List Mgmt. Trade: Allen Christensen traded to Brisbane in exchange for National Draft selection no. 21

[RegHickeyStand]

Nothing can be ruled out and that could be correct if the other rumour is true there will be child support,he's going to need some COLA.

Bundy was already offered a big pay rise by Geelong with the new contract. I mean a huge payday from a cashed up club.

 

[strauchnyy]

Not sure what you're reading. Majority view on our board is 5 and 25 to the Pies and 21 to you, maybe with some swapping of later picks. Think that is likely to happen.

Thing is 99% of tge Geelong space view a pick in the 20s for bundy is completely insulting and ridiculous.

The only reason a some on here have conceded defeat is that Geelong love playing the 'nice guys' and have historically shown that they are willing to get bent over without lubricantion to merely accommodate the player.

I think I speak for most in that I hope this time we stand up and do what is right for the club. Maybe not to the extent of collingwood, but I hope the club is speaking with bundy about other options.. Like west coast who would be willing to offer pick 11 by all reports.

Pick in the 20s for Christensen? Gtfo

 

[catempire]

But that is critical. The Pies part, I mean. They are competitors, and we might be letting them get miles ahead on this deal, which hurts us for the future.

I see the two things as entirely separate.

 

[you pick one]

Bundy was already offered a big pay rise by Geelong with the new contract. I mean a huge payday from a cashed up club.

I missed that is there a link?

 

[catempire]

You dont think mitch clark would get to us if he went into the preseason draft. You cant have it both ways. 2nd rd pick is fair for him and a top 10 pick is fair for christensen.

Fair is irrelevant.

 

[Seeds]

Why is the media just assuming we are going to accept a pick in the 20's whilst Beams is worth pick 5 and 25 and a 28 year old Griffen is worth a top 5 pick and James Cameron. Something is not right here.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

I see the two things as entirely separate.

Every good deal for a competitor puts us back a step. That has to be a fact.

 

[Seeds]

We lost this trade when we let his contract run down, all we are doing now is trying to salvage something from the wreckage. There is an admission amongst all clubs that the club losing the player gets the poor end of the deal. Players move frequently now, so the only way you regain ground is to get someone from another club next year.

We are on the losing end here but that is through bad management and we will pay a price. Hopefully lessons are learnt and we sign up Motlop and Hawkins a bit earlier next year.

Brisbane took unders for their players last year. They will expect us to do the same. Deal with it. It is our problem, not theirs this time.

No screw it. Put him in the pre season draft. A stand has to be made.

 

[Seeds]

Perhaps, we'll see, but Clark is a 200cm forward who has proven ability to kick bags of goals at AFL level.
Bundy is sub-180 cm midfielder with recent history of back issues.

Clark has barely played for 3 years. Is much older then Bundy and is just as injury prone if not more so then Bundy.

 

[David the Cat]

Clark is worth the risk.

He can play.

 

[SleazySimon]

The only reason a some on here have conceded defeat is that Geelong love playing the 'nice guys' and have historically shown that they are willing to get bent over without lubricantion to merely accommodate the player.

You'll get shot down for that by people on here who think they run this board. Yesterday I was being lectured that it was a good deal when we got pick 91 for Steven King ffs. Apparently Balme and Scott can do no wrong.

 

[Seeds]

Clark is worth the risk.

He can play.

Not disagreeing with that.

 

[Beanstalk]

Not sure what you're reading. Majority view on our board is 5 and 25 to the Pies and 21 to you, maybe with some swapping of later picks. Think that is likely to happen.

...

Getting Beams for a first and second rounder and a mild downgrade in a very even draft outside the top 4 is a damn good deal for a developing, youthful list - especially if the said downgrade doesn't make a difference in the Christensen trade (30 vs Gold Coast's 29 isn't going to mean anything).

I hope you are feeling festive with us tomorrow - pick up a slab on the way home from work. I think it could be a very good day for us.

 

[catempire]

Every good deal for a competitor puts us back a step. That has to be a fact.

Sure, but we have no say in the matter.

 

[Seeds]

If Geelong accepts a pick in the 20's for Christensen and hands a contracted Lonergan over as a freebie for the Bulldogs whilst they make there own stand on Griffen then Balme must resign. Some pressure needs to be put to the club that this approach to trading is no longer acceptable.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

I missed that is there a link?

Saw it yesterday, can't find it now. Sorry.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

No screw it. Put him in the pre season draft. A stand has to be made.

His actions deserve it.

Would love to be a fly on the wall when Bundy and his manager meet up after that.

My business ethics are you stick by companies that give you contracts. You try to squeeze them, yes - like they try to squeeze you. But you don't screw them.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

You'll get shot down for that by people on here who think they run this board. Yesterday I was being lectured that it was a good deal when we got pick 91 for Steven King ffs. Apparently Balme and Scott can do no wrong.

We didn't want King. Hard to get a good deal from a player we were trying to unload.

 

[cynical]

Still think the Eagles would offer pick 11. I'm sure we would offer more money to him as well.

they should, the eagles are only a couple of really good midfielders short of being a contender

 

[pantskyle]

they should, the eagles are only a couple of really good midfielders short of being a contender

Apparently we are still interested so hopefully we just make it an easier deal for Geelong to accept and have them entice him to come.

 

[OzeSparky]

Apparently we are still interested so hopefully we just make it an easier deal for Geelong to accept and have them entice him to come.

You need to make it a lot better deal, Geelong won't roll over easy on this, otherwise all our players will just leave for a bigger pay check. They will stand firm and make him sweat in his jocks until they get a deal they deserve.

At least I hope

 

[zb14]

The main reason in the discrepancy in the Beams and Christensen deals is that Beams has a contract. My guess is that Christensen is higher rated in club land than by the media boffins and were he under contract we would comfortably get the deals people want. But he is not. We will pay for that.

We have the leverage of sending him into the draft. If he gets to his destination, good luck to him, but I have serious doubts he would. I would rather the club take this stand than trade him for a pick in the 20s personally. Time to make a stand as a club. We always hear about how ruthless the AFL is as a competition, well it's time we became ruthless ourselves. No more gifting of players to opposition clubs. It's easy to play nice guys when your winning flags, but we ain't anymore, and need to get ruthless if we want to win one again.

If we want to retain Lonners we inform the Bulldogs and Tom we will not indulge their request. Simple. I don't get this idea that we somehow owe Lonners and can't stand in his way. Risk attached to contracting can't be entirely one way. If Lonners went down with an ACL last season, he would definitely be holding Geelong to its contract. It's been a mutually beneficial relationship, and neither party owes each other anything but respect for the terms of mutually agreed deals.

 

[Seeds]

His actions deserve it.

Would love to be a fly on the wall when Bundy and his manager meet up after that.

My business ethics are you stick by companies that give you contracts. You try to squeeze them, yes - like they try to squeeze you. But you don't screw them.

Yep he says that club has nothing to do with the decision and have been great which makes it even more baffling as to why he is screwing us over. He shouldn't limit himself to one club and say that he wants a fair deal to be done to move.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

We have the leverage of sending him into the draft. If he gets to his destination, good luck to him, but I have serious doubts he would. I would rather the club take this stand than trade him for a pick in the 20s personally. Time to make a stand as a club. We always hear about how ruthless the AFL is as a competition, well it's time we became ruthless ourselves. No more gifting of players to opposition clubs. It's easy to play nice guys when your winning flags, but we ain't anymore, and need to get ruthless if we want to win one again.

If we want to retain Lonners we inform the Bulldogs and Tom we will not indulge their request. Simple. I don't get this idea that we somehow owe Lonners and can't stand in his way. Risk attached to contracting can't be entirely one way. If Lonners went down with an ACL last season, he would definitely be holding Geelong to its contract. It's been a mutually beneficial relationship, and neither party owes each other anything but respect for the terms of mutually agreed deals.

With Lonners, I can see how he would feel after we tried to get Frawley. "They are giving me one more year, then the boot."

 

[SleazySimon]

We didn't want King. Hard to get a good deal from a player we were trying to unload.

And there you go.
Face it this club is not ruthless enough when it comes to trading and dealing with other clubs.