Free Agent # 6: Joe Daniher - derp Brisbane player

[Sockeye]

Barrett should be warned that due to Joe's issues he is off limits.
If Barrett writes an article similar to this one during the season then we go after him.
Due to Joe's mental health situation the club should ask for a VRO on Barrett.
Essendon is one of the biggest sporting clubs in Australia. It's time they started acting like one and not let weasels like Barrett dictate to the club how these thing are going to play out.

 

[Old Campaigner]

They’re literally saying Daniher was not worth the effort of sending a text saying “how about 5&9?”

 

[Red Black and Blue]

You’d think if Sydney were serious they’d have put 5 & 9 on the table regardless of whether they expected us to accept.

The fact that they offered worse picks when 5 apparently wasn’t going to get the deal done seems like a pretty good indication that the real reason was that they simply weren’t willing to part with pick 5.

It reads of Dodoro setting the terms very clearly. Why put something on the table that’s already been clearly rejected.

Dodoro: We won’t accept picks, we will only accept class players in return
Sydney: okay how about 9 and a future first
Dodoro: what the * did I just say

Sydney have said all along that it was made clear to them picks alone wouldn’t get it done.

 

[Squeaky]

And it didn't have to be a Swans player necessarily. They needed to get involved in other trades or get creative, but chose to do zero... The deal not getting done was on the Swans.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

And it didn't have to be a Swans player necessarily. They needed to get involved in other trades or get creative, but chose to do zero... The deal not getting done was on the Swans.

Sure don't disagree, but the notion they wouldn't have offered pick 5 on the basis that they didn't is intellectually dishonest IMO. People don't know the conversations that were had, maybe it was casually chatted about but not formally. We only know the end result.

 

[Unfazed]

It reads of Dodoro setting the terms very clearly. Why put something on the table that’s already been clearly rejected.

Dodoro: We won’t accept picks, we will only accept class players in return
Sydney: okay how about 9 and a future first
Dodoro: what the fu** did I just say

Sydney have said all along that it was made clear to them picks alone wouldn’t get it done.

Yet they still offered picks. Just not great ones. If they seriously wanted him, they would have offered 5 and 9. Who knows whether it would have got the job done but they still would have put them on the table if they were keen enough. Just like us with Shiel.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

The reason I just was in favour of trading is I just do not trust players having two seasons off and coming back to their full potential.

True but even after a year out and seriously interrupted pre season that game on Anzac Day was a standout for only his second(?) game back...and he still had underlying issues. Upside even though with risk is enormous. Can’t easily draft that kind of talent

 

[ghostdog]

I think that is a false reading of the scenario. Dodoro stated he wanted a player, if he’d stated he wanted picks they would have offered 5. The difference between 9 and a future first and 5 and 9 is negligible.

No, he said 9 and a player as a compromise. He originally said 5 + 9.

 

[Old Campaigner]

It reads of Dodoro setting the terms very clearly. Why put something on the table that’s already been clearly rejected.

Dodoro: We won’t accept picks, we will only accept class players in return
Sydney: okay how about 9 and a future first
Dodoro: what the fu** did I just say

Sydney have said all along that it was made clear to them picks alone wouldn’t get it done.

But if you wanted to get a deal done wouldn't you offer as much as you were prepared to give up? So either:

They’re literally saying Daniher was not worth the effort of sending a text saying “how about 5&9?”

Or 5 was never on the table as far is Sydney were concerned. I'm not sure what is hard to understand about this.

 

[Stopher]

I am not going to give Purple a wack this time around as clearly he has been fed some info from inside the Daniher camp , probably management. In reality it would be true that Joe is disappointed he did not get the trade as obviously he was pretty keen to gt out of Melbourne. Who know what the future holds and what will happen in 11 months time.
It was a risky call by us not to let him go but in saying that we did not get all that close to what we wanted. There are two things that worry me. First up is he does not recover and we have made a dud call. Second is the media circus keeps going and Joe does not get any respite from the spotlight and people wanting to know if he is still going.
We may well end up with less than we turned down which would be simply another Essington moment.
Personally I was just in favour of trading him out although it would have hurt if he came good again in another clubs colours. The reason I just was in favour of trading is I just do not trust players having two seasons off and coming back to their full potential. I am not unhappy we stood our ground and for the sake of the whole comp I am glad clubs showed some balls this year and did not just roll over to every trade request.
Interesting times ahead.

You can't call it an 'Essington' moment only if the risk doesn't pay off. If you're going to take a risk, make it one that is worth failing for. From an EFC perspective, JD absolutely meets that criteria. Whether it goes **** up or not from here, I'll support the club 100% for the stance that it took on Joe, knowing the potential pay-off for their stance could be massive.

 

[Burzum]

I'll back the club in but my expectations aren't high for the season so I think it will come back to bite us. I think most if not all other clubs would have done the deal.

 

[NAB777]

We should have pi$$ed this guy off. Stuff him.

He's finished anyway, just like his older brother.

 

[JayJ20]

I think that is a false reading of the scenario. Dodoro stated he wanted a player, if he’d stated he wanted picks they would have offered 5. The difference between 9 and a future first and 5 and 9 is negligible.

Lol no. It's up to Sydney to sway us.

"Essendon doesn't want pick 5 + 9, so we'll offer pick 9 + a pick we can drastically improve with a fit Daniher and Buddy in the side considering we have two academy players coming up anyway."

They didn't offer pick 5. Never have. If we said we wanted picks and demanded 5 + 9, then Sydney would try to meet in the middle and offer 9 + future first as the final offer.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

It is not a reading. To start with. Believe what you want but my comment is based on info from inside the recruiting world.
Yes we asked for a player but if 5 combined with either 9 or a future first was ever offered I have been told the deal would have gone through late.
Take it or leave it.

To me that’s questionable negotiating from our end then. If you categorically specify you don’t want picks, don’t be surprised when they don’t offer them.

Lol no. It's up to Sydney to sway us.

"Essendon doesn't want pick 5 + 9, so we'll offer pick 9 + a pick we can drastically improve with a fit Daniher and Buddy in the side considering we have two academy players coming up anyway."

They didn't offer pick 5. Never have. If we said we wanted picks and demanded 5 + 9, then Sydney would try to meet in the middle and offer 9 + future first as the final offer.

I don’t disagree that Sydney needed to sway us, but I doubt a four pick upgrade was the difference between them acquiring Joe Daniher or not.

 

[Old Campaigner]

To me that’s horrendous negotiating from our end then. If you specify you don’t want picks, don’t be surprised when they don’t offer them.

They did offer picks though, you allude to it right here:

I don’t disagree that Sydney needed to sway us, but I doubt a four pick upgrade was the difference between them acquiring Joe Daniher or not.

Which begs the question: If they apparently know picks 5 and 9 won't get it done, why do they offer 9 and a 2020 first? A trade offer isn't a 27 page document completed in triplicate, it's as simple as asking "would you accept XYZ?". If you want a player, and you're willing to trade those picks you make the offer regardless of what you've been told about not wanting picks.

Personally I think it's pretty obvious the Swans didn't think Daniher was worth 5 & 9. That's the reason it wasn't offered, not because we said we wanted players.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

They did offer picks though, you allude to it right here:



Which begs the question: If they apparently know picks 5 and 9 won't get it done, why do they offer 9 and a 2020 first? A trade offer isn't a 27 page document completed in triplicate, it's as simple as asking "would you accept XYZ?". If you want a player, and you're willing to trade those picks you make the offer regardless of what you've been told about not wanting picks.

Personally I think it's pretty obvious the Swans didn't think Daniher was worth 5 & 9. That's the reason it wasn't offered, not because we said we wanted players.

The only thing we know was the messaging all way through and after was that we said a player is the minimum starting point, we set them and Joes management the task of finding of one if Sydney couldn’t generate one. At no point was it indicated afterwards by either party that we would have accepted any pick offer.

"We didn't offer 5. We were advised early on that 5 and 9 wouldn't get it done. We didn't need to offer it because it became clear that deal was not going to satisfy Essendon"

If you believe Charlie Gardiner or not that says to me Dodoro categorically got his point across in regards to players.

 

[Cold Sober]

On and on and on and on......................

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

The only thing we know was the messaging all way through and after was that we said a player is the minimum starting point, we set them and Joes management the task of finding of one if Sydney couldn’t generate one. At no point was it indicated afterwards by either party that we would have accepted any pick offer.

"We didn't offer 5. We were advised early on that 5 and 9 wouldn't get it done. We didn't need to offer it because it became clear that deal was not going to satisfy Essendon"

If you believe Charlie Gardiner or not that says to me Dodoro categorically got his point across in regards to players.

So why offer 9 and a future first?

 

[Red Black and Blue]

So why offer 9 and a future first?

To test the veracity of our convictions and because they weren’t told verbatim that it wouldn’t get the deal done like they were with 5 and 9.

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

To test the veracity of our convictions and because they weren’t told verbatim that it wouldn’t get the deal done like they were with 5 and 9.

But it’s a lesser offer than what they were told wouldn’t get it done. So why bother? If you were going to test our conviction why not offer 5 & 9?

 

[Red Black and Blue]

But it’s a lesser offer than what they were told wouldn’t get it done. So why bother? If you were going to test our conviction why not offer 5 & 9?

It’s a slightly lesser offer (even with Daniher they would have been odds on for a bottom six finish), but the compensation spread over two drafts is potentially a more desirable prospect for us depending on how we rate the drafts. I think the best pick offer would have been 5 and a future first.

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

It’s a slightly lesser offer (even with Daniher they would have been odds on for a bottom six finish), but the compensation spread over two drafts is potentially a more desirable prospect for us depending on how we rate the drafts. I think the best pick offer would have been 5 and a future first.

So why didn’t they offer that?

 

[Duckworth]

So why didn’t they offer that?

Cause Sydney were probably not expecting the nomination to be announced. Probably felt that waiting until free-agency where he could be gotten cheaper was the better option.

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

Cause Sydney were probably not expecting the nomination to be announced. Probably felt that waiting until free-agency where he could be gotten cheaper was the better option.

So in other words because they didn’t want to pay that?

 

[Duckworth]

So in other words because they didn’t want to pay that?

Well, yeah. Sydney didn't want to give up too much. If they could get him for free next year.