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

[headache1]

Lets not be having a debate about PD''s football ability.

Some serious revisionist history happening here.

If we add nobody of any great talent to our midfield (hopefully B Crouch gets himself right, and we get somebody else), then watch how the rest of them go without Dangerfield taking the tag every week.

 

[Large 1]

if we give up Danger for picks 9 & 28, then the current admin is no better than under twiggy. I will be disgusted

why? because in a FA environment, you have 2 levers. it is a tight economy between cap and assets, a little more of one a little less of the other. like a set of old fashioned scales

we are all surprised that Geelong have tried to low ball Paddy, when they could get him for nothing by upping the offer to a market value. it makes no sense. except... when you step back and look at what they are doing overall.

they can use cap space or they can give up assets, and they have chosen to give up assets because their cap space is more limited. if they use cap space to sign danger, and keep assets it doesn't matter because there is no way they can add Henderson, Selwood and Zmith as well. can't be done.

so cap space is worth more to them than assets, because that is the tightest pinch point. it is finite in the extreme

which means that he can't go in the draft, because they won't have the cap space to price him out. the pie is spread very thing to add all these blokes.

so they need to give up assets, to get him for a certain price so they can fit in the other blokes and begin Geelong 2.0

they have no ******* leverage because they can only get for cheap in a trade. any other way and they miss out. so if they have chosen the assets rather than cap route, we better make them ******* squeak.

they have no alternatives, and I don't want to hear the words off-limits. if players are off limits, then they need to give him some money and go down that route. oh wait you can't!

9 & 28 is a capitulation given we know what they are up to, and how many balls they have in the air. and don't be adding b/c grade talent to sweeten the pot.

if they can't get PD I wonder how many of the others will be drinking the Kool-aid still, and it might all come crashing down.

we need to be bringing home a very big asset haul, because we have them by the balls if we know what we are doing. I wonder if we do?

Additionally Geelong seem like they are panicking a little about their financial situation and how poor performance will affect them.

They are already losing half a million this year and their members are ditching their full memberships for 3 game membership. Attendance numbers are down and things are only going to get worse as the town starts to struggle financially.

Geelong are throwing everything they've got into trying to perform in the next 2/3 years. Otherwise they will be in the wilderness financially.

This give us some leverage as PD is a massive part of that plan and they can't risk losing him.

 

[1990crow]

The ONLY possible way we should take 9 & 28 is if we know for fact they'll get him in the PSD. Since that's unlikely then we must go for broke, if we don't we've done a bad job. Not a horrific fail like some of you proclaim but its not a great result.

The other thing is getting guys who WANT to come to this club, and city. We've seen that this is an issue for us. So it's all well and good to say we want player X, but if he doesn't want to come to Adelaide what do we do ?? It's a fine line between sending him to the PSD in the pathetic attempt to send a message, and accepting unders because our list demands we take the picks.

Port seem to have done ok

 

[Sanders]

The ONLY possible way we should take 9 & 28 is if we know for fact they'll get him in the PSD. Since that's unlikely then we must go for broke, if we don't we've done a bad job. Not a horrific fail like some of you proclaim but its not a great result.

The other thing is getting guys who WANT to come to this club, and city. We've seen that this is an issue for us. So it's all well and good to say we want player X, but if he doesn't want to come to Adelaide what do we do ?? It's a fine line between sending him to the PSD in the pathetic attempt to send a message, and accepting unders because our list demands we take the picks.

it doesn't look likely that he can go into the draft (either) with anymore than the current price on his head because Geelong won't have any more cap. given that price includes a 50% hometown discount who wouldn't pick him up and retain his trade rights?

if he goes to the draft with a market price geelong can't afford him, if he goes with the current 50% discount he doesn't get through

i'd want 9 & Nakia/Guthrie or 9,28, Gregson & Murdoch/McCarthy

 

[skoobydoo]

Yes, one Bernie Vince comes to mind. He did well against him.

Problem there was Danger played the victim with the umps and consequently was not only disregarded, but was 'disenfranchised' by them. Made Vince's job an easy one. But Danger is smart enough that it won't happen again.

 

[hey shorty]

it doesn't look likely that he can go into the draft (either) with anymore than the current price on his head because Geelong won't have any more cap. given that price includes a 50% hometown discount who wouldn't pick him up and retain his trade rights?

if he goes to the draft with a market price geelong can't afford him, if he goes with the current 50% discount he doesn't get through

i'd want 9 & Nakia/Guthrie or 9,28, Gregson & Murdoch/McCarthy

9 and Nakia would be my preferred option of those. I reckon 9,28 and one player is also do-able, but not 2. Given we are likely to only delist 2 more players tops I reckon any more than that is lopsided list wise.

We have to also look at it relatively. People have been comparing this to the Judd deal. Judd was a better player in 07 than Danger is now IMO. Carlton gave up 3 and 20, which is already alot but not enough, but then they gave up the most promising KPF they had. Not a mid, a rare as hens teeth KPF. Carlton screwed themselves in that deal.

 

[hippyhippy]

Why can't you demand 2 firsts and nakia? That's still unders considering they are only mid picks... i couldn't care less what their excuses are. If you were in a position to draft danger given that you would get double the value next year. .. why wouldnt they pick him. And why would the rest of the competition just stand by and watch geelong get 1 of the best players for literally nothing in terms of trade value or cap space value?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Additionally Geelong seem like they are panicking a little about their financial situation and how poor performance will affect them.

They are already losing half a million this year and their members are ditching their full memberships for 3 game membership. Attendance numbers are down and things are only going to get worse as the town starts to struggle financially.

Geelong are throwing everything they've got into trying to perform in the next 2/3 years. Otherwise they will be in the wilderness financially.

This give us some leverage as PD is a massive part of that plan and they can't risk losing him.

Gives us no leverage .....and the off field performance has no relationship to the Dangerfield trade

Geelong about to start the next stage of the ground development ......something like another $100M in development
All means naught in the Dangerfield situation .....or Henderson....or Smith

 

[hey shorty]

Why can't you demand 2 firsts and nakia? That's still unders considering they are only mid picks... i couldn't care less what their excuses are. If you were in a position to draft danger given that you would hey double the value next year. .. why wouldnt they pick him. And why would the rest of the competition just stand by and watch geelong get 1 of the best players for literally nothing in terms of trade value or cap space value?

We probably have demanded it, whether or not that worked we will find out soon.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

9 and Nakia would be my preferred option of those. I reckon 9,28 and one player is also do-able, but not 2. Given we are likely to only delist 2 more players tops I reckon any more than that is lopsided list wise.

We have to also look at it relatively. People have been comparing this to the Judd deal. Judd was a better player in 07 than Danger is now IMO. Carlton gave up 3 and 20, which is already alot but not enough, but then they gave up the most promising KPF they had. Not a mid, a rare as hens teeth KPF. Carlton screwed themselves in that deal.

Would love Nakia and #9 ......but it's a pipe-dream

If we can get a first and second + a player of Murdock standard ....that's an acceptable outcome IMO

 

[hippyhippy]

Would love Nakia and #9 ......but it's a pipe-dream

If we can get a first and second + a player of Murdock standard ....that's an acceptable outcome IMO

That's why we are a mediocre club. .. you would not see collingwood accept that for pendles... let alone beams.

 

[marty36]

Why can't you demand 2 firsts and nakia? That's still unders considering they are only mid picks... i couldn't care less what their excuses are. If you were in a position to draft danger given that you would get double the value next year. .. why wouldnt they pick him. And why would the rest of the competition just stand by and watch geelong get 1 of the best players for literally nothing in terms of trade value or cap space value?

I'm very interested in the treloar trade with reports of 2 x 1st rounders or Carlisle. But Nakia would take a lot of pain away, but that's being optimistic

 

[hey shorty]

Would love Nakia and #9 ......but it's a pipe-dream

If we can get a first and second + a player of Murdock standard ....that's an acceptable outcome IMO

Its acceptable, not great. The great is if we get a couple of other targets for unders.

 

[Sanders]

9 and Nakia would be my preferred option of those. I reckon 9,28 and one player is also do-able, but not 2. Given we are likely to only delist 2 more players tops I reckon any more than that is lopsided list wise.

We have to also look at it relatively. People have been comparing this to the Judd deal. Judd was a better player in 07 than Danger is now IMO. Carlton gave up 3 and 20, which is already alot but not enough, but then they gave up the most promising KPF they had. Not a mid, a rare as hens teeth KPF. Carlton screwed themselves in that deal.

Richmond had the first pick in the 2007 psd, so I'd argue we have as much leverage

what Geelong are trying to do is a modern day version of the North Melbourne brown paper bag exploitation of the 200 game rule in the 1970's where they sucked up Doug Wade, John Rantall etc in one.

they have this big master plan to climb straight back up, and I wonder if Zmith, Henderson, Selwood etc are that keen if Danger as the star doesn't make it?

if they have chosen to give up assets then lets make them give up assets, and lots of them. they have no options. **** em

 

[Samcro24]

That's why we are a mediocre club. .. you would not see collingwood accept that for pendles... let alone beams.

They got 5 and a player for an under contract beams.

 

[Sanders]

Would love Nakia and #9 ......but it's a pipe-dream

If we can get a first and second + a player of Murdock standard ....that's an acceptable outcome IMO

yeah but I wouldn't trust you to negotiate a free whopper at Hungry Jacks with a 2:1 voucher

 

[WaynesWorld19]

That's why we are a mediocre club. .. you would not see collingwood accept that for pendles... let alone beams.

I understand .....but we don't have the choice of Geelongs players, nor would Collingwood ......some are untouchable as with any club

Love the passion ...but in a negotiation it's a win/win ....and that's what this is

 

[hippyhippy]

Its acceptable, not great. The great is if we get a couple of other targets for unders.

We cry and get pissed off with shit onfield performances... but when it comes to off field performance we accept mediocrity. .. elite standards thrown out the window. Are we trying to build the best football system or what?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Its acceptable, not great. The great is if we get a couple of other targets for unders.

Think i posted my ideal trade early today:

We get;
2015 First round #9
2016 First round ?
Player like Murdock

They Get:
Dangerfield
2015 Second round

Geelong
Trades the second round + Walker for Henderson

 

[WaynesWorld19]

They got 5 and a player for an under contract beams.

Yes that's a major difference ....Beams was under contract

 

[Red mist]

We've got to get the sand out of the lube.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Richmond had the first pick in the 2007 psd, so I'd argue we have as much leverage

what Geelong are trying to do is a modern day version of the North Melbourne brown paper bag exploitation of the 200 game rule in the 1970's where they sucked up Doug Wade, John Rantall etc in one.

they have this big master plan to climb straight back up, and I wonder if Zmith, Henderson, Selwood etc are that keen if Danger as the star doesn't make it?

if they have chosen to give up assets then lets make them give up assets, and lots of them. they have no options. **** em

Hypothetical ...if deal can't be done because cats refuse to give us fair value of 2 first rounders or first rounder and a v good player and danger gets to them at pick 9 in the ND will you be happy with our admin, indifferent or disappointed that they didn't read the situation ?

 

[footywedge]

If you're a Melbourne for instance, consider this. Drafting Dangerfield this year is like trading this year's first round pick or first PSD pick for two first rounders next year and/or the year after.

You'd do it in a heart beat. The steak knives is that you get Danger for a year!

 

[hey shorty]

We cry and get pissed off with shit onfield performances... but when it comes to off field performance we accept mediocrity. .. elite standards thrown out the window. Are we trying to build the best football system or what?

As I have said, I have no doubt we want the world as we should do but wanting the player and getting them here is completely different.

If we send PD to the draft it does send a message, but it can work against us. Recruits can look at this and think '**** they dont make it easy even if im a free agent'. Thats fine if we create an environment where they don't want to leave.

 

[conVINCEd]

They got 5 and a player for an under contract beams.

They got 5 (drafted De Goey), 25 (traded for Levi Greenwood) and Jack Crisp for Beams.

They did bloody well.