- Aug 4, 2014
- 1,765
- 2,297
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Grassy Hawks
Can you add Steele as well into the Schedule.
Traded Caleb Marchbank [traded to Carlton w/ Pickett, 2017 Rd 2 pk for Picks 45, 58 and Geelong's 2017 1st]
- Thread starter bird_man
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Can you add Steele as well into the Schedule.
- Banned
- #378
Yeah, didn't he?
- Jul 20, 2016
- 4,637
- 8,059
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
is this speculation, hope, a combination of both, or actual fact?
No doubt he will have a preferred club but that club will have to come up with a fair deal. If the going rate is a first rounder then they need to conjure 1.
Treloar nominated Collingwood and we were very well paid.
I, for one, welcome this hardline stance
- Banned
- #384
I didn't say they got him cheaply.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
I merely suggested that there's unlikely to be a bidding war. How does Treloar's example suggest otherwise?
- Banned
- #385
How is the 'going rate' established?
I'm not sure how that relates to Marchbank.
- Banned
- #387
Not really. I doubt he was ever in real danger of not getting to Collingwood.
Well I'll explain it to you.
If the relationship between the player and club is good then there is an AFL code where both parties work diligently to get a deal done. This does not preclude the player from nominating a favoured club it just means all parties then work hardest to get this deal done.
Last year Treloar wanted out but he also wanted GWS to be fairly compensated. It was established that the going rate was 2 1st rounders as that was the best offer. After initially offering a 1st and a 2nd Treloar's nominated team Collingwood upped the ante and offered 2 first rounders and the deal was sealed.
In the case of Marchbank it is already believed he has St Kilda, Carlton and possibly Essendon interested in his services whilst there is also belief that Richmond and North Melbourne may also be keen. All this interest will mean the best offer is likely to be a 1st rounder so given his primary goal is to get to Melbourne he is likely to pick one of the other deals if he doesn't get the right deal from his preferred suitor.
More often than not the player gets to his chosen club and the club that loses the player is adequately compensated. He is a 1st rounder every day of the week.
- Aug 4, 2014
- 1,765
- 2,297
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Grassy Hawks
Bit of hope.. Think if North could get Marchbank + Steele. It could set us up for awhile.
- Banned
- #391
My point is that there is unlikely to be a bidding war. It won't be an auction.
- Banned
- #392
I see articles about how he didn't want to go to Richmond.
If he chooses say Carlton and their best offer is a 2nd rounder but Richmond offer a first it will create a war. I think interest will be very high, we rate him as best 22 and there is an absolute lack of talls available, particularly defenders. Clubs could wait until 2017' but its a pretty important position so I think they will chase hard.
The bidding for Steele will be just as fierce
- Banned
- #394
No, it won't. Not unless the player can be persuaded to accept a different destination.
Again, you seem to be imagining an auction scenario that is unlikely to eventuate.
I'm not making any argument about Marchbank's worth or what GWS will end up getting. I'm simply saying there's unlikely to be a bidding war.
That's incorrect. If Collingwood did not stump up for the second 1st rounder he would have been a Richmond player. GWS was not going to blink, we played hardball (eventually to out detriment) with McCarthy and Tomlinson and would have done the same with Treloar. THe money and deal he was offered was basically the same from both clubs.
- Banned
- #396
Based on what?
In order for him to have been traded to Richmond, he would have had to consent to that. Which he didn't.
Yeah, but he nominated Collingwood and apparently wasn't willing to go to Richmond.
No that is not right. He was asked to nominate his preferred club and he nominated Collingwood. Richmond was in the lead but Collingwood eventually trumped them and he signed up.
The deal that was not cohesive was the Tom Boyd deal. In that case Tom and his father decided after meeting PEter Gordon that they absolutely had to do that deal as frankly the deal was ridiculous. He demanded to be traded to the Western Bulldogs, moved out of Sydney and basically said he wasn't coming back. In that case in spite of having a contracted player our hands were a bit tied but thankfully the Doggies were really desperate and overpaid.
- Banned
- #398
Yeah, so he ended up nominating Collingwood. That's what I said.
For him to have been traded to Richmond, he would have had to change his mind about his preferred destination. Which part of that do you disagree with?
Relevance?
Mate how could he prove that if he signed with Collingwood?? Richmond were very public about their offer. Do you think Collingwoods first offer was 2 first rounders?? Do you think it did not go down to the wire because they had to improve it?? This was our player and we know a little better what went down than a bloke in WA.
The reason for the last point was to illustrate if the relationship between player and club is not good than the process is different but to date Marchbank and GWS like each other...its part of the reason he still may stay.
Marchbanks injury history has to be a major concern.
As a 20yo, he has already had significant back, ankle and shoulder injuries.
This history has to have a weighting on his worth. It is a worry.
As a 20yo, he has already had significant back, ankle and shoulder injuries.
This history has to have a weighting on his worth. It is a worry.
