Traded Jake Stringer [traded to Essendon]

[LittleG]

Because Essendon has steadfastly and publicly refused to put it on the table.

And?

Same with pick 5 of the Saints two years ago.

 

[boncer34]

Its frustraing people leaving out key assets in trades and just focusing on pick 11 hey.

Nope.

 

[boncer34]

Good to see that John Stringer has said Essendon has been quite supportive of Jake in this troubling time. At least one club is concerned about what is best for Jake.

 

[eth-dog]

And?

Same with pick 5 of the Saints two years ago.

Actually that was different, as much as Essendon supporters have fun with it. They wanted a first round pick back if they were giving up pick 5. Which they got.

 

[boncer34]

Actually that was different, as much as Essendon supporters have fun with it. They wanted a first round pick back if they were giving up pick 5. Which they got.

Not from us.

Which is where we have fun.

 

[LittleG]

Actually that was different, as much as Essendon supporters have fun with it. They wanted a first round pick back if they were giving up pick 5. Which they got.

You don't think the dogs would also have to give up their future third rounder to get access to the first rounder?

Trading out all other assets as Dodo is doing, is great IF you think the other club will fold. IF he is wrong, he has nothing left but his future first, which will have to be on the table.

 

[Nomad12]

Nope.

Righto mate, thats why you bothered to respond.. doesnt bother me thays why I dont usually comment on it till now.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

EFC fans continue to be highly confident based on Bomber media propaganda.

History does repeat.

Amusing.

that is highly ironic, given now it is Bulldog fans slurping up their club spin that everyone else in the entire industry can see for what it is

 

[eth-dog]

Not from us.

Which is where we have fun.

Yeah, it is pretty funny that we "gave up" Gresham instead of Leonardis.

You don't think the dogs would also have to give up their future third rounder to get access to the first rounder?

Trading out all other assets as Dodo is doing, is great IF you think the other club will fold. IF he is wrong, he has nothing left but his future first, which will have to be on the table.

You can't tell the difference between "We won't give up pick 5 without another first round pick coming back" and "We won't give up our future first, period"?

 

[boncer34]

Righto mate, thats why you bothered to respond.. doesnt bother me thays why I dont usually comment on it till now.

He asked a question.

I answered it.

Sorry that me answering a question bothered you.

 

[halfback dasher]

Good to see that John Stringer has said Essendon has been quite supportive of Jake in this troubling time. At least one club is concerned about what is best for Jake.

Oh now this is right up there for post of the year !!

Pot/kettle ...on judging a club on player welfare .
Wowee !!

 

[Chickster]

You don't think the dogs would also have to give up their future third rounder to get access to the first rounder?

Trading out all other assets as Dodo is doing, is great IF you think the other club will fold. IF he is wrong, he has nothing left but his future first, which will have to be on the table.

Not unless you understand when you just walk away. Next year's draft is mooted to be much better than this years, so if the deal for 11 this year didn't get done I wouldn't put too much on the bet for next year's first rounder.
If the dogs don't take 25 and 30 I hope Essendon leave it there, and we can then enjoy watching one of the most uncomfortable years of player/club relations in AFL football history.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Thank **** we seemingly never trade with Essendon.
Conversing with the smugness is sickening.

 

[DapperJong]

Oh now this is right up there for post of the year !!

Pot/kettle ...on judging a club on player welfare .
Wowee !!

Wtf?

Pretty sure it's obvious the Essendon 34 are grateful for their gainz.

 

[Beerfish]

Oh now this is right up there for post of the year !!

Pot/kettle ...on judging a club on player welfare .
Wowee !!

2012 called..

 

[DapperJong]

Thank **** we seemingly never trade with Essendon.
Conversing with the smugness is sickening.

You ruin every thread you post in.

 

[boncer34]

Thank **** we seemingly never trade with Essendon.
Conversing with the smugness is sickening.

Yet you'll happily post on the Geelong board?

Weird.

 

[LittleG]

Yeah, it is pretty funny that we "gave up" Gresham instead of Leonardis.

You can't tell the difference between "We won't give up pick 5 without another first round pick coming back" and "We won't give up our future first, period"?

Arbitration won't care about that statement. They will just look at player contract, previous performance and assets of destination club. IF dogs were going to trade Jake at any price; then this will go to arbitration to get that pick on the table.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Oh now this is right up there for post of the year !!

Pot/kettle ...on judging a club on player welfare .
Wowee !!

Tell ol man Stringer, not us.

"There's been a little bit of a public stoning, from our perspective.

"We thought he was obviously contracted [for another year] at the Dogs and was going to stay there, so for them to come out publicly and say it's time to move on is a little bit disappointing.

"I think for the whole family it's been fairly tough, and probably more so for Jake.

"The human face of the whole football industry sometimes gets forgotten a little bit, and I think particularly in Jake's case, it's very easy for people to cast aspersions and say this has happened, or that's happened.

"At the end of the day, you're dealing with a human being."

"Maybe a change is really what he needs,"

"Essendon have been quite supportive so we're hopeful that's what will transpire."

 

[eth-dog]

Arbitration won't care about that statement. They will just look at player contract, previous performance and assets of destination club. IF dogs were going to trade Jake at any price; then this will go to arbitration to get that pick on the table.

Well given we just traded out a future second, future first officially can't be traded.

 

[boncer34]

Well given we just traded out a future second, future first officially can't be traded.

I didn't think those rules mattered yet? Wasn't there a delay in bringing them in?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Well given we just traded out a future second, future first officially can't be traded.

Didn't Geelong get around that rule anyway?

 

[Rookie]

Well given we just traded out a future second, future first officially can't be traded.

Do you really believe the AFL would hold Essendon to that, given they've still got a future second round pick? C'mon this is the AFL we are talking about. Rules ain't rules.

 

[Capt Hindsight]

Well given we just traded out a future second, future first officially can't be traded.

We have GWS 2018 2nd rd pick so can still trade first on that rule.

 

[halfback dasher]

2012 called..

My friend make no mistake 2012 has been on speed dial for your club since then , what makes you think it's not going to be going fwd?

No one has seen the last of the cluster ###k !!