again they can afford to go down firstly. If they are willing to drop in the short term, they have players to trade to get picks. Our trajectory is up, we aren't in a position of do a mini-rebuild and relaunch as Geelong could(/should) do from 2015.
2. Adelaide is unwilling to trade Talia, Dangerfield or Sloane. It'd be a sick irony that after waiting for lol's if they were forced to trade Clangerman or lose him for nothing, it ends up netting them Cameron. Adelaide will have a better pick than us and if they package that up with one of the three listed it'd go along way to getting it done Almost certainly if they let go of Talia. With Rutten gone though I can't see that happening, he's young, but the centrepiece of their backline.
3. We're willing to be lateral on payments. I definitely think one area we have a clear advantage for GWS is in the rules to 'catch up' player payments from the last couple of years. If we trade a player like Hartlett and pay most of his salary that gives GWS a nice chunk of change to pay others.
 
Last edited:
Andre said:
If he stretches it to any SA or Vic club then several of the clubs in the bottom eight from Vic would happily trade out a good player and have a high pick to tempt GWS. They aren't in contention anytime soon and could afford to give up a key midfielder or defender to land him.

We're only in the race to be fair if it is only Port, Adelaide and Geelong. And then we need certain conditions to be met to be in the box seat.

1. Geelong don't accept to get to the top again they can afford to go down firstly. If they are willing to drop in the short term, they have players to trade to get picks. Our trajectory is up, we aren't in a position of do a mini-rebuild and relaunch as Geelong could(/should) do from 2015.
2. Adelaide is unwilling to trade Talia, Dangerfield or Sloane. It'd be a sick irony that after waiting for lol's if they were forced to trade Clangerman or lose him for nothing, it ends up netting them Cameron. Adelaide will have a better pick than us and if they package that up with one of the three listed it'd go along way to getting it done Almost certainly if they let go of Talia. With Rutten gone though I can't see that happening, he's young, but the centrepiece of their backline.
3. We're willing to be lateral on payments. I definitely think one area we have a clear advantage for GWS is in the rules to 'catch up' player payments from the last couple of years. If we trade a player like Hartlett and pay most of his salary that gives GWS a nice chunk of change to pay others.
Click to expand...

For sure, if Cameron is happy to play for St. Kilda it's game over.

If it's between us, Adelaide and Geelong, we have a fighting chance.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

So this is the thread we look back on in 5 or so years and laugh at each other because: "remember you wanted to trade our norm smith medallist?" Or "I forgot I was willing to get rid of 15 of our premiership players for that guy." Ok, I get it now.
 
Jack Foster said:
So this is the thread we look back on in 5 or so years and laugh at each other because: "remember you wanted to trade our norm smith medallist?" Or "I forgot I was willing to get rid of 15 of our premiership players for that guy." Ok, I get it now.
Click to expand...
Or we could be saying remember when we only gave *Player A* and a draft pick for our premiership player, three time Coleman medalist 100 goal player
 
The next person who puts Ollie in a trade equation i will personly hunt down your family and can them ( you have a choice of either roma tomatoes or hinez baked beans, i personly like the beans can better but its up to you).
 
port_adelaide_1870 said:
Or we could be saying remember when we only gave *Player A* and a draft pick for our premiership player, three time Coleman medalist 100 goal player
Click to expand...
Possibly but I'm thinking the other is more likely.

I may be wrong but I can't help but feel some people are getting 'wood' over this a bit early.
 
It Just Is said:
Callum Sinclair just re-signed with West Coast for another two years.
Click to expand...
Janus said:
Giving more credence to the idea that Lycett wants to move, since you'd think that they'd be locking away Lycett first before offering contracts to a rookie listed player.
Click to expand...
RossFC said:
Lycett "Rested"
Click to expand...
It's the Brad Ebert trade saga all over again, the writing will be on the wall if he doesn't find his way back in at Cox' expense or ahead of Sinclair before the seasons over.

If we could get Scott back to Port without overpaying he will be a pretty good pick up for us long term.
 
The advantage of Kochie living in Sydney - he can wine and dine him and invite him around to his home for a chat. The Sydney media wouldnt be interested in staking out Kochie or Jezza like the SA or Vic media would.
 
I'm a massive fan of Lycett but I would be worried if he dummy spits over being in a rotation with Dean Cox and Nic-nat. They are pretty handy players and sometimes you can't play three rucks.
 
Ford Fairlane said:
Port keeping an eye on Tim Broomhead.
Click to expand...
I read on the Collingwood board that he is out of contract at the end of this season.
But let Collingwood develop him for a year or 2 more and then we will swoop on him. ;)

He still looks like a broom atm. (obviously pun intended)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Enviable Tradition
The medical recruits
Replies
13
Views
737
chiwigi
chiwigi

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top