Recommitted Jesse hogan puts contracts talks on hold... [re-signed until end of 2019]

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
You said you can't speak for every supporter or the club BUT there is a general expectation, why include the club if you weren't actually referencing anything coming out of the club?
An expectation among those posting here.

Would've been more accurate to say "Some posters on big footy want fremantle to pay heavily for Hogan"
Fair enough.

Although it seems you're only referencing about 2 posters.
Are they unrepresentative?

You tell me.

If you agree with me, I promise I won't object.
 
Last edited:
I know you're not suggesting pick 1 for Dawes would be anything less than drastic overs.

I'm just using an example to demonstrate my point: we can assess trades independently of broader list considerations.

With regard to Judd, the deal was still unders, regardless of WC having other midfielders at the time.

See above. I'm not misrepresenting you, but merely using an extreme hypothetical to extrapolate a point.

The Ebert trade was pretty different to the trade that brought Kennedy to WC.

Even if we make an allowance for Kennedy's "potential" aged 20, the best player in the comp was going the other way. That's why it was unders for WC. It's not really about whether Kennedy was highly rated at the time or what he's done since.

Well, we disagree on that. WC got stuck with pick 28 because they had no leverage.

Still, Brisbane weren't too happy about what they got in return, were they?

We can go back and argue about whether these trades were unders or overs or break-even.

My point, though, is that clubs without leverage often find themselves accepting trades they probably don't consider "fair".

Was it "fair"?

Dangerfield was a restricted free agent, which means Adelaide always had the option to force a trade.

Granted it was an unusual situation. But it is another example of a club with little leverage accepting less than what is "fair".
I remember Brisbane sooking about multiple players wanting to leave and how it was stuffing up their trading. I don't know if they thought that specific trade was fair or not. I wouldn't think it was too unfair

I was just using your words. Melbourne gave up 23 for Bernie Vince, a reasonable player at Adelaide (I rate him higher at Melbourne). So I think a 2nd round pick is fair for a "reasonable" player.

It was fair based on compo, which is all that is needed to be considered, so yes.
 
An expectation among those posting here.

Fair enough.

Are they unrepresentative?

You tell me.

If you agree with me, I promise I won't object.
I don't think it's representative no. I don't think there is that general expectation at all. I'd say the general expectation floating around is him not leaving at all. I get shouted at a lot for saying if he wants 1.5million a year, that I would trade him, most are adamant he will stay
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I remember Brisbane sooking about multiple players wanting to leave and how it was stuffing up their trading. I don't know if they thought that specific trade was fair or not. I wouldn't think it was too unfair
Bit stiff. I guess it was that off-season where they lost a bunch of players and were just powerless to stop it.

I was just using your words. Melbourne gave up 23 for Bernie Vince, a reasonable player at Adelaide (I rate him higher at Melbourne). So I think a 2nd round pick is fair for a "reasonable" player.
Melbourne traded for a 29-year-old. Port traded for a 21-year-old. That's quite a gap.

From Port's perspective, that was a very sweet deal to get a 21-year-old, first-round draftee who'd managed 70-odd games already for pick 28. That's unders all day long, even disregarding what he's done at Port.

It was fair based on compo, which is all that is needed to be considered, so yes.
Questionable.

These are all examples of clubs with little leverage losing players for less than they would have deemed "fair". That's all I've been trying to demonstrate.

I don't think it's representative no. I don't think there is that general expectation at all. I'd say the general expectation floating around is him not leaving at all.
Sure. But we're working on the proviso that he refuses to sign a new deal.

My question is, in that event, what is "fair"?

You seem to have a lower expectation than quite a few others.
 
So two top 10 picks?

No player required?

Id be comfortable that our guys had done their job if they got that. No pick swaps or back trades. Just the two picks.

I doubt Freo could manage it, which then brings additional pieces into the equation.

I dont think he will leave - but pick 2 and 7, or 3 and 6 etc, would continue our pattern of adding 2 elite talents each year for the past few.
 
Id be comfortable that our guys had done their job if they got that. No pick swaps or back trades. Just the two picks.

I doubt Freo could manage it, which then brings additional pieces into the equation.

I dont think he will leave - but pick 2 and 7, or 3 and 6 etc, would continue our pattern of adding 2 elite talents each year for the past few.
That's not unreasonable.

Basically it would be their existing first-rounder and then they'd have to scrounge another pick around 8 or 9, probably trading out someone like Weller or Hill.
 
Not taking contract statuses into account a straight swap for Hogan and Neale is starting to look pretty even.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Dion Prestia heading to the dees?

Prestia is a gun, is The Suns 2nd best midfielder after Ablett. Going to be hard to get when Melbourne have no first round pick this year.

Is there a player Melbourne could trade to a bottom 4 team to get some early picks to make the Prestia transaction happen?
 
Prestia is a gun, is The Suns 2nd best midfielder after Ablett. Going to be hard to get when Melbourne have no first round pick this year.

Is there a player Melbourne could trade to a bottom 4 team to get some early picks to make the Prestia transaction happen?

I used to think he was a gun, I am starting to reevaluate that stance though. Has looked sloppy of late. Certainly not looking like the player he was a couple of years ago. I would have Aaron Hall ahead of him as 2nd best midfielder for GC.
 
For me, Melbourne would be asking for our first pick and Neale (or the pick we get for him which should be top 10) to part with Hogan under contract.

I think that's a reasonable request and fair on both parties. Would Dees supporters agree?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top