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

[1990crow]

A local SA boy currently at Geelong is being nudged towards the door as part of the deal, Crows are keen, player is happy at Geelong so may need some convincing.
Not sure what else in the way of picks/players is being proposed but my guess is this may be sorted already if the both clubs have agreed on the player.

Ps: long time forum reader- 1st time poster.

Doesn't take a mind reader to work out you are referring to Murdoch.

 

[marty36]

Can't help but think neither team has any real bargaining power here, nor does Paddy really. Someone's gonna blink first, can't see Adelaide getting his true value though. It's not like the Judd scenario.

Gonna be a looooong drawn out trade which all but eliminated the good feelings from last years trade and the cancelling game this season.

The supporters are fired up the clubs dont seem to be

Adelaide supporters want serious compensation for losing the best player they have.

Geelong supporters look at the computer screen and see restricted FREE AGENT

 

[TexForPM]

marty you have first pick who do you take
fyfe, selwood, danger, pendles

for me it would be
fyfe
selwood
danger
pendles

in that order

No way.
fyfe
pendles
danger
selwood

 

[Niximus]

Do you seriously think geelong Geelong aren't going to try and minimise there their loss to gain danger Danger? That they don't care and just want to be fair? It's not the stock exchange or the petrol pump there's no fixed price.
Again your you're not thinking about Adelaide you're more worried about geelong Geelong. I get it, your you're all upset dangers Danger has left, your you're angry, you want someone to suffer like you all are. Getting the most out of Geelong seems to be fine for everyone, making them and their supporters unhappy as you all are. It's not going to happen unless you satisfy Geelong.
Adelaide can demand pick 9 that's it, it's not fair, I know this, but geelong Geelong has the power to do that.
Their They're not going to offer more to satisfy Adelaide when they don't have to.

C-

 

[1990crow]

C-

Generous.
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threa...ive-up-for-dangerfield.1113856/#post-41264414

 

[PAFC_1870]

Of course Adelaide won't get true value, but they'll do a lot better than solely Pick 14, which is what they would get, if in fact what you're saying is true. Of course Adelaide has bargaining power, that's why there are current negotiations and not just an acceptance of a compo pick. Jezuz, it's not hard.

Adelaide loses their bargaining power if Paddy is a campaigner and nominates the draft.

That's where I see a chance of it being messy. I don't believe it will, it's not Essendon after all.

 

[TexForPM]

On that basis, do you rate Nick Maxwell as a better player than Nick Riewoldt?

It's like shouting at yourself in the mirror

 

[TexForPM]

Geelong and Adelaide have to get together and keep 14 in the equation. I think both clubs are smart enough with 80 odd players pick 9 and 13, 27 and 30 plus next years draft picks to work something out which which both clubs are happy with.
There has to be players that both clubs need from each other to work it out. Adelaide and geelong need to take advantage of the fact 14 is right there if they can be mature about things.

Just an example

Trade 1
9 Murdoch to Adelaide for 14 plus 3 round
Trade 2
adelaides 30 plus next next years second round for geelongs next years first round pick.
Trade 3
27 for a have decent player from Adelaide but waited to Adelaide.

Afl can't do shit about tampering. All far trades.

Out
geelong

9, 27, Murdoch rd1 2016

In danger, 14, 30, rd2 2016 third round 2015 additional half decent Adelaide player.


Adeaide
Out danger, 30 "half decent" Adelaide player round 2 2016, round 3 2015

In. 9, 27, Murdoch, rd1 2016

Gets Adelaide 2 first round picks upgrade of round 2 this year in shallow draft and a have decent tall runner with great kick.

My point is 14 will keep every happy.

 

[Red mist]

A local SA boy currently at Geelong is being nudged towards the door as part of the deal, Crows are keen, player is happy at Geelong so may need some convincing.
Not sure what else in the way of picks/players is being proposed but my guess is this may be sorted already if the both clubs have agreed on the player.

Ps: long time forum reader- 1st time poster.

Thanks for that information. If it's Ellen DeGeneres (GHS) I'm gonna throw the toys out of the cot.

 

[Niximus]

Adelaide loses their bargaining power if Paddy is a campaigner and nominates the draft.

That's where I see a chance of it being messy. I don't believe it will, it's not Essendon after all.

If he nominates for the draft he doesn't get to Geelong, very doubtful he'd do that.

 

[Stevolution]

Pick 9 is an inprovement on what we selected Danger with (pick 10)
worst case I would probably take it so Geelong lose something

 

[marty36]

Adelaide loses their bargaining power if Paddy is a campaigner and nominates the draft.

That's where I see a chance of it being messy. I don't believe it will, it's not Essendon after all.

Comes down to PD's role in the situation, has a commitment been made to him but a club?

 

[happy_knackers]

Pftt... Adelaide risk getting nothing for danger if geelong walk?
We are old hats at this man. The last franchise player that left COST us 4-6 first and second round picks!
Not losing anything in this danger trade would me a major step up from there.
I think I'd handle it if it came to that if it meant we don't bow to this crap anymore.

 

[MattyB_76]

Do you seriously think geelong aren't going to try and minimise there loss to gain danger? That they don't care and just want to be fair? It's not the stock exchange or the petrol pump there's no fixed price.
Again your not thinking about Adelaide you're more worried about geelong. I get it, your all upset dangers left, your angry, you want someone to suffer like you all are. Getting the most out of Geelong seems to be fine for everyone, making them and their supporters unhappy as you all are. It's not going to happen unless you satisfy Geelong.
Adelaide can demand pick 9 that's it, it's not fair, I know this, but geelong has the power to do that.
Their not going to offer more to satisfy Adelaide when they don't have to.

Porgy, I'm gonna take a stab in the dark and say you've never negotiated anything in your life. Maybe you convinced your parents to let you stay up late once, but that's about it. Negotiating is NEVER about walking in, dropping an offer on the table and walking out.

And once a trade has started (i.e. we've matched Geelong's offer) it still must pass the "Ken Wood sniff test". #9 for Danger is not fair and won't be accepted by the AFL. You can claim "that's all we need to do" until the cows come home, but it doesn't make it true.

 

[footy4ever]

Adelaide loses their bargaining power if Paddy is a campaigner and nominates the draft.

That's where I see a chance of it being messy. I don't believe it will, it's not Essendon after all.

Probably, but that means Crows must have had bargaining power in the first place no? I'm with Chocco on this. Make a statement and take a hit. It might not immediately be better for the club player-wise, but IMO it is better for the long term culture. PD will look good in any of a Carlton, Brisbane, Saints, Melbourne jumper.

 

[AusTerran]

Do you seriously think geelong aren't going to try and minimise there loss to gain danger? That they don't care and just want to be fair? It's not the stock exchange or the petrol pump there's no fixed price.
Again your not thinking about Adelaide you're more worried about geelong. I get it, your all upset dangers left, your angry, you want someone to suffer like you all are. Getting the most out of Geelong seems to be fine for everyone, making them and their supporters unhappy as you all are. It's not going to happen unless you satisfy Geelong.
Adelaide can demand pick 9 that's it, it's not fair, I know this, but geelong has the power to do that.
Their not going to offer more to satisfy Adelaide when they don't have to.

I think you need to realize that if the Geelong/Adelaide trade fails, there are other Victorian clubs willing to offer Danger 1.1m plus and happy to trade for him. If you think Danger hasn't talked to another club, you'll be gravely mistaken.

 

[latinoheat]

Mods, can we have an automatic ban for supporters (of any club) suggesting that we take #14 and then do a deal in favour of the Crows?

Well it ain't as stupid as it sounds really. Keeping 14 in play is smart. But the real problem is how we are going to get adequate compensation for danger. And it's not draft tampering if deals favour a certain club .

 

[Deaneus!]

If the parties are as stubborn as Essendon?

Stubborn, or stupid?

 

[Niximus]

Well it ain't as stupid as it sounds really. Keeping 14 in play is smart. But the real problem is how we are going to get adequate compensation for danger. And it's not draft tampering if deals favour a certain club .

The thing is that arranging any deal with Geelong that involves agreeing not to match and fixing up in other trades wouldn't be legal regardless of how 'fair' people may think any scenario it.

Therefore it's a discussion of 'how can we break the rules and not get caught'.

Opposition supporters who come proposing we start breaking more rules aren't welcome.

 

[footy4ever]

A local SA boy currently at Geelong is being nudged towards the door as part of the deal, Crows are keen, player is happy at Geelong so may need some convincing.
Not sure what else in the way of picks/players is being proposed but my guess is this may be sorted already if the both clubs have agreed on the player.

Ps: long time forum reader- 1st time poster.

Hmmm… yeah... I'm gonna have to ask you to elaborate on that just a little. It's kinda not very helpful at the moment. Last time I counted there were 12 South Aussies on the Geelong list. You're prolly gonna have to actually spit it out and say who you think it might be.

 

[Danoz]

Doesn't take a mind reader to work out you are referring to Murdoch.

(Young) South Aussies on Geelong's list:
Lincoln McCarthy (23)
Dean Gore (19)
Jordan Murdoch (23)
Cory Gregson (19)
GHS (23)
Zac Bates (20)
Tom Read (19)

 

[footy4ever]

(Young) South Aussies on Geelong's list:
Lincoln McCarthy (23)
Dean Gore (19)
Jordan Murdoch (23)
Cory Gregson (19)
GHS (23)
Zac Bates (20)
Tom Read (19)

…and more…depending on whether you think 30 is old.

 

[Danoz]

…and more…depending on whether you think 30 is old.

If we take a 30yo South Aussie as steak knives I would struggle to support this team.

 

[*PAF]

HAWKS couldn't Match... jesus.

No one has matched because they either
1. Couldn't or
2. Didn't think the player was worth it.

So difference is. We match and get better than compo. Which is completely different to franklin too.

To be honest I'm not sure why you quoted me.

I've been saying from day dot that you should match and force Geelong into trading for Danger. However you are never going to get his true value.
If you can get Geelong's pick 9 plus their second rounder either this year or next you will have done well.
These restricted FA trades are a bit tricky unless you got the wooden spoon or close to it.
Give up too easily and you'll get bugger all. Go too hard and you could end up even worse.
The trick is to end up somewhere in the middle and cut your losses.

 

[Large 1]

The thing is that arranging any deal with Geelong that involves agreeing not to match and fixing up in other trades wouldn't be legal regardless of how 'fair' people may think any scenario it.

Therefore it's a discussion of 'how can we break the rules and not get caught'.

Opposition supporters who come proposing we start breaking more rules aren't welcome.

But taking a compensation pick does make at least one back end pick redundant. For example if you are only using 3 picks and you have two 1st round picks and a second the any picks after the second round aren't needed. This can be packaged up to bring in more valuable picks such as future picks.

Not great but better than nothing.

In saying this I do think that the only way we can even start getting close to value is to trade. You will almost never replace danger with a like for like. What we do need to aim for is 2 players, where they both might be 20% worse than danger but they displace a player who is 30% worse than them. That way the team as a whole improve.

So in other words we HAVE to bring in at least two players both significantly better than the worst player in our 22. That needs to be our guiding principle in this.