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

[Pdub]

You see no value in someone being the captain of a premiership side? I can guarantee you Bicks wouldn't have been accepted in the Hall of Fame if he wasn't a dual premiership captain. He was a good average player and nohing more. But the esteem is still of value, a lot it would appear...

There's also a flaw in your argument about playing in a competitive team where one isn't tagged as much; Judd won his Brownlow medal in 2004 when the Eagles were still a mid-table side, as evidenced by finishing 7th on the ladder that year.

Judd's 2004 was just an exceptional season which was capped off with a Brownlow. His career was stellar up until he left the Eagles and he had certainly achieved more accolades than Danger at the same period.

Ben Cousins was the leader of the Eagle's premiership side, everyone knows that. Judd was given the captaincy as a way to try and keep him in the west. Shane Wowoden also had a brownlow medal at the same age as Dangerfield, would he have carried more value?

The Brownlow is dictated by how strong your team mates are and how many competitive games your team played. How important would Brownlow's be if Joel Sellwood wanted a trade?

When Judd left West coast he was a 2 time all Australian, Dangerfield is a 3 time All Australian.

 

[Strangled Cat]

Get back to the to the debate at hand PD has requested Adelaide be compensated fairly, give me a fair figure for PD to be traded I wouid say he would be equivelantand if not greater trade value than Pendelbury, Priddis, Gibbs, Cotchin, Rioli, R Gray, Wingard, Selwood, so what is a fair figure on all of these players and PD considering thats what PD wants and he is the one wanting thsi trade to happen the most. I left Fyfe out because he is better than PD by the way

I was very recently in Coober Pedy and may have been under a rock of some sorts when this hapenned, so can you please enlighten me as to when exactly Danger made that request?

 

[marty36]

I was very recently in Coober Pedy and may have been under a rock of some sorts when this hapenned, so can you please enlighten me as to when exactly Danger made that request?

You are kidding, you are writing crap about how a trrade will take place, I suppose you havent read what Fagan, Scott and PD have all publicly stated about the affair, instead you choose to read the Geelong BF board and listen to the crap about matching and National Draft nomination and its not fair. Tell me you havent neglected to listen to the three parties that actually matter?

Talk about ignorant

 

[DangerSloane]

I'm worried that we're going to get pulled up on all this. I have this nagging feeling that the first round pick swap last year was actually the first leg of the trade.

We do Geelong a favour by doing a random pick swap. They do us a favour by not pricing Danger out of our matching range, thus enabling a trade.

I'll be royally pissed off if we get done and sanctioned again.

I said that a year ago.
We could've taken Lever at 9 and screwed over Geelong.

The fact that we did that, I think was part of an initial peace offering to Geelong to get a proper deal done this year, and still allow them to get cockatoo.

 

[Strangled Cat]

Really? We're absolutely shafted there and you make out like bandits, while Brisbane do ok but not great. We lose Dangerfield for Aish, a second rounder and upgrades on some useless later picks. I think a three-way trade should involve Redden to us. I'm not super keen on Aish to be honest. I'd rather deal separately for him if we were interested.

As a matter of curiosity, what do you think Jansen's legitimate value is? Like what would you accept from Brisbane if you traded just him to them? I've never heard of him.

Brisbane's third rounder would most probably get the deal done. He hasn't been able to crack into the side yet, but he has shown potential in the VFL. With Danger and Selwood potentially arriving, he would see his natural role of inside mid under threat almost indefinitely. He'd get a game round 1 next year at Brisbane, barring injury of course.

 

[LiquidCrow]

I'm worried that we're going to get pulled up on all this. I have this nagging feeling that the first round pick swap last year was actually the first leg of the trade.

We do Geelong a favour by doing a random pick swap. They do us a favour by not pricing Danger out of our matching range, thus enabling a trade.

I'll be royally pissed off if we get done and sanctioned again.

That theory has never made sense to me. If we had done Geelong a favour at the time, why would we then make it easier for them to get Dangerfield? Surely it would follow that they would be the ones owing us something, eg. Geelong not targeting Dangerfield. As it stands however, the trade in picks last year appears to be balanced and none of the above has happened so I'm less worried about any inappropriate "behind the scenes" dealing.

I think what has tripped up Geelong's trade plans is that they were probably expecting us to finish below them on the ladder this year, and simply assumed that we'd just take the compo pick - likely a top 10 pick and better then their first rounder. I think much of their trade plans has hinged on this, and it seems to be the only explanation why the talk about them being so keen to offer up their first rounder for Henderson started so early.

I think the same thought process would have applied with Geelong targeting S. Selwood as a RFA. At the start of the year the Eagles were tipped by many to finish outside the 8, and early season injuries to their KPDs wouldn't have altered that perception. However, they're playing in the GF tomorrow so any free agency compensation pick for Selwood is going to be a lot lower than what Geelong may have originally predicted at the start of the year.

A lot of the talk in the media has been about Geelong arresting their slide down the ladder and avoiding a rebuild by targeting Dangerfield, Henderson and S. Selwood. However, with the Eagles also talking about matching, I can't see them having enough trade currency to get all three without giving up a bunch of draft picks or trading away some young players.

 

[6BTS]

I'm worried that we're going to get pulled up on all this. I have this nagging feeling that the first round pick swap last year was actually the first leg of the trade.

We do Geelong a favour by doing a random pick swap. They do us a favour by not pricing Danger out of our matching range, thus enabling a trade.

I'll be royally pissed off if we get done and sanctioned again.

Adelaide had their eyes on Lever well before the draft and were extremely confident if he made it to pick 10 he would slide to pick 14 and were right, they really wanted to draft Brayden Maynard or Daniel Howe (if I remember correctly) who they thought one might be a chance to slide to the mid thirties but would almost certainly not make it to their pick in the forties. As it turns out, Maynard was drafted at pick 30 and Howe at 31 so our gamble didn't pay off, but we still got Lever so we didn't lose out and Wigg might have been a player they also wanted, but wouldn't have gotten at pick 47.

Geelong won't pay players that are over the top so we never had to worry about that happening, although I'm still unsure how Danger can choose to sign a long term deal with one club and a 1 year deal with another club when he has originally accepted or nominated for a long term deal. This sort of thing can't happen in NBA, if a club tries to get a restricted free agent on a 5 year deal and that player accepts, then the original club can match that contract and will get the player on the same 5 year deal. So I'm still confused about how Danger can do that, but apparently he can, AFL need to fix that crap up because I count that as draft tampering by the player.

The trade might include Corey Gregson, which ironically was the player Geelong picked with the #47 pick we traded to them. Geelong supporters are really pushing Murdoch and the reason they are doing this is because they don't rate him. He might be Mackay 2.0, looks good running with the ball out in the open, but the rest is, well, questionable so I would rather get Gregson than Murdoch.

 

[marty36]

I was very recently in Coober Pedy and may have been under a rock of some sorts when this hapenned, so can you please enlighten me as to when exactly Danger made that request?

Here ya go, consdering you arent that interested in seeing what PD thinks or wants! After all the whole thing as about what PD wants , not Geelong or Adelaide

http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au...best-and-fairest/story-fnjuhrxq-1227546182564

“I certainly hope that it’s a fair deal for both parties — that will obviously take its course. The season has only just finished for us and the free agency period and trade period is some while away,” Dangerfield said.

 

[Gets!]

I was very recently in Coober Pedy and may have been under a rock of some sorts when this hapenned, so can you please enlighten me as to when exactly Danger made that request?

“I certainly hope it is a fair deal for both parties,” said Dangerfield.

 

[Strangled Cat]

You are kidding, you are writing crap about how a trrade will take place, I suppose you havent read what Fagan, Scott and PD have all publicly stated about the affair, instead you choose to read the Geelong BF board and listen to the crap about matching and National Draft nomination and its not fair. Tell me you havent neglected to listen to the three parties that actually matter?

Talk about ignorant

It's simple. I asked you to point me to the direction of where Danger stated that he wanted Adelaide adequately compensated.

 

[Strangled Cat]

“I certainly hope it is a fair deal for both parties,” said Dangerfield.

I guess he'll just stay in Adelaide, then. Because by the definition of "fair" in here, Geelong will not oblige. If he's true to his wishes, there won't be any threats of nominating himself for the draft, then...

 

[marty36]

I guess he'll just stay in Adelaide, then. Because by the definition of "fair" in here, Geelong will not oblige. If he's true to his wishes, there won't be any threats of nominating himself for the draft, then...

Correct has his said he would nominate, please show me the link, and not Robo's statement, a lnk where he is quoted as saying he will enter the draft? I think everyone read Robo's article a laughed

 

[Connoisseur]

“I certainly hope it is a fair deal for both parties,” said Dangerfield.

His definition of fair could be very different to that afc supporters meaning that he's viewing it more from Geelong's perspective (not conceding needed quality players in a trade for him) and not the crows.

 

[Pdub]

His definition of fair could be very different to that afc supporters meaning that he's viewing it more from Geelong's perspective (not conceding needed quality players in a trade for him) and not the crows.

His definition of fair could be very different to that Geelong supporters meaning that he's viewing it more from Adelaide's perspective (wanting his best mates to be in a successful side) and not the Cats.

 

[marty36]

His definition of fair could be very different to that afc supporters meaning that he's viewing it more from Geelong's perspective (not conceding needed quality players in a trade for him) and not the crows.

Mate and black coould nean grey to some people if they are color blind. Lets not talk crap. What is a fair deal with Selwood, Fyfe, Pendelbury, Gray, everyone knows what a he is talking about by fair, he doesnt need to state two first rounders and a quality player or whatever it is.

Dont try and over complicate a pretty simple statement

 

[marty36]

I guess he'll just stay in Adelaide, then. Because by the definition of "fair" in here, Geelong will not oblige. If he's true to his wishes, there won't be any threats of nominating himself for the draft, then...

Here is Robo's BS about nominating, PD has not been quoted however his manager was

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...her-than-geelong/story-fnp04d70-1227547841801

Dangerfield’ manager Paul Connors did not want to comment.

 

[Strangled Cat]

Correct has his said he would nominate, please show me the link, and not Robo's statement, a lnk where he is quoted as saying he will enter the draft? I think everyone read Robo's article a laughed

I know that Slobbo is a joke and I know that Danger wasn't quoted directly saying he'd nominate. My point was that if Danger is true to his word, he will not threaten anything (as has been suggested -but not quoted directly) and will instead go back to Adelaide. Because Geelong WILL NOT hand over what you lot think is fair.

 

[Brentmeister]

I guess he'll just stay in Adelaide, then. Because by the definition of "fair" in here, Geelong will not oblige. If he's true to his wishes, there won't be any threats of nominating himself for the draft, then...

Pick 9 and maybe pick 12 (2016 guess) for Danger too much? It's still well under what he is worth. Go back and look at the players picked in that range over the last decade. Don't just look at the good ones, look at the bad ones too. The draft is always a bit of a mystery. Danger is a certainty and will give Geelong a serious crack at top 6 over the next 5 years. From there , anything can happen.

 

[Pdub]

I know that Slobbo is a joke and I know that Danger wasn't quoted directly saying he'd nominate. My point was that if Danger is true to his word, he will not threaten anything (as has been suggested -but not quoted directly) and will instead go back to Adelaide. Because Geelong WILL NOT hand over what you lot think is fair.

Adelaide would be happy for Danger to stay, would geelong be happy for Danger to stay?

 

[WAG]

I guess he'll just stay in Adelaide, then. Because by the definition of "fair" in here, Geelong will not oblige. If he's true to his wishes, there won't be any threats of nominating himself for the draft, then...

Why do you keep stating this as fact?

 

[WAG]

I know that Slobbo is a joke and I know that Danger wasn't quoted directly saying he'd nominate. My point was that if Danger is true to his word, he will not threaten anything (as has been suggested -but not quoted directly) and will instead go back to Adelaide. Because Geelong WILL NOT hand over what you lot think is fair.

Another fact!

Who is your source? Or is this just your opinion?

 

[Mahlepi]

His definition of fair could be very different to that Geelong supporters meaning that he's viewing it more from Adelaide's perspective (wanting his best mates to be in a successful side) and not the Cats.

i think you will find it is a throwaway line, ablett made plenty of these
to be honest the hawks have the depth where they would have let you not match and then trade 3-4 depth type players for a third round pick

we simply dont have the cattle for this, so i think the impass and aingst is due to our list

that is not adelaide's fault but rather where the situation is
ie last year we could have traded sj to gws and sent the picks to the crows, and everyone would have been happy

 

[Stiffy_18]

Reading through this thead I have come to the realization that these Geelong idiots are a bigger bunch of inbreds than those Carlton idiots poluting our board when we were trading for Jacobs and were interested in Walker.

 

[Scorpus]

Pick 9 and maybe pick 12 (2016 guess) for Danger too much? It's still well under what he is worth. Go back and look at the players picked in that range over the last decade. Don't just look at the good ones, look at the bad ones too. The draft is always a bit of a mystery. Danger is a certainty and will give Geelong a serious crack at top 6 over the next 5 years. From there , anything can happen.

Let's have a look:

Pick 9
Jordan Russell
Mitch Clark
David Armitage
Ben McEvoy
Jack Ziebell
Andrew Moore
Dion Prestia
Adam Tomlinson
Nick Vlastuin
Christian Salem
Darcy Moore

Pick 12
Danny Meyer
Nathan Jones
James Frawley
Cyril Rioli
Lewis Johnston
Kane Lucas
Lucas Cook
Sam Docherty
Kristian Jaksch
Ben Lennon
Corey Ellis

Couple of spuds, couple of really good players, a couple of decent role players, and the last few are too early to tell.

No proven superstars

 

[marty36]

I know that Slobbo is a joke and I know that Danger wasn't quoted directly saying he'd nominate. My point was that if Danger is true to his word, he will not threaten anything (as has been suggested -but not quoted directly) and will instead go back to Adelaide. Because Geelong WILL NOT hand over what you lot think is fair.

You are in Denial, its not only us that want a fair trade, Patrick Dangerfield does to, he has publicy stated it, are you about to say he was lying. You know the guy that you want to play for you, the guy that wants the move and has proclaimed how Adelaide should be compensated fairly for his move. As for suggested nomination, who bloody suggested it, its wasnt PD or his manager, maybe friggen Humpty Dumpty suggested it or Slobo, who gives a shit.

And your opinion on what Geelong will hand over is your opinion, if they are listening to the person who wants to come to their club it will be a fair deal.

Back to the debate, what is fair, as I said make a comparison on what would be fair for Selwood, Pendelbury, Cotchin, Fyfe, Rioli, and there is your answer, unfortunatly you arent honest enough to answer what is fair for players of that ability.