Analysis Danger on Tim Kelly

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Posts
16,846
Likes
5,414
Location
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Thread starter #701
I've read enough of the thread to know that you're beyond hopeless... and that replying is just a waste of my time. But let's have a little look. And God help me, refer to that one off the cuff comment by Dangerfield as gospel one more time and I will report your comment. Get a different source or stop posting about it.

Here are two slightly varying references for the deal West Coast were trying to get him in with next year. Draftee wage is locked in and cannot be varied by extension, so either way we know he was offered 650,000-700,000 odd per year by West Coast during the course of last year's season and they continued to pursue him on those terms during the trade period.

7 August 2018: 1.5 million over three years
https://outline.com/WTS3Wx

18 February 2019: 3 million over five years
https://outline.com/p4Gd7C

So we know that in money terms it was significantly higher than 400k. Offered that 700k/year to return home it should be pretty clear that TK would gladly have accepted terms likely quite similar to Geelong's offer. Let's look at the trade.

Wells asking for a top ten pick. Also mentions the WCE as reigning premiers might have reduced interest, but the fact that the entire trade period has ongoing negotiations to trade him makes it pretty clear that the interest was red hot throughout.

8 October 2018
https://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/a...a-top-10-pick-for-tim-kelly-ng-b88984549z.amp

Here's clarity on the trade position, and the fact that it would be fought over while the trade window remained open - West Coast wanted him for two medium range picks, Geelong did not think this represented fair value.

October 15 2018

Another source for that a day later if you don't want Twitter as a reference

October 16 2018
https://www.tweeddailynews.com.au/news/geelong-declare-tim-kellys-trade-to-west-coast-/3550822/

Immediately after the trade fails to get up Brady Rawlings commented that



Clearly not indicating any tempering of the interest that had been reported, either post premiership or Gaff retention.

October 18 2018
https://www.wellingtontimes.com.au/story/5710837/kellys-trade-bid-means-more-afl-scrutiny/

So let's dig into this offer. We know 20 and 22 were on the table from the start. We also know that West Coast's attempt to boost it to get the deal done was to include the sad trombone noise of your future second.

17 October 2018
https://thewest.com.au/sport/afl-tr...etener-into-tim-kelly-offer-ng-b88993436z.amp

Geelong were not satisfied with this wet fart of an offer - their request was for you to include at least one first round pick into the deal, through your future first. A pretty fair request considering you would have Buckley's chance of drafting a better player with said pick.

October 17 2018
https://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/a...on-last-day-of-trade-period-ng-b88993188z.amp

17 October 2018
https://www.triplem.com.au/story/tim-kelly-fails-to-secure-a-trade-home-113666

Now to close off this deep dive let's get Chris Scott's thoughts on the whole matter, from more recently.



Geelong regarded your deal as massive unders



But wanted to do the right thing by Tim and his family



The deal offered did not satisfy these criteria - it would have put the club at a big disadvantage.

2 April 2019
https://www.foxsports.com.au/api/v1...a/news-story/b9265ca367278dd0bdef138f189dca05

So, let's round off the facts

  1. West Coast pursued Tim throughout last year with at least a good money offer - 650-700k a year as soon as it was in their hands.
  2. They have stated repeatedly on record that they want him, behaviour that is supported by their repeated attempts to trade for him. They will try again.
  3. Geelong were open to trading Tim for the right deal. Top ten posturing aside, the difference came down to whether it was a future first or second on the table.
  4. Chris Scott is on the record publicly saying your offer was an attempt to rob Geelong blind
  5. Quote that single Patrick F Dangerfield interview that was clearly provided to be diplomatic and I will report your comment. Honestly I'm not even sure I want you to reply, here are the facts and it is simply not on me if you want to stick your fingers in your ears and go lalalalala as loudly as possible.
You quote opinion, its what you choose to believe, scuttlebutt is not my go, I'm hopeless, OK.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Posts
16,846
Likes
5,414
Location
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Thread starter #703
Be nice if Kelly went , we bring in McLuggage ..but the system just doesnt work like that.
3rd party deal might be the only way both Kelly & the Cats can be satisfied.

IF the Eagles were the underhand dills that some on this thread suggest, they knew Lycett was on the way once they won the flag, to my knowledge neither Geelong or West Coast went down that path at least in public.
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Posts
16,846
Likes
5,414
Location
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Thread starter #704
There's a minute thirty left on the clock and you're 12 goals down mate.
Sometimes you just have to admit you've lost.
Need to be a fair bit stronger case than the Grafter put up - many need someone to blame when they dont get their own way, I'm not one of those.
Be happy that some are happy its not Geelongs fault Kelly wanted to go home, its West Coast thats at fault, & the fairies at the bottom of the garden .... ;)
You can be sure that if it could be done the CEOs would have got it done, they couldnt IMHO, but I'm hopeless ...
 

Max Milburn

Premiership Player
Joined
Aug 10, 2018
Posts
3,156
Likes
5,846
Location
Hobbiton, Tasmania
AFL Club
Geelong
Need to be a fair bit stronger case than the Grafter put up - many need someone to blame when they dont get their own way, I'm not one of those.
Be happy that some are happy its not Geelongs fault Kelly wanted to go home, its West Coast thats at fault, & the fairies at the bottom of the garden .... ;)
You can be sure that if it could be done the CEOs would have got it done, they couldnt IMHO, but I'm hopeless ...
Nah, not hopeless.
Too much hope, if anything.
 

Down at K Park

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 18, 2016
Posts
5,930
Likes
9,515
AFL Club
Geelong
Need to be a fair bit stronger case than the Grafter put up - many need someone to blame when they dont get their own way, I'm not one of those.
Be happy that some are happy its not Geelongs fault Kelly wanted to go home, its West Coast thats at fault, & the fairies at the bottom of the garden .... ;)
You can be sure that if it could be done the CEOs would have got it done, they couldnt IMHO, but I'm hopeless ...
It was never going to be done with a low ball offer. Either stump up or stfu.
 

Turbocat

Premium Platinum
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
Posts
36,688
Likes
32,539
Location
Newtown
AFL Club
Geelong
I'd be happy with that. We won't get a Kelly replacement lets face it. You brought up Caldwell's name. He'd be definitely worthy of consideration if available. But would cost a bit I'd say...
Caldwell seems like a wells pick to me... most thought him worthy of discussion for the 2nd best mid...bar for injury. Wells usually gos car-ching(bell noise) and sees value.

My thinking if we look at when teams have lost guys who were top end players.. very rarely if ever have they replaced them with a pnp..its more thru depth and coverage till you develop a replacement. How did we cover GA when he left. How has Freo covered the loss of arguably their best player. It just depends on how clever we are and the guys who develop and the cheaper options we can find. I certainly am happy to say guys like Miers is a bonus , add Fogarty etc and we have the starting point of a young group... but its unlikely we are finding a best 22 for our side..if someone is not best 22 at another side.
 

Down at K Park

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 18, 2016
Posts
5,930
Likes
9,515
AFL Club
Geelong
No one in footy admin is that stupid anymore, not at the Eagles or the Cats, get with the world as it is. Wakey, wakey ..o_O
Eagles need to wake up and offer something worthwhile, before he either stays, or freo swoop in and steal him.

**** low ball offers won’t get it done.
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Posts
16,846
Likes
5,414
Location
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Thread starter #710
Eagles need to wake up and offer something worthwhile, before he either stays, or freo swoop in and steal him.

**** low ball offers won’t get it done.
They didnt have what the Cats wanted?

Footy 101
The Bradbury-Carey deal.
Essendon had won the past two premierships, but was beginning to struggle under the weight of injury in 1986. Determined to keep its place at the head of the pecking order, the Bombers cleared popular clubmen Peter Bradbury and Steve Carey, both of whom had played in one of those flags, to Collingwood and Geelong respectively. The 'prize' was disgruntled Collingwood pair Geoff Raines and Mike Richardson, who had quit the penniless Magpies over money. It was a disaster. The loss of the long-serving Bradbury and Carey tore a large hole in what had been a very closeknit Essendon playing unit. Raines and Richardson played just one season with the Bombers before departing again for VFL newcomer Brisbane, and the Dons didn’t make the finals again until 1989.

For the deal to go ahead the Eagles would have to repeat history, a disaster scenario, and they chose not to, hard as it may be for you ... you call it lowballing, I refer you to Footy 101. 101, not Footy for Dummies. You'll never get a gig at the Cats, dummies they are not.
 

Turbocat

Premium Platinum
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
Posts
36,688
Likes
32,539
Location
Newtown
AFL Club
Geelong
They didnt have what the Cats wanted?

Footy 101
The Bradbury-Carey deal.
Essendon had won the past two premierships, but was beginning to struggle under the weight of injury in 1986. Determined to keep its place at the head of the pecking order, the Bombers cleared popular clubmen Peter Bradbury and Steve Carey, both of whom had played in one of those flags, to Collingwood and Geelong respectively. The 'prize' was disgruntled Collingwood pair Geoff Raines and Mike Richardson, who had quit the penniless Magpies over money. It was a disaster. The loss of the long-serving Bradbury and Carey tore a large hole in what had been a very closeknit Essendon playing unit. Raines and Richardson played just one season with the Bombers before departing again for VFL newcomer Brisbane, and the Dons didn’t make the finals again until 1989.

For the deal to go ahead the Eagles would have to repeat history, a disaster scenario, and they chose not to, hard as it may be for you ... you call it lowballing, I refer you to Footy 101. 101, not Footy for Dummies. You'll never get a gig at the Cats, dummies they are not.
Its disingenuous to go back that far .. too much has changed ..multiple changes infact. That trade preceded the draft. Your point is that all the players are so valued that none will be moved on. Every club moves players on every year.

If you had traded your Future R1 with the picks you had already offered a deal most likely would have been done. .. and who knows what adding a non premiership player to a pick would have reaped at a club with a lower pick. Its not factual to say you didn't have collateral to get it done..it was a choice to only trade to a price you found acceptable. Its now obvious that it would have been a good deal to do... every club makes choices but WC choice to draw the line a bit to close to a value trade.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Down at K Park

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 18, 2016
Posts
5,930
Likes
9,515
AFL Club
Geelong
They didnt have what the Cats wanted?

Footy 101
The Bradbury-Carey deal.
Essendon had won the past two premierships, but was beginning to struggle under the weight of injury in 1986. Determined to keep its place at the head of the pecking order, the Bombers cleared popular clubmen Peter Bradbury and Steve Carey, both of whom had played in one of those flags, to Collingwood and Geelong respectively. The 'prize' was disgruntled Collingwood pair Geoff Raines and Mike Richardson, who had quit the penniless Magpies over money. It was a disaster. The loss of the long-serving Bradbury and Carey tore a large hole in what had been a very closeknit Essendon playing unit. Raines and Richardson played just one season with the Bombers before departing again for VFL newcomer Brisbane, and the Dons didn’t make the finals again until 1989.

For the deal to go ahead the Eagles would have to repeat history, a disaster scenario, and they chose not to, hard as it may be for you ... you call it lowballing, I refer you to Footy 101. 101, not Footy for Dummies. You'll never get a gig at the Cats, dummies they are not.
You don’t get guns for peanuts. Despite what you west cokers think. Footy 101.
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Posts
16,846
Likes
5,414
Location
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Thread starter #714
Its disingenuous to go back that far .. too much has changed ..multiple changes infact. That trade preceded the draft. Your point is that all the players are so valued that none will be moved on. Every club moves players on every year.

If you had traded your Future R1 with the picks you had already offered a deal most likely would have been done. .. and who knows what adding a non premiership player to a pick would have reaped at a club with a lower pick. Its not factual to say you didn't have collateral to get it done..it was a choice to only trade to a price you found acceptable. Its now obvious that it would have been a good deal to do... every club makes choices but WC choice to draw the line a bit to close to a value trade.
Future picks yes, but the Eagles obviously valued it at more than Kelly, selling a spot in the first round may not be the smartest thing to do.

I agree that as we stand the Eagles lost by that decision, but the deal isnt on the table today.

The point I was making going back to Sheeds is that forcing out a member(s) of a Flag winning squad has ramifications, got an idea Sheeds did it again after their 2000 flag, maybe not?
 

Turbocat

Premium Platinum
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
Posts
36,688
Likes
32,539
Location
Newtown
AFL Club
Geelong
Future picks yes, but the Eagles obviously valued it at more than Kelly, selling a spot in the first round may not be the smartest thing to do.

I agree that as we stand the Eagles lost by that decision, but the deal isnt on the table today.

The point I was making going back to Sheeds is that forcing out a member(s) of a Flag winning squad has ramifications, got an idea Sheeds did it again after their 2000 flag, maybe not?
Ess had cap issues in 2000/2001.. and had no choice.

I bet you could name 5 players that were not in the flag winning 22 that would have drawn trade interest.. so it was not just flag winning squad thing... and as I said 3-6 players gone from every club every year.

A future pick that you would have estimated as P16-P20... you guys pulled the wrong lever IF as reported you offered a future 2nd.. what 18 picks later.

Anyway thats done.. the only question now is ... are the Eagle slow learners .. will they be too tight fisted again.. or will they just look at whats needed and just get it done. I suspect if they are willing to pay the price ..he could be theirs on day1 of trade period. They have more than enough picks and players to get a trade deal that would reflect other trade of high dollar players. He will be on .8 to 1M that indicates 2 R1 picks. ..and if they are late it will probably require icing.
 
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Posts
117
Likes
84
AFL Club
Geelong
He went home didnt he? Were you happy with the trade or did one party stick it up the other, how about Scooter ...?
What?

Kersten wanted to play with Hamling and he’s not that great so we were happy to let him go. When it comes to not best 22 players or out of contract guys we let them go wherever they like. We will make the trades work to let them go.

Scooter was a UFA, you had no intention of matching any offers. Pretty sure we offered him way unders given his injury issues.
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Posts
16,846
Likes
5,414
Location
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Thread starter #717
Ess had cap issues in 2000/2001.. and had no choice.

I bet you could name 5 players that were not in the flag winning 22 that would have drawn trade interest.. so it was not just flag winning squad thing... and as I said 3-6 players gone from every club every year.

A future pick that you would have estimated as P16-P20... you guys pulled the wrong lever IF as reported you offered a future 2nd.. what 18 picks later.

Anyway thats done.. the only question now is ... are the Eagle slow learners .. will they be too tight fisted again.. or will they just look at whats needed and just get it done. I suspect if they are willing to pay the price ..he could be theirs on day1 of trade period. They have more than enough picks and players to get a trade deal that would reflect other trade of high dollar players. He will be on .8 to 1M that indicates 2 R1 picks. ..and if they are late it will probably require icing.
All good points, why I suggested a 3rd party might be in play, e.g in 2018 Scotty Lycett had a big offer to go home. The Gaff thing was too hard missing out on the GF, IMHO.
The only go homes in the GF final side were Schoey (too old), Cole (how attractive?) & the potential of Venables, add future talent in Brander ... cant see all of them being enough & it'd leave a bloody big hole in the list.
The future picks needed would also leave a real hole, too big a hole?

You blokes worked on the Danger deal well ahead of the trade happening, despite the suggestions (even absolute certainly !! ??) the Eagles were into Kelly from the day he was drafted, I've never heard of a 3rd party deal & to this day the Eagles list is not well respected in Melbourne, e.g even the Norm Smith winning performance of Shuey wouldnt see him ranked with the likes of Danger, Sellwood, Martin, Cotchin (not denigrating any of them) - we had a couple of ex Vic nobodies in Vardy, Cripps, Hutchings, & mature age debutants like Rioli & Ryan .... Yeo had already gone East & come home, pretty much leaves McGovern?

Therein lies the problem, the why the deal wasnt done - not sure dollars really came into it, the clubs (Cook & Nisbett) could sort that out IMHO.
:) are you suggesting p16-18 alone would have got the deal done? If so, Kelly 2019 suggests we've got egg on our face, lowballing nah!
 

Seeds

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Posts
28,665
Likes
24,728
Location
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
What?

Kersten wanted to play with Hamling and he’s not that great so we were happy to let him go. When it comes to not best 22 players or out of contract guys we let them go wherever they like. We will make the trades work to let them go.

Scooter was a UFA, you had no intention of matching any offers. Pretty sure we offered him way unders given his injury issues.
We offered him 1.6 million dollars over 4 years. It was way overs.
 

Down at K Park

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 18, 2016
Posts
5,930
Likes
9,515
AFL Club
Geelong
& you cant give what you dont have, uncommon sense?
You could have got the deal done with the extra pick we asked for. Apparently you were close to considering it. You baulked and now you probably can’t afford him.

You had the picks to get the deal done. But keep trying to play the “we didn’t low ball you” card.
 

Turbocat

Premium Platinum
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
Posts
36,688
Likes
32,539
Location
Newtown
AFL Club
Geelong
All good points, why I suggested a 3rd party might be in play, e.g in 2018 Scotty Lycett had a big offer to go home. The Gaff thing was too hard missing out on the GF, IMHO.
The only go homes in the GF final side were Schoey (too old), Cole (how attractive?) & the potential of Venables, add future talent in Brander ... cant see all of them being enough & it'd leave a bloody big hole in the list.
The future picks needed would also leave a real hole, too big a hole?

You blokes worked on the Danger deal well ahead of the trade happening, despite the suggestions (even absolute certainly !! ??) the Eagles were into Kelly from the day he was drafted, I've never heard of a 3rd party deal & to this day the Eagles list is not well respected in Melbourne, e.g even the Norm Smith winning performance of Shuey wouldnt see him ranked with the likes of Danger, Sellwood, Martin, Cotchin (not denigrating any of them) - we had a couple of ex Vic nobodies in Vardy, Cripps, Hutchings, & mature age debutants like Rioli & Ryan .... Yeo had already gone East & come home, pretty much leaves McGovern?

Therein lies the problem, the why the deal wasnt done - not sure dollars really came into it, the clubs (Cook & Nisbett) could sort that out IMHO.
:)are you suggesting p16-18 alone would have got the deal done? If so, Kelly 2019 suggests we've got egg on our face, lowballing nah!
It been "reported" offer ... the two picks 20 & 22 ..(that then worked into 22 and 25 I think ) and a future pick. If that future picks was a R2 ..and we wanted that changed to one.etc. The deal would have then been 20 & 22 & FR1 (about P16-P20) .. It quite possible that you could have got him without one pick lower than 20( depending on your finish this year and how many bids on players this year).

Again. I find too much retrospective rather boring ... Its far more relevant now if you are going to bring a gun to the gun fight this year... It matter not what you could have picked him for or what we picked him for ... as Costner said in Draft Day... "we live in a differnt world than we did 30 seconds ago" let alone 18 months ago..

TK will be on .8 to 1M. If you finish top 4 this year ... 2R1's , say P16 and P16 +... will be required imo
 
Last edited:

year of the cat

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Mar 27, 2006
Posts
16,314
Likes
17,480
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
It been "reported" offer ... the two picks 20 & 22 ..(that then worked into 22 and 25 I think ) and a future pick. If that future picks was a R2 ..and we wanted that changed to one.etc. The deal would have then been 20 & 22 & FR1 (about P16-P20) .. It quite possible that you could have got him without one pick lower than 20( depending on your finish this year and how many bids on players this year).

Again. I find too much retrospective rather boring ... Its far more relevant now if you are going to bring a gun to the gun fight this year... It matter not what you could have picked him for or what we picked him for ... as Costner said in Draft Day... "we live in a differnt world than we did 30 seconds ago" let alone 18 months ago..

TK will be on .8 to 1M. If you finish top 4 this year ... 2R1's , say P16 and P16 +... will be required imo
At least. I reckon one has to be a top 7 pick. I really don't think WC has the capacity to do the deal on two fronts - they can't offer him that type of contract and secondly it's unlikely they get the picks to get the trade done. It will be either us or Freo most likely I think.
 

Footy Smarts

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Posts
6,733
Likes
9,591
AFL Club
Geelong
The fact West Coast can't offer what they don't have is fair enough. If Kelly asks to be traded to West Coast then we'll probably sniff around some of their good young players and talk to Freo to see if they offer something better. Ultimately if we can't prize out a young kid we like and Kelly insists on preferring West Coast over Freo then I think we'll accept their 2 first rounders even if they are likely to both be picks 15-20. There's also Sydney's 2nd rounder this year that belongs to West Coast now which could be a pick around 20 if they keep stinking it up.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Posts
2,485
Likes
4,052
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
The fact West Coast can't offer what they don't have is fair enough. If Kelly asks to be traded to West Coast then we'll probably sniff around some of their good young players and talk to Freo to see if they offer something better. Ultimately if we can't prize out a young kid we like and Kelly insists on preferring West Coast over Freo then I think we'll accept their 2 first rounders even if they are likely to both be picks 15-20. There's also Sydney's 2nd rounder this year that belongs to West Coast now which could be a pick around 20 if they keep stinking it up.
Agree with this.

If WC can't get a top 5 pick, it'll have to be their 2 x first rounders (this year and next) ... probably around 15 + 15.

I think we'd push for their Sydney R2 pick as well (with our later R2 pick in the 30s going back).
 
Top Bottom