Traded #30: Patrick Ryder - Returns to the club as Indigenous Player Development Manager

[Here_we_come]

Since when are we giving up Ryder AND a player for 17? I thought 17 for Ryder in itself was "peanuts"?

 

[raskolnikov]

so no one else is outraged that Port look like getting Ryder and Hardingham for pick 17

I'm beyond outraged at what has happened at this club over the past 18 months. Now I'm just numb.

 

[westking]

staggering if this occurs, just staggering

 

[bomberz20_72]

James Frawley - pick 3

Biggest flipping joke....

 

[Mercuri Rising]

Since when are we giving up Ryder AND a player for 17? I thought 17 for Ryder in itself was "peanuts"?

Look over the past few pages - the idea is losing Ryder as an FA, getting 21 as compensation, then swapping a fringe player for 17. Stinks to high heaven but AFL apparently looking to OK it.

 

[MightyDon]

So if we don't trade, Paddy pushes to act on the get out clause, during that time SCN are dismissed, would be rather interesting.

 

[The Dustbin]

Biggest flipping joke....

It's their priority pick in disguise.

 

[Here_we_come]

Look over the past few pages - the idea is losing Ryder as an FA, getting 21 as compensation, then swapping a fringe player for 17. Stinks to high heaven but AFL apparently looking to OK it.

Ok thanks. To my mind that was like getting 17 + 21 for Ryder/player, which is terrible deal. Ryder himself is worth at least a top 10 pick and a player or later pick IMO.

I guess there is no surprise. We always seem to fall over at the trade table.

 

[Stopher]

Unless it was a 1st round compo that could be cashed in at a later year?

 

[fishardansin]

so no one else is outraged that Port look like getting Ryder and Hardingham for pick 17

I am. I am totally raging. It's affecting how I interact with people. I'm close to asking for a ban!!

 

[Resistor]

Yeah this is BS. How can port get a 2 for 1 deal? I don't care what we get (what the AFL wants), I care that Port are getting another free ride.

 

[CBombers17]

Look over the past few pages - the idea is losing Ryder as an FA, getting 21 as compensation, then swapping a fringe player for 17. Stinks to high heaven but AFL apparently looking to OK it.

Be barely ok if it was with a club who wasn't going to smash us with Paddy as a top 4 rival. So they give up pick 17, gain Paddy and a depth player.

The AFL is a wrought and a joke. Contrived rubbish.

 

[Kakkle]

Be barely ok if it was with a club who wasn't going to smash us with Paddy as a top 4 rival. So they give up pick 17, gain Paddy and a depth player.

The AFL is a wrought and a joke. Contrived rubbish.

Heh.

 

[Tassieboy]

Biggest flipping joke....

There's your priority pick AFL style

 

[bomberz20_72]

It's their priority pick in disguise.

There's your priority pick AFL style

Yeah, cleverly disguised too I might add ;-)

 

[Tassieboy]

Yeah, cleverly disguised too I might add ;-)

The AFL comp is just a rort. Even more than what anyone could have imagined 15 years ago.

 

[fishardansin]

Seriously Essendon. No ****ing deal. Contact Connors and tell him what our price range for Paddy is. HE CAN DO THE LEG WORK AND COME BACK TO US IF HE FINDS A SUITOR TO MATCH THAT. Otherwise we hang on to our contracted player ... or fight any claims he makes for grievance at tribunal and then courts.

Then if the AFL doesn't support us in this battle lets take the whole friggen system to court. We have more money than most clubs and would stand to benefit from a free for all player buying system.

 

[ghostdog]

Look over the past few pages - the idea is losing Ryder as an FA, getting 21 as compensation, then swapping a fringe player for 17. Stinks to high heaven but AFL apparently looking to OK it.

It doesn't matter which way you look at it though. We still end up with pick 17, so let's say that's for Ryder. Then we get pick 21 for a player we don't want anymore. The latter doesn't justify the former in my view. Essentially we're getting two picks in exchange for two players. Ryder alone is worth two picks, not that I want that. FFS, Ryder is worth more to us than he is to Port. I'm leaning more towards closing the door on him and testing the clause, but I know that's my anger rising.

 

[Zephyr Effekt]

If the club was able to get this done with everyone knowing it was a complete farce;

 

[yodellinhank]

Look over the past few pages - the idea is losing Ryder as an FA, getting 21 as compensation, then swapping a fringe player for 17. Stinks to high heaven but AFL apparently looking to OK it.

The AFL have seemingly given the green light to FA compo for Ryder. I'd want it in writing that they wouldn't be vetoing any Veale deal though, otherwise they could just turn around and veto the other deal, letting Port keep #17 and giving us #21 for paddy.

 

[Mercuri Rising]

It doesn't matter which way you look at it though. We still end up with pick 17, so let's say that's for Ryder. Then we get pick 21 for a player we don't want anymore. The latter doesn't justify the former in my view. Essentially we're getting two picks in exchange for two players. Ryder alone is worth two picks, not that I want that. FFS, Ryder is worth more to us than he is to Port. I'm leaning more towards closing the door on him and testing the clause, but I know that's my anger rising.

I'm not defending it, I'm just explaining how it works. Yes, it is dodgy. 17 is unders for Ryder, 21 is overs for whoever we're dishing off. It's closer than 17 for Ryder, if we're just looking at how "fair" the trade is value-wise, and not how much of a rort it is.

 

[TheFrenchCut]

I maintain that we shouldn't agree to it unless we can just give them either Hardingham or pick 53. I understand there's the bullshit "trade for 17 has to be commercially viable" yet the whole point of them giving us 17 as well is because 21 isn't enough for Ryder.

 

[ghostdog]

I'm not defending it, I'm just explaining how it works. Yes, it is dodgy. 17 is unders for Ryder, 21 is overs for whoever we're dishing off. It's closer than 17 for Ryder, if we're just looking at how "fair" the trade is value-wise, and not how much of a rort it is.

I don't mean to sound like I'm having a ping at you MR, I'm not. I'm a bit annoyed with the perception of some that the offer of pick 21 and our exchange of a low end player somehow how evens the ledger. That's p***weak. The bottom line is that if we receive picks there are no guarantees that we'll be able to find AFL ready players who'll be best 22 while we lose a top 10 player. I hope Dodoro holds his ground.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

I'm starting to hope this goes to court. Interesting that lawyer saying we'd have a good case for Port inciting breach of contract.

 

[2one2]

I thought the "trade" for pick 17 was just literally anything - so we could trade them pick 100 for pick 17 just to formalise it. The idea is that they get paddy for pick 17 and we get more than pick 17. If you told me we would get another pick in the top 25 a week ago I'd honestly have taken it.

It's like Luke Delaney being traded for an unused 5th round pick with St Kilda and North - worth a whole lot more and works out as a straight swap for Dal after it all washes up.