Rumour GFC 2021 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists... Part II

[BigCat1]

Hardly ludicrous for a bloke youve shown zero intention to play, and when they have played they've been seriously average.

Anyone who isnt in a sides top 25 players isn't worth a top 20 pick.

Vast majority of this board has overrated Clark for the last 18 months though so nothing really surprises me anymore.

Freo overrate him so much they are giving him a 4 year deal. Maybe you’re underrating him. Maybe the the staff know what they have. Remember you pulverised the club for taking Holmes last year. The selection not just what we gave up. The best person to understand and assess the future value of Clark would be the GFC.

 

[TEDDY24INC]

Hardly ludicrous for a bloke youve shown zero intention to play, and when they have played they've been seriously average.

Anyone who isnt in a sides top 25 players isn't worth a top 20 pick.

Vast majority of this board has overrated Clark for the last 18 months though so nothing really surprises me anymore.

Freo offer a pick 15 from 3 years ago a 4 year contract whilst he still has one year to go on his contract at his existing club… 15 is a starting point

 

[Strange Cat]

27 for Clark is fair IMO.

We've screwed the pooch with his development.

Putting him back to half back now is back to square one. We should have been spending the last 3 years improving the defensive side of his game instead of moving him around.

For a contracted player that Freo are offering a 4 year deal to?

You are happy with pick 27 which will blow out to pick 30-31 ?

yeah right

 

[catempire]

Thats on the proviso you believe the narrative that has gone around, which I have always found very hard to believe considering the head coach picks the side every week, I'm alot more likely to side with the notion that the guy just isn't that good and his form didn't warrant selection, also think its very unlikely that he'll suddenly have a change of heart when hes very close to his family and has wanted to leave 2 years in a row.

Incorrect. The Match Committee does.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Incorrect. The Match Committee does.

Beat me to it, CE.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Pick 8 yes please, however somewhere in the middle I think 15-20 sounds fair.

Stick to pick 8.
If Freo don't like it, they can come back next year, and we'll Kelly them.

 

[PeasFC]

Fully expect Freo to walk away, our demands are ridiculous in all honesty, near certainty they can get him in 12 months and would need an astronomical turnaround in output to have any trade currency whatsoever.

I don’t think the cats mind if freo walks away. I feel like you are being sucked into the narrative that a player out of contract has no currency.

psd is a threat that rarely comes to fruition. When it does it involves a team very close to the bottom. Freo will not be that team.

so if freo walk, there are a few scenarios.

he doesn’t have a good year, traded to freo for a 3rd round pick 38 - 50.

he has a decent year - traded for freos second round pick (26 - 32). Or stays like Dunkley.

has a good year - gets happy and stays like papley.
Or still wants to go and traded to freo for a late first round pick or early second. (15 - 25).

I don’t see why the cats would risk anything less than something around 20 when the bottom two options are alive and well.

 

[PeasFC]

For a contracted player that Freo are offering a 4 year deal to?

You are happy with pick 27 which will blow out to pick 30-31 ?

yeah right

it won’t blow out more than 1 or 2 spots max. The pies and dogs likely to have a selection each before 27 which will be absolved when they match bids for daicos and Darcy. It’s only the potential of windhager that might see it slide back a spot.

 

[Tackle_happy]

Hardly ludicrous for a bloke youve shown zero intention to play, and when they have played they've been seriously average.

Anyone who isnt in a sides top 25 players isn't worth a top 20 pick.

Vast majority of this board has overrated Clark for the last 18 months though so nothing really surprises me anymore.

His value is one that is summed up pretty easily. A 4 year contract. Doesn't matter the amount. That long term contract shows just how keen they are for his services. His value to Geelong is also summed up in the response to Freo.

Oh we have him for another year so they cant bend us over anyways and if they do really want him then do better.

What this board and the individuals who comment is irrelevant. None of us have any idea on any of it.

 

[Tackle_happy]

27 for Clark is fair IMO.

We've screwed the pooch with his development.

Putting him back to half back now is back to square one. We should have been spending the last 3 years improving the defensive side of his game instead of moving him around.

If there was not another year on his contract then maybe, but there is and Geelong have the whip hand right now (and obviously rate him higher).

 

[Sttew]

Stick to pick 8.
If Freo don't like it, they can come back next year, and we'll Kelly them.

Force feed him grain and fat a la gavage, and fatten him up for a sale

 

[Jumping Jack]

This is kind of an inane argument. Is he a front runner, or is he a catalyst for the team to play well?

You could just as easily argue that when he plays well Geelong win. Ie. He doesnt play well because Geelong are winning, rather Geelong wins when he plays well.

Depends on which side of the argument you want to place yourself on.

You go throwing words like inane around like you're some sort of high level overlord on other peoples views. You'd do well to pull your head in and carefully read what I typed.

It's not an argument - it's my personal opinion and my own observation. When was it ever an "argument" - just telling you what I think. So unless we've all lost the plot and are becoming the "easily offended" types that seem to be popular nowadays, just accept the fact this is a forum and people can freely express their own opinion. No one else has to agree - but to suggest someone's view is inane - well, you need to chill.

If I think Geelong would be better of moving him on - and that he only plays well when the team plays well - then that's what I'll go with. But I'm not sure it's your position to suggest another persons views are "inane".

 

[Danger handballs we win]

Don’t shoot me but..

Sammy Powell Pepper- would be a great get IF we back our well-being/leadership to assist him to maintain healthy choices

He is 23 and wants more onball time

Parfit and SPP would crash in with Holmes and Narkle for flair

I’m not being a smart ass I would genuinely love to see this happen- west coast are after him apparently


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[cats_09]

Ah yes, that old chestnut. Player X is sh*t and therefore expendable but I expect other clubs will pay through the nose for him.

I also like the idea that as a club we'll just put the names of 3 or 4 best 22 players out there in trade world to see what sort of hits we'll receive, but no indication that the players we're putting out there actually want to be traded...

SO, if we get no real interest or no genuine offers, do we then turn around to the player/s and tell them that they're still wanted and were wanted all along but we were curious if another team wanted them more?

I also don't see how that can be seen a good thing from a club cultural point of view, or how those opposition players who may be looking their options & considering a move to Geelong would receive that idea; "players are seen as best 22 & wanted, but if a first round pick can be received in return for trading certain player/s, then that will be seen as more valuable - is that a club I want to make a move to..."

 

[Strange Cat]

I also like the idea that as a club we'll just put the names of 3 or 4 best 22 players out there in trade world to see what sort of hits we'll receive, but no indication that the players we're putting out there actually want to be traded...

SO, if we get no real interest or no genuine offers, do we then turn around to the player/s and tell them that they're still wanted and were wanted all along but we were curious if another team wanted them more?

I also don't see how that can be seen a good thing from a club cultural point of view, or how those opposition players who may be looking their options & considering a move to Geelong would receive that idea; "players are seen as best 22 & wanted, but if a first round pick can be received in return for trading certain player/s, then that will be seen as more valuable - is that a club I want to make a move to..."

Worked out well for Ben Simmons lol but to be fair there’s a lot more going on there than the trade attempt in itself ( I.e coach, players and fans have all thrown him under the bus and now trying to back peddle for him to come back to the club)

 

[cats_09]

I actually said you wouldn't accept 27. I suggested 27 and Tucker and said that 25 would get the deal done. Plus it's the first day of trading. Every team rejects the first offer every time.

No they don't

We've often got early deals done with various teams - especially with the likes of Brisbane and Sydney in recent years

When both teams have gone to the trade table with fair & reasonable expectations of what they're willing to pay & in return receive for a player, there's no reason for unnecessary games and delays

 

[CatRiot]

Not if Collingwood sign him for 4 years like reported

Doesnt that mean we get compo? oh he ain't UFA yet?

 

[Jumping Jack]

I also like the idea that as a club we'll just put the names of 3 or 4 best 22 players out there in trade world to see what sort of hits we'll receive, but no indication that the players we're putting out there actually want to be traded...

SO, if we get no real interest or no genuine offers, do we then turn around to the player/s and tell them that they're still wanted and were wanted all along but we were curious if another team wanted them more?

I also don't see how that can be seen a good thing from a club cultural point of view, or how those opposition players who may be looking their options & considering a move to Geelong would receive that idea; "players are seen as best 22 & wanted, but if a first round pick can be received in return for trading certain player/s, then that will be seen as more valuable - is that a club I want to make a move to..."

Track down some people who work within football recruiting departments or list management roles and ask the question. I can assure you, these conversations are taking place regularly between clubs, players and player managers ...... and not just this time of year.

Players are well aware that their contracts can be flicked around like monopoly money .... and they wanted it. They pushed harder than anyone for free agency and have also been right behind the push for a mid season draft / exchange period.

 

[cats_09]

I agree. If we assume Selwood retires at the end of next year (pains me to write it), that's about $800k to 900k freed up. Others on less money but still quite good coin also coming to the end of their careers. We will definitely be in Walsh's ear (amongst others) about a big contract, good culture, two power forwards (I'm sure Hawkins will still be going for a couple of years). It's interesting that Walsh isn't in any rush, why would he be?

According to reports Selwood isn't in the top 100 paid players this past season and not sure if there's necessarily going to be a pay increase for him next year. So if he's on similar pay next year to what he was this year, it's in the reported range of $500k to $550k

So we won't necessarily create a heap of cap space due to one player leaving but the retirements of multiple players, such as Dahlhaus not extending his stay as he's one on good coin

 

[Danger handballs we win]

There is still a way to have this done respectfully a hypothetical eg: Menegola at the end of last year when he was an AA squad member and certainly wouldn’t be paid as an AA squad member so Geelong could have said - Perth clubs have knocked on our door- we want to keep you but you fit in a lot higher up on their payment structure then in ours - they would offer you X and whilst we rate you and would extend you we would have you falling in at Y - we wouldn’t trade you unless you wanted and we get a good return but if you want your pay day it won’t come at Geelong so these are your options we would happily extend your contract at this level or you could explore better payment with them

Before you say menegola is a bad example - it’s easy to imagine others such as Parfitt or Simpson being hunted by gws last year in return for Cameron




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[year of the cat]

I also like the idea that as a club we'll just put the names of 3 or 4 best 22 players out there in trade world to see what sort of hits we'll receive, but no indication that the players we're putting out there actually want to be traded...

SO, if we get no real interest or no genuine offers, do we then turn around to the player/s and tell them that they're still wanted and were wanted all along but we were curious if another team wanted them more?

I also don't see how that can be seen a good thing from a club cultural point of view, or how those opposition players who may be looking their options & considering a move to Geelong would receive that idea; "players are seen as best 22 & wanted, but if a first round pick can be received in return for trading certain player/s, then that will be seen as more valuable - is that a club I want to make a move to..."

Cuts both ways. Players request to leave clubs prior to contracts being completed as we are seeing with Clark - like it or not we are in a new paradigm where players move more freely either initiated by the club or themselves. Suffice to say, a club can’t force a player to move if he’s under contract.

I think it’s accepted that players have far more power now than they’ve ever had. They demanded FA. From the clubs point of view now, it’s not unreasonable to expect them to explore options to trade contracted players IF the player themselves is comfortable with it.

 

[Danger handballs we win]

Krueger was also linked with St Kilda earlier —- straight swap for Ben Long

22

Ben Long

Age

28

Ht

186cm

Wt

81kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.9

3star

K

6.2

2star

HB

4.7

3star

M

3.3

3star

T

2.7

4star

G

0.7

4star

D

12.8

3star

K

6.7

3star

HB

6.2

4star

M

3.3

3star

T

2.3

3star

G

0.0

1star

D

13.4

4star

K

6.8

3star

HB

6.6

4star

M

3.2

4star

T

3.2

5star

G

0.6

3star

is a tick for me


Sent from my iPhone us

 

[Jumping Jack]

There is still a way to have this done respectfully a hypothetical eg: Menegola at the end of last year when he was an AA squad member and certainly wouldn’t be paid as an AA squad member so Geelong could have said - Perth clubs have knocked on our door- we want to keep you but you fit in a lot higher up on their payment structure then in ours - they would offer you X and whilst we rate you and would extend you we would have you falling in at Y - we wouldn’t trade you unless you wanted and we get a good return but if you want your pay day it won’t come at Geelong so these are your options we would happily extend your contract at this level or you could explore better payment with them

Before you say menegola is a bad example - it’s easy to imagine others such as Parfitt or Simpson being hunted by gws last year in return for Cameron




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Yeah I agree 100%

It might just be that I'm personally not a massive Menegola fan. Plays his role and is a handy type - but for me, he's absolutely the glaringly obvious one we'd shop around.

Would he get us a pick inside the top 20? - yes I think so

Would we get on fine without him? - yes I think so

 

[Wojcinski]

Krueger was also linked with St Kilda earlier —- straight swap for Ben Long is a tick for me


Sent from my iPhone us

Ben Long is garbage, I'd rather just give them Freddy for free

 

[cats_09]

Not a chance in hell.
Maybe 8 for 16 and Clark. (Assuming we have 16)

But even that is pushing it.
Let mummy boy go home I say.

Didn't handle the bubble last year. Never recovered.
Byeeeeee

That's a ridiculous deal - we've already rejected pick 27 in a swap for Clark, is we instead made a deal that was pick 8 for Clark & pick 16 (if we had it), it would value Clark at roughly pick 37

We would be better off accepting pick 27 rather than even contemplating anything like the above suggestion