Freo's hard line on Warnock trade

[THE_GUN]

If you want evidence as to why the 2 trades are totally different, go no further than ask Jacobs himself. He basically said he wasn't going to get a game ahead of Warnock. No disrespect to Sammy, but Warnock is a few talent classes above him, also 6cm taller and a much better athlete. That's why we paid way unders for Warnock, and got back a little overs for Jacobs. I was hoping we'd win on the Jacobs trade by a bigger margin though, but our focus shifted to getting Laidler very cheaply, so we had to settle for only a small win on the Jacobs trade in order to get a huge win on the Laidler trade before the deadline. Warnock's true market value was about pick 12 when he was traded.

thats what freo supporters were telling you at the time , yet you kept argueing that he wasnt.

were you wrong or just lying at the time !

 

[Blue since 72]

Warnock is better than Sammy. We paid slightly more for him than we got for Sammy.

The free market works.

Yep. Pretty much the perfect example of the free market working at its best.

 

[AndyLucimitis]

thats what freo supporters were telling you at the time , yet you kept argueing that he wasnt.

were you wrong or just lyeing at the time !

We were lying.

 

[parrot]

thats what freo supporters were telling you at the time , yet you kept argueing that he wasnt....

Market value is irrelevant during a trade negotiation. Trades are about leverage, and how well your negotiators use leverage, or create leverage when there is none. Market value is never important. We tend to win trades because our negotiators are the best in the AFL. Even when we have no leverage, we create it by being tricky e.g. Grigg trade, Fev trade, Jacobs trade etc. BTW, did you work out how we got something out of the Grigg trade? I can tell you we wouldn't have paid anything if we were in your position. Swann played on the need for the Tiges to free up a spot in the PSD to secure Jacobs in case he fell through to the PSD. That forced the Tiges to trade when they really didn't need to. Clever eh.

 

[Sam The Doc]

We were lying.

 

[Canyouhearthedrums]

Warnock's true market value was about pick 12 when he was traded.

Yeah and Sammy's was about 14. And yet we got 33 and they got 24. Funny how it works out.

 

[THE_GUN]

Market value is irrelevant during a trade negotiation. Trades are about leverage, and how well your negotiators use leverage, or create leverage when there is none. Market value is never important. We tend to win trades because our negotiators are the best in the AFL. Even when we have no leverage, we create it by being tricky e.g. Grigg trade, Fev trade, Jacobs trade etc. BTW, did you work out how we got something out of the Grigg trade? I can tell you we wouldn't have paid anything if we were in your position. Swann played on the need for the Tiges to free up a spot in the PSD to secure Jacobs in case he fell through to the PSD. That forced the Tiges to trade when they really didn't need to. Clever eh.

WRONG !!

the tigers took a concious decission to do fair trades & not rip other clubs off, carlton were offered pick 46 & upgrade of your last pick for 63 for grigg or 1 of our disposeable players which were knocked back.

then carlton were asked what would do the deal & carlton requested collins & after the player agreed the trade was done.
no tricks, no clever underhanded techniques etc etc

same with the bombers and houli trade , the tigers offered the true worth of the player even though they could of gotten both players through the psd , they elected to trade fair value for them

also parrot, you lost the jacobs trade , because carlton were greedy
if played properly & were smart they would of had bock compo & 50 for jacobs on day 1

 

[Blue since 72]

WRONG !!

the tigers took a concious decission to do fair trades & not rip other clubs off, carlton were offered pick 46 & upgrade of your last pick for 63 for grigg or 1 of our disposeable players which were knocked back.

then carlton were asked what would do the deal & carlton requested collins & after the player agreed the trade was done.
no tricks, no clever underhanded techniques etc etc

same with the bombers and houli trade , the tigers offered the true worth of the player even though they could of gotten both players through the psd , they elected to trade fair value for them

also parrot, you lost the jacobs trade , because carlton were greedy
if played properly & were smart they would of had bock compo & 50 for jacobs on day 1

We weren't greedy, we used negotiating tactic 101 which is to go in high to allow yourself room to move. The bock pick may have been on the table, it may not have, but I'd suggest the Crows initial thoughts were a package deal involving Sauce and Walker. In reality this would have been tough for the Crows to get over the line without giving up something they didn't want to because Walker was contracted, so our position there was one of strength. With Sauce we were in the weaker position.

In the end the Crows got their 'Walker' in Tambling and Sauce for fair value.

The Blues would be pretty happy with 33 when it could have been nothing. The rest is posturing for public consumption.

 

[Silvagnis]

WRONG !!

the tigers took a concious decission to do fair trades & not rip other clubs off, carlton were offered pick 46 & upgrade of your last pick for 63 for grigg or 1 of our disposeable players which were knocked back.

then carlton were asked what would do the deal & carlton requested collins & after the player agreed the trade was done.
no tricks, no clever underhanded techniques etc etc

same with the bombers and houli trade , the tigers offered the true worth of the player even though they could of gotten both players through the psd , they elected to trade fair value for them

also parrot, you lost the jacobs trade , because carlton were greedy
if played properly & were smart they would of had bock compo & 50 for jacobs on day 1

How does this moron even manage to log in without using a spell check to get the right username?

Anyone who responds to parrot is dumber than they appear.

 

[parrot]

WRONG !!

the tigers took a concious decission to do fair trades ....

lol. You're incredibly naive if you believe that. Everyone's trying to do the best for their side, it just so happens we have the best negotiators going around which is our advantage. The Tiges had all the cards in the Grigg trade but we managed to get them worried enough about missing a potential PSD trade, that we forced them to cough up when in fact they didn't really need to. It was very clever actually.

 

[THE_GUN]

How does this moron even manage to log in without using a spell check to get the right username?

Anyone who responds to parrot is dumber than they appear.

i wont even bother with you general, there's more than enough people that you already have trouble with.

 

[THE_GUN]

lol. You're incredibly naive if you believe that. Everyone's trying to do the best for their side, it just so happens we have the best negotiators going around which is our advantage. The Tiges had all the cards in the Grigg trade but we managed to get them worried enough about missing a potential PSD trade, that we forced them to cough up when in fact they didn't really need to. It was very clever actually.

you don't even believe that parrot, but lets continue to tow the company line ha !

 

[parrot]

... but lets continue to tow the company line ha !

The reality is the Tiges traded for Grigg when they didn't need to. Even your own supporters were shocked when it happened. And please don't tell me they did that because "they wanted to be seen as being fair". They were forced to, because there was a possibility Jacobs was off to the PSD. They could use the PSD on Grigg or Jacobs but not both. If the Jacobs trade had been settled before, it would have been different. So in effect the Cows delaying the Jacobs trade, gave us more in the Grigg trade. The Tiges punted that the Jacobs trade would fail, but it didn't.