Recruiting Trade & Free Agency V

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sadly, we just don't need that many picks in this year's draft, so accepting that would be unfeasible. The points calculator is therefore pointless to assess that deal, considering our tight list spots. Where it is more useful is to calculate what you paid for Smith. No matter where the Giants finish in 2017, it looks like GWS almost gave Smith away as steak knives.

I personally would have done that trade with our pick 9 and laughed all the way to the bank. Well played.
I guess if volume of picks is not needed then maybe we are using them to trade back for a later 1st rounder to give to you?? Thoughts?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Bulldogs supporters are probably the main reason I want Stringer at the moment. They're so in denial I actually feel kind of sorry for them - not enough to not enjoy their melts though. Just imagine how good it will get if they only get a second rounder or 2 for him!
They should be taking their anger out on their own club not opposition clubs offering what is reasonable now in the circumstances.

They screwed up not the other clubs (if any) wanting Stringer.
 
Bulldogs supporters are probably the main reason I want Stringer at the moment. They're so in denial I actually feel kind of sorry for them - not enough to not enjoy their melts though. Just imagine how good it will get if they only get a second rounder or 2 for him!

I'm enjoying that some still think it's a motivational excercise for a big 2018 for Jake.
 
I guess if volume of picks is not needed then maybe we are using them to trade back for a later 1st rounder to give to you?? Thoughts?
I'm certainly one who is in the camp that you don't trade away premium assets for multiple smaller, less valuable assets. I thought 11 was fair value for Stringer (and a great deal for Essendon), but let's assume for a moment he's worth pick 17 or equivalent. Adding say a third rounder to Stringer or a 2nd / 2rd swap and emerging with pick 11 (say Stringer + 39 for pick 11, or Stringer + 26 for 11 and a pick in the 40s) would have been much better than an equivalent pick of 17-19 by itself. I'd be pretty disappointed if we end up with pick 17ish unless that pick nets us Schache and I'd hope we seriously consider keeping him at that price. Or more likely, we go for future picks which are more valuable for us (given list spots + Smith as a father/son).

Pick 17ish + Essendon's future second (maybe with ??? going back to Essendon?) was proposed on the Bulldogs board and it's not an awful trade for either party TBH and might be a way of Essendon turning many second rounders into Stringer.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I think the dog fans are still salty at the fact that they traded Zach Merrett for Stewart Crameri :D:D
We've done pretty well with our 2nd and 3rd round picks lately so I don't think that even rates a thought among Doggie fans - however its a great example of how seemingly winning the trade on the day can quickly turn to smoke and ash. Nothing beats trading in best 22 players, but beyond that I don't think there would be much correlation between trading success and actual success.
 
I'm certainly one who is in the camp that you don't trade away premium assets for multiple smaller, less valuable assets. I thought 11 was fair value for Stringer (and a great deal for Essendon), but let's assume for a moment he's worth pick 17 or equivalent. Adding say a third rounder to Stringer or a 2nd / 2rd swap and emerging with pick 11 (say Stringer + 39 for pick 11, or Stringer + 26 for 11 and a pick in the 40s) would have been much better than an equivalent pick of 17-19 by itself. I'd be pretty disappointed if we end up with pick 17ish unless that pick nets us Schache and I'd hope we seriously consider keeping him at that price. Or more likely, we go for future picks which are more valuable for us (given list spots + Smith as a father/son).

Pick 17ish + Essendon's future second (maybe with ??? going back to Essendon?) was proposed on the Bulldogs board and it's not an awful trade for either party TBH and might be a way of Essendon turning many second rounders into Stringer.
Stringer was an awesome player in 2015 and intermittently in 2016. He lost his way on 2017 and starting becoming injury prone.

He has some serious personal issues which it is hard to imagine him getting over straight away. Typically this takes 12-18 months. Dogs said it is best to part ways because I assume he must be a bad influence on other players and/or you believe he is in the too hard basket to turn around.

He may never get back to his 2015-2016 heroics.

What value would you place on a player like this if the Dogs were paying using their hard earned?
 
Was surprised Damo didn't ask him about why would it be strange.

It was a good interview, he sounds like he has brought into the club
It was a good interview actually, was quite honest in his answers.

Sounds like he just loves footy and is really excited about the Bombers. Spoke highly of the list and was surprised on how young some of the players were.

Good get!
 
Stringer was an awesome player in 2015 and intermittently in 2016. He lost his way on 2017 and starting becoming injury prone.

He has some serious personal issues which it is hard to imagine him getting over straight away. Typically this takes 12-18 months. Dogs said it is best to part ways because I assume he must be a bad influence on other players and/or you believe he is in the too hard basket to turn around.

He may never get back to his 2015-2016 heroics.

What value would you place on a player like this if the Dogs were paying using their hard earned?
The best comparison I can think of at the moment is Schache, who has significant personal issues. Maybe he's gettable for a late first rounder, who knows? If the club think his issues are fixable and they rate his ability to deliver on his potential, I wouldn't mind seemingly overpaying. I'd probably want something back from pick 9 but wouldn't be too worried. When a player of significant quality (or in Schache's case, potential) is on the table, you go and get him. I also don't think Melbourne overpaid for Lever - when a guy of his quality is available you do what you gotta do to get him on the list. We did what we had to do to get Tom Boyd on the list, and no way we win a prelim and a granny without him.

There are hundreds of AFL quality players but few who can do what Lever does, few who can do what Stringer will probably get back to, few with Schache's potential. Stringer is a risk, but at a cost of pick 11, a future first, or a bag of three second rounders I'd do that trade every day of the week (providing you have a deep understanding of the issues and are confident your club has what it takes to turn him around). None of those trades get close to Stringer's on-field value if he's firing, which is why Essendon can sense the bargain and the opportunity. If they seize the moment and allow the dogs to leave with their dignity in place, the expected cost of Stringer makes him a pretty compelling risk/reward opportunity.
 
Bulldogs supporters are probably the main reason I want Stringer at the moment. They're so in denial I actually feel kind of sorry for them - not enough to not enjoy their melts though. Just imagine how good it will get if they only get a second rounder or 2 for him!
2017 will have been good to us
Finals
McGrath over Burton
Daniher over Howe
Saad over Carlton
Then Stringer on the cheap.

We'd go close to being accused as the cause of global warming given the level of melts that would occur
 
Respect your opinion.

Not sure about Schache issues, but hard to imagine them being anywhere near as significant as Stringers (a relationship breakup involving two children, gambling problem and 17yo girls and publicly sacked by your coach not to mention the front page headlines across the country and every major news channel
).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top