News Brad Crouch to Saints (STK make offer; Band 3, ADL to match?)

[BrissyCrow]

And take it to the courts.

I am just waiting for some club to challenge the AFL in court, I wish it were us. So long as we had a legit reason for doing so. I think we have been screwed over on many occasions and we need to stand up. But I know it wont happen.

 

[xchadders]

We’re about to roll over more willingly than my dog. And he’s very willing.

 

[Kezza86]

You are giving u

How is getting a better pick than compo worse than compo?

Your giving up a pick along with compo to move up 6 spots lol.

 

[Crow till I die]

maybe the club forgot today is the day they need to make the call either way

 

[Thetrader15]

maybe the club forgot today is the day they need to make the call either way

I wish they'd hurry up, I have to go out at 3.30

 

[FR0GGY]

maybe the club forgot today is the day they need to make the call either way

The club hasn’t been made aware if Brad has nominated for FA yet...

 

[Bernie L]

 

[CrowinNT]

This reminds me of the anxiety of the first attempt at getting Gibbs.

 

[Thetrader15]

Seriously would be great if we match with 5mins to go. That would really p155 the Vics off, as well as Brad, no way he would come back here then.

Brad might then be open to going else where and let the bidding begin!

 

[Mego Red]

Pick 23 doesn't just disappear in your proposal. It goes to the Saints.

So we give up Brouch, then get pick 23. Then give up 23. So we have given both away. The fact that we don't have it now is irrelevant. These are things that we would give up in that trade. Plus pick 39. And then we get 17 back. It is a terrible proposal.

I'm not sure I can argue this anymore.

We have Crouch OR 23. Only ONE of those is a tradable asset of ours, that we can give up.

Look - I have two $1 bills. I swap one for two 50c pieces. I then give my $1 and my two 50c pieces to buy a loaf of bread.

What have I given up? Has the loaf of bread cost $3?

So - I have Crouch and 39. I swap Crouch for 23. I then give 39 and 23 to St Kilda for 17.

Is this clear now? Getting 17 for Crouch and 39 DOESN'T ALSO cost us 23.

 

[Anzacpaul]

I'm not sure I can argue this anymore.

We have Crouch OR 23. Only ONE of those is a tradable asset of ours, that we can give up.

Look - I have two $1 bills. I swap one for two 50c pieces. I then give my $1 and my two 50c pieces to buy a loaf of bread.

What have I given up? Has the loaf of bread cost $3?

So - I have Crouch and 39. I swap Crouch for 23. I then give 39 and 23 to St Kilda for 17.

Is this clear now? Getting 17 for Crouch and 39 DOESN'T ALSO cost us 23.

So if Crouch doesn't cost us 23, how come we don't end up with it at the end of the deal?

You say we have Crouch Or 23, yet they both somehow end up at St Kilda.

They are both ours, and we give them both to St Kilda.

 

[Mego Red]

You are giving u

Your giving up a pick along with compo to move up 6 spots lol.

Uh - yeah.

Would you rather have 17 or 23 and 39?

 

[Thetrader15]

This reminds me of the anxiety of the first attempt at getting Gibbs.

Feels like we have already handed over our draft picks and now are waiting to see if SOS will let Bryce leave.

 

[xchadders]

I'm not sure I can argue this anymore.

We have Crouch OR 23. Only ONE of those is a tradable asset of ours, that we can give up.

Look - I have two $1 bills. I swap one for two 50c pieces. I then give my $1 and my two 50c pieces to buy a loaf of bread.

What have I given up? Has the loaf of bread cost $3?

So - I have Crouch and 39. I swap Crouch for 23. I then give 39 and 23 to St Kilda for 17.

Is this clear now? Getting 17 for Crouch and 39 DOESN'T ALSO cost us 23.

yes you’ve only given $2. But the baker has received $3.

 

[Eagleboy2011]

Where were these guys when AFL media was canning any deal for Crouch last week.

 

[Crow till I die]

Whoda thunkit

The voice of reason!!

 

[FR0GGY]

Have the AFC invested in bigfooty?
Slow as anything

 

[Mego Red]

So if Crouch doesn't cost us 23, how come we don't end up with it at the end of the deal?

You say we have Crouch Or 23, yet they both somehow end up at St Kilda.

They are both ours, and we give them both to St Kilda.

Walk me through which part of my explanation you didn't understand?

Is it the fact that you're looking at what St Kilda gets, instead of what it costs us? Is that what you're misunderstanding?

Fine if you care about what St kilda gets more than worrying about we do - but that's not what we're talking about.

Let me try again and tell me what is confusing.

I have a ten dollar bill (Crouch) and a $1 coin (pick 39).

I swap the ten dollar bill (Crouch) for two $5 bills (pick 23). I haven't SPENT $10, I've exchanged it.

I then give my two $5 and my $1 to someone for a new stapler (pick 17)

That stapler (pick 17) has cost me $11, which is what I started with (Crouch and 39). Pick 17 for Crouch and 39.

Is that now clear?

 

[Anzacpaul]

Have the AFC invested in bigfooty?
Slow as anything

US Election is my bet.

 

[Brett Cummings]

man if they're taking this long and they dont match they're really bad at flipping poker.

 

[DJ75]

I'm not sure I can argue this anymore.

We have Crouch OR 23. Only ONE of those is a tradable asset of ours, that we can give up.

Look - I have two $1 bills. I swap one for two 50c pieces. I then give my $1 and my two 50c pieces to buy a loaf of bread.

What have I given up? Has the loaf of bread cost $3?

So - I have Crouch and 39. I swap Crouch for 23. I then give 39 and 23 to St Kilda for 17.

Is this clear now? Getting 17 for Crouch and 39 DOESN'T ALSO cost us 23.

17 for Crouch and 39 is still a sh!t deal. Why would we do it?

 

[SaltPeter]

Peak BF - getting trolled by Chiefs servers now

 

[Scorpus]

So if Crouch doesn't cost us 23, how come we don't end up with it at the end of the deal?

You say we have Crouch Or 23, yet they both somehow end up at St Kilda.

They are both ours, and we give them both to St Kilda.

The actual way is to look at it like this

We trade Brad to the AFL for pick 23. The AFL then trade Brad to St Kilda for nothing

Then we trade 23 and 39 to St Kilda for 17.

Our net gain is 17, and net losses are Brad and 39. St Kilda's net gain is 23, 39 and Crouch, net losses are 17. The AFL's net gain is nothing, and net losses are pick 23.

It's a shit deal either way for us but the issue is pick 23 is generated out of thin air

 

[70lethal]

So if Crouch doesn't cost us 23, how come we don't end up with it at the end of the deal?

You say we have Crouch Or 23, yet they both somehow end up at St Kilda.

They are both ours, and we give them both to St Kilda.

They both arent ours. We have either Crouch or pick 23. Its one or the other.

 

[Murray2503]

Whoda thunkit

The voice of reason!!

Yes why haven't we matched when the saints and Brad have no other option but to make sure he gets to StK. No club is turning their back on a player when they would have given them assurances that they will get to that club. Their name will be mud if they do that. We match and they have to give up pick 17. FFS it's not that hard. It's obvious the AFL asked stkilda to restructure their deal to make sure we didn't get tier 2. Likely offered them more Friday night matches or something to that effect. We must make them pay for doing us over.