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

[rezagun]

Burgoyne??

There's actually a few in your list that wouldn't be in my top ten - but then neither would Selwood.

Its not actually my top 10 more of a reference of players you would pick before selwood

 

[Bonkers000]

But at the crows he has won just one b&f and not been captain

What has b&f's got to do with anything?
Player A finished second in the b&f every year over the course of his career.
Player B finishes first in one year, but 10th in every other year of his career.
They both play 14 year long careers.

You tell me who the better player is.

Being captain also has no affect on a players ability or talent. Tex was deemed to have better leadership skills.
Tom Harley was a very good player, and a premiership captain as you well know. Yet I guarantee you, no club would offer up a better trade to aquire Harley than they would danger.

 

[Brentmeister]

the argument was around getting something for nothing, and you got betts for nix
smart play as you won well on that deal or non deal

We didn't get Betts for "nix". We had to pay a lot more money than anyone else in the comp was willing to pay. We were laughed at for offering Betts $500k a year. Just because he has played well above expectations doesn't change the fact that we had to give something up to get him.

if thats ade position geelong should just slap a two year 1.4 mil deal on him

Danger doesn't want 2 year deals. He's looking for a 5-6 deal to set him up for life.

 

[Brentmeister]

Yep, fair cop and while I do know the rules including that one, that was just a rare brain fart on my part. But since pick #14 is practically nothing in the minds of all and sundry on here, and you're all supremely confident about getting two first rounders as well as at least one quality player from Geelong, would it be worth keeping Danger for two additional years if it meant losing a first round draft pick and a quality player?

Some people on this board are arguing for that. I am not one of them. I think Danger is worth your first rounders and a quality player, but I think we'll have to accept two first rounders.

 

[gothecrows]

Watch him tommorow and then tell me you wouldnt have him in your top 10 right now. He is a jet. Think hes playing in his 30 th final or something saturday. He is a 4 time premiership player and on the big stage is as good as they come.

Not yet he's not. He went to Hawthorn in 2010, so he's played in premierships in 2004, 2013, 2014

 

[Bicks]

Its a public holiday today. The shift key is on double pay today

But your on school holidays so that goes not apply in your case...

 

[Brentmeister]

So what geelong is trading for here is two years of dangers service, and pick 14 is a given as you would get that in 2 years
So if danger leaves in two years we give up nothing, and you still are rewarded
It's seems unbalanced to want another first round pick, and cockatoo for those two years

Beams had one year left on his contract with Brisbane. Brisbane could have waited one year and then offered peanuts for him at the end of 2015. Without Beams Brisbane would've finished bottom of the ladder this year as opposed to second bottom.

So Brisbane traded Pick 5 and 25 for Beams when they could've got him for nothing ONE YEAR LATER.

Hmmm interesting.

 

[Elite Crow]

So what geelong is trading for here is two years of dangers service, and pick 14 is a given as you would get that in 2 years
So if danger leaves in two years we give up nothing, and you still are rewarded
It's seems unbalanced to want another first round pick, and cockatoo for those two years

Would the crows accept 14 and 20 from the afl?

Why dont you just wait then?

 

[Elite Crow]

Its a public holiday today. The shift key is on double pay today

Have you an manboob decided to play tag?

Day 1 Manboob keeps posting crap ends in thread ban
Day 2 Mahelpi tags in

Who is next in line, the North Korean dude?

 

[randyzany]

as I said don't really care about what you think, I care more about what your club thinks and I think they are quality who don't try to screw other clubs.

I'm pretty confident that when this deal is finalised Geelong supporters predictions of what it will take to get it done, will be a lot closer than Adelaide supporters.

 

[1990crow]

I'm pretty confident that when this deal is finalised Geelong supporters predictions of what it will take to to get it done, will be a lot closer than Adelaide supporters.

I'm pretty confident that when this deal is finalised Adelaide supporters predictions of what it will take to get it done will be a lot closer than Geelong supporters.

 

[6BTS]

I will actually defend the AFL here. It is an incredably difficult job to make rules in an effort to even out the comp and to have the AFLPA through there two cents in makes it even harder. Then you have Northern State clubs that are more important to the comp ATM than southern states on population alone where 60% of australia's population live. So unfortunatly they need a lick to give them supporters thus getting more supporters and better market share, Power supporters talk about being a club no AFL franchise is a club, its a business needing to be fed by market share, I think its sort of gone a little away from footy as we know it, similar to that of American sport, its now entertainment first and foremost. Man, look at the Powesr home day entertainment there is a franchise that has embraced the entertainment, no longer going down to your local before the game, getting there just as the ball is bounced, different times.

I can never defend an organisation that only exists in its current form because of the fans and then tries to have their cake and eat it too at the expense of the integrity of the competition and fan satisfaction.

 

[Brentmeister]

I'm pretty confident that when this deal is finalised Geelong supporters predictions of what it will take to get it done, will be a lot closer than Adelaide supporters.

So you're confident the Crows won't match?

 

[randyzany]

I wouldn't if I were you. You're setting yourself up for a massive disappointment if you seriously expect to get 'fair' value from a player who wishes to move on.

Geelong has lost some good to very good players (gaj, christensen, mumford) over the years and we didn't get anything close to their value as compensation, it's just the way the cookie crumbles for clubs with players who want to leave.

 

[Brentmeister]

I wouldn't if I were you. You're setting yourself up for a massive disappointment if you seriously expect to get 'fair' value from a player who wishes to move on.

Geelong has lost some good to very good players (gaj, christensen, mumford) over the years and we didn't get anything close to their value as compensation, it's just the way the cookie crumbles for clubs with players who want to leave.

Two first rounders, when they are likely to be 9 and maybe 12, is not "fair" value for Danger. Two high top-10 picks would be much closer. So really we're being pretty reasonable when we suggest that.

Garry wasn't a free agent, Christensen had to go because he was rooting around with girls he shouldn't have and Mumford got dropped near the end of 2009 so was looking for more opportunities. Hard to claim you were short changed in that deal when you guys seemingly rated Mark Blake higher than Shane Mumford.

 

[FAITH]

I wouldn't if I were you. You're setting yourself up for a massive disappointment if you seriously expect to get 'fair' value from a player who wishes to move on.

Geelong has lost some good to very good players (gaj, christensen, mumford) over the years and we didn't get anything close to their value as compensation, it's just the way the cookie crumbles for clubs with players who want to leave.

burgoyne and judd deals were fair.

 

[marty36]

I wouldn't if I were you. You're setting yourself up for a massive disappointment if you seriously expect to get 'fair' value from a player who wishes to move on.

Geelong has lost some good to very good players (gaj, christensen, mumford) over the years and we didn't get anything close to their value as compensation, it's just the way the cookie crumbles for clubs with players who want to leave.

Fair Value is like for like, so I dont think anyone suggesting two picks that may or may not work out and a player is actually fair considering the circumstances its actually faiir if you compare to other trades done where players have left clubs like Beams. As we are discussing PD what are the thoughts on treloar and a fair trade for someone wanting to leave the club. He is not the value of PD a lot are mentioning two first rounders.

 

[Stripple]

Geelong fans think they gave up Christensen for unders at pick 21 last year, so I think we should base it off that, Christensen and Dangerfield are the same age so it works.

Dangerfield is currently rated by the AFL as the 3rd best player in the competition, Christensen is rated as the 224th best player in the competition.

This puts Dangerfield in the 99th percentile, and Christensen in the 68th percentile.

If this was international tennis Dangerfield's earnings would be about $6mil/year, Christensen < $100k.

It means Dangerfield is a 1 in 240 player, Christensen is a 1 in 3.

Statistically that makes Dangerfield 80 times more valuable than Christensen.

If pick 21 is worth 878 points, Dangerfield is then worth 70,240 points or 23 x pick 1s.

Beautiful logic


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jeffcrowe]

I wouldn't if I were you. You're setting yourself up for a massive disappointment if you seriously expect to get 'fair' value from a player who wishes to move on.

Geelong has lost some good to very good players (gaj, christensen, mumford) over the years and we didn't get anything close to their value as compensation, it's just the way the cookie crumbles for clubs with players who want to leave.

So you'd take pick 14 instead of pick 9 as a minimum if you were working at afc

Losing pick 9....That's the best you'll get in all if this and even that is $100-1

Tell us more about why we should take 14 compo against all other improved deals

 

[mistylake]

When you negotiate you start anywhere you like but you need to have in the back of your head what you are really prepared to take. What I have mentioned above is the bottom line. Unless I get that I call it off. If you want you can start with asking for Geelongs 5 best players so long as you understand that wont happen.

I'd say it's best not to ask for less than you expect to get first up. Then try to increase your demands after.
Seems like some are willing to take what Geelong are saying they have to offer at face value. What there supporters say is irrelevant as the club will need to cough up or we don't have a deal simple. Hardball means hard ball. A deal will happen but it will take more than a bunch of beads and surely Geelong would know we've been planning for this for 1.5 years as they have to.

Believe it or not, I too want Adelaide to be compensated fairly. Two first round draft picks as compensation is fair in my mind. What I don't want is Geelong handing over two first round draft picks plus a player or two, as that is overs. So, just as I want the AFL to afford compensation to Adelaide by way of an additional, end of first round compensation draft pick to complement pick #14, I am almost certain that Mr. Dangerfield would echo my sentiments. I dare say that if you were to ask young Paddy how he feels about Geelong, the team he wishes to play for and succeed with, handing over precious first round draft picks and players, I'd say the reception you'd receive would be cooler than luke warm.

How about the AFL give us your #9 and the #14 then you actually pay something for Danger and we get compensation.

 

[footy4ever]

So if he was coming from Hawthorn he would be a more valuable player as he would have played in premierships and playing in a team that was always competitive, won more games and was tagged much less he would have had more Brownlow votes.

Exactly. makes him worth more looking at it that way.

****ing cough up Geelong.

 

[Pdub]

So what geelong is trading for here is two years of dangers service, and pick 14 is a given as you would get that in 2 years
So if danger leaves in two years we give up nothing, and you still are rewarded
It's seems unbalanced to want another first round pick, and cockatoo for those two years

Would the crows accept 14 and 20 from the afl?

You aren't guaranteed to get him in 2 years, in 2 years time he might have a different girlfriend who wants to stay in Adelaide, he might have a 1+ yr old kid who he doesn't want to take away from his 1 yr old friends, Geelong may be an irrelevant mess both as a football team and as a city with no jobs.

Plus we get compensation in 2 years if he leaves as a free agent.

 

[footy4ever]

How many ******* times must it be stated that Adelaide still get a compo pick if Dangerfield stays in Adelaide leaves via non-restricted FA in two years? So we would not "lose him for nothing" if that were the case. Why do people keep saying this shit over and over again?

And let me state my position again. I have no desire for Dangerfield to remain at the Crows for a further two years. Too much water has gone under the bridge.

Is it because they are Geelong supporters, or are Crows supporters also believing that?

 

[Mr_Moogle]

The AFL have to remove compensation ASAP but to counter balance that they must allow clubs to trade players where ever they wish.

Therefore, ideally 12 months ago we trade Dangerfield to a Melbourne based club.

This is it. It's about time we grew up and looked how other sporting codes do it around the world. The Free Agency system we have at the moment is a total joke.

 

[BrissyCrow]

I'd say it's best not to ask for less than you expect to get first up. Then try to increase your demands after..

Yep. I just assumed that everybody would initially ask for more and not less.