-
Rd 14 Reviews + Club boards »
BL v StK · WB v FRE · RIC v HAW · ADE v SYD · NM v COL · GWS v PA ·
And post your "Liked, Learned, Hated" right here.
Traded Esava Ratugolea [Traded to Port Adelaide for #25, #76 and #94]
- Thread starter The Nostradamus
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Outrage, outrage, outrage. Might as well be a currency on BF, the amount that we trade in it.
I posted a tongue in cheek thing on Monday saying 'Mack asks for 22 and Ollie Lord for Sav and Future 3rd ; *thread implodes' - and now it's basically happened.
The thing is, as many clubs do, we're asking the question and trying to extract maximum value. If Lord as Edmund has just reported, is not interested, then we move on and go back to the pick. If he is interested, then we plant the seed to look at him if he stays OOC next year.
At the end of the day, Pick 24 is more than fair, and no sane person in this thread or elsewhere is arguing that (Chris Scott is not included, because as I have posted multiple times - he has an extremely unhealthy attachment to Sav
)
With all of this said, there was an interview done with Sav's manager that said he thought the deal would get done, but that it wouldn't be done until late in the piece, as there was no reason for either party to just get it done straight away with such a long period of time left in the trade period.
This is the real problem here. List managers screw around because they've got so much time to do so. If trade period was 3-5 days, list managers would be forced to do the deals in a shorter time frame. As it stands though, the AFL love their ad revenue, so we have to withstand nearly 3 effing weeks of trade radio, and 10 days of trade period.
It'll get done for 24 in the end, and pick swaps going either way. It's all BS, and this always happens...and everyone always gets so outraged...just like the AFL media wants you to be to keep you listening, lol.
I posted a tongue in cheek thing on Monday saying 'Mack asks for 22 and Ollie Lord for Sav and Future 3rd ; *thread implodes' - and now it's basically happened.
The thing is, as many clubs do, we're asking the question and trying to extract maximum value. If Lord as Edmund has just reported, is not interested, then we move on and go back to the pick. If he is interested, then we plant the seed to look at him if he stays OOC next year.
At the end of the day, Pick 24 is more than fair, and no sane person in this thread or elsewhere is arguing that (Chris Scott is not included, because as I have posted multiple times - he has an extremely unhealthy attachment to Sav
)With all of this said, there was an interview done with Sav's manager that said he thought the deal would get done, but that it wouldn't be done until late in the piece, as there was no reason for either party to just get it done straight away with such a long period of time left in the trade period.
This is the real problem here. List managers screw around because they've got so much time to do so. If trade period was 3-5 days, list managers would be forced to do the deals in a shorter time frame. As it stands though, the AFL love their ad revenue, so we have to withstand nearly 3 effing weeks of trade radio, and 10 days of trade period.
It'll get done for 24 in the end, and pick swaps going either way. It's all BS, and this always happens...and everyone always gets so outraged...just like the AFL media wants you to be to keep you listening, lol.
Reminiscent of Luke Ball.
This is too funny
so Port is holding this up? Delusional lol 24 is far more than Port should pay and there are so many reasons why - not contracted, a player who has never cemented a position at the Cats etc etc It has become an absolute circus - even all the posturing from Scott before the trade period was embarrassing. My 2 cents as a neutral
Well I hope so and I would love to see it happens, as Geelong are being unreasonable in this case.
- Feb 12, 2017
- 17,271
- 45,044
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Again, what's funnier is Port trading out for 24 without asking Geelong first if they'd even accept it, and then acting shocked when it's rebuffed. Put it down to a learning experience for the Port fella, and maybe next time pick up the phone and get some sort of assurance before you go and trade your F1.This is too funny
My 2 cents as a neutral
Hope so. Another 1 year deal. Another 22 games. Then we will get a 1st round pick after our own next year in free agency. That is Geelongs big mistake. Should never allow your talls to be out of contract a year before RFA. Mackie and Wells really dropped the ball there.
I literally cannot believe the nuffies that keep trotting out “isn’t best 22”. If that was the case WTF are port doing offering mega contracts to SANFL players.
It will end up being a similar deal to the Jordan Clark deal
Last edited:
Yeah we actually did the exact same thing with Oliver Henry last year when we sourced pick 25 (at great expense) and then got rejected. They have actually progressed the negotiation. They don’t have their future pick and that’s the end of that conversation. Like Geelong with Henry and Freo with Clark it’s now just shaving the edge of the deal with the best pick they have. Which will 100% happen.
There will be a swap of late Futures added late next Wed on TV and everyone will carry on.
Last edited:
All good as the media have reported, Port filthy at Mackie turning into a worse than Dodoro type operator saying they'll pull him through the national draft.
Bit of pull from both sides with that being the case. Mackie being unreasonable and Davies then putting the PSD/National Draft threat well into the air.
It'll get done for pick 24 or walked through the draft and using that pick anyway.
Whether Geelong wants it or not is up to them.
If you're referring to a move for pick 8, what i've seen posted isn't anything special
Geelong didn't have Esava in their best side not sure they can demand the world for him imo.
Read...the damn...thread.
This is getting ridiculous how much this line is getting trotted out - on here and in the media.
I don't even care what people think he's worth, I'm just sick of hearing that a player who was 2nd in our B+F at the halfway mark of the season, who then got injured, came back for two games got dropped for 2 and then injured for another 2, is somehow 'not in our best side.'
If he wasn't in our best side, we wouldn't have played him for 16 out of a possible 18 games for the season.
100%
Kings of Lygon
All Australian
- Aug 31, 2021
- 693
- 1,695
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Banned
- #2,368
24 is more than reasonable for this guy... Can't see Geelong doing better than that, even if he was on the "open market" where everyone could put a bid in.
VinnieB
Norm Smith Medallist
- Oct 28, 2021
- 6,643
- 9,891
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
16 other clubs will be disappointed if Esava leaves Geelong.Outrage, outrage, outrage. Might as well be a currency on BF, the amount that we trade in it.
I posted a tongue in cheek thing on Monday saying 'Mack asks for 22 and Ollie Lord for Sav and Future 3rd ; *thread implodes' - and now it's basically happened.
The thing is, as many clubs do, we're asking the question and trying to extract maximum value. If Lord as Edmund has just reported, is not interested, then we move on and go back to the pick. If he is interested, then we plant the seed to look at him if he stays OOC next year.
At the end of the day, Pick 24 is more than fair, and no sane person in this thread or elsewhere is arguing that (Chris Scott is not included, because as I have posted multiple times - he has an extremely unhealthy attachment to Sav
With all of this said, there was an interview done with Sav's manager that said he thought the deal would get done, but that it wouldn't be done until late in the piece, as there was no reason for either party to just get it done straight away with such a long period of time left in the trade period.
This is the real problem here. List managers screw around because they've got so much time to do so. If trade period was 3-5 days, list managers would be forced to do the deals in a shorter time frame. As it stands though, the AFL love their ad revenue, so we have to withstand nearly 3 effing weeks of trade radio, and 10 days of trade period.
It'll get done for 24 in the end, and pick swaps going either way. It's all BS, and this always happens...and everyone always gets so outraged...just like the AFL media wants you to be to keep you listening, lol.
VinnieB
Norm Smith Medallist
- Oct 28, 2021
- 6,643
- 9,891
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
This guy was actually running 2nd in your B&F? And got dropped for a couple of games?
No surprise you didn't look like making finals.
hawkman
Hall of Famer
Or if you look at it another way, he played 5 of the 11 games when Jack Henry was fit. If 3 of those games Henry was moved out of the backline to accommodate him as they couldn't work out how to fit them both in the team
Last edited:
I want to apologise to Port fans for our stubbornness two years in a row over this guy.
In my view, pick 24 is probably even a bit overs for him.
Mackie is fast becoming one of most unreasonable list managers to deal with.
Really getting quite embarrassing now. Just get it done.
In my view, pick 24 is probably even a bit overs for him.
Mackie is fast becoming one of most unreasonable list managers to deal with.
Really getting quite embarrassing now. Just get it done.
- Jul 13, 2015
- 37,240
- 41,592
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
View attachment 1829143
West Coast fans what will you accept for pick 1 in the PSD? I don't think this has been discussed enough
Cant be traded plus they need it to shaft us over Brockman.
- Aug 17, 2009
- 28,040
- 24,129
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Phila 76ers , Phila Eagles , Man U
They did the same with Henry and Bruhn who are Geelong boys. Didn’t draft them then pinched them a year later.
Similar threads
