Henry Slattery Effect

[Skeeta Olly]

Why are we the only administration in AFL history that is only capable of working 1 deal at a time during trade week when all other clubs can juggle multiple dealings at the one time?

I think far too many people are taking the words of Hamilton far too literally.

Ok, say we were offered a 4th rounder for Hank, why would Essendon do that trade? We're only using two picks in the draft (the 3rd being upgrading Crameri) so it would be no use to Essendon. The other thing with Hank is negotiating his contract with the new club.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

Do you rate Hank?

If you don't, then why do you care if we can or can't do a trade. If he's so shit like everyone says, no one will trade for him anyway, contracted or uncontracted. So really, we've never had a trade position re: Hank.

But apparently plenty of clubs are in to him. Given he is on the outer, has little room for improvement it seems a perfect time to trade.

And no I don't rate him. He is foot soldier who can never have his commitment questioned but he has no footy brain and will not make us a better team.

 

[Skeeta Olly]

It would have been a good time to trade, but it wasn't a necessity. What we don't know is how Hank was involved, be it the Caddy deal, a pick upgrade or a package with another player. Slappery is probably the only one here that knows anything about Slattery's football career and current status.

Other clubs were and have been in Slattery, but Essendon might not have been satisfied with what was being offered or Slattery might not have been satisfied and considering he's contracted, doesn't have to go.

 

[yaco55]

So we spent 8 days on one trade and couldn't spare 2 hours out of 8 days to discuss other trades? Hird and co really are simple then. I mean they can only handle one task for 8 days. So the entire Jenkins deal just magically happened in 5 minutes?

Heaven help us.

Thats the way i see it.

Just think the whole Caddy situation reflects badly on the club.

 

[yaco55]

Why lose Jenkins for nothing because you're trying to trade a contracted player, when you can focus on trading you're uncontracted players now and trading Slattery, when he's uncontracted, next year?

Problem with this argument is that if Slattery plays most of the year for Bendigo - which is a possibility taking all things into account - Clubs will be less likely to trade for him.

 

[yaco55]

Do you rate Hank?

If you don't, then why do you care if we can or can't do a trade. If he's so shit like everyone says, no one will trade for him anyway, contracted or uncontracted. So really, we've never had a trade position re: Hank.

It is irrelevant whether said posters rate or dont rate Slattery.

More than one poster has stated in the last 18 months that Slattery was wanted by more than one club - Slats is put on the Trade Table - No takers - 'That's Life' - But it is because the Caddy deal got in the way - That Slattery wasn't traded.

The whole scenario beggars belief.

Had enough of this thread.

 

[SirJimi05]

Ok, say we were offered a 4th rounder for Hank, why would Essendon do that trade? We're only using two picks in the draft (the 3rd being upgrading Crameri) so it would be no use to Essendon. The other thing with Hank is negotiating his contract with the new club.

Has nothing at all to do with what I'm saying. I don't think Essendon would have been wrong to reject this hypothetical offer.

I'm saying it is a more believable story than the other rubbish I've been hearing.

It is irrelevant whether said posters rate or dont rate Slattery.

More than one poster has stated in the last 18 months that Slattery was wanted by more than one club - Slats is put on the Trade Table - No takers - 'That's Life' - But it is because the Caddy deal got in the way - That Slattery wasn't traded.

The whole scenario beggars belief.

Had enough of this thread.

Summed up to perfection.

 

[table tennis]

Shit, I am agreeing far too much with both yaco and jimi! Both are spot on

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Trade week lasts for over a week, Ben. Or are you trying to say that Essendon refused to speak with any clubs about any of its players for the entire week, until after the Caddy deal fell down?

So an average player who can't get a game in the seniors has clubs all over him but Essendon refuse to enter into discussions despite him clearly not being a favored player at the club.

Your Slattery man love is making you delusional, mate.

E: "Hey GC, we want Caddy, he wants to come to us. What do you want?"
GC: "Well we'd need your pick 19 and a first round compo pick to start with?"
E: "K cool"

E: "Hey Brisbane, we want your compo pick for a deal for Caddy. What do you want?"
B: "Well we want <players/picks which haven't been reported in the media> and we're also interested in Slattery. Maybe make him part of the deal"
E: "K, well we're going to start working with GC then"

*negotiating*

1.50, deadline day

GC: "OK, this isn't happening, we're done"
B: "Well we're still interested in Slattery. Here's <offer>"
E: "That's too low, we want <price>"

*negotia-

2.00, deadline day

 

[Slattery_20]

Ess didn't want to move on a well-liked clubman for a pick they weren't going to use. Hardly shocking stuff.

IMHO all it says is they put the value of that slight bit of loyalty slightly higher than the very marginal gains of a late-ish pick and another open slot which they could've opened anyway.
And with that said, I probably would've taken the (any) deal.

 

[The Donners]

Why lose Jenkins for nothing because you're trying to trade a contracted player, when you can focus on trading you're uncontracted players now and trading Slattery, when he's uncontracted, next year?

So we'll lose Slattery for nothing next year cos he'll be uncontracted. Either that or we delist him.

 

[SirJimi05]

Ess didn't want to move on a well-liked clubman for a pick they weren't going to use. Hardly shocking stuff.

IMHO all it says is they put the value of that slight bit of loyalty slightly higher than the very marginal gains of a late-ish pick and another open slot which they could've opened anyway.
And with that said, I probably would've taken the (any) deal.

BTG said that Slattery was open to moving to a another club for more opportunities.

Club would have been doing him a favor by getting a deal done.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

BTG said that Slattery was open to moving to a another club for more opportunities.

Club would have been doing him a favor by getting a deal done.

Yeah, of course, but that doesn't mean that you take a pick that you're not going to use, or a marginal upgrade.

Like I said, he was intrinsically tied into the Caddy deal that fell through, and there simply wasn't enough time to satisfy all parties after the Caddy deal broke down.

Jenkins got done because a) he was uncontracted and it was a case of get what you can or get nothing and b) negotiations were separate to Caddy as it didn't involve GC or Brisbane.

 

[Skeeta Olly]

So we'll lose Slattery for nothing next year cos he'll be uncontracted. Either that or we delist him.

You want something for Slattery? Can't have it both ways, he's either shit and worthless or he's a decent player with value and Essendon will have the opportunity to make a trade. It's different to the McPhee situation if that's what you're getting at.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

Yeah, of course, but that doesn't mean that you take a pick that you're not going to use, or a marginal upgrade.

Like I said, he was intrinsically tied into the Caddy deal that fell through, and there simply wasn't enough time to satisfy all parties after the Caddy deal broke down.

Jenkins got done because a) he was uncontracted and it was a case of get what you can or get nothing and b) negotiations were separate to Caddy as it didn't involve GC or Brisbane.

So we are supposed to believe GC played hardball yet we were looking to use a list clogger to get the deal done. If true we are idiotic. How you are supposed to get quality by offering up crap? That would mean we wasted 8 days on trying to con someone to swap lottery tickets when they already know they have won.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

So we are supposed to believe GC played hardball yet we were looking to use a list clogger to get the deal done. If true we are idiotic. How you are supposed to get quality by offering up crap? That would mean we wasted 8 days on trying to con someone to swap lottery tickets when they already know they have won.

No.

Try reading more closely next time. I never suggested that he was a key part of the deal, just that he was a part of it.

 

[SirJimi05]

Spot on Pevers.

The spin I'm hearing would do Warney proud. It beggars belief.

I've had enough of this thread.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

No.

Try reading more closely next time. I never suggested that he was a key part of the deal, just that he was a part of it.

Not key, just intrinsically linked. Maybe I need to revisit the dictionary to understand the difference.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

Spot on Pevers.

The spin I'm hearing would do Warney proud. It beggars belief.

I've had enough of this thread.

But watching digging is so much fun

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Not key, just intrinsically linked. Maybe I need to revisit the dictionary to understand the difference.

Yeah, as in Slattery moving depended on the deal going through. He was a part of a complex three way deal we were working on, and he wasn't tacked on as in "We'll throw in pick X if you throw in Slattery", he was part of the deal with Brisbane. He wasn't a key part or the meat and bones of the deal but he was in there.

I'm not sure how many times I can say the same thing and have everyone saying that a completely different thing is ridiculous and I must be wrong.

 

[Skeeta Olly]

The moral of the story is it's always Slattery's fault.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

Yeah, as in Slattery moving depended on the deal going through. He was a part of a complex three way deal we were working on, and he wasn't tacked on as in "We'll throw in pick X if you throw in Slattery", he was part of the deal with Brisbane. He wasn't a key part or the meat and bones of the deal but he was in there.

I'm not sure how many times I can say the same thing and have everyone saying that a completely different thing is ridiculous and I must be wrong.

So for 8 days we only tried one complex way to trade for Caddy which involved a non-starting 22 player?

I couldn't care less about Slattery staying or leaving this year - he is steak knives and barring a miracle will be gone next year - I'm just trying to understand how he is so pivotal to getting a gun kid and how bad we must be at trading, let alone list management (which I must say we have rocked at for the last 10 years).

 

[daz17]

He started pre-season training, so I don't see him going anywhere.

 

[yaco55]

The moral of the story is that it is never Slattery's fault.

 

[table tennis]

Essendon part with first pick, slatts & gumby
Brisbane part with first pick
Gold coast part with caddy

Essendon gain caddy
Brisbane pick up gumby & slatts
Gold coast get two first rounders


That was my understanding.