Traded Cameron McCarthy [traded to Fremantle with picks 7, 33 and 71 for pick 3]

[CFC_#17]

Being paid like the Pies guys?
Sook? Now that is a very ignorant suggestion.

If you don't turn up for work for a year should you get paid for doing your job?
He chose to sign a three year deal, then when another club offered more money and the chance to go home, I start to feel home sick. When the club refuse to be under traded for a contract player he spits the dummy and moves back home. He should of delisted him self sat out for a year then he can go into the draft.
And any player that have been caught and banned for performance enhancing drugs, should be delisted and de-registered by the afl and not be allowed on an afl list until there suspensions are up.

 

[dlanod]

If you don't turn up for work for a year should you get paid for doing your job?
He chose to sign a three year deal, then when another club offered more money and the chance to go home, I start to feel home sick. When the club refuse to be under traded for a contract player he spits the dummy and moves back home. He should of delisted him self sat out for a year then he can go into the draft.
And any player that have been caught and banned for performance enhancing drugs, should be delisted and de-registered by the afl and not be allowed on an afl list until there suspensions are up.

Many, if not most, workplaces have sick leave and other health-related clauses. I have no doubt that if we review the AFL CBA there will be similar in there, and it would likely cover McCarthy's situation.

 

[Clems Knee]

If you don't turn up for work for a year should you get paid for doing your job?
He chose to sign a three year deal, then when another club offered more money and the chance to go home, I start to feel home sick. When the club refuse to be under traded for a contract player he spits the dummy and moves back home. He should of delisted him self sat out for a year then he can go into the draft.
And any player that have been caught and banned for performance enhancing drugs, should be delisted and de-registered by the afl and not be allowed on an afl list until there suspensions are up.

This is the reason why some people shouldn't have children.

Comments like this reflect more upon yourself than on McCarthy. You are clearly ignorant of most of the published information regarding his situation, let alone the stuff that only McCarthy's close friends and associates (and his club) would be aware of, yet still make accusations based more on your own personal experience than his.

If you are going to contribute, learn a little first or crawl back to the slime you came from.

 

[Cobbler]

You took one version of the conversation & I was seeking to verify your claim given what Fairfax Media had printed, as posted. If you need an apology, toughen up princess, an unsubstantiated claim by a supporter of one of the clubs involved is unlikely to convince anyone other than a fellow supporter.
Raffrox did what you would not, thank him ...

As Sam McLure said on Fairfax radio on Stephen Hill & the Hawks, you wouldn't put anything past them offering Shane Burgoyne, Brian Lake deal & the MacEvoy as examples of their work.

Will it effect the McCarthy deal, how deep is the grab bag

There's no version. It's called the English language. What Clarko said was in past tense.
I didn't really need to try and prove anything because I heard it from the source, not read it in an article.
Up to you and others to work out if im lying, but it's a bit hard to lie when it's from the horses mouth. That's why I wasn't really bothered, because it's wasn't my interpretation.
This is the problem when people like you pass off secondary resources as fact.
I've stopped believing newspapers for about 20 years. You take what's written with a pinch of salt.

 

[CFC_#17]

This is the reason why some people shouldn't have children.

Comments like this reflect more upon yourself than on McCarthy. You are clearly ignorant of most of the published information regarding his situation, let alone the stuff that only McCarthy's close friends and associates (and his club) would be aware of, yet still make accusations based more on your own personal experience than his.

If you are going to contribute, learn a little first or crawl back to the slime you came from.

Yes this is my opinion, i know everybody is not the same but didn't Mitch Clarke want to go home aswell until he got a better offer.

afl players get paid a lot of money to play sport, there are some down sides to that like not always being able to choose were you work.
If I as an employee moved interstate because of home sickness and depression and was not working, there is no way in the world I would expect to be paid.

In other sporting codes around the world you can be traded anywhere while contract and not have a say, if it's too hard don't take the money and do something else.

There are too many players that hold there clubs to ransom, and request a trade after 1 year into a contract, which is a joke. Players want free agency, but then Have to agree to be traded to any other club while contracted.

 

[Clems Knee]

Yes this is my opinion, i know everybody is not the same but didn't Mitch Clarke want to go home aswell until he got a better offer.

afl players get paid a lot of money to play sport, there are some down sides to that like not always being able to choose were you work.
If I as an employee moved interstate because of home sickness and depression and was not working, there is no way in the world I would expect to be paid.

In other sporting codes around the world you can be traded anywhere while contract and not have a say, if it's too hard don't take the money and do something else.

There are too many players that hold there clubs to ransom, and request a trade after 1 year into a contract, which is a joke. Players want free agency, but then Have to agree to be traded to any other club while contracted.

Mitch Clark does not equal Cam McCarthy.
So if a player is injured,he shouldn't get paid? That's the same thing. Or maybe if he gets concussion, because that's just a brain issue, he shouldn't be paid?

Again, I am certain that you are not a professional sportsperson. You are talking from a different background and trying to project it to an AFL playing career. And fortunately we are no other sporting codes - which, incidentally involve a lot more money than we are talking about.

There is a balance between how clubs treat their players and vice versa. The balance has always been in the clubs favour unless the player was a superstar. Apart from superstars (look at how Hird's massive playing contract broke up their premiership team), clubs never get held to ransom.

McCarthy requested a trade 2 complete seasons after extending his contract , not 1 year. He is in his rights to request a trade, Hill looks like doing the same, and so have others. And GWS were in their rights to refuse, as they did.

I think, and thought at the time, that it was a mistake by GWS. Despite the tweet from Jon Ralph and the spectrum-like repitition of General Giant, it wasn't about the money. There was clearly an issue going on for Cam that wasn't going to be easily resolved.

 

[CFC_#17]

Mitch Clark does not equal Cam McCarthy.
So if a player is injured,he shouldn't get paid? That's the same thing. Or maybe if he gets concussion, because that's just a brain issue, he shouldn't be paid?

Again, I am certain that you are not a professional sportsperson. You are talking from a different background and trying to project it to an AFL playing career. And fortunately we are no other sporting codes - which, incidentally involve a lot more money than we are talking about.

There is a balance between how clubs treat their players and vice versa. The balance has always been in the clubs favour unless the player was a superstar. Apart from superstars (look at how Hird's massive playing contract broke up their premiership team), clubs never get held to ransom.

McCarthy requested a trade 2 complete seasons after extending his contract , not 1 year. He is in his rights to request a trade, Hill looks like doing the same, and so have others. And GWS were in their rights to refuse, as they did.

I think, and thought at the time, that it was a mistake by GWS. Despite the tweet from Jon Ralph and the spectrum-like repitition of General Giant, it wasn't about the money. There was clearly an issue going on for Cam that wasn't going to be easily resolved.

I agree to some degree about clubs trading players straight away, when they request a trade.

For example the blues offered pick 10 to GWS for Adam Tomlinson last year, this year he will probably be worth a third round pick, but last year GWS already had enough points to get there academy kids so didn't need any more picks. In relation to Cam freo traded away there first pick for Harley, so they didn't have much to trade with. So GWS probably thought we will try and turn Cam around to staying and if not get more for him next year. Also he should have informed the club a lot earlier about his feeling of returning home, not at the start of trade period last year.

In relation to Hill I think he has been clear with his club of his intention which give the club time to organise possible trades.

When players are injured or concussed, they are required to turn up to training and rehab. They also get fined for going out and drinking while injured, that can hamper there recovery.

In relation to re-signing he's manager should have given him better advice about signing 6 months after being drafted. And should have come to the club straight away with the urge to go home and give them time to deal with the situation.

 

[WilloTree]

I'd say no need to get insulting, but it's making this funny still. Just looking for confirmation these were all typos?



Proven wrong.



Proven wrong.



Proven wrong.



And proven wrong.

For my second time and the third time overall, he played 21 games in the AFL and 20 games, not 24, in the NEAFL. Regardless of claims of typos, 20 is never more than 21.

Does any of this have anything remotely to do with "Cameron McCarthy Trade Value"? Mods have been very forgiving towards the last couple of pages of drivel. 'he played 22, no it was 21, no it was 24, no 21, no 24, no 22...' pretty exciting thread this has turned into.. sheesh. How about one of you have a stab at what his trade value is, then the other can (respectfully) offer a counter-opinion?

 

[dlanod]

Does any of this have anything remotely to do with "Cameron McCarthy Trade Value"? Mods have been very forgiving towards the last couple of pages of drivel. 'he played 22, no it was 21, no it was 24, no 21, no 24, no 22...' pretty exciting thread this has turned into.. sheesh. How about one of you have a stab at what his trade value is, then the other can (respectfully) offer a counter-opinion?

I struggle to see how the number of games Cam has played in the seniors versus the reserves isn't relevant, given it goes directly to establishing his trade value.

For the record the mods are pretty lenient as long as posts don't break the D&T board rules, are relatively civil, and aren't trolling. Off-topic discussions, e.g. the Brad Hill discussion in this same thread, not Cam McCarthy's playing career, will falter and the thread come back on-topic quickly enough.

 

[WilloTree]

I struggle to see how the number of games Cam has played in the seniors versus the reserves isn't relevant, given it goes directly to establishing his trade value.

For the record the mods are pretty lenient as long as posts don't break the D&T board rules, are relatively civil, and aren't trolling. Off-topic discussions, e.g. the Brad Hill discussion in this same thread, not Cam McCarthy's playing career, will falter and the thread come back on-topic quickly enough.

The number of AFL games he's played is 21. That's relevant. Not if it's 20, or 19, or 22. Makes no difference. What will determine his value is weighing up his 21 games Vs the likelihood of him adding to that number.

 

[Kwality]

This is the reason why some people shouldn't have children.

Comments like this reflect more upon yourself than on McCarthy. You are clearly ignorant of most of the published information regarding his situation, let alone the stuff that only McCarthy's close friends and associates (and his club) would be aware of, yet still make accusations based more on your own personal experience than his.

If you are going to contribute, learn a little first or crawl back to the slime you came from.

Absence of maturity - well put Clem.

 

[Kwality]

There's no version. It's called the English language. What Clarko said was in past tense.
I didn't really need to try and prove anything because I heard it from the source, not read it in an article.
Up to you and others to work out if im lying, but it's a bit hard to lie when it's from the horses mouth. That's why I wasn't really bothered, because it's wasn't my interpretation.
This is the problem when people like you pass off secondary resources as fact.
I've stopped believing newspapers for about 20 years. You take what's written with a pinch of salt.

I'm sure to take your claims as gospel - that will be a big help, I just cancelled my Fairfax sub - speaking of Fairfax, on Melbourne radio today there was a suggestion Lachie Weller is in play.

When someone quotes a source as I did, you can believe it or not.

 

[Kwality]

I struggle to see how the number of games Cam has played in the seniors versus the reserves isn't relevant, given it goes directly to establishing his trade value.

For the record the mods are pretty lenient as long as posts don't break the D&T board rules, are relatively civil, and aren't trolling. Off-topic discussions, e.g. the Brad Hill discussion in this same thread, not Cam McCarthy's playing career, will falter and the thread come back on-topic quickly enough.

Depends if you take the Tom Boyd deal as the norm.

 

[imperial_oz]

I'm sure to take your claims as gospel - that will be a big help, I just cancelled my Fairfax sub - speaking of Fairfax, on Melbourne radio today there was a suggestion Lachie Weller is in play.

When someone quotes a source as I did, you can believe it or not.

Mate, sources are like backsides, everybody has one

Sources had Weller in play last year even after he said he wasn't moving and the club said the same thing. Ditto Barlow and probably a dozen others. What was the supposed deal and who was the source. FWIW, Weller said last off season he didn't want to go anywhere and to my knowledge, nothing has changed.

 

[dlanod]

Depends if you take the Tom Boyd deal as the norm.

Ha! Well I guess circumstances argue that no one should follow the Boyd deal as a guide on what to do.

 

[Cobbler]

I'm sure to take your claims as gospel - that will be a big help, I just cancelled my Fairfax sub - speaking of Fairfax, on Melbourne radio today there was a suggestion Lachie Weller is in play.

When someone quotes a source as I did, you can believe it or not.

You don't need to take my claims. Like I said I wasn't bothered and still am not. I was just letting you know that it was wrong. That's now been highlighted for you with what Clarko exactly said. Not sure what's hard to understand here?

When anyone quotes a source it can be believed or not believed. It's a secondary source. There's a reason why the article you highlighted initially didn't have what you bolded in quotation marks. That's because the writer for what ever reason made there own comment or opinion or connection BUT it was factually wrong.

Anyway. Thanks for the chat.

 

[citizen-erased]

Dropped this in the B.Hill discussion
Combine this with the McCarthy deal and it should get done.

Hawks get Geelongs 1st rd from GWS
GWS get Freo's 1st rd pick
Freo get McCarthy and Hill.

Hill = late 1st rd
McCarthy + late 1st rd = early 1st rd (handy with academy selections too)

 

[Freoforever86]

Dropped this in the B.Hill discussion
Combine this with the McCarthy deal and it should get done.

Hawks get Geelongs 1st rd from GWS
GWS get Freo's 1st rd pick
Freo get McCarthy and Hill.

Hill = late 1st rd
McCarthy + late 1st rd = early 1st rd (handy with academy selections too)

No thanks

 

[grouse mate]

Dropped this in the B.Hill discussion
Combine this with the McCarthy deal and it should get done.

Hawks get Geelongs 1st rd from GWS
GWS get Freo's 1st rd pick
Freo get McCarthy and Hill.

Hill = late 1st rd
McCarthy + late 1st rd = early 1st rd (handy with academy selections too)

No it isnt.

We have 3 highly rated mids in the academy and there is nobody in the range of pick 3 that is anything more than surplus to needs when we have guys like Pickett and Ahern who havent even played yet as well as Hopper, Kennedy and Steele on the fringe. Trading up to pick another mid is insanity, if a Weitering was in this draft would absolutely go for it but McCreadie will be it so there is no point at all.

 

[Clems Knee]

No it isnt.

We have 3 highly rated mids in the academy and there is nobody in the range of pick 3 that is anything more than surplus to needs when we have guys like Pickett and Ahern who havent even played yet as well as Hopper, Kennedy and Steele on the fringe. Trading up to pick another mid is insanity, if a Weitering was in this draft would absolutely go for it but McCreadie will be it so there is no point at all.

This is funny. You are essentially saying that your team is so good for now and the future that a pick 3 would not benefit.

I'm not sure if you get how your academy picks work. With the points GWS banked last trading period, you can get as many as you want. You are limited only by the spaces available on your list.

The value of those Academy players is determined by other teams nominating them, not by GWS. For the other teams it is a risk - do they really want them or are they betting that GWS will match the bid? - have they done enough work on knowing whether the player was worth the pick? - why did they waste resources on finding about an academy player when it's almost certain that they won't get them? For these reasons it is unlikely that a team will nominate exactly where we think they should, but a few places lower down.

So it is very very unlikely that Essendon or Brisbane will nominate a top GWS player. If GWS had pick 3, there is no way they would pick their Academy player because they don't need to - they can pay less when another team nominates down the draft order. By trading up to pick 3, GWS get a top three potential champion midfielder of their choice plus they still get to keep every one of the academy players that they rate.

 

[IanW]

This is funny. You are essentially saying that your team is so good for now and the future that a pick 3 would not benefit.

I'm not sure if you get how your academy picks work. With the points GWS banked last trading period, you can get as many as you want. You are limited only by the spaces available on your list..

Which is why the people who actually know how things work agree what you need to be offering GWS is future picks.

 

[Clems Knee]

Which is why the people who actually know how things work agree what you need to be offering GWS is future picks.

True. GWS are right for this year, but they always need to set themselves up for the following year as well.

 

[citizen-erased]

This is funny. You are essentially saying that your team is so good for now and the future that a pick 3 would not benefit.

I'm not sure if you get how your academy picks work. With the points GWS banked last trading period, you can get as many as you want. You are limited only by the spaces available on your list.

The value of those Academy players is determined by other teams nominating them, not by GWS. For the other teams it is a risk - do they really want them or are they betting that GWS will match the bid? - have they done enough work on knowing whether the player was worth the pick? - why did they waste resources on finding about an academy player when it's almost certain that they won't get them? For these reasons it is unlikely that a team will nominate exactly where we think they should, but a few places lower down.

So it is very very unlikely that Essendon or Brisbane will nominate a top GWS player. If GWS had pick 3, there is no way they would pick their Academy player because they don't need to - they can pay less when another team nominates down the draft order. By trading up to pick 3, GWS get a top three potential champion midfielder of their choice plus they still get to keep every one of the academy players that they rate.

Would be nothing stopping you from trading pick 3 once you have it.
With 3 and the pies pick (7?) - that's tempting enough to get a player to fill a need. Perhaps get in the game for an elite tall defender.
Was more focusing on what you could get out freo that's worthwhile.

 

[mezaire]

Dropped this in the B.Hill discussion
Combine this with the McCarthy deal and it should get done.

Hawks get Geelongs 1st rd from GWS
GWS get Freo's 1st rd pick
Freo get McCarthy and Hill.

Hill = late 1st rd
McCarthy + late 1st rd = early 1st rd (handy with academy selections too)

I don't think McCarthy and Hill are worth pick 3.

Think Freo would also want another player or pick, perhaps they also get Hawks 2nd?

So
Freo give 3 - get mcCarthy, Hill and 38 (ish)
Hawthorn give Hill pick 38(ish) - get pick 18(ish)
GWS give McCarthy, pick 18(ish) - get pick 3

Wouldn't be surprised if somehow Hawthorn do something else with GWS to get pick 3 so they can use for O'Meara!

 

[Moist Biscuit]

McCarthy and Hill together aren't worth pick 3. Not a chance in hell we part with that pick for either of them so pick 3 just isn't even in the discussion.