Oppo Camp Dangerfield's Gone (Zero tolerance to trolling) - READ THREAD LINKED IN OP BEFORE POSTING

[Bicks]

• I think it will be Geelong's pick 9 and one of Murdoch/Gregson/Smedts.........
• Murdoch>Gregson>Smedts in order of preference.

GHS I would be very disappointed if he is part of any deal...he is slowwwwww.

Edited*

 

[mistylake]

Problem is, in these situations the team losing the player rarely gets their worth. See Hawthorn/Buddy. It won't be long before the compensation pick is removed completely and therefore we would get nothing. People need to be realistic in their expectations. If we can manufacture something better than pick 14, we've done well. If we can then turn that pick(s) into something even better - bonus.

Where's the dislike the capitulation button.

 

[Red mist]

• I think it will be Geelong's pick 9 and Murdoch or Gregson.........GHS I would be very disappointed if he is part of any deal...he is slowwwwww.

Want a second rounder future as well. I'm not sure 9 and a player is enough. That's just me.

 

[mistylake]

Agreed. Too many people on here expressing their "wants" rather than being realistic. Some are simply focused on screwing Geelong rather than being focused on achieving something better than pick 14.

Personally I think two first rounders or a first rounder and a player is about what we will get....at best. Would like more though.

You would never get what you want if you start there. Best for our group think to aim a little higher. And not signal a willingness to cave in so readily.
I love to buy a used car off half the crows supporters here. I'd be able to sell for a profit the next day.

 

[boffo]

The issue with getting a 2016 pick is its value is unknown, it could be really good or really bad. So I think both clubs will try to get it done in 2015 picks only. Geelong will certainly want to preserve their position in the 2016 draft, and for us it's a bit on the never-never since we are looking to improve our list NOW.

I agree #9 and Murdoch is unders for us, but I could see us settling for this plus Gellongs second pick in excha ge for one or two of our lower picks (or possibly swap of picks i.e. upgrade for us in the second and third rounds.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Want a second rounder future as well. I'm not sure 9 and a player is enough. That's just me.

It really depends on who the player is. If it is Cockatoo (highly unlikely) who was a top 10 pick last year and had a promising first season they you would say it's reasonable given the circumstances. Any of the other names mentioned and its very underwhelming.

 

[Red mist]

It really depends on who the player is. If it is Cockatoo (highly unlikely) who was a top 10 pick last year and had a promising first season they you would say it's reasonable given the circumstances. Any of the other names mentioned and its very underwhelming.

Cockatoo and 9 sure. Others as you say.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Yep if we match

Only to a degree as uncontracted and nominated a specific club

It's not right but it's what it is

 

[Pdub]

The issue with getting a 2016 pick is its value is unknown, it could be really good or really bad. So I think both clubs will try to get it done in 2015 picks only. Geelong will certainly want to preserve their position in the 2016 draft, and for us it's a bit on the never-never since we are looking to improve our list NOW.

I agree #9 and Murdoch is unders for us, but I could see us settling for this plus Gellongs second pick in excha ge for one or two of our lower picks (or possibly swap of picks i.e. upgrade for us in the second and third rounds.

Next years draft is stronger than this years draft, Geelong's veterans aren't getting younger. We want their pick for next year.

 

[Mego Red]

I think two first rounds is par. Not what Danger is worth, obviously, but what is fair in these circumstances.

Murdoch and 9 would be an absolute fail. Murdoch, 9 and 27 or so is less than par but I wouldn't feel disgusted.

 

[Dan2352]

I think two first rounds is par. Not what Danger is worth, obviously, but what is fair in these circumstances.

Murdoch and 9 would be an absolute fail. Murdoch, 9 and 27 or so is less than par but I wouldn't feel disgusted.

Do we really want 27 this year though? who would be left in a shallow draft there?

I would personally rather trade for next year's picks so that we have something in the bank for a better draft/Ben Jarman FS pick

 

[Golumless]

Do we really want 27 this year though? who would be left in a shallow draft there?

Pretty easy way to answer that question:

If there is someone we rate that'll be around that pick, then yes.
If not, then probably not.

That said, who we rate? I have no idea.

 

[Strangled Cat]

That's not how I remember it. He picked Carlton after everyone expected him to go to Melbounre as his boy hood club and Collingwood with a massive media deal attached.

He said Carlton and only Carlton after meeting with a few clubs a week after saying he was coming back to Victoria.

He shopped himself around a chose Carlton as they offered him the biggest contract PLUS the VISY side deal. Carlton also offered overs in compensation. It was a win win for both Judd and the Eagles.

 

[LiquidCrow]

The "AFL experts" (namely Gary Lyon, Leigh Matthews, Lloyd, Fantasia, ) even Hutchy personal opinion on 5aa, have said he is worth 2 first rounders* (and assuming one would be a single digit pick) as a minimum. So that is the general consensus of the "AFL industry "

With this in mind, it could work out well for us if it goes to mediation.

Pretty easy way to answer that question:

If there is someone we rate that'll be around that pick, then yes.
If not, then probably not.

That said, who we rate? I have no idea.

Wouldn't mind extra second round picks - if there is no-one in the draft we want, it could be bundled with other picks for an upgrade or on traded for a player we want.

 

[Strangled Cat]

Yes but where are the differences? That's just waffle

I've already highlighted the differences in INTENT. Everything else is subjectivity. Judd netted WCE better compensation than he was worth for the team in hindsight. If you think Geelong will pay overs because Carlton did, you're wrong. What else do you want to know? I'll make one last attempt to expand further...

There is every possibility that a trade which sees Danger get to Geelong, should Adelaide match Geelong's offer, will end up in a similar scenario to the Burgoyne trade. If, and it's a big IF... Geelong trade two first rounders, then just like the Burgoyne trade where Hawthorn got a second rounder and scraps in return (IIRC), so too will Geelong get a second rounder back from somewhere.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

I've already highlighted the differences in INTENT. Everything else is subjectivity. Judd netted WCE better compensation than he was worth for the team in hindsight. If you think Geelong will pay overs because Carlton did, you're wrong. What else do you want to know? I'll make one last attempt to expand further...

There is every possibility that a trade which sees Danger get to Geelong, should Adelaide match Geelong's offer, will end up in a similar scenario to the Burgoyne trade. If, and it's a big IF... Geelong trade two first rounders, then just like the Burgoyne trade where Hawthorn got a second rounder and scraps in return (IIRC), so too will Geelong get a second rounder back from somewhere.

Carlton only paid overs in hindsight. While rated nobody expected Kennedy to be as good as he has become

 

[MRB37]

I've already highlighted the differences in INTENT. Everything else is subjectivity. Judd netted WCE better compensation than he was worth for the team in hindsight. If you think Geelong will pay overs because Carlton did, you're wrong. What else do you want to know? I'll make one last attempt to expand further...

There is every possibility that a trade which sees Danger get to Geelong, should Adelaide match Geelong's offer, will end up in a similar scenario to the Burgoyne trade. If, and it's a big IF... Geelong trade two first rounders, then just like the Burgoyne trade where Hawthorn got a second rounder and scraps in return (IIRC), so too will Geelong get a second rounder back from somewhere.

In the end i'm probably not all that bothered by us sending later picks in return if it nets us what we want. That all probably depends on what the Crows have in store for those later picks though, be it trading (Hampton, Seedsman etc) or drafting. There's also a chance that we can still generate enough currency from guys like Kerridge/CEY/Lyons perhaps leaving that could also be used for trading too.

 

[1970crow]

Problem is, in these situations the team losing the player rarely gets their worth. See Hawthorn/Buddy. It won't be long before the compensation pick is removed completely and therefore we would get nothing. People need to be realistic in their expectations. If we can manufacture something better than pick 14, we've done well. If we can then turn that pick(s) into something even better - bonus.

Removing the compo pick will guarantee matching where the contract price is broadly similar. There'd be nothing to risk, so Melbourne would have matched the Frawley offer. I'm not sure that's the direction the AFLPA want this heading.

 

[1970crow]

Are we in a position of power here though?

Depends entirely on Danger's view of going into a draft to get to Geelong.

 

[Strangled Cat]

Carlton only paid overs in hindsight. While rated nobody expected Kennedy to be as good as he has become

I agree with that, and I did say in hindsight, also. But the wonderful thing about history is that if we educate ourselves with what happened in the past, we can avoid making the same mistakes as our predecessors. It is my opinion that selling the farm for one player is not the way to go.

Champion teams win flags, not teams with a few champs. And as far as champs go, Judd was a Brownlow medalist and premiership captain when he left WCE. Danger has played eight seasons with Adelaide and only just won his first B&F a week ago. I don't think it is fair to compare the two on output.

 

[1970crow]

I think the balance of power is a fine one ... both clubs don't have enough power to demand anything, as there is too much to lose if goes bad either way.

Crows don't want to get nada.
Geelong don't want to miss Danger.

Because of this, it will be one of those deals where everyone just goes "oh well, not perfect - but at least we didnt <insert past catastrophe here>".

A player and pick 9 after matching is fine with me., or we get a deal done that the AFL is ok with regarding the compo and pick 9.

The player? Dunno - I like Gregson > Murdoch > Horlin-Smith.

We can only lose pick 14 in one draft. Geelong could lose a marquee player at a $300k discount for years and at a greater discount in trade value than the 14 we're risking. There's more on the line for them than us if they're not certain they will get him in a draft. There's a reason there's only been 1 Nick Stevens occurring.

 

[Mike Smyth]

Murdich - wtf - average at best.

Would Geelong accept Lyons and pick 9 for Selwood?

 

[1970crow]

• I think it will be Geelong's pick 9 and one of Murdoch/Gregson/Smedts.........
• Murdoch>Gregson>Smedts in order of preference.

GHS I would be very disappointed if he is part of any deal...he is slowwwwww.

Edited*

I don't reckon they'll be forcing players out.

 

[Strangled Cat]

Murdich - wtf - average at best.

Would Geelong accept Lyons and pick 9 for Selwood?

Does Selwood want to leave Geelong?

 

[Sanders]

I've already highlighted the differences in INTENT. Everything else is subjectivity. Judd netted WCE better compensation than he was worth for the team in hindsight. If you think Geelong will pay overs because Carlton did, you're wrong. What else do you want to know? I'll make one last attempt to expand further...

There is every possibility that a trade which sees Danger get to Geelong, should Adelaide match Geelong's offer, will end up in a similar scenario to the Burgoyne trade. If, and it's a big IF... Geelong trade two first rounders, then just like the Burgoyne trade where Hawthorn got a second rounder and scraps in return (IIRC), so too will Geelong get a second rounder back from somewhere.

That Carlton got overs is neither agreed nor fact

You can't base an argument on the premise created by passing your opinion off as acknowledged fact