Recommitted Nasiah Wanganeen-Milera - two year extension

[Amacca 23]

Port will trade in a first this year. Don't ask me how, but they will.

That ONLY happens if you trade bergman or butters

 

[Cleric]

Well if that’s the case and he has nominated Adelaide. Don’t change your offer from your 2 second rounders and late first.. sorry I mean 3 firsts.

Just let the AFL shut us down

That's silly. All clubs trade in good faith. What goes around comes around, so no club are pricks.
If the Crows or Port offer the three seconds when they have three firsts, yeah, but if they offer the best picks they can, and a player, then its in good faith.

 

[stavro#4]

That's silly. All clubs trade in good faith. What goes around comes around, so no club are pricks.
If the Crows or Port offer the three seconds when they have three firsts, yeah, but if they offer the best picks they can, and a player, then its in good faith.

Just because it’s good faith doesn’t mean it’s a good deal.

Good faith would be either club exhausting all options which may involve trading players you would ideally want to keep to acquire the currency to get a deal done.

Choosing not to do that, isn’t good faith trading.

The prerogative to get a deal done doesn’t rest with St Kilda. If NAS was to leave it’s on the club trying to land him.

 

[Gavin Excell]

Just because it’s good faith doesn’t mean it’s a good deal.

Good faith would be either club exhausting all options which may involve trading players you would ideally want to keep to acquire the currency to get a deal done.

Choosing not to do that, isn’t good faith trading.

The prerogative to get a deal done doesn’t rest with St Kilda. If NAS was to leave it’s on the club trying to land him.

Unfortunately when a player wants out, the club he's leaving rarely gets appropriate value

 

[stavro#4]

Unfortunately when a player wants out, the club he's leaving rarely gets appropriate value

I nor any other stkilda supporter have said we will get 100% his value. But the hypothetical slop supporters are saying is beyond laughable.

It’s here this is all we are going to offer bad luck.

 

[Gavin Excell]

I nor any other stkilda supporter have said we will get 100% his value. But the hypothetical slop supporters are saying is beyond laughable.

It’s here this is all we are going to offer bad luck.

Fair enough

 

[Cleric]

Just because it’s good faith doesn’t mean it’s a good deal.

Good faith would be either club exhausting all options which may involve trading players you would ideally want to keep to acquire the currency to get a deal done.

Choosing not to do that, isn’t good faith trading.

The prerogative to get a deal done doesn’t rest with St Kilda. If NAS was to leave it’s on the club trying to land him.

Theres just as much prerogative on St Kilda, because other wise you lose him for nothing.
I think alot of St Kilda supporters think that if a deal cant be made he is going to stay.

 

[boncer34]

That’s the point.

We have plenty of SA supporters telling us it’s take it or leave it with whatever rubbish they have.

You just used what I did last year as an example - it just proved that even though YOU NEEDED to move the pick. You still got absolute value for it.

I dont think you've fully grasped the point.

You going "never going to happen" isn’t the final say. You're doing what your dismissing others for doing.

 

[Holy Hunter Clark]

Which bank?

The blood bank at this rate

 

[Crow till I die]

I'll maintain that on the off chance he chose the crows, I would fully expect SOS to ask for our 1st and a player like Rachele and that would be fair value

 

[stavro#4]

Theres just as much prerogative on St Kilda, because other wise you lose him for nothing.
I think alot of St Kilda supporters think that if a deal cant be made he is going to stay.

I think he is staying. So this is just chewing the hypothetical fat.

He doesn’t get to either SA club without a trade. That’s the only fact of the matter.

A trade doesn’t happen unless the saints are satisfied. However else people want to pretend this happens is up to them.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

Theres just as much prerogative on St Kilda, because other wise you lose him for nothing.
I think alot of St Kilda supporters think that if a deal cant be made he is going to stay.

Whats the alternative?

Do you really think he is joining the Eagles as pick 1 in the PSD or something?

 

[PearLover5]

Saints don’t need to be happy. Nas has all the power as he’s OOC - and if he nominates Port, and they can’t get a deal done, I doubt he would be very keen to go back and face the music at the Saints

 

[stavro#4]

Saints don’t need to be happy. Nas has all the power as he’s OOC - and if he nominates Port, and they can’t get a deal done, I doubt he would be very keen to go back and face the music at the Saints

So Port would be stumping up a fair deal?

Which might have to include players you wish to retain either directly or indirectly?

 

[Cleric]

I think he is staying. So this is just chewing the hypothetical fat.

He doesn’t get to either SA club without a trade. That’s the only fact of the matter.

A trade doesn’t happen unless the saints are satisfied. However else people want to pretend this happens is up to them.

I used to think he was a good chance of staying, but not now. I could be well wrong, as he has kept this closer than anyone else has.
I just think that he would have signed by now if he was going to. The last time he re-sigjed he did it back in April.

But, like I said, I wouldn't be surprised what option he takes. I thought it was a two horse race with Port and St Kilda, but the Crows maybe right in at as well.

 

[DukeX]

Have come late to this thread, and I'm sure this may have come up (but 158 is a lot of pages...)- Does the '2 first round picks in a rolling 4 year period' rule still apply, or has that changed with the ability to trade more futures?
Port were able to trade this year's first for Lukosius as they were using one in the Draft (Berry). Their last first rounders before that were Sinn & JHF (was considered to be a first as he was the #1 the Draft the year before) in 2021. Following the rule, wouldn't Port not be able to trade their future picks as the current rolling 4 years would be 2022 (0), 2023 (0), 2024 (1) & 2025 (currently 0)? If they were to trade their current future firsts, it's essentially going to be a 6 year window with only one first round pick. Can the AFL grant permission to trade without the guarantee the the rule holds?
Genuinely curious, as I haven't heard this mentioned much in the whole saga

 

[Cleric]

Have come late to this thread, and I'm sure this may have come up (but 158 is a lot of pages...)- Does the '2 first round picks in a rolling 4 year period' rule still apply, or has that changed with the ability to trade more futures?
Port were able to trade this year's first for Lukosius as they were using one in the Draft (Berry). Their last first rounders before that were Sinn & JHF (was considered to be a first as he was the #1 the Draft the year before) in 2021. Following the rule, wouldn't Port not be able to trade their future picks as the current rolling 4 years would be 2022 (0), 2023 (0), 2024 (1) & 2025 (currently 0)? If they were to trade their current future firsts, it's essentially going to be a 6 year window with only one first round pick. Can the AFL grant permission to trade without the guarantee the the rule holds?
Genuinely curious, as I haven't heard this mentioned much in the whole saga

The AFL do what ever they want to. They have already given clubs exemptions to the rule, so basically they just want to have to tick it off before you can do it.
If a club is using all their first round picks to bring in 29 year old, then the AFL will say they cant do it. If a club is using their first round picks to bring in young players like JHF, Nas, Rankine etc, then they are ok.

Its really there as a stop gap to make sure teams are still bringing in young talent for their list health

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Enter the draft
Ok buddy

I am highly skilled and sought after professional at the top of my game. I am uncontracted.


An employer of my choice offers me a contract on X dollars at X location. I agree to these terms.

But I'm then forced into a draft of unknown employer and unknown location.

You think that's not a restraint of trade?

You would be laughed out of kindy.

So going buy your theory every player in the competition that’s out of contract would be a free agent every player is aware of there requirements

Disagree. Full suite of first round picks, 20+ A and B grade players and another 5-8 quality depth players, many that have played many games this year in various important position inc KPD, mid or hbf.

As well placed as any team in the comp to get a deal done especially compared to our SA cousin

Thank you for the affirmation. Clearly 3 x firsts would be the highest price any team has paid for anyone ever for starters.

Now clearly I am not privy to Crows List Management decisions on what players would specifically be on the table but i have analysed previously our A and B graders that give us flexibility. More flexibility than any other club to satisfy the Saints thru a combination of picks and/or pla

No one would be pay three firsts…that is fantasy land stuff.

Jeremy Cameron got three late firsts, but there is a significant big man tax.

Lachie Neale only got two firsts.

If he moves they will get 2 firsts, or the equivalent thereof, and late pick swaps.

Times have changed look at the deals Richmond got last year for players well below the ability of nwm,

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Which bank?

2 first Rounders, 1 being Future. Take it to the bank.

Considering you don’t have a first this year and are only trading one future pick where’s the other first coming from ?

 

[The Jack]

 

[DT_35]

Saints don’t need to be happy. Nas has all the power as he’s OOC - and if he nominates Port, and they can’t get a deal done, I doubt he would be very keen to go back and face the music at the Saints

He’s not a coward like JHF

 

[Moist Biscuit]

Evaluating the biggest trades of the last decade

How often do high-profile trades actually work out?

www.zerohanger.com

Most value was probably Tom Boyd, who was what was thought to be a generational Centre Half Forward and 1 year gone First Pick and still under contract. Ryan Griffen and pick 6. That's the best deal that has ever been. An out of contract half back flanker, no matter how good he is, ain't getting better than that.

Referring to Nas as an OOC half back flanker is disingenuous imo, has shown he is much more than just that.

 

[Newbie Real Talk]

The thought of Poort gaining another generational talent from a small club for absolute peanuts boils my blood.

 

[WillHayward]

Evaluating the biggest trades of the last decade

How often do high-profile trades actually work out?

www.zerohanger.com

Most value was probably Tom Boyd, who was what was thought to be a generational Centre Half Forward and 1 year gone First Pick and still under contract. Ryan Griffen and pick 6. That's the best deal that has ever been. An out of contract half back flanker, no matter how good he is, ain't getting better than that.

Dunno if he's a "back flanker".

Don't think that really is an accurate description of this bloke.

Can play wherever the heck he likes.

He ain't no "back flanker". He's something else.

 

[Moist Biscuit]

Dunno if he's a "back flanker".

Don't think that really is an accurate description of this bloke.

Can play wherever the heck he likes.

He ain't no "back flanker".

Yeah theres no way anyones watched his last 2 months and thought "god hes good for a back flanker".