News Update: Charles Cameron traded to Brisbane for Pick 12

[BRL121]

You're not serious?

The question was because I thought that the current view on here was that we already have ample HB options. The Mayes suggestion looks like an afterthought. If he were the blatantly obvious thing to go for to replace Smith, then I would have expected early clamouring from us to get him, before the trade period. If we let Charlie go, we need a direct, or indirect replacement of at least some of his qualities.

 

[Deaneus!]

Surely Carlton are looking at Schache, we're looking at Gibbs, and Brisbane are trying to facilitate the entire deal so they can have Cameron?

My presumption is they're all feverishly working on hashing this out, and everything else is smoke and mirrors.

Carlton could cash in Gibbs, land Schache, and buy Gibson off the free market to do the same job - teach & lead the kids

It's a no-brainer... so it should be right up SOS's alley

 

[Golumless]

Honestly lads you would think we were dealing with Sloane or walker , bit of an over kill isn't it ?
Yea line in the sand stuff but keep it for next year when the wolves come for Sloane not Cameron

Don't think your current big balls attitude will make up for the flag you gave to Richmond or even give you next seasons one. Look we all thought you were the best team last season , how it ended up Like it did is anyone's guess but you are not attracting players like you should , look at Motlop and keeping a player who wants out who is not essential to the crows going forward seems silly to me

Hope it works out in he end

This is the perfect player for a line in the sand moment. Not overly important, we have control and a draft pick doesn't matter to us as we have 4 firsts in the next two years.

You don't do it with Sloane if he goes because you can attract massive value providing we take every step possible to extract that. That's cutting your nose to spite your face move; Camerons is to a lesser extent but the wound is very small for the benefit it can provide.

If you get us Gibbs, you can have him; if not, we don't care and he can rot here. Considering the absolute bullshit excuse he's used, i'll take a good bit of satisfaction if he spends the year in a McCarthy like situation.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

 

[ftmch]

This is the perfect player for a line in the sand moment. Not overly important, we have control and a draft pick doesn't matter to us as we have 4 firsts in the next two years.

You don't do it with Sloane if he goes because you can attract massive value providing we take every step possible to extract that. That's cutting your nose to spite your face move; Camerons is to a lesser extent but the wound is very small for the benefit it can provide.

If you get us Gibbs, you can have him; if not, we don't care and he can rot here. Considering the absolute bullshit excuse he's used, i'll take a good bit of satisfaction if he spends the year in a McCarthy like situation.

Yep, completely agree.

 

[PrideOf]

Even the Americans can see what's happening here.

 

[Crowhorse]

Looking fairly obvious now. We won't move on Cameron, unless a ready-made player (Gibbs) is coming back our way.

Not sure I agree with this, as Cameron's value will be far less at the end of 2018. But, if the club feels like it needs to make a statement, then so be it.

I think the Gibbs near trade of 2016 almost set a bad precedent. CFC should have told us and Gibbs to f off on the first day of trade. I wonder if Trigg was involved somehow trying to make everyone happy but it was never going to (and shouldn't have) eventuate.

Hopefully this non trade will put all this "I'm contracted but want to go elsewhere" stuff to bed. We hold the leverage here, 12 months is an eternity, any player tanking will be held to their own performance contracts that could see them unemployed.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Looking fairly obvious now. We won't move on Cameron, unless a ready-made player (Gibbs) is coming back our way.

Not sure I agree with this, as Cameron's value will be far less at the end of 2018. But, if the club feels like it needs to make a statement, then so be it.

If you really look at it, I am not sure that this has been different at any stage of the trade period.

This about it for a seconds and look at the end results of all the trades and not that trades individually. From our best 22 this season we know that Lever is at Melbourne, Smith is out for 12 months and highly unlikely that he will play any AFL games for us next season and certainly won't be at his best if he does.

That means you are already down to two players out of the best 22 out and no replacements. We are not going to give up Charlie if there is nothing else coming into the best 22 regardless if the offer is 12, 18 or 28.

The point is, we as a club are in the window NOW and should be looking to improve NOW. Losing 3 players doesn't improve us now. Getting those picks and going to the draft might improve us in 3-5 years from now. By that time, guys like Walker, Jacobs, Sloane, Douglas, Jenkins, Betts etc are either retired or about to. Their best footy would certainly be behind them.

Club's mantra is to build a footy club that is a contender for a long time. That is why we are happy to take some picks and bring in the youth but also ensure that we don't compromise our best 22.

People will talk how Cameron needed to be dropped and blah blah blah but the fact remains he was in our best 22 EVERY game he was available for this year. It's the Mackay talk all over again despite all the coaches from Craig to Pyke picking him consistently in the best 22.

We need to ensure that we do not compromise our best 22 for next season too much while also ensuring that we are bringing in the young talent to come through.

Despite popular belief, Cameron is really important to the side as the overall "package" he bring to the table cannot be replaced by anyone else on the team. His defensive pressure is elite, his pace his electric and he has genuine X factor which is under-rated on this board. Sure, we would all like to see a lot more consistency from him but generally speaking, those types of players are pretty inconsistent but can turn the game on its head in bursts of brilliance.

12 months is a long time in football. Despite what his manager is sprouting publicly, there is a chance that Cameron re-signs with the team if he does stay. I still believe that we will trade him if we can bring Gibbs or similar high level experienced player into the team but I also still believe that we won't trade Cameron just because we get offered very good deal in isolation, despite there being a risk of losing Cameron for nothing next year.

 

[DoubleBlue2]

It would be crazy to turn down any pick under 20 for a player like Cameron (who wants to leave).

The deal is too good to make a stand.

 

[Wood_Duck]

It would be crazy to turn down any pick under 20 for a player like Cameron (who wants to leave).

The deal is too good to make a stand.

I think sanity will prevail, but only after we have exhausted all other possibilities.

 

[Peter Doherty]

To the posters saying, 'we won't get 18 for Cameron when out of contract'. Do you think the club hasn't realised there is a chance that could be the case?

This is not the potential Tippett to Brisbane trade, we will still get something for him, Brisbane will be reasonable. We could potentially get less for him nest year but potentially he could sign on again, potentially he could play a part inba flag next year. Strictly talking trade outcomes, the worst scenario is Brisbane don't offer as early draft pick next year.

 

[Stiffy_18]

It's interesting how people are buying the crap paddled out from his manager how Charlie's performance will suffer next year if he stay with us. It's a manager trying to arm wrestle his client out of his contract. It's stock standard rubbish that average player managers get out there.

My understanding is that Charlie's contract contains performance based bonuses so it is in his best interest to perform to the best of his ability. No to mention that the team will be setting itself up to go one better next year. Why would Cameron stink it up if he is held to his contract? He has a potential flag and more money to lose.

People will point out to the speculation that this will carry into next season but I am pretty sure that playing group would rather know in advance if someone is out, as opposed to "I haven't really thought about it" - will he or won't he scenario. It's the will he or won't he that will create more speculation as opposed to he is leaving at the end of the year, we know about it but we still expect him to play his ass off for the club in the final year of his contract.

If Charlie is held to his contract, I am confident he will perform well for us next year and I am quietly confident that we can convince him to stick around for longer.

I think we have more to lose if we let him go without bringing anyone into our best 22 in the trade period.

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

If you really look at it, I am not sure that this has been different at any stage of the trade period.

This about it for a seconds and look at the end results of all the trades and not that trades individually. From our best 22 this season we know that Lever is at Melbourne, Smith is out for 12 months and highly unlikely that he will play any AFL games for us next season and certainly won't be at his best if he does.

That means you are already down to two players out of the best 22 out and no replacements. We are not going to give up Charlie if there is nothing else coming into the best 22 regardless if the offer is 12, 18 or 28.

The point is, we as a club are in the window NOW and should be looking to improve NOW. Losing 3 players doesn't improve us now. Getting those picks and going to the draft might improve us in 3-5 years from now. By that time, guys like Walker, Jacobs, Sloane, Douglas, Jenkins, Betts etc are either retired or about to. Their best footy would certainly be behind them.

Club's mantra is to build a footy club that is a contender for a long time. That is why we are happy to take some picks and bring in the youth but also ensure that we don't compromise our best 22.

People will talk how Cameron needed to be dropped and blah blah blah but the fact remains he was in our best 22 EVERY game he was available for this year. It's the Mackay talk all over again despite all the coaches from Craig to Pyke picking him consistently in the best 22.

We need to ensure that we do not compromise our best 22 for next season too much while also ensuring that we are bringing in the young talent to come through.

Despite popular belief, Cameron is really important to the side as the overall "package" he bring to the table cannot be replaced by anyone else on the team. His defensive pressure is elite, his pace his electric and he has genuine X factor which is under-rated on this board. Sure, we would all like to see a lot more consistency from him but generally speaking, those types of players are pretty inconsistent but can turn the game on its head in bursts of brilliance.

12 months is a long time in football. Despite what his manager is sprouting publicly, there is a chance that Cameron re-signs with the team if he does stay. I still believe that we will trade him if we can bring Gibbs or similar high level experienced player into the team but I also still believe that we won't trade Cameron just because we get offered very good deal in isolation, despite there being a risk of losing Cameron for nothing next year.

And regardless of an incentive based contract or not a poor year by Charlie doesn't guarantee that the Lions will make the same offer in 12 months time

The AFL landscape is a competitive and at times fickle industry and performance is the only currency a player holds when coming out of contract

 

[Stiffy_18]

And regardless of an incentive based contract or not a poor year by Charlie doesn't guarantee that the Lions will make the same offer in 12 months time

The AFL landscape is a competitive and at times fickle industry and performance is the only currency a player holds when coming out of contract

And if he go one better next year and/or Charlie re-signs with Adelaide, then the decision to stand our ground has been vindicated.

 

[SydCrow]

#12 for Charlie is a great deal. But FFS this free agency for everybody is a joke.

 

[Mismatched]

It's interesting how people are buying the crap paddled out from his manager how Charlie's performance will suffer next year if he stay with us. It's a manager trying to arm wrestle his client out of his contract. It's stock standard rubbish that average player managers get out there.

My understanding is that Charlie's contract contains performance based bonuses so it is in his best interest to perform to the best of his ability. No to mention that the team will be setting itself up to go one better next year. Why would Cameron stink it up if he is held to his contract? He has a potential flag and more money to lose.

People will point out to the speculation that this will carry into next season but I am pretty sure that playing group would rather know in advance if someone is out, as opposed to "I haven't really thought about it" - will he or won't he scenario. It's the will he or won't he that will create more speculation as opposed to he is leaving at the end of the year, we know about it but we still expect him to play his ass off for the club in the final year of his contract.

If Charlie is held to his contract, I am confident he will perform well for us next year and I am quietly confident that we can convince him to stick around for longer.

I think we have more to lose if we let him go without bringing anyone into our best 22 in the trade period.

I think the worry is that we saw how poorly he played this year, with the supposed concern regarding leaving, will he be able to push it all out of his mind next year? Or will he have another year of sub par performances.

Personally, if a player doesn't want to play with us, I'd rather get them out sooner rather than later. A pick inside the top 20 is a very good deal given Charlies complete lack of consistency and I understand the part about not wanting to lose another best 22 player, but I just don't see the point in trying to keep him around. I see it as much creating discord amongst the remaining players who have/are committed to the club, as anything else.

I was similar with Tippett, if the player isn't committed to staying, as long as you're getting a half reasonable deal, move him on.

I'd rather now be investing time into Hampton/Gallucci/Poholke in the position, than waste it on a guy who's checked out already.

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

And if he go one better next year and/or Charlie re-signs with Adelaide, then the decision to stand our ground has been vindicated.

Totally agree

Also I think the AFL would be happy to see a few more clubs hold players to their contracts

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

I think the worry is that we saw how poorly he played this year, with the supposed concern regarding leaving, will he be able to push it all out of his mind next year? Or will he have another year of sub par performances.

Personally, if a player doesn't want to play with us, I'd rather get them out sooner rather than later. A pick inside the top 20 is a very good deal given Charlies complete lack of consistency and I understand the part about not wanting to lose another best 22 player, but I just don't see the point in trying to keep him around. I see it as much creating discord amongst the remaining players who have/are committed to the club, as anything else.

I was similar with Tippett, if the player isn't committed to staying, as long as you're getting a half reasonable deal, move him on.

I'd rather now be investing time into Hampton/Gallucci/Poholke in the position, than waste it on a guy who's checked out already.

However that is an assumption that his dilemma in leaving was the cause of his patches of poor form

Another assumption could be that maybe he was just out of form, pure and simple

 

[SydCrow]

I wonder how Eddie feels about all this? Kind of puts his mentorship into perspective.

 

[Mismatched]

However that is an assumption that his dilemma in leaving was the cause of his patches of poor form

Another assumption could be that maybe he was just out of form, pure and simple

That maybe so, but we're wasting a lot of "ifs" on a player who isn't committed to our club and doesn't want to be with us, for whom we can get decent value for now. It's the same dilemma, side deals and emails aside, as Tippett to Brisbane in 2011.

Charlie may have a great year for us, but there's a fair chance, and decent evidence to support this happening, that he'll have a stinker or could even sit out the year, if his manager is anything to go by.

Get pick 18, see if we can't get involved in a swap for Francis and let's not waste another thought on a player who wants to piss off to Brisbane for dollars, warmer weather and to chill with "mates". Now if that's what he wants to do, fair enough, but this is clearly a player to whom playing successful footy is not a high priority, why bother keeping him? There's plenty others begging for his spot/opportunity.

 

[Thetrader15]

Grow his hair?

Grow a dirty moustache?

 

[Thetrader15]

Yeah we need to go hard for Brisbane's 2018 first rounder.

Get it done Reid !!!!

I agree, but can see the afl giving the lions an easy draw and they finish 10th and we get pick 8

 

[GROTTO]

#12 for Charlie is a great deal. But FFS this free agency for everybody is a joke.

Seriously whats the point of free agency anymore when any player contracted or not can just tell a Club I have had enough and want to go "home".

I would like the AFL to give absolute total power to the Clubs for the first 5 years and they own the player no matter what. If a player is homesick etc, then fine they should be allowed to go home, no one is forcing a player to play and stay interstate, but ffs dont expect to play AFL at another Club if you dont have the blessing of the Club that drafted you.

 

[Croweater23]

Why on earth should we be going hard for Mayes??
Reid and Elite are correct in that we should be preferring players instead of picks, at this point,
However, they should be best-22 players in areas of need (unless stars), not middling depth players. We should not be trading just for the sake of it.

Because he fills a need and would be best 22.

 

[relapse]

#12 for Charlie is a great deal. But FFS this free agency for everybody is a joke.

If we turn down #12 then the club would have officially lost its mind.