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.

 

[Prochard123]

Or if we got 2 of 6/7/8 for Dunkley, they could have those two, plus 14, and we may get back a couple of Norths late seconds for points and #2. Something along those lines anyway.

Trading for pick 2 has got to be one of the dumbest strategies for WBD.

There's no guarantee Adelaide won't bid on Ugle-Hagan. And even if it is unlikely, if they do, you instantly take a huge loss by losing pick 2. Your list managers are smarter than that.

You'd want to be absolutely certain that Adelaide won't bid for this move to be worthwhile. Adelaide has all the incentive in the world to force you to match. They know you will, and all of their many picks in this draft gets moved up.

 

[Hoges64]

2 of 6,7,8 or Ess future 1st is about right for Dunks. Either nothing going back or future 3rd. Were getting pantsed if 14 goes back.

Agreed, but we don't have a future 3rd after the Hannan deal yesterday?

Better make it a future 4th. That way Essendon can legally trade us their future 1st.

 

[Scratchy05]

2 of 6,7,8 or Ess future 1st is about right for Dunks. Either nothing going back or future 3rd. Were getting pantsed if 14 goes back.

You really aren't. Your midfield is stacked and you can afford to lose him with no issue in my eyes. You are not getting pantsed in the slightest. You have way more pressing issues such as the lack of key defenders and a forward line. I'm not kidding when I say I don't think you'll miss Dunkley a lot, he is a gun but you don't need him. Bontempelli, Macrae, Libba & Smith is already heaps and if you land Treloar, he is not needed at all, should cash out now for him while his value is at his highest.

 

[Taylor]

Or if we got 2 of 6/7/8 for Dunkley, they could have those two, plus 14, and we may get back a couple of Norths late seconds for points and #2. Something along those lines anyway.

It would all depend on North thinking the player they get at #2 isn't worth as much as the players taken at #7, #8, #14.

They could go into the draft with #7, #8, #11, #14, #70, #71

Bulldogs go in with #2, #3 (big matching with #28, #30, #41 and #54) with a first round surplus of 151 points for later bids.

 

[Hoges64]

Trading for pick 2 has got to be one of the dumbest strategies for WBD.

There's no guarantee Adelaide won't bid on Ugle-Hagan. And even if it is unlikely, if they do, you instantly take a huge loss by losing pick 2. Your list managers are smarter than that.

You'd want to be absolutely certain that Adelaide won't bid for this move to be worthwhile. Adelaide has all the incentive in the world to force you to match. They know you will, and all of their many picks in this draft gets moved up.

They may be more inclined to not bid on him after we swap pick 14 with a couple of their second rounders....? *wink wink nudge nudge*

Every chance they straight pick McDonald, Hollands, or there's word they're keen on Thilthorpe.

JUH is NOT the out and out, slam dunk, pick 1 like everyone believes he is.

 

[mezaire]

Here's the whole scenario trade for the hell of it!!

WB and Essendon:
Dunkley and Future 2nd, for Pick 8 and Future 1st

WB and Collingwood:
Pick 8 and future 3rd, for Future 1st and 39

Melbourne and North
Pick 26 and 43, for Brown

North and WB
Pick 26, 28 and 43, for Pick 14

Essendon and Brisbane
Pick 7, for picks 18 and 19

Essendon and GWS
Pick 18, for Caldwell

For WB they end up...
Give: Dunkley, 14, Future 2nd, Future 3rd
Get: Picks 26, 28, 39, 43, Future 1st (Coll), Future 1st (Ess)

For Essendon
Give: Picks 7,8, Future 1st
Get: Dunkley, Caldwell, 19, Future 2nd

For Collingwood
Give: Future 1st and 39
Get: 8 and Future 3rd

For Melbourne
Give: Picks 26 and 43
Get: Brown

For North
Give: Brown, 28
Get: Pick 14

For GWS:
Give: Caldwell
Get: Pick 18

 

[Hoges64]

It would all depend on North thinking the player they get at #2 isn't worth as much as the players taken at #7, #8, #14.

They could go into the draft with #7, #8, #11, #14, #70, #71

Bulldogs go in with #2, #3 (big matching with #28, #30, #41 and #54) with a first round surplus of 151 points for later bids.

Exactly right, COULD be very beneficial for both sides, depending on North seeing your scenario above as favourable. Guess that's what their LM team has to decide.

 

[astrowizzle]

Yeah, but he just conned Carlton out of pick 8 for an uncontracted Saad. Surely he's rational can can see that this would imply that Dunkley has greater value? I mean Saad is a garden variety unaccountable half back

You really have never watched Saad play.

 

[Hoges64]

You really aren't. Your midfield is stacked and you can afford to lose him with no issue in my eyes. You are not getting pantsed in the slightest. You have way more pressing issues such as the lack of key defenders and a forward line. I'm not kidding when I say I don't think you'll miss Dunkley a lot, he is a gun but you don't need him. Bontempelli, Macrae, Libba & Smith is already heaps and if you land Treloar, he is not needed at all, should cash out now for him while his value is at his highest.

I get what you're saying, but a surplus of a player in a position doesn't dememan their trade value. If the Pies held all of Darcy Moore

30

Darcy Moore

Age

28

Ht

203cm

Wt

100kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

11.1

3star

K

7.0

3star

HB

4.1

3star

M

4.8

5star

T

1.6

4star

MG

169.1

3star

D

13.9

3star

K

7.3

3star

HB

6.6

4star

M

4.9

5star

T

0.7

1star

MG

182.0

3star

D

6.8

2star

K

4.2

2star

HB

2.6

3star

M

2.6

3star

T

1.8

4star

MG

87.4

2star

, Harris Andrews

31

Harris Andrews

Age

27

Ht

202cm

Wt

98kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.8

3star

K

7.4

3star

HB

5.4

4star

M

5.6

5star

T

1.6

4star

MG

151.7

2star

D

17.0

4star

K

9.0

4star

HB

8.0

4star

M

4.0

4star

T

2.0

3star

D

9.8

3star

K

5.0

2star

HB

4.8

4star

M

3.4

4star

T

1.6

4star

MG

94.0

2star

, Jeremy McGovern

20

Jeremy Mcgovern

Age

32

Ht

197cm

Wt

97kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.7

4star

K

10.1

4star

HB

4.6

3star

M

6.8

5star

T

1.5

3star

MG

238.7

4star

D

12.4

3star

K

8.6

3star

HB

3.8

3star

M

6.4

5star

T

2.0

3star

MG

183.4

3star

D

11.0

3star

K

8.8

4star

HB

2.2

2star

M

7.2

5star

T

1.4

4star

and Nick Haynes

19

Nick Haynes

Age

31

Ht

192cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.4

4star

K

11.4

4star

HB

4.9

4star

M

6.2

5star

T

1.6

4star

MG

326.8

4star

D

17.4

4star

K

13.9

5star

HB

3.5

2star

M

8.0

5star

T

1.5

2star

MG

326.8

5star

D

7.8

2star

K

4.4

2star

HB

3.4

3star

M

2.4

3star

T

2.2

4star

, and they all had two years left on a contract with you, would you take 7 & 8 and give 14 back if you didn't have to?

 

[BEaston]

Trading for pick 2 has got to be one of the dumbest strategies for WBD.

There's no guarantee Adelaide won't bid on Ugle-Hagan. And even if it is unlikely, if they do, you instantly take a huge loss by losing pick 2. Your list managers are smarter than that.

You'd want to be absolutely certain that Adelaide won't bid for this move to be worthwhile. Adelaide has all the incentive in the world to force you to match. They know you will, and all of their many picks in this draft gets moved up.

Live trading is a thing now.
We'd just wait until there's no bid at pick 1 before enacting the trade (assuming North want to of course).

The Dogs would have to have an equally acceptable contingency plan if there were a bid at 1 as well though.... thought out and confirmed before we'd consider the trade for Dunkley.

 

[Outback Footy]

You really aren't. Your midfield is stacked and you can afford to lose him with no issue in my eyes. You are not getting pantsed in the slightest. You have way more pressing issues such as the lack of key defenders and a forward line. I'm not kidding when I say I don't think you'll miss Dunkley a lot, he is a gun but you don't need him. Bontempelli, Macrae, Libba & Smith is already heaps and if you land Treloar, he is not needed at all, should cash out now for him while his value is at his highest.

I agree, weve got a strong midfield. That doesnt devalue any of them, including Dunks. My point is that Dunks is worth 2 first rounders. If we send a first rounder back (14) with him were only getting 1. Thats how were getting pantsed. That would equate Dunks w Saad, Saad =8, Dunks = 8&9 with 14 back (discounts 9 considerably. Dunks is worth 2 first rounders. Period. If anything goes back with him it cant be a first rounder (now or future) or were underselling him. And remember hes still got 2 years to run on his contract. If we undersell him were opening the door for contracts to be meaningless.

 

[citizen-erased]

Live trading is a thing now.
We'd just wait until there's no bid at pick 1 before enacting the trade (assuming North want to of course).

The Dogs would have to have an equally acceptable outcome in a contingency plan if there were a bid at 1 as well, thought out before we'd consider the trade for Dunkley.

question i have is do you know of the bid, then have time to trade then match?
or is it a matter of bid is in, match or don't.

 

[dlb99]

Here's the whole scenario trade for the hell of it!!

WB and Essendon:
Dunkley and Future 2nd, for Pick 8 and Future 1st

WB and Collingwood:
Pick 8 and future 3rd, for Future 1st and 39

No one should be trading future firsts, it is quite likely that some junior talent will avoid this year's draft and go again next year making that draft deeper and better.

 

[Prochard123]

No one should be trading future firsts, it is quite likely that some junior talent will avoid this year's draft and go again next year making that draft deeper and better.

We will trade it, even if we have it next year we can't use it.

But agree, can't see any club but us being too keen.

 

[Moist Biscuit]

"What did surprise me was the Bulldogs wanting two first-round picks for Josh Dunkley. It shouldn't be anything more than one first-round pick from Essendon."

"@MatthewLloyd18 and @kanecornes agree that the Dogs are being a bit greedy"

God this shits me, when someone approaches you to buy the car that you don't want to sell, they don't then get to decide what you should take for it. THE SELLER DETERMINES THE VALUE.

 

[Ambrosia]

Adrian is paying more (reportably). Pick 8 is far more than the couple of second rounders he'd propose if Josh was out of contract or the relationship broken between player and club (see Stringer).

In Adrian's world P8 is overs and the Dogs should be grateful for the offer.

You just need to inhabit Adrian's reality and you will understand.

We overpaid for Stringer I don’t know how you could argue otherwise.

 

[Hoges64]

question i have is do you know of the bid, then have time to trade then match?
or is it a matter of bid is in, match or don't.

From memory (and I could be making this up), once the bid is in you have 2 minutes to trade picks, then match bid.

And as mentioned by another poster just before, we'd have those trades already lined up with xxx team, ready to go.

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

"What did surprise me was the Bulldogs wanting two first-round picks for Josh Dunkley. It shouldn't be anything more than one first-round pick from Essendon."

"@MatthewLloyd18 and @kanecornes agree that the Dogs are being a bit greedy"

God this shits me, when someone approaches you to buy the car that you don't want to sell, they don't then get to decide what you should take for it. THE SELLER DETERMINES THE VALUE.

2021 first+one of 6,7,8 with Dogs handing back a future 2nd imo

 

[mezaire]

No one should be trading future firsts, it is quite likely that some junior talent will avoid this year's draft and go again next year making that draft deeper and better.

Yeah I agree, but if Essendon really want Dunkley, that may be the price they have to pay.
Plus if they think Merrett might leave they will get a some currency there

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

Yeah I agree, but if Essendon really want Dunkley, that may be the price they have to pay.
Plus if they think Merrett might leave they will get a some currency there

That's true

 

[Moist Biscuit]

2021 first+one of 6,7,8 with Dogs handing back a future 2nd imo

That seems like a fair deal. These airheads on trade radio can't fathom the fact that Dunkley is contracted for 2 more years and they don't want to lose him.

 

[Dale4captain]

2021 first+one of 6,7,8 with Dogs handing back a future 2nd imo

I'd say that's just about spot on. Probably a future 4th from us, too.

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

I'd say that's just about spot on. Probably a future 4th from us, too.

I can see us cave in happened with Shiel last year club really wants Dunks not just for his balling winning ability but also as a leader,professionalism etc

 

[Outback Footy]

You really have never watched Saad play.

Saads a good HBF. But no way a good HBF is worth as much as a good inside mid. Whose younger and has played in a premiership and is contracted.

 

[Scratchy05]

I agree, weve got a strong midfield. That doesnt devalue any of them, including Dunks. My point is that Dunks is worth 2 first rounders. If we send a first rounder back (14) with him were only getting 1. Thats how were getting pantsed. That would equate Dunks w Saad, Saad =8, Dunks = 8&9 with 14 back (discounts 9 considerably. Dunks is worth 2 first rounders. Period. If anything goes back with him it cant be a first rounder (now or future) or were underselling him. And remember hes still got 2 years to run on his contract. If we undersell him were opening the door for contracts to be meaningless.

You aren't though. If Dunkley was in this years draft, I would personally take him 4th or 5th. I would have McDonald, Phillips & Ugle-Hagan ahead of him so yes, 6 and 7 is overs in my eyes hence why the future 2nd makes it a fairer deal.