2017 Trade and FA thread

[Dom PC]

For 1, it is SCHACHE. 2, you keep saying we ****** up big time for Schache. What is wrong with points equalling pick 13 for a guy with serious problems that trading was the best solution for both parties despite all the work we'd put in?

Ask yourself this as well: if Schache has high ability like most believe - why is it that nobody wanted him and pick 25 managed to win him? If you can't see there is more to the story I don't know how else to convince you.

Pick 20 and 25 were likely going to be points for Ballenden at best, so moving our points into the 40s and upgrading pick 20 to pick 15 after traditing pick 12 was a smart move. Now we've got 3 first round draft picks, Cameron, Ballenden and Hodge.

Opps, wow i didn't even realise my phone was doing that. Schache!

The points system for draft picks is not right when it comes to combining lower picks to equal higher picks. We got smashed in that Schahce trade.

If Schache had issues, then we as a club should have backed ourselves in, at least for one more year. I am a firm believer that two years is not long enough to settle in a city.

 

[Dom PC]

This continued carping about how badly we did with the Schache trade reminds me of this oldie but goodie

Other than the draft and when the cricket starts, what else is there to do in the off season!

 

[Dalions]

I am a firm believer that two years is not long enough to settle in a city.

So I guess the club though he had long enough!

 

[Nunez]

Opps, wow i didn't even realise my phone was doing that. Schache!

The points system for draft picks is not right when it comes to combining lower picks to equal higher picks. We got smashed in that Schahce trade.

If Schache had issues, then we as a club should have backed ourselves in, at least for one more year. I am a firm believer that two years is not long enough to settle in a city.

Yes it is - the lower picks we now have pay for Ballenden and we were able to move back to pick 15?

Sometimes there is only so much you can do for someone and if our guys felt despite 2 years of helping Schache and having 2 years to run on his contract we still traded him for pick 25, it speaks volumes. It is hardly a matter of just being settled with Schache.

 

[captainrich]

Club probs realised with Walkers form, Hipwoods X Factor, the fact we will more than likely keep Hammelman and Ballendan on his way we just didn't see a spot for him within the club in the future and just needed to offload him? realistically he would be on form playing reserves inext year

 

[carnthemlions]

It was mentioned somewhere on BF Lions that Hodge is on a substantial $$$ contract for season 2018 which then drops down significantly in 2019 for the expected increase for some our younger players from 2019 and beyond.

I would assume D.Beams and Zorko would be on really good coin and Rich signed a generous $$$ and length contract not that long ago.

You'd think a few of our bigger contracts would've also been frontloaded as well, so it's still pretty confusing to me.

 

[spotthedog1]

Sure, if we had kept him for another 12 months to re-assess, we may have rebuilt his confidence, improved his wellbeing and had him positioned as a more valuable trade target. But we also ran the risk of exacerbating whatever issues Schache had, using welfare resources that would otherwise been directed towards other players (including our new draftees) and ending up 1 year down the track with an even more miserable player with even less value on the trade table.

His value dropped from pick 2 to pick 21 (equivalent - see below). I don't know how much further his stock could've fallen in another year.

For 1, it is SCHACHE. 2, you keep saying we ****** up big time for Schache. What is wrong with points equalling pick 13 for a guy with serious problems that trading was the best solution for both parties despite all the work we'd put in?

Ask yourself this as well: if Schache has high ability like most believe - why is it that nobody wanted him and pick 25 managed to win him? If you can't see there is more to the story I don't know how else to convince you.

Pick 20 and 25 were likely going to be points for Ballenden at best, so moving our points into the 40s and upgrading pick 20 to pick 15 after traditing pick 12 was a smart move. Now we've got 3 first round draft picks, Cameron, Ballenden and Hodge.

Points didn't equal 13. Points were closer to 14 - call it 13.5. The key pick was also, within 1 minute, traded to Richmond. Except that we had to give up an even better pick to get hold of pick 15, so there's no way that in this draft, Schache can be justified as being traded for anything better than 15. If you combine the Schache-for-picks and immediate ontrade of picks-for-picks, Schache was traded for pick 21. Effectively, Schache and pick 20 got us picks 15, 40, 52. A 5-pick upgrade and change to make sure we aren't short for Ballenden.

And picks 20 and 25 weren't "points for Ballenden at best". They were points for Ballenden at worst. Based on most mocks, probably 20 as a pick, and 25 as points for Ballenden... If not both as picks.

Noble's still doubling down though. His post-trade period interview on the Roar Deal, he insisted that Schache could've come back. He's not trying to fool opposition list managers any more. Either he's telling the truth, in which case he sold Schache for a minor pick upgrade, or he's lying, and it isn't to deceive other clubs, it's to deceive Brisbane Lions fans. He could easily have 'no comment'ed if it was a sensitive issue, but he's still talking it up.

 

[Hollow Knight]

His value dropped from pick 2 to pick 21 (equivalent - see below). I don't know how much further his stock could've fallen in another year.

How about his personal wellbeing?

 

[spotthedog1]

How about his personal wellbeing?

Noble insists he could've come back. Am I supposed to believe the club is lying?

Yes, worst case scenario is that it could've been a mental health issue. And I get the club not going into mental health issues. Not out business, and not their place. In which case, when asked "could Schache have returned to Brisbane?" on the podcast, the answer is "probably not - we thought it was better for him to be there" or "look, it's a tough situation, and it's been talked about plenty". Not saying "yeah, he could've".

Long-term player health is more important than our club's list management. Our club's list management is more important than a 20 year old who is homesick, however genuinely. Club still saying it's just homesicknes though.

 

[Dalions]

His value dropped from pick 2 to pick 21 (equivalent - see below). I don't know how much further his stock could've fallen in another year.

Points didn't equal 13. Points were closer to 14 - call it 13.5. The key pick was also, within 1 minute, traded to Richmond. Except that we had to give up an even better pick to get hold of pick 15, so there's no way that in this draft, Schache can be justified as being traded for anything better than 15. If you combine the Schache-for-picks and immediate ontrade of picks-for-picks, Schache was traded for pick 21. Effectively, Schache and pick 20 got us picks 15, 40, 52. A 5-pick upgrade and change to make sure we aren't short for Ballenden.

And picks 20 and 25 weren't "points for Ballenden at best". They were points for Ballenden at worst. Based on most mocks, probably 20 as a pick, and 25 as points for Ballenden... If not both as picks.

Noble's still doubling down though. His post-trade period interview on the Roar Deal, he insisted that Schache could've come back. He's not trying to fool opposition list managers any more. Either he's telling the truth, in which case he sold Schache for a minor pick upgrade, or he's lying, and it isn't to deceive other clubs, it's to deceive Brisbane Lions fans. He could easily have 'no comment'ed if it was a sensitive issue, but he's still talking it up.

Would you have been happier if we traded him to the doggies for 16 in a straight swap? It is probably about the best we would have got this year.
We would then have had 1, 16, 18, 20 and 44.
Is that any better for the draft? Were we better off to have done that?
Not sure how we would have benefitted from that?

 

[lioninthesand]

In regards to Schahce. Niether did Lappin, Leppitch,Power etc. at some point in their careers but we convinced them to hang in there and they eventually settled... and even after that point, we rolled over in the Schahce trade. Contracted pick 2 KPF, two years into his career and we get that in a trade? That's really poor.

Holding someone to their contract (even if it was for one more year of his two years) should have been a real option. Based on what we got, I'd say it wasn't, which I think is really disappointing.

Brisbane ****** up on Schahce. There should have been "fire extinguishers" out in the media everyday squashing the Schahce rumours. The whole saga this year was a total balls up and disaster.

As for Rockliff, what we got for him was close enough to fair for someone we pushed out. That's not my issue with his situation. It's the fact we essentially traded him and Schache for pick 15.... that's a serious **** up on our behalf!

Still annoys me now.... pick 15 for Rockliff and Schahce... WTF!!!

Going to do your head in worrying about the trade value of a trade that never occurred.

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[bungalow_bill]

Personally I'm just happy he didn't go to Richmond Carlton or Essendon and the trade helped us to get pick 15.

 

[Dalions]

Personally I'm just happy he didn't go to Richmond Carlton or Essendon and the trade helped us to get pick 15.

I'll throw Collingwood into that mix.

 

[spotthedog1]

Would you have been happier if we traded him to the doggies for 16 in a straight swap? It is probably about the best we would have got this year.
We would then have had 1, 16, 18, 20 and 44.
Is that any better for the draft? Were we better off to have done that?
Not sure how we would have benefitted from that?

You're asking whether 16+20 is better than 15? Yes. Yes it is.

List spots become an issue, but pick trading can happen. Richmond traded 20+25 for 15+change. I'd imagine we could have traded 18+20 for 15+change, and probably a 2nd rounder next year too (even if not, we'd still be in a better position). Hell, I'd have been fine with us offering pick 18 or 20 for a mid-ladder 2nd rounder next year (to compensate for draft depth variances). 1,16,18 and a mid-second rounder next year is better than 1,15,18 and not.

Edit: This isn't to say I'd be thrilled with the trade, but at least we'd get a 1st rounder for Schache, not part of a first rounder like we actually did (20+25 to get to 15). Seriously - pick 21 is the eventual compensation we received.

 

[Maboo]

His value dropped from pick 2 to pick 21 (equivalent - see below). I don't know how much further his stock could've fallen in another year.

Points didn't equal 13. Points were closer to 14 - call it 13.5. The key pick was also, within 1 minute, traded to Richmond. Except that we had to give up an even better pick to get hold of pick 15, so there's no way that in this draft, Schache can be justified as being traded for anything better than 15. If you combine the Schache-for-picks and immediate ontrade of picks-for-picks, Schache was traded for pick 21. Effectively, Schache and pick 20 got us picks 15, 40, 52. A 5-pick upgrade and change to make sure we aren't short for Ballenden.

And picks 20 and 25 weren't "points for Ballenden at best". They were points for Ballenden at worst. Based on most mocks, probably 20 as a pick, and 25 as points for Ballenden... If not both as picks.

Noble's still doubling down though. His post-trade period interview on the Roar Deal, he insisted that Schache could've come back. He's not trying to fool opposition list managers any more. Either he's telling the truth, in which case he sold Schache for a minor pick upgrade, or he's lying, and it isn't to deceive other clubs, it's to deceive Brisbane Lions fans. He could easily have 'no comment'ed if it was a sensitive issue, but he's still talking it up.

Let's put it this way, if Shache was kept on the Lions list, he probably would have come back to Brisbane. He might have played a couple of games, but he most likely wouldn't have been here by the end of the season. If you read my post a week or so ago you would understand, it is the truth, and we did ok in the trade all things considered.

 

[Dalions]

You're asking whether 16+20 is better than 15? Yes. Yes it is.

List spots become an issue, but pick trading can happen. Richmond traded 20+25 for 15+change. I'd imagine we could have traded 18+20 for 15+change, and probably a 2nd rounder next year too (even if not, we'd still be in a better position). Hell, I'd have been fine with us offering pick 18 or 20 for a mid-ladder 2nd rounder next year (to compensate for draft depth variances). 1,16,18 and a mid-second rounder next year is better than 1,15,18 and not.

Edit: This isn't to say I'd be thrilled with the trade, but at least we'd get a 1st rounder for Schache, not part of a first rounder like we actually did (20+25 to get to 15). Seriously - pick 21 is the eventual compensation we received.

Its all just if's, but's and maybe's. West Coast were the only team who made a move into this year draft to forgo a selection in next years draft (widely criticized) so it is doubtful anything like that would have eventuated.
And to move 18 and 20 to get to 15 and change as you say, is exactly what has happened, just in a roundabout way. And the 'change' just gets used up on Ballenden anyway. So we then end up with 1, 15 and 16 and Ballenden picks, barely any difference.
Whilst I was absolutely fuming at the time of the trade, especially after just giving up 12 for Charlie. The club did the best they could in the given situation.

 

[Gadzorks]

He was worth what someone was prepared to pay. No more, no less.

In a different year or universe it would be different but we got what we got.

 

[Lazza16]

History.....

 

[Hollow Knight]

Noble insists he could've come back. Am I supposed to believe the club is lying?

Who would have benefitted by Noble saying "in all honesty, if he stays in Brisbane he's probably going to struggle even more".

Not the Lions. Not Josh.

People just need to read between the lines on this one a bit. Well preferably they probably just need to move on but yeah...

 

[mish33]

I think part of the problem with the Schache situation is how he was treated by Leppa and co. I think that while, this year, the club has gonna above and beyond to help the guy out, the way he was welcomed to the club and expectations were set have been a big factor in the outcome. So while Noble wasn't here then, he still has to cop that responsibility, which is why he didn't push too hard perhaps.

I would hope that from now on, with the men finally running that place, players who want to leave in contract are only ever let go for trade conditions like T. Boyd, Weller or Cameron left under.

The club also seem to be sharing enough of the pie around now so we can keep our young and talented players resigning so we aren't held over a barrel when they're out of contract.

 

[cheekyLionsFan]

anyone have new news on witho or clugga contracts?

 

[BuntonRules]

anyone have new news on witho or clugga contracts?

Why do people ask silly questions? If anything had happened there is a fair chance it would be on the Lion's website.

 

[luthor]

Who would have benefitted by Noble saying "in all honesty, if he stays in Brisbane he's probably going to struggle even more".

Not the Lions. Not Josh.

People just need to read between the lines on this one a bit. Well preferably they probably just need to move on but yeah...

I think it's called politics.

As hard as it may be for some people to accept, it exists in the AFL .... both at interclub and intraclub levels.

Sometimes tactful politics is preferable to the brutal truth.

As you say.....read between the lines.

 

[braddsey]

Noble insists he could've come back. Am I supposed to believe the club is lying?

Everyone lies in football, especially at trade period. Do you really think WB would have welcomed Stringer back?

I'm of the opinion the club decided to cut our losses on this one. Rather than keep a player that is not fitting into the playing group, they've traded him out. In this case, certainly the club has to be bigger than the player. The last thing we need with the likes of McLuggage and Witherdon unsigned is an internal destabilizing influence. For other young players, if the club started throwing additional resources at Schache to try and keep him happy - young people can fail to see the bigger picture, and get a bit of a "what about me?".

Focus on the players that want to be here, and creating a positive environment that is a fun place to work. Remove the potential negative influence.

 

[luthor]

Everyone lies in football, especially at trade period. Do you really think WB would have welcomed Stringer back?

Melbourne grabbed Jack Watts by the scruff of the neck, showed him the door, told him to walk through it and tell his story walking.

Yet even Melbourne were making noises about Jack being welcome back if a "suitable" trade couldn't be found.

As if.