Recommitted Tim Kelly [requested a trade to West Coast]

[Obeanie1]

I don't see how west coast can afford him. Surely will be on big money next year

There is a reason you can't see.

 

[Obeanie1]

Think he is close, certainly performing as one anyway. Don’t think we will pay him that about 600k will be around the mark.

Starts on a $600k base plus incentives. These being B&F finish. Number of games potentially. Finals played and a flag.

A five year deal with scope to back end and ramp up post Kennedy turning (33), Hurn(33), Shuey(29), Jetta (30) and Naitanui(29) retirements.

Marketing role $$ is never a problem either.

 

[BigCat1]

The Brander thing is highly amusing. How many so called gun players will have 2 career games heading into their 4th season. I wonder what odds Sportsbet would give on that not being a bust

 

[Scotland]

Brander was in the same draft as Kelly, 2017.

His 4th season will be 2021. Which is coincidentally the final year of his contract with West Coast.

 

[Yamumluvsbigcox]

The Brander thing is highly amusing. How many so called gun players will have 2 career games heading into their 4th season. I wonder what odds Sportsbet would give on that not being a bust

Brander only just turned 20 in February they dont draft kids at 16 anymore

 

[Obeanie1]

The Brander thing is highly amusing. How many so called gun players will have 2 career games heading into their 4th season. I wonder what odds Sportsbet would give on that not being a bust

I find it highly amusing you need to learn to count.

2019 is Branders 2nd season.

At the same age no one even knew Kelly's name and it took Kelly five more years 23 years old to reach 2 AFL games.

When Kennedy and McGovern label a 19 yr the best kp player they have seen at the club that is a pretty fair indication he will have at the minimum a decent AFL career bar injury.......minimum.

 

[Scotland]

They're just taking Brander's value down to nothing so they get him as steak knives. Which is funny considering they get narky if we talk down whatever Kelly's latest arbitrary value is, and he's the one that requested a trade last year.

Kelly could theoretically leave for nothing or be traded for any number of things. Brander would actually cost a suiting club a first round pick. Contracted, rated, not up for sale.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

They're just taking Brander's value down to nothing so they get him as steak knives. Which is funny considering they get narky if we talk down whatever Kelly's latest arbitrary value is, and he's the one that requested a trade last year.

Kelly could theoretically leave for nothing or be traded for any number of things. Brander would actually cost a suiting club a first round pick. Contracted, rated, not up for sale.

You would doubt the club would even consider offering Brander unless he himself requested it.

 

[Scotland]

You would doubt the club would even consider offering Brander unless he himself requested it.

Won't be offered. But if I was Geelong (or GWS with Coniglio) I'd be speaking to his manager.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

They're just taking Brander's value down to nothing so they get him as steak knives. Which is funny considering they get narky if we talk down whatever Kelly's latest arbitrary value is, and he's the one that requested a trade last year.

Kelly could theoretically leave for nothing or be traded for any number of things. Brander would actually cost a suiting club a first round pick. Contracted, rated, not up for sale.

Well then you should keep him because the market wont pay a first rounder for him which is all that has been pointed out to you. I dont see anything wrong with that.

 

[Scotland]

Well then you should keep him because the market wont pay a first rounder for him which is all that has been pointed out to you. I dont see anything wrong with that.

Exactly, and we will. Market value is a massive furphy anyway. Brander for example would appeal to some clubs and not others, and if he's worth pick 5 to Adelaide or Gold Coast or whoever and doesn't want to go there it's pretty irrelevant.

You reckon Geelong would consider a first round pick 10-18 for Kelly if he was contracted and not asking for a trade? Of course not. Different circumstances.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Exactly, and we will. Market value is a massive furphy anyway. Brander for example would appeal to some clubs and not others, and if he's worth pick 5 to Adelaide or Gold Coast or whoever and doesn't want to go there it's pretty irrelevant.

You reckon Geelong would consider a first round pick 10-18 for Kelly if he was contracted and not asking for a trade? Of course not. Different circumstances.

No i dont, but equally no one in Geelong would swap Kelly for Brander (as your poster suggested) as the latter doesnt have the currency. I rate Daniher but trade currency and talent are not the same thing.

 

[ghostbat12]

No i dont, but equally no one in Geelong would swap Kelly for Brander (as your poster suggested) as the latter doesnt have the currency. I rate Daniher but trade currency and talent are not the same thing.

Then why do you keep bringing him up? We don’t want to lose him, you don’t want him and yet he is still topic of conversation.

Deep down you do want him. That’s really it.

 

[Warhorse]

Geelong would be silly not to ask about brander. A good young prospect in a position that we are short on that west coast seem to have covered in the short term. I would even be asking about waterman. West coast have waterman allen and darling all a similar type fighting over positions

 

[Prochard123]

Geelong needs Kelly more than Eagles does, will be a tough trade.

Post selwood/ablett, geelong has just enough depth with a starting setup with Danger-Kelly-Constable/Parfitt, losing Kelly will hurt.

Tim would be top 2 midfielder at eagles too but their midfield is perfectly fine.

Getting Kelly is like us getting Beams, costly and redundant trade which will only hamper the growth of the next generation.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Then why do you keep bringing him up? We don’t want to lose him, you don’t want him and yet he is still topic of conversation.

Deep down you do want him. That’s really it.

I keep bringing him up because other people do. Hes a good player who might be of some use to Geelong but i can think of at least a dozen i'd want more.

 

[Scotland]

I keep bringing him up because other people do. Hes a good player who might be of some use to Geelong but i can think of at least a dozen i'd want more.

Who do you think you'll get? In addition to whatever picks...

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Who do you think you'll get? In addition to whatever picks...

From WCE in a Kelly trade or in general?

 

[Turbocat]

Geelong needs Kelly more than Eagles does, will be a tough trade.

Post selwood/ablett, geelong has just enough depth with a starting setup with Danger-Kelly-Constable/Parfitt, losing Kelly will hurt.

Tim would be top 2 midfielder at eagles too but their midfield is perfectly fine.

Getting Kelly is like us getting Beams, costly and redundant trade which will only hamper the growth of the next generation.

Kelly and Beams is one of the best comparisons I have heard... talent is obvious and no one wants to lose talent.
Id say your esimation of the Geelong setup is fair as well. Id say Brisbane and Geelong are slightly different stages but still Brisbane brought in a ready made replacement. Geelong are slight less endowed with the new group of mids than Brisbane as.. as you say it will hurt.. but its not like there is a choice. OOC players can go.
Its probably why Kelly would fit Freo better if he wanted to go there.. thats up to whether they want him and they would appeal to him. Their form so far this year will not hurt.

 

[Turbocat]

Geelong would be silly not to ask about brander. A good young prospect in a position that we are short on that west coast seem to have covered in the short term. I would even be asking about waterman. West coast have waterman allen and darling all a similar type fighting over positions

It is interesting that Brander has been named in the 26 this week to play Geelong.. if he plays it will have elements of showing off a potential option ...
Without knowing WCoast intimately ..id say the only way they would consider letting him go is if the form of Allen etc is good enough to give them confidence about heir future is covered. Brander seem to be a long term play to have coverage for KPF..he is contracted for another couple.

 

[Warhorse]

It is interesting that Brander has been named in the 26 this week to play Geelong.. if he plays it will have elements of showing off a potential option ...
Without knowing WCoast intimately ..id say the only way they would consider letting him go is if the form of Allen etc is good enough to give them confidence about heir future is covered. Brander seem to be a long term play to have coverage for KPF..he is contracted for another couple.

I look at West Coasts lost and the players in there bottom few players and players just outside the 22 include jake waterman, Liam Duggan, Daniel venebles, jake petrucelle, Josh Gotham, Mathew Allen, Cole . You would suspect that a first round pick and one of the above players would be offered from west coast.

 

[Turbocat]

Then why do you keep bringing him up? We don’t want to lose him, you don’t want him and yet he is still topic of conversation.

Deep down you do want him. That’s really it.

Brander would obviously appeal to clubs that have no strong candidates to be their future KPP for them , its only value that would have to be agreed on and in that its a difficult discussion.

for what its worth... The last time I saw highlights of Brander he looked like he was developing nicely.. but as with most players who are in that build stage their value goes backwards a bit till they start playing on the big stage. Its why most clubs would not consider trading a development type player early on.. I'm sure WC would have drafted him with a 3-4 year time line min. The longer it goes in system , play or not ..the more any players value drafts from draft value to their AFL performance value. It shows the WC have been clever getting him to sign an extended contract to give them coverage for an extra period.. cause if he was OCC without much playing ..his value would have dropped from where he was drafted.

 

[Turbocat]

I look at West Coasts lost and the players in there bottom few players and players just outside the 22 include jake waterman, Liam Duggan, Daniel venebles, jake petrucelle, Josh Gotham, Mathew Allen, Cole . You would suspect that a first round pick and one of the above players would be offered from west coast.

Maybe.. any trade need player approval..

 

[Obeanie1]

This weeks rising star nominee.

Picked up with one of those "crappy 2nd round picks". Pick 38 no less.




https://www.westcoasteagles.com.au/news/2017-11-25/recruiters-nailed-it

You already know about another crappy 2nd rounder we picked up in that draft pick 26.




And IMO the one who will end up the pick of the 2017 draft for the Eagles the U18 Lark Medalist pick 21.




So much for crappy 2nd rounders!!!

 

[Obeanie1]

Geelong needs Kelly more than Eagles does, will be a tough trade.

Post selwood/ablett, geelong has just enough depth with a starting setup with Danger-Kelly-Constable/Parfitt, losing Kelly will hurt.

Tim would be top 2 midfielder at eagles too but their midfield is perfectly fine.

Getting Kelly is like us getting Beams, costly and redundant trade which will only hamper the growth of the next generation.

Agree what the Pies paid for Beams with the midfield they already had wasnt a real need.

In exchange for Beams and Pick No. 41 and 44, the Lions receive Pick No. 18, 56 and a future first-round pick from the Magpies.

Feb 1990 DOB so turning 30 and now a player like Seir cant get a game.

Kelly however is turning 25 and if he ends up at the Eagles we should see Kelly in the centre square, Gaff back to a wing and Masten either let go or playing in the WAFL on a 1 yr deal as a depth player.