Before talking trades please read this thread

[Supermercado]

Probably my favourite BF post ever. The names are last year but it will always be relevant.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=491267

Number 12: The crazy 3- or 4- way trades that involve about 15 players and 10 draft picks.

Funnily enough players are people. They are not pawns in a giant game of chess that you move around to satisfy every party. Adding more clubs, and more and more players and swapping picks willy-nilly doesn't make the trade fairer - it just makes it more unrealistic.

Number 11: The "We should get him because he would come cheap".

I'll use a couple of non-Brisbane players in this example: Cousins and Prismall. Do you really think other clubs would let these players go for PSD or 7th round ND picks? Or their current club (Geelong for example) would trade Prismall for a 4th rounder when one other club is offering a 3rd rounder? It only takes one higher bid.

Number 10: Wanting to trade for a player as soon as he comes good.

For example opposition supporters wanting to trade for Bradd Dalziell because they have seen he can play. Why would we get rid of him as soon as he starts to play well?

Number 9: "We should trade a prehistoric player to get a youngster because he isn't going to be around when we next challenge / he can be covered etc".

For example Tim Notting. Why would other clubs want your old retreads just because they are still semi-decent and you want to inject some youth into the team. Every single club is wanting young players - not just yours!!! There seems to be a feeling that Hawthorn and Geelong will trade for any old fart because they are in "premiership contention". Every club would have a "youth policy", even if it isn't as fancily named.

Number 8: Someone has just signed but, "it doesn't mean he can't be traded".

Yes we know the rules - a player can be traded after signing a new contract. But if a club just signed a player on a long-term deal, why would they be trading him? How many times has a player been traded immediately after signing a new contract? For example, Mitch Clark. Clark signed a 3-year deal about 1.5 months ago yet we have potential offers flooding in. Why would we get rid of him if we value him that highly?

Number 7: "We should offer <insert spud A> to <insert team X> because they are lacking in <insert spud A's position>"

For example, wanting to trade Wayde Mills to the Bulldogs because they are "lacking" in tall forwards. Just because they want a tall forward, it doesn't mean they are going to throw something at any old (but tall) hack that floats along. It's the same premise by thinking a South Australian / Western Australian / Queensland club would be interested in trading for a South Australian / Western Australian / Queensland spud.

Number 6: "They may be interested in trading him after having a poor year".

For example: Jed Adcock. Why would Brisbane trade the contracted Adcock just because he didn't have the best year? Why would any club do that to a player they rate highly? And it's not so much the idea, but it's the fact people believing said player would come super cheap because of it.

Number 5: "We won't trade for that superstar because we may miss out on a 15-year player with that pick".

Yes you may. But what is the average AFL career for a draftee. Is it still 3 years? How many 15-season players are running around these days? You often see this argument come up when a prospective, proven star player is 26 or 27. "We may only get 4 or 5 years out of him tops, but the kid we are going to select with that pick could star for 15 years".

Number 4: "We should trade uber-spud + pick for a better pick".

Yeah seems fantastic in principle. But do you think, just maybe, other clubs don't want to give up pick 36 to get for example, Moody + pick 51. Clubs have to find a spot on their list to accomodate trash.

Number 3: "You will have to trade with us or risk losing him in the PSD".

Oh yes, this old chestnut. How many times has this happened? It would be very rare - most players aren't bastards - they are not going to just screw their clubs.

Number 2: The rumour-mongering.

Yes, everyone knows someone that knows someone from every single club in the league. It's amazing how many sources pop up this time of year. When a sentence starts off with "there is a rumour player X...", you can be 75% sure that rumour started on BigFooty.

Number 1: Quantity does not equal quality.

The big one. The old adage is you have to give something to get something. It has been happening for years and there are very few trades that significantly benefit one side. "West Coast wouldn't trade Kerr for Brisbane's 2nd rounder, but maybe they would for Brisbane's 2nd rounder + Moody + Mills + Garner". You can't get gold with a piece of crap. And 2 pieces of crap doesn't make it more appealing. I think a lot of supporters see it as a way to clear their fringe players for a genuine star of the competition.

 

[Dez!]

After reading number 12 I want to see a mammoth 16 club trade, would be awesome and pointless the perfect kind of trade.

 

[Crimson Azure]

What?

How do I respond?

Yes.

 

[B B Bryan]

I was about to suggest we do a trade with geelong for Ablett for Zomer and pick 50 odd. Guess not?

 

[ExTasDeeMan]

Not a trade at all - but I was on the same flight as Brad Green coming back from Sydney. Looks as if he did a day trip (sans luggage).

 

[FOOOOTY]

everyones a comedian

 

[Demon 86]

Good post.

Point 7 (amongst others) is particularly poignant given how many people want Bell shipped of to Port Adelaide for a pick purely coz he's a South Australian!

 

[RandB]

Yeah I remember this thread when it came out and it was a good one by Warwick.

 

[melbournemartin]

Watch Ice Hockey and the 3 average players = 1 gun rule actually does exist. See Joe Thornton.

 

[givemethecure]

Or the Ray Allen trade for Boston Celtics, MM. Or indeed Pau Gasol to Lakers for the draft rights to his younger (inferior) brother that the Lakers pulled off last year...

 

[Dez!]

Or the Ray Allen trade for Boston Celtics, MM. Or indeed Pau Gasol to Lakers for the draft rights to his younger (inferior) brother that the Lakers pulled off last year...

That was more due to the moronic organisation that the Lakers were dealing with, we also have them here in the AFL but we just call them Fremantle.

 

[master bate]

Number 5: "We won't trade for that superstar because we may miss out on a 15-year player with that pick".

Yes you may. But what is the average AFL career for a draftee. Is it still 3 years? How many 15-season players are running around these days? You often see this argument come up when a prospective, proven star player is 26 or 27. "We may only get 4 or 5 years out of him tops, but the kid we are going to select with that pick could star for 15 years".

Good post, but he stuffed himself with this one. Trav Johnstone is now getting to the end of his playing days (I don't think he'll make the 15 years), and whilst he had a decent game on the weekend he is nothing on Jack Grimes, who wouldn't just help you for the next 10 years but would help you now if you can catch him injury free!

Number 1 is the best