Remove this Banner Ad

Traded #22: Jake Carlisle - Pt.1 - Traded with some other stuff for pick 5, 24 and a Bird (cont in Part 2)

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bob81 said:
Thats my impression as well. Surely if it goes to mediation it wont look good for them. Also AFL will be under pressure from Sydney if Hawks get Carlisle so AFL would prefer a saints deal. I think that is good for us.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I don't get the Swans/Hawks comparisons. Swans did what they did with COLA. Hawks have done it by being a very well run operation on and off the field making them an attractive destination...
 
Bob81 said:
Thats my impression as well. Surely if it goes to mediation it wont look good for them. Also AFL will be under pressure from Sydney if Hawks get Carlisle so AFL would prefer a saints deal. I think that is good for us.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Good point. The proposed hawks deal has confirmed his market value, which is still technically higher than pick 5 according to the shiny new points system, so St Kilda can hardly claim they're being ripped off.

Kudos to Hawthorn though. Going a step further with the proposed trade, they've solved the Anderson/pick 15 part independently and now have the picks ready to use in a number of ways should Carlisle not even reach them. It hasn't left Jed hanging either.
 
Id be furious if I was Hawks and they got in anyway penalised for what they are achieving. Just because we have equalisation does not mean rules/measures need to be taken to weaken successful teams.
They are successful because they do things the right way, if anything it should be encouraged.

Its not comparable to Sydney anyway, who's issue was the COLA allowance. Not that I agree with their trading bans either.
 
Hawthorn are using currency they themselves have increased through list development (Anderson for 15, to facilitate a potential Carlisle move)

Sydney's only increased currency is that handed to them by the league. Not even comparable.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Stopher said:
Good point. The proposed hawks deal has confirmed his market value, which is still technically higher than pick 5 according to the shiny new points system, so St Kilda can hardly claim they're being ripped off.

Kudos to Hawthorn though. Going a step further with the proposed trade, they've solved the Anderson/pick 15 part independently and now have the picks ready to use in a number of ways should Carlisle not even reach them. It hasn't left Jed hanging either.
Click to expand...

I don't think the saints are claiming they'd be getting ripped off if they swapped pick 5 for Carlisle. More they actually want to rip us off...
 
This thread is moving as lightning fast as ours; I was wondering if you could point out if the information you guys have is similar to (or contradicts) the following:
  • St Kilda don't want to give up pick 5 unless a first round pick is coming back
  • Essendon are asking for pick 5
  • Carlisle's number one, and only "legitimate" preference at this point in time is St Kilda
  • Since the Hawthorn offer, Carlisle has entertained their pitch and considered it
  • Carlisle doesn't want to risk going interstate in the PSD (Brisbane, GC) hence desperately wants a trade
  • Due to the above, Carlisle would settle for Hawthorn if no trade eventuates
If the above is more or less spot on, it seems the true negotiation power is with Carlisle, himself. St Kilda need to convince him to flat out refuse Hawthorn's approaches (perhaps by ensuring that the PSD is a safe option due to front-loading or whatnot), thus opening the PSD option and weakening Essendon's position. Meanwhile, Essendon need Carlisle to publicly commit to Hawthorn as an alternative suitor, so that St Kilda are left in a vice. From either of these scenarios, the fine points of a trade would then be detailed.
Does that seem about right?
 
Strahany said:
This thread is moving as lightning fast as ours; I was wondering if you could point out if the information you guys have is similar to (or contradicts) the following:
  • St Kilda don't want to give up pick 5 unless a first round pick is coming back
  • Essendon are asking for pick 5
  • Carlisle's number one, and only "legitimate" preference at this point in time is St Kilda
  • Since the Hawthorn offer, Carlisle has entertained their pitch and considered it
  • Carlisle doesn't want to risk going interstate in the PSD (Brisbane, GC) hence desperately wants a trade
  • Due to the above, Carlisle would settle for Hawthorn if no trade eventuates
If the above is more or less spot on, it seems the true negotiation power is with Carlisle, himself. St Kilda need to convince him to flat out refuse Hawthorn's approaches (perhaps by ensuring that the PSD is a safe option due to front-loading or whatnot), thus opening the PSD option and weakening Essendon's position. Meanwhile, Essendon need Carlisle to publicly commit to Hawthorn as an alternative suitor, so that St Kilda are left in a vice. From either of these scenarios, the fine points of a trade would then be detailed.
Does that seem about right?
Click to expand...

How About The Saints Offer A Fair Deal....
 
Strahany said:
This thread is moving as lightning fast as ours; I was wondering if you could point out if the information you guys have is similar to (or contradicts) the following:
  • St Kilda don't want to give up pick 5 unless a first round pick is coming back
  • Essendon are asking for pick 5
  • Carlisle's number one, and only "legitimate" preference at this point in time is St Kilda
  • Since the Hawthorn offer, Carlisle has entertained their pitch and considered it
  • Carlisle doesn't want to risk going interstate in the PSD (Brisbane, GC) hence desperately wants a trade
  • Due to the above, Carlisle would settle for Hawthorn if no trade eventuates
If the above is more or less spot on, it seems the true negotiation power is with Carlisle, himself. St Kilda need to convince him to flat out refuse Hawthorn's approaches (perhaps by ensuring that the PSD is a safe option due to front-loading or whatnot), thus opening the PSD option and weakening Essendon's position. Meanwhile, Essendon need Carlisle to publicly commit to Hawthorn as an alternative suitor, so that St Kilda are left in a vice. From either of these scenarios, the fine points of a trade would then be detailed.
Does that seem about right?
Click to expand...
Last dot point is just speculation I think. Not much point guessing whether or not he's agreed in private. Otherwise that's about the size of it.

ed: I would say that it's more than likely that we've offered at least our third to get 5. Seriously doubt that we'd knock back a deal like that - Dodoro has been pretty broad with his statements about wanting 5 (Bains too).
 
Mercuri Rising said:
Last dot point is just speculation I think. Not much point guessing whether or not he's agreed in private. Otherwise that's about the size of it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's speculation based on some information from people on our board who have been spot all year (proven track record and such). Whether it's because Carlisle want's Essendon to receive at least something, or he is fearful of moving interstate, as our board's "inside info" suggests (or both), it would seem that he definitely wants out, but it HAS to be a trade.
 
Strahany said:
This thread is moving as lightning fast as ours; I was wondering if you could point out if the information you guys have is similar to (or contradicts) the following:
  • St Kilda don't want to give up pick 5 unless a first round pick is coming back
  • Essendon are asking for pick 5
  • Carlisle's number one, and only "legitimate" preference at this point in time is St Kilda
  • Since the Hawthorn offer, Carlisle has entertained their pitch and considered it
  • Carlisle doesn't want to risk going interstate in the PSD (Brisbane, GC) hence desperately wants a trade
  • Due to the above, Carlisle would settle for Hawthorn if no trade eventuates
If the above is more or less spot on, it seems the true negotiation power is with Carlisle, himself. St Kilda need to convince him to flat out refuse Hawthorn's approaches (perhaps by ensuring that the PSD is a safe option due to front-loading or whatnot), thus opening the PSD option and weakening Essendon's position. Meanwhile, Essendon need Carlisle to publicly commit to Hawthorn as an alternative suitor, so that St Kilda are left in a vice. From either of these scenarios, the fine points of a trade would then be detailed.
Does that seem about right?
Click to expand...

The last 3 points should also consider that Carlisle wants EFC to be fairly compensated for him. He has stated this several times and his consideration of Hawthorn's offer backs this up. It is not just about fear of going interstate in the PSD. Not everyone wants to shaft their ex-team mates and be hated by tens of thousands of people.
 
Kaiser Powser said:
The last 3 points should also consider that Carlisle wants EFC to be fairly compensated for him. He has stated this several times and his consideration of Hawthorn's offer backs this up. It is not just about fear of going interstate in the PSD. Not everyone wants to shaft their ex-team mates and be hated by tens of thousands of people.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I should clarify that my lack of mentioning that point was because it was public knowledge established some time ago as fact (assuming he's telling the truth in the media, of course). I mentioned the "interstate fear" as an additional consideration.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Strahany said:
'Fair' is subjective. Dodoro will believe that he is asking for a 'fair' offer, whilst Bains will also believe that he is presenting a 'fair' offer. There is no absolute truth in subjectivity.
Click to expand...
Problem is Bains fair offer is an insult and the reason we went and spoke to other clubs.
 
Strahany said:
'Fair' is subjective. Dodoro will believe that he is asking for a 'fair' offer, whilst Bains will also believe that he is presenting a 'fair' offer. There is no absolute truth in subjectivity.
Click to expand...

Agreed, 'fair' for the most part is subjective. The only possible way to define 'fair' is through market price. At the momment that is picks 15 and 18. The saints as it seems are a fair bit off that
 
Strahany said:
This thread is moving as lightning fast as ours; I was wondering if you could point out if the information you guys have is similar to (or contradicts) the following:
  • St Kilda don't want to give up pick 5 unless a first round pick is coming back
  • Essendon are asking for pick 5
  • Carlisle's number one, and only "legitimate" preference at this point in time is St Kilda
  • Since the Hawthorn offer, Carlisle has entertained their pitch and considered it
  • Carlisle doesn't want to risk going interstate in the PSD (Brisbane, GC) hence desperately wants a trade
  • Due to the above, Carlisle would settle for Hawthorn if no trade eventuates
If the above is more or less spot on, it seems the true negotiation power is with Carlisle, himself. St Kilda need to convince him to flat out refuse Hawthorn's approaches (perhaps by ensuring that the PSD is a safe option due to front-loading or whatnot), thus opening the PSD option and weakening Essendon's position. Meanwhile, Essendon need Carlisle to publicly commit to Hawthorn as an alternative suitor, so that St Kilda are left in a vice. From either of these scenarios, the fine points of a trade would then be detailed.
Does that seem about right?
Click to expand...
there is one glaring fallacy in your post.

You can't "ensure" the PSD is a safe option because you do not know for certain what the financial situation of the other clubs is.

You also have a hidden assumption that because Carlisle's preference is the Saints that it's the only club he'll consider, and that further he prefers a good financial deal to a much higher chance of playing in a premiership.

They are all assumptions not certainties.

Based on that I think your conclusions are wrong. The power is with St Kilda in that they have a means of achieving their goal. This isn't like a situation like last year where Port wanted Ryder, but didn't actually possess what we wanted for him, meaning we had to settle. No. You have the means, you just don't want to spend it. Which is fine, but then don't go thinking it's up to Carlisle to do your deal for you. That is actually the biggest fallacy in your post. It is NOT up to Carlisle to get your deal done, it is up to YOU.

Saints have ****ed this big time. They thought they could screw EFC by waiting and extorting. When in fact when YOU commit to a player, it is YOUR responsibility to do what you have to to get him. Sure it may not be ideal, but that's tough tittie.

It blows my mind that St Kilda and Carlisle had all these meetings, and St Kilda CLEARLY convinced Jake they would do whatever it took to get him, but then in fact had no intention of doing that, and instead preferred to leave it in the fates of the negotiation gods and just assumed that they had some rubbish power, when is it now proven what a big lie that was. Carlisle would and should be furious it has come to this.

St Kilda have the means to get him! They obviously conveyed to Jake they'd do what was necessary to get him. Then they played games with that trust. Utterly disgusting.

It's not often I would ever say this, but... take a leaf out of Melbourne's book. They committed to Melksham, and because of that commitment the did what they had to to honour that commitment, even if it did mean they paid marginally overs - which your club refuses to do.
 
Kaiser Powser said:
The last 3 points should also consider that Carlisle wants EFC to be fairly compensated for him. He has stated this several times and his consideration of Hawthorn's offer backs this up. It is not just about fear of going interstate in the PSD. Not everyone wants to shaft their ex-team mates and be hated by tens of thousands of people.
Click to expand...
I don't even think Carlisle does, or even should, give a tin shit whether EFC are compensated fairly. Why would he truly want to weaken his new team and strengthen his old?

No, it's not about that. It's about him believing that if he publicly committed to the Saints that they'd do what was necessary to get him. Not **** around with stupid games when they have the means to get him right there.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Lance Uppercut said:
there is one glaring fallacy in your post.

You can't "ensure" the PSD is a safe option because you do not know for certain what the financial situation of the other clubs is.

You also have a hidden assumption that because Carlisle's preference is the Saints that it's the only club he'll consider, and that further he prefers a good financial deal to a much higher chance of playing in a premiership.

They are all assumptions not certainties.

Based on that I think your conclusions are wrong. The power is with St Kilda in that they have a means of achieving their goal. This isn't like a situation like last year where Port wanted Ryder, but didn't actually possess what we wanted for him, meaning we had to settle. No. You have the means, you just don't want to spend it. Which is fine, but then don't go thinking it's up to Carlisle to do your deal for you. That is actually the biggest fallacy in your post. It is NOT up to Carlisle to get your deal done, it is up to YOU.

Saints have stuffed this big time. They thought they could screw EFC by waiting and extorting. When in fact when YOU commit to a player, it is YOUR responsibility to do what you have to to get him. Sure it may not be ideal, but that's tough tittie.

It blows my mind that St Kilda and Carlisle had all these meetings, and St Kilda CLEARLY convinced Jake they would do whatever it took to get him, but then in fact had no intention of doing that, and instead preferred to leave it in the fates of the negotiation gods and just assumed that they had some rubbish power, when is it now proven what a big lie that was. Carlisle would and should be furious it has come to this.

St Kilda have the means to get him! They obviously conveyed to Jake they'd do what was necessary to get him. Then they played games with that trust. Utterly disgusting.

It's not often I would ever say this, but... take a leaf out of Melbourne's book. They committed to Melksham, and because of that commitment the did what they had to to honour that commitment, even if it did mean they paid marginally overs - which your club refuses to do.
Click to expand...

 
Lance Uppercut said:
there is one glaring fallacy in your post.

You can't "ensure" the PSD is a safe option because you do not know for certain what the financial situation of the other clubs is.

You also have a hidden assumption that because Carlisle's preference is the Saints that it's the only club he'll consider, and that further he prefers a good financial deal to a much higher chance of playing in a premiership.

They are all assumptions not certainties.

Based on that I think your conclusions are wrong. The power is with St Kilda in that they have a means of achieving their goal. This isn't like a situation like last year where Port wanted Ryder, but didn't actually possess what we wanted for him, meaning we had to settle. No. You have the means, you just don't want to spend it. Which is fine, but then don't go thinking it's up to Carlisle to do your deal for you. That is actually the biggest fallacy in your post. It is NOT up to Carlisle to get your deal done, it is up to YOU.

Saints have stuffed this big time. They thought they could screw EFC by waiting and extorting. When in fact when YOU commit to a player, it is YOUR responsibility to do what you have to to get him. Sure it may not be ideal, but that's tough tittie.

It blows my mind that St Kilda and Carlisle had all these meetings, and St Kilda CLEARLY convinced Jake they would do whatever it took to get him, but then in fact had no intention of doing that, and instead preferred to leave it in the fates of the negotiation gods and just assumed that they had some rubbish power, when is it now proven what a big lie that was. Carlisle would and should be furious it has come to this.

St Kilda have the means to get him! They obviously conveyed to Jake they'd do what was necessary to get him. Then they played games with that trust. Utterly disgusting.

It's not often I would ever say this, but... take a leaf out of Melbourne's book. They committed to Melksham, and because of that commitment the did what they had to to honour that commitment, even if it did mean they paid marginally overs - which your club refuses to do.
Click to expand...

I was going to say the exact same thing but with less words.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

RedmanWasHere
Delisted 47: Oskar Smartt - Delisted as of 22/09/25
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
211
Views
14K
DERO
DERO

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top