Rumour GFC 2017 Player Trading, Drafting, FA, Rumours, and Wish lists - PT2

[Turbocat]

port adelaide dont have a magic war chest

wells is playing a smart game for once
1. he told gc to f off and be sensible, or f off again, ablett will be a bundle of players who are going up to gc for super/retirement
2. watts wants geelong, as he doesnt want to move, melb are asking a lot in order to satisfy the crows and not wipe them too much
3. stringer, essendon will simply not do the deal, they are fd

what everyone is waiting for is for dominoes to fall, and none are falling,
once one does the rest will follow

ie is essendon trade p11 for smith and say pick 30, it means the dogs cant ask for a pick they dont have
p30 can then be moved to gc

motlop is milking this as he had no real interest months ago -

I think that Ess drop Smith..unless they can trade a player to generate another pick. Ade will have picks to burn after Lever and Cameron so perhaps on of those.

I get the feeling that some clubs are used to us being very conducive to do deals quickly but the last couple of years has now made us less willing to pay overs just to get a deal done quickly... and to add I don't think the players available represent a fix for all our errors.

First domino may be Mots but I hope not. Rather keep the pick but I suspect it will be used in the ablett deal. You think players...any idea who?

 

[Turbocat]

Whoever suggested we let Motlop go to Gold Coast then trade his compo pick for Ablett and a 2nd rounder has no idea... Not allowed to do that.

Specify. Are you saying comp picks are not tradable? So Brisbane can not trade their Rockliff pick out for a Duncan type ? That makes no sense to me.

Whether its GC or an Adelaide team.. if Motlop gets band2 it will be P19 .. we will then have 19 and 22 ..are you saying 19 is not tradeable?

I cant remember if this has been don in the past... but considering the closeness of 22 .. the deal could be done with that pick instead. The point is a pick earlier than most of GC picks. ... and to be honest ..I cant see the afl being too pedantic if it helps GC do the deal.

 

[David the Cat]

I find the Geelong approach to the Stringer scenario very interesting. Wells has made it clear that Pick 22 would be used for Stringer while sitting back and letting the Dons battle it out with the Dogs over the player. It is genuinely possible that the whole Dogs/Dons/Stringer negotiation turns to shit and should it do so, the other option...Geelong....may be the next port of call. The Dons won't give 11 to the Dogs...(the Dogs don't want Stringer.).....and their next pick is lower than Geelong's...Geelong have I assume stated their position and not budged, and await the Motlop outcome...which may b a game changer....

Personally, I'm wary of the possible Stringer inclusion to our list, but it does appear that Geelong and Wells are not prepared to be bent over on this trade, at least.

 

[manboob]

I am confused by suggestions Watts hinges on the Mots compo. If Wells thinks 20 is too much, then why would 19 be any different? Likewise with 33 or 34. Just because we may get an extra pick surely doesn't mean you value it any differently. That would be terrible list management.

Actually it does mean exactly that and it's not terrible. We want a pick in the early 20s to take to the draft. We value Watts at 20 but at this stage value a pick in the draft at that spot more. If we get a pick for Motlop we can give it away for Watts and still take our pick to the draft. That's why having an extra pick does indeed mean we value it differently.

 

[manboob]

You can't trade a compensation pick to the club that the original deal involved, being compensated then using the pick again in a seperate deal is considered draft tampering.
You can trade compensation picks, but not in the same deal involving the original club, it would be like GC trading Ablett to Geelong then Geelong turning around and trading Ablett back to GC.

Can you show me where it says that in writing?

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

I find the Geelong approach to the Stringer scenario very interesting. Wells has made it clear that Pick 22 would be used for Stringer while sitting back and letting the Dons battle it out with the Dogs over the player. It is genuinely possible that the whole Dogs/Dons/Stringer negotiation turns to shit and should it do so, the other option...Geelong....may be the next port of call. The Dons won't give 11 to the Dogs...(the Dogs don't want Stringer.).....and their next pick is lower than Geelong's...Geelong have I assume stated their position and not budged, and await the Motlop outcome...which may b a game changer....

Personally, I'm wary of the possible Stringer inclusion to our list, but it does appear that Geelong and Wells are not prepared to be bent over on this trade, at least.

My take is that both Stringer and Watts want Geelong but we haven't got the resources to strike a deal.

That being that both the Bulldogs and Essendon are asking more than we're willing to give.

Now that might change and I suspect it will.

I personally can't see Stringer being at Essendon. It's either Geelong or the Bulldogs for me ... I could be wrong.

I suspect we'll get pick 19 for Motlop which we'll take to the draft and then use 22 on Jack Watts or Stringer.

I'm guessing we'll take 19 and 36 and 54 to the draft and whatever we get for Lang and then upgrade Parsons.

Time will tell.

 

[ShaunWDT]

Specify. Are you saying comp picks are not tradable? So Brisbane can not trade their Rockliff pick out for a Duncan type ? That makes no sense to me.

Whether its GC or an Adelaide team.. if Motlop gets band2 it will be P19 .. we will then have 19 and 22 ..are you saying 19 is not tradeable?

I cant remember if this has been don in the past... but considering the closeness of 22 .. the deal could be done with that pick instead. The point is a pick earlier than most of GC picks. ... and to be honest ..I can see the afl being too pedantic if it helps GC do the deal.

Can't trade a compensation pick to the club that was involved in the original compensation, it would be like us trading pick 20 to Gold Coast then Gold Coast trading it back to us, it's abusing the system and would be surprised if the AFL allowed it.

 

[David the Cat]

Actually it does mean exactly that and it's not terrible. We want a pick in the early 20s to take to the draft. We value Watts at 20 but at this stage value a pick in the draft at that spot more. If we get a pick for Motlop we can give it away for Watts and still take our pick to the draft. That's why having an extra pick does indeed mean we value it differently.

Hey Booby...havent interacted for a while.....

Actually, I don't think Geelong do value Watts at 20.(Don't think anyone does)...I think Geelong are hanging on to that in the event of a Stringer change of heart....and if that doesn't eventuate...off to the draft. Melbourne may eventually take a low 30 pick for Watts (?) and while Port have the inside running, can they take Rocky, Motlop AND Watts in the one trading period? Be interested in what you think.

 

[Leeds17]

Bartel has surprised me ... maybe I just had not heard him like this enough. Very strong in his opinions and knowledgable.Id always expect him to have a feel for Geelong players but he has demonstrated a knowledge on a wide range of players. On GC its almost like he has has some input form someone very close to the issues... how often have the all played together , what types of players did they recruit , playing out of potables etc..

When on TV he seems to stumble over his words a bit but does to always have a unique point to make when not just reading off a teleprompter, he's better on radio at this stage.

 

[darrenmorgan]

Im a bit disappointed in that offer from us to be honest...

Early days i know but you think 33 would just about seal it. 33 is a speculative draft selection.

My reading is they've reserved 33 to use for Ablett trade if no player will go.

 

[Willo_]

So Watts comments immediately as leaving Geelong.... decision in 24-48 hours..

Wells comes out stating we like Jack, he likes us but the price is too high at this stage, but may change. (I've loosely summarised obviously)

Watts managment now reported as saying a decision to come early next week...


Imo that clearly says he is wanting to get to Geelong, we'll keep working with Melbourne.. depending on Mots we may be in a position to deal early next week - or try meet in the middle for what the Dees are after

 

[Nickoo]

Says Jake Niall. Mark Stevens on 7 thinks Geelong still front runner. Scoop Maclure is adamant Watts will be at Port. Dwayne Russell is adamant Watts will be at Geelong. Who the f%$# in the media really knows?

That's brilliant. Thank you. I'm million miles away with intermittent access but that quick summary cracked me up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

My reading is they've reserved 33 to use for Ablett trade if no player will go.

GC don't need picks. They want ready made players.

Don't rule out Horlin-Smith.

So Watts comments immediately as leaving Geelong.... decision in 24-48 hours..

Wells comes out stating we like Jack, he likes us but the price is too high at this stage, but may change. (I've loosely summarised obviously)

Watts managment now reported as saying a decision to come early next week...


Imo that clearly says he is wanting to get to Geelong, we'll keep working with Melbourne.. depending on Mots we may be in a position to deal early next week - or try meet in the middle for what the Dees are after

That's precisely my take.

 

[Turbocat]

Can't trade a compensation pick to the club that was involved in the original compensation, it would be like us trading pick 20 to Gold Coast then Gold Coast trading it back to us, it's abusing the system and would be surprised if the AFL allowed it.

That make no sense. The Motlop deal is separate. We got two comp picks for Ablett and traded them both to Gold Coast.

 

[Baudolino]

Not about us but Jim is class. Very astute football person.

Even though his intelligence has always been obvious, I thought Jimmy was a pretty weak commentator when he first entered the media just in terms of how inarticulate and fence-riding he was. But credit where it's due, he's improved exponentially in both of those areas in a very short space of time.

Already one of the better media personalities.

 

[darrenmorgan]

GC don't need picks. They want ready made players.
.

Yeah but perhaps via a third club. Either way, we've committed to Ablett so I think he's keeping that pick in case we need it for that deal.

 

[OzeSparky]

Sounds like Wells is holding firm, Melbourne want a pick in 20's we are offering pick in 50's for Watts.

Our 20's pick is backup for Stringer I think.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/me...h/news-story/05f8e09e0d6bb1a7c07f60356b9f8014

 

[catempire]

Can't trade a compensation pick to the club that was involved in the original compensation, it would be like us trading pick 20 to Gold Coast then Gold Coast trading it back to us, it's abusing the system and would be surprised if the AFL allowed it.

The requirement is that the deals are separate.

You can’t agree to let Motlop go to GC on condition that we trade Ablett for the compensation.

However you can let Motlop go to GC and then trade Ablett for the compensation.

Semantics? Subjective? Yep and yep. But that’s the rule. It’s not a blanket prohibition like you suggest.

 

[cynical]

It doesn't work that way mate, it's not simple arithmetic of players in versus players out. As in life generally it's much more nuanced. A mix of factors, such as game plan, fitness, injury, and the relativity of all other sides with regard to those factors.

same thing happened last year

with the same coach and players the same thing will happen, there is no catalyst for change

 

[Turbocat]

Even though his intelligence has always been obvious, I thought Jimmy was a pretty weak commentator when he first entered the media just in terms of how inarticulate and fence-riding he was. But credit where it's due, he's improved exponentially in both of those areas in a very short space of time.

Already one of the better media personalities.

Calling out the Texman ... was quite good. Not sure how it would have played in SA however.

 

[Wojcinski]

So from what I see in the Watts situation:
- Its down to Port and Geelong
- Port have offered pick 29, Geelong 51
- Melbourne wants a pick in the 20's
- Port has offered Watts a 3 year deal, Geelong has not offered a contract
- Watts must be favouring Geelong as the deal has not been been done despite Port having a satisfactory pick and offering a contract.

I'm a bit baffled as to why we'd offer pick 51 when we have 33 available, but as Nakia has said above - they must be holding 33 to use in the Ablett trade. I hope Motlop makes a decision soon so we know what compo we get, it feels like our whole trade period is hinging on it.

 

[Cat Addict]

I for some reason reckon well end up with both Stringer & Watts.
20 + Lang for Stringer
34 + an upgrade of later picks/ or player for Watts

So how does the Ablett trade get done? Motlop compo...

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Whoever suggested we let Motlop go to Gold Coast then trade his compo pick for Ablett and a 2nd rounder has no idea... Not allowed to do that.

The compo picks are tradeable just as bris will try and trade the rockliff compo for cameron whichever journo said otherwise doesn't know the AFL rules re FA. The only thing thats not allowed is a player cant lodge more than one FA offer ie if he lodges with Port and we match then its trade or draft he cant lodge a 2nd FA offer with a 3rd club. But we can not match take the compo pick and on trade it, perfectly legal that.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Specify. Are you saying comp picks are not tradable? So Brisbane can not trade their Rockliff pick out for a Duncan type ? That makes no sense to me.

Whether its GC or an Adelaide team.. if Motlop gets band2 it will be P19 .. we will then have 19 and 22 ..are you saying 19 is not tradeable?

I cant remember if this has been don in the past... but considering the closeness of 22 .. the deal could be done with that pick instead. The point is a pick earlier than most of GC picks. ... and to be honest ..I can see the afl being too pedantic if it helps GC do the deal.

Compo picks are tradeable and always have been.

 

[Turbocat]

The requirement is that the deals are separate.

You can’t agree to let Motlop go to GC on condition that we trade Ablett for the compensation.

However you can let Motlop go to GC and then trade Ablett for the compensation.

Semantics? Subjective? Yep and yep. But that’s the rule. It’s not a blanket prohibition like you suggest.