No Oppo Supporters Double-Death-Riding Carlton 2019 Edition - Currently Pick 1 and 19

[Golumless]

GC will ask Rankine if he really wants to go back to SA then we will get the best deal either from Port Power or the Crows, we don't care who and I think if he is really home sick, he couldn't care if he plays for Port Power or the Crows and GC will convince him that he will only allow to go back to SA if it's the best deal for the club.
In Kelly's case, he didn't want to go to Fremantle so Geelong kept him and that's the point I am making, 1st year players wanting to leave after only 1 year have no bargaining power to the club (and nor should they) unlike an uncontracted player or a lesser extent a contracted player who has been at the club for at least 2 years.

The only power GCS has in dealing with this is they can say no. That's it, and even then that's an massive risk as you're guaranteed to lose the player in a year, and in conditions where you'll be forced to say "yes" eventually, and before factoring in the McCarthy risk (which is overblown). GCs cannot deal with anyone else because Rankine has veto so everything you say is just bluster, and not only that, but bluster that in the majority of situations harms the club losing the player more so then doing a deal year one.

If Kelly had no bargaining power, he'd be at Fremantle right now. By the fact Geelong were forced to keep him shows Kelly had the most power in this negotiation. After all, it was in Geelongs interest to let Kelly go this year, as they're likely to get more for him from Fremantle now then West Coast next year. The only difference between contracted and uncontracted is the club in question actually has a small amount of bargaining power, however, the power is still firmly with the player.

The word homesickness carries too much weight, and not only that, it isn't literal. More a nice way of saying "I want to go to a club in my home state who is offering me much more then what you are". Unfortunately a part of our culture is a very ingrained tall poppy syndrome, and it's a diplomatic way around that.

 

[SaltPeter]

Curious if anyone knows enough about trading and contracts where the situation could arise where, for want of a better expression, clubs could "pay it forward" in trades for players?

In other words AFC, GCS and Izak Rankine agree to a trade that involved AFC's (Carltons) first round pick for Rankine. However the transfer doesn't occur until the end of the 2020 season.

It would almost be the inverse of future picks being offered in trades for players. Clearly a huge risk for AFC in this case if Rankine were to suffer a major or career ending injury prior to transfer.

 

[Golumless]

Curious if anyone knows enough about trading and contracts where the situation could arise where, for want of a better expression, clubs could "pay it forward" in trades for players?

In other words AFC, GCS and Izak Rankine agree to a trade that involved AFC's (Carltons) first round pick for Rankine. However the transfer doesn't occur until the end of the 2020 season.

It would almost be the inverse of future picks being offered in trades for players. Clearly a huge risk for AFC in this case if Rankine were to suffer a major or career ending injury prior to transfer.

The answer to that question is no *wink*.

There isn't allowed to be anything written down, or formally agreed. That said, providing there isn't any written proof, there could be a verbal agreement, as that would be practically impossible to police, or enforce if a situation changed.

 

[conVINCEd]

The answer to that question is no *wink*.

There isn't allowed to be anything written down, or formally agreed. That said, providing there isn't any written proof, there could be a verbal agreement, as that would be practically impossible to police, or enforce if a situation changed.

But how are we trading Carlton’s 2019 first rounder, at the end of 2020? What has happened to that pick at the draft?

 

[70lethal]

Exactly how each season pans out for Carlton

March 2015

May 2015

 

[ABAB]

The only power GCS has in dealing with this is they can say no. That's it, and even then that's an massive risk as you're guaranteed to lose the player in a year, and in conditions where you'll be forced to say "yes" eventually, and before factoring in the McCarthy risk (which is overblown). GCs cannot deal with anyone else because Rankine has veto so everything you say is just bluster, and not only that, but bluster that in the majority of situations harms the club losing the player more so then doing a deal year one.

If Kelly had no bargaining power, he'd be at Fremantle right now. By the fact Geelong were forced to keep him shows Kelly had the most power in this negotiation. After all, it was in Geelongs interest to let Kelly go this year, as they're likely to get more for him from Fremantle now then West Coast next year. The only difference between contracted and uncontracted is the club in question actually has a small amount of bargaining power, however, the power is still firmly with the player.

The word homesickness carries too much weight, and not only that, it isn't literal. More a nice way of saying "I want to go to a club in my home state who is offering me much more then what you are". Unfortunately a part of our culture is a very ingrained tall poppy syndrome, and it's a diplomatic way around that.

I see it as more as a failure from Geelong that they couldn't "convince" Kelly to also consider Fremantle than Kelly having any bargaining power to allow him to get to his prefer club, if he did he would be West Coast right now so Geelong had all the bargaining power in this instance given what West Coast was offering wasn't adequate. If he wasn't contracted or if he was contracted and was at a club for a long time, they would have facilitate this adequate trade as he deserve to chose where he wants to go either being there for a long time or the club risk getting him for nothing being uncontracted, that was the point I was making. Rankine (if he choose to leave next year), doesn't have any bargaining power, GC has it all and it's up to us to make the trade which means we will need to give what GC wants (and not just an "adequate" trade), especially if they can convince him to choose both Port Power and us.

 

[SaltPeter]

But how are we trading Carlton’s 2019 first rounder, at the end of 2020? What has happened to that pick at the draft?

Swap the 2019 1st round pick for their 1st 2020 pick. We give them 2020 back for Rankine.

 

[Bearded Clam]

Port will offer lots of $...we will offer "you're a crows fan and like Eddie Betts"

The amount port offer doesn’t really matter if Rankine wants to be a crow... I’m sure atleast 6 other Melbourne clubs could have offered Tom Lynch a hell of a lot more coin than Richmond did/could, but Tom wanted to be a tiger..

 

[fabs33]

Depends on GC, they might want to set a players precedent at the club (given their recent departures) and tell we don't care who you chose, we will get the best deal for the club given you only been here for 1 year and breaking your contract to go back to SA, and that's why getting Carlton's first next year was very important as I think this is the route that GC will chose.

They could say something like that to him but it would be an empty threat and he would know that. All GC can do at the end of this year is negotiate with the club he nominates (if he asks to leave) or hold him to his contract. At the end of next year they again have the option of negotiating with his nominated club or let him enter the draft, obviously the latter means they get nothing in return for him.

Ask yourself the following; if clubs could force a player into an auction of sorts to maximise their return, why don't we see that happening on a regular basis? After all why should they care about the wishes of someone abandoning the club? It's because they can't, there's simply no way a club can force one of their players into an auction against his will. That kind of process clearly only advantages the club at a cost to the player, and the player is going to be in no mood to do the club any favors if they're forcing him to do something that disadvantages him against his will.

There have been quite a few examples recently of contracted players requesting trades, and I can't think of one single example where a player ended up at a club other than his nominated club or the one where he already was at. Kelly with Geelong. Gibbs first at Carlton, then at Adelaide. Wingard at Hawks, even though Port would have preferred he chose the Bulldog's offer because it meant they would have gotten a better pick. McGovern to Carlton. The list goes on...

Edit: I just want to add that we may very well need to use our Carlton first round pick to get Rankine if he requests a trade this year, but it will have nothing to do with beating a Port offer.

 

[Donkey Magoo]

I think that the best case scenario for us is Rankine says that he wants to stay at the GCS this year then mid-2020 he tells them nah he wants out... after we spent pick 1.

 

[Crow till I die]

The amount port offer doesn’t really matter if Rankine wants to be a crow... I’m sure atleast 6 other Melbourne clubs could have offered Tom Lynch a hell of a lot more coin than Richmond did/could, but Tom wanted to be a tiger..

And this is exactly how it plays out. There are really only 2 variables here. 1 Rankine has to want to leave. 2. AFC wants him. If adelaide has at any stage indicated it not want rankine then i think he stays at GC for a long time. If the AFC have indicated at some stage they will try and make a play for Rankine then 100% he will end up a crow at some point. Port are not in the picture at all here

 

[1970crow]

You know who else fits that bill? Brett Ratten

Oh wait, no thats right, they already fired Ratten after he took them to the finals 3 times in 4 years...

Sacking him was a high point in their stupidity. They’ve not recovered in any meaningful way whatsoever.

 

[Perthcrow23]

Swap the 2019 1st round pick for their 1st 2020 pick. We give them 2020 back for Rankine.

So effectively 2 early first round picks? Not sure that works....

 

[1970crow]

The problem is this is when they lose their senior players or begin their decline

Not just that, footballers don’t like getting smoked each week. Their risk of losing players isn’t too different to our go home factor issue. It’s hard to keep a group together if you’re perennially s**t. Worse, if they do stay then their desire for success is so low that you’ve no hope of getting close to it. They need to be much better this year otherwise they’ll be open to losing highly talented kids. I’m not sure they’re capable of improving at all.

 

[1970crow]

Richmond $1.18
Carlton $4.75

Ouch

$1.18 sounds pretty good.

 

[Donkey Magoo]

$1.18 sounds pretty good.

I’m gonna take a loan out at that price.

 

[SaltPeter]

So effectively 2 early first round picks? Not sure that works....

TBH I was bored and kicking rocks around.

However, if AFC swapped its 2019 first round for GC 2020 first round. And then GC 2020 first round pick to trade for Rankine it is still only 1 first round pick.

Prefer Donkey Magoos scenario where we spend the 1st round pick received from Carlton and worry about trading in other players later

 

[kulak]

Not just that, footballers don’t like getting smoked each week. Their risk of losing players isn’t too different to our go home factor issue. It’s hard to keep a group together if you’re perennially s**t. Worse, if they do stay then their desire for success is so low that you’ve no hope of getting close to it. They need to be much better this year otherwise they’ll be open to losing highly talented kids. I’m not sure they’re capable of improving at all.

Unhappy workplaces tend to have more absenteeism due to illness etc

I would expect that principle applies to football clubs. Carlton looked an unhappy club last year. This is one factor increasing the risk of a run of injuries.

Anecdotally the most helpless feeling low morale workplace I experienced had high levels of sick leave...and great staff retention. I think staff self esteem was so low they didn’t think they could get anything better.

 

[Coopers]

I think that the best case scenario for us is Rankine says that he wants to stay at the GCS this year then mid-2020 he tells them nah he wants out... after we spent pick 1.

That might be the worst case, as port could be able to spend some good picks we don't have...

 

[Crow till I die]

That might be the worst case, as port could be able to spend some good picks we don't have...

If Rankine nominated us in that scenario - port are not even in the conversation no matter even if they had pick 1 whether GC want them to be or not

 

[Golumless]

That might be the worst case, as port could be able to spend some good picks we don't have...

If Rankine wants to come to Adelaide, the Port are irrelevant no matter what picks they have.

Your only risk is Port may have the cap space to sway that want.

 

[GROTTO]

One of these days I am going to wake up to a Carlton loss the day before lol.

 

[Coopers]

If Rankine wants to come to Adelaide, the Port are irrelevant no matter what picks they have.

Your only risk is Port may have the cap space to sway that want.

Yeah, but he might accept coming to Port. I'd not risk it.

 

[Golumless]

Yeah, but he might accept coming to Port. I'd not risk it.

That won't be based on collateral, just salary.

It is of course a risk, however if we're on the ball with this, he should be ours.

 

[LittleCrowBoy]

Assuming we have zero injuries...our SANFL side is looking stronger than Carlton's AFL side....shame they cant play each other....would be a good game for a half....before Blues give up.