Recommitted Josh Dunkley [OOC 2022, requested a trade to Essendon, didn't get there]

[JayJ20]

There is some criticism of Dodoro, but the defence of his trading this year and last is strident, and it's not one or two isolated examples.


Again, refer previous comments about Dodoro not valuing his own deal as enough.

There is pleeenty of criticism for Dodoro regarding Daniher. Many believed we should have traded Daniher last year instead of holding onto him. Plenty of criticism for the Shiel trade. Most Essendon fans also believed he unnecessarily made the Fantasia trade complicated.

I don’t have any problems with his conduct regarding the Dunkley trade though except for the length it took to come up with his offer. The final offer of pick 8 and a future second is more than enough. The 3-way trade for Treloar and Dunkley was also enough. Bulldogs just weren’t interested which is fair enough.

You’re misinterpreting Dodoro’s statement. Saying he wouldn’t do the deal if he was Bulldogs doesn’t mean he believes that’s what Dunkley is worth. It means he understands why Bulldogs didn’t trade Dunkley and would do the same for a player like him. A classic case of a player being worth more to a club than the open market considering Dunkley only has 3 quarters of one season last year to even justify a first rounder. There’s a reason why we targeted Dunkley over an Oliver type because he should realistically be cheaper than Oliver. Someone that’s pushed out of the midfield loses value.

Don’t think Dodoro or anyone expected the price to be 2 top 10 picks, which is what a contracted Oliver costs. We offered as high as we could and moved on from it. No issues there. All of Essendon, Bulldogs and Dunkley parted in an amicable way.

 

[Dogsman16]

It's not what you should take, its what you could do with what you get.

What could we do with the deal you offered though?

Pick 7 would be burnt on points for JUH. Leaving us with a measly future 2nd rounder.

As I said many times in this thread we had the cap space and trade assets to get Treloar done, points for JUH without needing to give up any player.

 

[Mr Pickles]

2 top ten picks is actually Daniher territory. A deal which you rejected.

Why would we take less for Dunkley??

This is one of the funniest aspects of all this bombers conjecture in here. So the team who wouldn't accept 2 first round picks, for a guy with 1 year to go on his contract, who has mostly just been hype with bog-standard production....isn't willing to pay 2 first round picks, for a guy with 2 years to go on his contract, is younger, and is simply a better player than the the other . The irony of it all.

 

[Foxx]

What could we do with the deal you offered though?

Pick 7 would be burnt on points for JUH. Leaving us with a measly future 2nd rounder.

As I said many times in this thread we had the cap space and trade assets to get Treloar done, points for JUH without needing to give up any player.

Read back a few posts. As I said, you guys could have on traded those picks to strengthen other parts of your team. Effectively using the currency of a surplus midfielder for a requirement.

 

[Dogsman16]

Read back a few posts. As I said, you guys could have on traded those picks to strengthen other parts of your team. Effectively using the currency of a surplus midfielder for a requirement.

We don't generally attract gun players. Treloar is arguably the best player we have acquired in modern history and that was cause he was pushed out (and got him ridiculously cheap).

We hit the draft. Thats the way we built our 2016 and have built this current list that hopefully contends.

So pick 7 and future second wouldn't have amounted to anything.

 

[maddog37]

Read back a few posts. As I said, you guys could have on traded those picks to strengthen other parts of your team. Effectively using the currency of a surplus midfielder for a requirement.

How long did we have to organise these wonder trades?? Dodo only made the offer when Saad moved. You have a very high opinion of our list managers ability to organise trades obviously.

 

[Hoges64]

Wasn't it "two good firsts"? That's not necessarily 2 x top 10s if one of them is a 2021 first.

 

[Hoges64]

And yes, gotta love the "oh, you can just flip the 2020 first into something you want".

So easy to have interviews and medicals and do due diligence on 10 players in this environment we're currently in at short notice.

The Dons came up well short when it counted here. Courted the player, offered him a generous contract (I have no doubt it'd be 700+) while still under a 2 year contract, then refused (by his own admission) to offer anything resembling "fair".

But no, what the dogs demanded was overs. * me.

 

[owen87]

what the dogs demanded was overs

It was though, that’s clear as day.

He was only ever going to be traded for major overs.

 

[Foxx]

How long did we have to organise these wonder trades?? Dodo only made the offer when Saad moved. You have a very high opinion of our list managers ability to organise trades obviously.

They had weeks. Everyone had a fair idea what was happening. They missed an opportunity. We move on now.

 

[BombersDave]

Wasn't it "two good firsts"? That's not necessarily 2 x top 10s if one of them is a 2021 first.

Not just that, it might've got done for a first and a second if that first was our future first. We'll never know because the future first wasn't put up. I'm staggered that some Bombers supporters can't see that. Even if we didn't want to offer 2 x good firsts I would have at least been comfortable with that knowing that we put up an offer that enticed the doggies.

 

[JayJ20]

Not just that, it might've got done for a first and a second if that first was our future first. We'll never know because the future first wasn't put up. I'm staggered that some Bombers supporters can't see that. Even if we didn't want to offer 2 x good firsts I would have at least been comfortable with that knowing that we put up an offer that enticed the doggies.

You do realise Collingwood's future first was offered to Dogs right? If Bulldogs entertained the 3-way trade that Collingwood drafted, then they could have negotiated our future first and we would have taken Collingwood's. But they didn't want to do that. We offered 7 and a future second after Bulldogs rejected that trade proposal. We really can't give up a future first without having one ourselves.

 

[BombersDave]

You do realise Collingwood's future first was offered to Dogs right? If Bulldogs entertained the 3-way trade that Collingwood drafted, then they could have negotiated our future first and we would have taken Collingwood's. But they didn't want to do that. We offered 7 and a future second after Bulldogs rejected that trade proposal. We really can't give up a future first without having one ourselves.

Could they have negotiated for our future first though? Dodoro specifically said our future first was not on the table.

 

[JayJ20]

Could they have negotiated for our future first though? Dodoro specifically said our future first was not on the table.

The reason why they didn't negotiate our future first is because Bulldogs ruled out a 3-way trade. They wanted to do Treloar and Dunkley separately, meaning we wouldn't have Collingwood's future first. They asked for our future first separately to the Treloar trade. Collingwood was clearly losing the plot so I doubt they'd have time to trade a future first to us if they can't use it to offload Treloar.

 

[Hoges64]

It was though, that’s clear as day.

He was only ever going to be traded for major overs.

It's not clear as day. We set the price for our contracted player (with a little room for ambiguity), and the Dons offered a deal that "Dodoro himself wouldn't accept". When you're the chasing party and you refuse to come over half way to the price, you've done nothing but prove to the AFL world (not that we didn't already know it) that you're a massive flog, and Dons supporters are the only ones that can't see that.

The only thing that's clear as day here is that Dodoro was up to his usual floggy tricks. Nothing new to see here.

 

[Hoges64]

Not just that, it might've got done for a first and a second if that first was our future first. We'll never know because the future first wasn't put up. I'm staggered that some Bombers supporters can't see that. Even if we didn't want to offer 2 x good firsts I would have at least been comfortable with that knowing that we put up an offer that enticed the doggies.

Exactly this. Your future first and this years second (or pick 8 split into one of 13 / 15 / 18 / 19) MIGHT well have been enough to do it. Doubt anyone could argue that those are so far over for a 23yo gun AA40 mid that their club has desperately needed for 5 years that you wouldn't do it.

But like you said, we'll never know.

Instead the Dons will take picks 7, 8 and 9 now after the JUH bid (in a draft with a recognised top 6 that no-one will trade out of unless, ironically, being paid massive overs), and probably around a pick 6-8 next year (I can't see them truly bottoming out) and HOPE they can get someone of Dunkleys calibre. Sounds like a solid plan to me.

 

[Hoges64]

You do realise Collingwood's future first was offered to Dogs right? If Bulldogs entertained the 3-way trade that Collingwood drafted, then they could have negotiated our future first and we would have taken Collingwood's. But they didn't want to do that. We offered 7 and a future second after Bulldogs rejected that trade proposal. We really can't give up a future first without having one ourselves.

The 3 way trade diluted Dunkleys value, and raised Treloars.

The reason we didn't accept was because we could do the Treloar deal seperately for less. We're not accepting unders to get you the player you want for the price YOU want to pay.

 

[Hoges64]

Could they have negotiated for our future first though? Dodoro specifically said our future first was not on the table.

Exactly this.

You're making great sense. Thank you.

 

[Doggy]

This is one of the funniest aspects of all this bombers conjecture in here. So the team who wouldn't accept 2 first round picks, for a guy with 1 year to go on his contract, who has mostly just been hype with bog-standard production....isn't willing to pay 2 first round picks, for a guy with 2 years to go on his contract, is younger, and is simply a better player than the the other . The irony of it all.

Dodoro only rates outgoing players

 

[DapperDon]

Never have I seen a bunch of fans so angry they kept a player.

 

[blitzer]

Instead the Dons will take picks 7, 8 and 9 now after the JUH bid (in a draft with a recognised top 6 that no-one will trade out of unless, ironically, being paid massive overs), and probably around a pick 6-8 next year (I can't see them truly bottoming out) and HOPE they can get someone of Dunkleys calibre. Sounds like a solid plan to me.

Yeah I guess we'll have to suffer as a rebuilding team with 4 firsts over the next 2 years. I don't reckon anyone has done it as tough as us. Definitely no hope. Last one out turn off the lights.

 

[Hoges64]

Yeah I guess we'll have to suffer as a rebuilding team with 4 firsts over the next 2 years. I don't reckon anyone has done it as tough as us. Definitely no hope. Last one out turn off the lights.

You MAY have been able to have 3 firsts and a Dunkley to set the standards for your new draftees. Just sayin'...

 

[threenewpadlocks]

This is one of the funniest aspects of all this bombers conjecture in here. So the team who wouldn't accept 2 first round picks, for a guy with 1 year to go on his contract, who has mostly just been hype with bog-standard production....isn't willing to pay 2 first round picks, for a guy with 2 years to go on his contract, is younger, and is simply a better player than the the other . The irony of it all.

Even worse. Daniher was a free agent when he came out of contract. Dunkley isn't a FA eligible player in 2022. He'll still have to go through a trade if he wants to leave the Dogs when OOC, giving us more leverage than the Daniher comparison.

 

[maddog37]

Never have I seen a bunch of fans so angry they kept a player.

Never have I seen a bunch of fans so devoted to their list manager. Their list manager!!!!!!!!!!

 

[adogsfan5]

The 3 way trade diluted Dunkleys value, and raised Treloars.

The reason we didn't accept was because we could do the Treloar deal seperately for less. We're not accepting unders to get you the player you want for the price YOU want to pay.

This

 

[BluesRule]

Even worse. Daniher was a free agent when he came out of contract. Dunkley isn't a FA eligible player in 2022. He'll still have to go through a trade if he wants to leave the Dogs when OOC, giving us more leverage than the Daniher comparison.

Worked for Bryce Gibbs. Crows paid the required price the second time around.