2016 Non Freo discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
It makes you wonder what it was with McCarthy that led to GWS basically refusing to discuss a trade

I don't recall any other player, and there's been plenty of them, that GWS have not found a trade for. McCarthy has been the only one they haven't accepted a trade proposal for.

Surely it's just coincidence that he's been the only WA player to request a trade

Should Lobb actually ask to be traded it'll be interesting to see how the Giants approach it

NB: just to be clear I'm not suggesting Fremantle did anything wrong in the McCarthy negotiations, just odd that it was that deal in particular the Giants chose to dig their heels in

My theory is the deal with Carlton was more important and once done it ticked all the boxes for GWS and there was no additional benefit for them in trading Cam. If it wasn't for the loophole exploitation they had lined up in advance they might have entertained the idea but with a player with two years to go on his contract plus the Carlton deal of the century they had no interest in listening.
 
They couldn't trade contracted players and claim to not have the cap space for Treloar last season.

Couldn't or wouldn't?

If they couldn't what was the big issue with McCarthy, GWS, and Freo? From my understanding he was contracted last off season?
 
They didn't want to trade mc Cathy because they had him signed up for two more years at probably a good rate of pay, ie cheap and he's going to be a gun.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

It makes you wonder what it was with McCarthy that led to GWS basically refusing to discuss a trade

I don't recall any other player, and there's been plenty of them, that GWS have not found a trade for. McCarthy has been the only one they haven't accepted a trade proposal for.

Surely it's just coincidence that he's been the only WA player to request a trade

Should Lobb actually ask to be traded it'll be interesting to see how the Giants approach it

NB: just to be clear I'm not suggesting Fremantle did anything wrong in the McCarthy negotiations, just odd that it was that deal in particular the Giants chose to dig their heels in
Just been on Gdubs forum Lobb thread asking if they had learnt anything from the McCarthy debacle in how things will go when Lobb calls up the coach to ask to be traded. It went down really well...
 
Just been on Gdubs forum Lobb thread asking if they had learnt anything from the McCarthy debacle in how things will go when Lobb calls up the coach to ask to be traded. It went down really well...
Did lol
 
They didn't want to trade mc Cathy because they had him signed up for two more years at probably a good rate of pay, ie cheap and he's going to be a gun.

Yeah, I think it's simple as that really. From their perspective it was a perfect player to make a point on. If McCarthy was on a salary that was eating big time into the TPP and the like, then maybe. Though I'm sure they were aware they could get good picks for him, they got and will get plenty of high end picks anyway. It was low risk/high reward for them really to dig their heals in. It's why I always thought it would never happen last year.
 
It makes you wonder what it was with McCarthy that led to GWS basically refusing to discuss a trade

I don't recall any other player, and there's been plenty of them, that GWS have not found a trade for. McCarthy has been the only one they haven't accepted a trade proposal for.

Surely it's just coincidence that he's been the only WA player to request a trade

Should Lobb actually ask to be traded it'll be interesting to see how the Giants approach it

NB: just to be clear I'm not suggesting Fremantle did anything wrong in the McCarthy negotiations, just odd that it was that deal in particular the Giants chose to dig their heels in

I think beyond just hoping he would change his mind, the McCarthy trade offered an absolutely perfect opportunity for GWS to draw a line in the sand and send a message.

Tall forwards is not exactly something they are starved for, and as we've seen they've been fine without him. At some point they knew they exodus of high picks was going to come, so in refusing the trade they were able to make a statement to a lot of younger players that they expect them to honour their contracts unless a very favourable deal (i.e. Treloar) comes along.
 
Couldn't or wouldn't?

If they couldn't what was the big issue with McCarthy, GWS, and Freo? From my understanding he was contracted last off season?

It was mainly due to the Tom Boyd trade to the Bulldogs, which made GWS look like a bunch of idiots who were walked over like a door mat.

They were never going to let McCarthy do the same to them.
 
I think if it was 1 of the big boy clubs. Or a melbourne boy they wouldnt have pushed Back so hard. I'm sort of glad they carried on. We were going to pay overs for him anyways
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

My theory is the deal with Carlton was more important and once done it ticked all the boxes for GWS and there was no additional benefit for them in trading Cam. If it wasn't for the loophole exploitation they had lined up in advance they might have entertained the idea but with a player with two years to go on his contract plus the Carlton deal of the century they had no interest in listening.

I reckon it was sheedy. He was pissed at how we treated his old mate Harvey so said to GWS before he left to "under no circumstances, trade with freo"
 
I am thinking if menegola go all the way with geelong. Is freo mismanaged him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top