True. I am just talking about the principle of guys playing good footy into their 30s like boris is doing.
It's different when the guy is already on your list you don't have to pay to acquire.
How I'd think about recruiting a player
Benefit relative to the guy pushed out of the 22 X probability of not suffering debilitating injures X Length of career remaining > cost to acquire ($ and draft picks)
Benefit relative to the guy pushed out of the 22: Despite his versatility I don't see a weakness in our list that he fills either position wise or experience wise, which limits any marginal benefit. For me this would be the strongest reason to not trade him to the club. It's hard to determine who exactly is being forced out.
Probability of not suffering debilitating injures: He suffered two different types of soft tissue injuries this year, he'll be 30 next year. While it's not a certainty that his injury issue will continue it is a heightened risk. That may effect his longevity.
Maximum length of career remaining: You'd think at 3 to 4 seasons at most, small chance that it'd be longer but I wouldn't.
Cost to acquire: he is of the age where he should be a free agent. Instead he is contracted so Richmond get to dictate his cost in draft picks which would be high. We'd have to take over his existing contract which would be pretty high. Richmond would have to be chasing him away like the Bulldogs did to Lake.
Assuming money isn't an issue.
I'd value the cost of acquisition draft picks in a trade like
value = sum ( milestone * pr(reaching milestone)) - games of development required [higher for later picks, could also be called early pick premium].
For a pick in the early 20s this would be around 70 to 100 games.
If money is an issue or If we're trading our a player
I'd value it at the player we'd lose