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

Remove this Banner Ad

JayJ20

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 28, 2016
17,147
26,109
AFL Club
Essendon
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.
 
Look at the players who were drafted pick 7 and 8 in the last 10 years.
Dunkley will probably have a better career if you doubled the average career of those 20 players.

For example, those 20 players have only made the All-Australian squad of 40, 3 times in their careers, something Dunkley has already done and probably should do again.

Entirely fair request for a contracted player.

There are players in Pick 7 & 8 in the last 10 drafts that I would easily take ahead of Dunkley now given what I know and have seen. a few of them are actual All Australians. It's a gamble either way. Dunkley has syndesmosis this year, who's to say that doesn't stick around and hamper him?

Dunkley is being valued on his potential of which I think he has a lot but he has not shown anything to warrant what was requested.

I do agree though as a contracted player it is the dogs right to request such a trade, as ridiculous as it is.
 
There are players in Pick 7 & 8 in the last 10 drafts that I would easily take ahead of Dunkley now given what I know and have seen.
Nick Haynes is pretty much the only better player. Wines and Heppell I'd argue will have marginally worse careers than Dunkley when it's all said and done.

A simple way would be to look at Brownlow votes polled and pick 7 and 8 together for an average career roughly equate to what Dunkley should equate to the rest of the career, by the simple average of Brownlow votes per game over the rest of the career.
 
Nick Haynes is pretty much the only better player. Wines and Heppell I'd argue will have marginally worse careers than Dunkley when it's all said and done.

A simple way would be to look at Brownlow votes polled and pick 7 and 8 together for an average career roughly equate to what Dunkley should equate to the rest of the career, by the simple average of Brownlow votes per game over the rest of the career.

If I got 2 of wines/Heppell/Haynes instead of 1 Dunkley I’d be happy :)
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Jan 13, 2006
26,598
19,328
melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
geelong
There are players in Pick 7 & 8 in the last 10 drafts that I would easily take ahead of Dunkley now given what I know and have seen. a few of them are actual All Australians. It's a gamble either way. Dunkley has syndesmosis this year, who's to say that doesn't stick around and hamper him?

Dunkley is being valued on his potential of which I think he has a lot but he has not shown anything to warrant what was requested.

I do agree though as a contracted player it is the dogs right to request such a trade, as ridiculous as it is.

market value I would say myself and others based it off at the treloar and shiel trade which ended up being 2x firsts and a second rounder coming back.

is dunkley in the same bracket as these two is probably a question to ask? Unsure...

Is dunkley actually worth giving up two first rounders when essendon will be looking to rebuild?? I would actually say your probably better off hitting the draft looking for a gun elite kid as opposed to what dunkley offers.

potential to draft a selwood/boak or a jimmy bartel ( my geelong bias) is probably higher as opposed to bringing in dunkley as I wouldn’t classify him that level you could potentially pick up if you do your recruiting cards right
 

Golden_6

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 15, 2014
10,166
20,870
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
agree on this. There is also an onus on the team trading the player to act in good and reasonable faith when trading. It is not all pinned on the team he is leaving for to “ stick em up and gimme everything you got” train robbery style mentality people seem to believe...
Could not disagree more on this part. How on earth is the team trading the player under contract expected to act in ‘good and reasonable faith’? How about the other club not go after players that are under contract? That would be acting in good and reasonable faith.

Essendon are within their right to have a crack at him, but we are under no duty to anyone but ourselves.
 
Oct 1, 2006
26,018
20,062
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Everton, Storm, Victory
market value I would say myself and others based it off at the treloar and shiel trade which ended up being 2x firsts and a second rounder coming back.

is dunkley in the same bracket as these two is probably a question to ask? Unsure...

Is dunkley actually worth giving up two first rounders when essendon will be looking to rebuild?? I would actually say your probably better off hitting the draft looking for a gun elite kid as opposed to what dunkley offers.

potential to draft a selwood/boak or a jimmy bartel ( my geelong bias) is probably higher as opposed to bringing in dunkley as I wouldn’t classify him that level you could potentially pick up if you do your recruiting cards right

Market value when future trading opened up. Both of those trades have turned out to be massive mistakes for their respective clubs and should prove cautionary tales. If the player isn’t a bonafide Fyfe/Dangerfield level superstar they aren’t worth close to that asking price.
 
Market value when future trading opened up. Both of those trades have turned out to be massive mistakes for their respective clubs and should prove cautionary tales. If the player isn’t a bonafide Fyfe/Dangerfield level superstar they aren’t worth close to that asking price.
Treloar wasn't the mistake, their Salary Cap management was. Or more correctly, Dayne Beams was their mistake, capitalised by overvaluing Grundy and especially De Goey.

Shiel, well, I still can't believe Essendon paid that for him. Not what they needed AND poor skills. Yeesh.
 

adogsfan5

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 12, 2020
14,958
20,030
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
There’s been plenty of assumptions around the fact that the bombers and dogs would have been talking about price before Dunks even came out and announced he wanted to be traded. Assumptions that he came out and asked for a trade because we gave Essendon a price to work with.

I really don’t think that’s the case. I’m confident the dogs said no deal from the get go - Pickers came out and announced it to put some pressure on us and we just never caved. Dodo offered what he thought was fair at the time (that was Dunks value as an out of contract player) and he stuck to his guns too. Not the best way to play it but it is what it is. Nobody loses.
 
Oct 1, 2006
26,018
20,062
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Everton, Storm, Victory
Treloar wasn't the mistake, their Salary Cap management was. Or more correctly, Dayne Beams was their mistake, capitalised by overvaluing Grundy and especially De Goey.

Shiel, well, I still can't believe Essendon paid that for him. Not what they needed AND poor skills. Yeesh.

Treloar could have been Harry McKay and Jarrod Berry/Jy Simpkin and 800k spare for a free agent. The value in high cost trades just isn’t there.
 
There’s been plenty of assumptions around the fact that the bombers and dogs would have been talking about price before Dunks even came out and announced he wanted to be traded. Assumptions that he came out and asked for a trade because we gave Essendon a price to work with.

I really don’t think that’s the case. I’m confident the dogs said no deal from the get go - Pickers came out and announced it to put some pressure on us and we just never caved. Dodo offered what he thought was fair at the time (that was Dunks value as an out of contract player) and he stuck to his guns too. Not the best way to play it but it is what it is. Nobody loses.

If Dunkley was Out of Contract you wouldn't have been offered a 1st & 2021 2nd.......That offer was his "fair" value as a contracted player, the dogs (well within their rights) wanted stupid overs which meant changing the 2021 2nd to a 2021 1st.
 
Last edited:
There’s been plenty of assumptions around the fact that the bombers and dogs would have been talking about price before Dunks even came out and announced he wanted to be traded. Assumptions that he came out and asked for a trade because we gave Essendon a price to work with.

I really don’t think that’s the case. I’m confident the dogs said no deal from the get go - Pickers came out and announced it to put some pressure on us and we just never caved. Dodo offered what he thought was fair at the time (that was Dunks value as an out of contract player) and he stuck to his guns too. Not the best way to play it but it is what it is. Nobody loses.

I reckon you are probably pretty spot on, dogs would have told us to GAGF until Dunkley made the request to leave.

Once that happened dogs probably told us what they wanted which was ridiculous enough that it was never really going to happen.

At the end of the day I blame JUH - if it wasn't for him Dunkley would be ours!!!
 
Dec 29, 2009
8,165
9,483
Hobart
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
I agree with everything you said except bolded bit....

Essendon would have told Dunkley what their limit was prior to him nominating us. Getting a player to nominate you DOES NOT mean you sell the farm to get the player just out of principle. Essendon already offered overs on Dunkley to the Dogs and the Dogs were all within their right to reject and request absurd overs, but Essendon are also well within in their right to hold firm, like I said Dunkley would have known this. If Dodoro had of given up 2 x Top 10 Picks with one of those being our future first (This is reportedly what the Dogs were asking for) he would have been burned at the stake.

Like I said I think both clubs did what was best for them given the situation.

I disagree but that’s okay.

Not saying Essendon came away looking terrible, but Essendon knew the price the bulldogs had placed on Dunkley before he nominated them and players generally don’t nominate a club unless that club assures them they can get the deal done. My opinion is that Essendon probably thought Dunkley nominating them would lower the bulldogs asking price but the bulldogs held firm.

Now Essendon did the best things for their own long term future, as the bulldogs were asking overs but they did let the player down to a degree and that could possibly affected players nominating them in future. Doesn’t make Essendon look bad but does take the gloss off them to a degree.
 
I disagree but that’s okay.

Not saying Essendon came away looking terrible, but Essendon knew the price the bulldogs had placed on Dunkley before he nominated them and players generally don’t nominate a club unless that club assures them they can get the deal done. My opinion is that Essendon probably thought Dunkley nominating them would lower the bulldogs asking price but the bulldogs held firm.

Now Essendon did the best things for their own long term future, as the bulldogs were asking overs but they did let the player down to a degree and that could possibly affected players nominating them in future. Doesn’t make Essendon look bad but does take the gloss off them to a degree.

I actually don't think Essendon did know the price prior to Dunkley nominating them.

I think that Essendon approached the dogs, who in turn told Essendon to GAGF and that he's not up for trade. I don't think a price was even discussed until Dunkley actually nominated Essendon, in which the dogs set a price they probably knew was never going to be paid.

Was only ever a win win for the dogs. Either keep Dunkley or get stupid ridiculous overs - pretty good spot to be in and pretty well played by sam powers..
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Golden_6

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 15, 2014
10,166
20,870
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Dunkley has spoken on his failed trade:https://www.afl.com.au/video/525238...dal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1606167007001

Sounds like he is all in on the Doggies again
It's just a puff piece, something like this was always going to come out a couple of weeks after. Josh is an outstanding young man, and it's clear that he would always come back and give everything he has to the upcoming season.

It will be interesting in 12 months time if he's put away his ego and has decided to buy into winning another Bulldogs flag especially if we are in contention, or whether he still wants to go and chase the cash and be the main man in the midfield.
 
Jul 22, 2013
18,785
27,441
AFL Club
Carlton
I have no issues for 2 firsts but not 2 x top 10’s especially next year which is a super stacked draft.

It's a bit of a diversion from the topic at hand, but I am really bemused that I keep reading this statement.

This years draft is commonly considered to be throwing darts blindfold, because the players have not had the chance to show their stuff in their draft year - a year when many of the best blossom and stand out from the pack as physical maturity and player development kick in.

In light of that, how on earth do we so confidently predict that kids another year younger are going to be a super draft?
 
It's a bit of a diversion from the topic at hand, but I am really bemused that I keep reading this statement.

This years draft is commonly considered to be throwing darts blindfold, because the players have not had the chance to show their stuff in their draft year - a year when many of the best blossom and stand out from the pack as physical maturity and player development kick in.

In light of that, how on earth do we so confidently predict that kids another year younger are going to be a super draft?

we don't know anything, as in you and me.

the guys who are paid to know (club recruiters/scouts etc) think next year is stacked so that's good enough for me.

The recruiters/scouts watch these kids from a young age, so regardless if they don't play in the U18 Cships or not they would still have a pretty good idea who the cream of the crop are already, and how deep the draft likely is.
 
Nov 29, 2018
1,793
3,213
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Memphis Grizzlies
If Dunkley was Out of Contract you wouldn't have been offered a 1st & 2021 2nd.......That offer was his "fair" value as a contracted player, the dogs (well within their rights) wanted stupid overs which meant changing the 2021 2nd to a 2021 1st.

What do you think his value is as an uncontracted player? Because even if you view this year as an off year, he had the 4th best average tackles in the league from a forward pocket. His best year was just a season ago and he got the 6th most tackles and 9th most contested possessions in the league. He hasn't got unproven potential to be elite, he's shown he can play at that level in the midfield. Treloar got two firsts an an uncontracted player leaving GWS, Dunkley would at least get a first and a second.
 
Jul 22, 2013
18,785
27,441
AFL Club
Carlton
we don't know anything, as in you and me.

the guys who are paid to know (club recruiters/scouts etc) think next year is stacked so that's good enough for me.

The recruiters/scouts watch these kids from a young age, so regardless if they don't play in the U18 Cships or not they would still have a pretty good idea who the cream of the crop are already, and how deep the draft likely is.

Still doesn't make sense to me.

The vibe that this year's draft is a crapshoot because of the lack of exposed form comes from the same sources.
 
What do you think his value is as an uncontracted player? Because even if you view this year as an off year, he had the 4th best average tackles in the league from a forward pocket. His best year was just a season ago and he got the 6th most tackles and 9th most contested possessions in the league. He hasn't got unproven potential to be elite, he's shown he can play at that level in the midfield. Treloar got two firsts an an uncontracted player leaving GWS, Dunkley would at least get a first and a second.

If we was uncontracted I think he's worth a single top 10 first round, nothing added. Dunkley has had 1 good year, maybe that's because bevo has been playing him out of position, could also be because he had syndesmosis, I dunno, but you can only judge on what he's delivered.

Mind you that's just my opinion. I'm a nobody.

People forget how good Treloar was in 2014 & 2015 in his last 2 years at GWS, also Pretty sure Collingwood got a second round pick back in the deal.
 
Mar 5, 2015
1,711
2,061
West of Woop Woop
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Marconi, Arsenal, GreenEdge
If I got 2 of wines/Heppell/Haynes instead of 1 Dunkley I’d be happy :)
Exactly right. Which is why it was entirely reasonable of the dogs to ask for 2 first rounders in order for us to be "happy" to let Josh go with 2 years still to run on his contract.
Your logic shows the fallacy of your argument that he wasnt worth 2 first rounders. Your club was trying to wrestle him away from his current employer who didnt want to lose him. Your club had to make his current employer happy. Instead you managed to make him publicly commit to a change and then wouldnt negotiate beyond what was clearly a winning position for you. Like for like wasnt good enough in this instance (and of course no guarantee that 1 first rounder would equate as another Josh), Bombers had to offer up enough for us to be happy to see him go. The "potential" of two guns, like wines/heppel/haynes would have been enough. The 50/50 chance that 1 pick offered, against the guaranteed product which is jOsh was simply not good enough to pry him loose.
You consistently fail to acknowledge that Essendon had to make Bulldogs happy for this to happen ie meet our demand which never changed by all reports. Refusal to do so was just s**t from Dodo.
 
Mar 5, 2015
1,711
2,061
West of Woop Woop
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Marconi, Arsenal, GreenEdge
If we was uncontracted I think he's worth a single top 10 first round, nothing added. Dunkley has had 1 good year, maybe that's because bevo has been playing him out of position, could also be because he had syndesmosis, I dunno, but you can only judge on what he's delivered.

Mind you that's just my opinion. I'm a nobody.

People forget how good Treloar was in 2014 & 2015 in his last 2 years at GWS, also Pretty sure Collingwood got a second round pick back in the deal.
Fine, if he was uncontracted he might only be worth 1 FR pick. Now what do you add to that to prise him out of a contract with 2 years still to run with a club that clearly still wants him.
The onus on this trade happening was entirely with Dodo and he failed to deliver. Failed to deliver Dunks to your club and failed to deliver for the bloke hed convinced to nominate and stick his neck on the line. Really poor form from Dodo.

And I agree that keeping the picks is the best option for your club btw. But Dodo had a responsibility to make that trade happen, after setting it up in the first place, and it was only ever going to happen by paying overs.
 
Exactly right. Which is why it was entirely reasonable of the dogs to ask for 2 first rounders in order for us to be "happy" to let Josh go with 2 years still to run on his contract.
Your logic shows the fallacy of your argument that he wasnt worth 2 first rounders. Your club was trying to wrestle him away from his current employer who didnt want to lose him. Your club had to make his current employer happy. Instead you managed to make him publicly commit to a change and then wouldnt negotiate beyond what was clearly a winning position for you. Like for like wasnt good enough in this instance (and of course no guarantee that 1 first rounder would equate as another Josh), Bombers had to offer up enough for us to be happy to see him go. The "potential" of two guns, like wines/heppel/haynes would have been enough. The 50/50 chance that 1 pick offered, against the guaranteed product which is jOsh was simply not good enough to pry him loose.
You consistently fail to acknowledge that Essendon had to make Bulldogs happy for this to happen ie meet our demand which never changed by all reports. Refusal to do so was just sh*t from Dodo.

really not interested in this circular argument that I have specially said numerous times in my posts......

The dogs were MORE than entitled ask for a stupid price for Dunkley, just like Essendon are MORE than entitled to walk away at said stupid price.

This is the problem you don't seem to get, Essendon didn't fail anything, they would have told Dunkley what their limit was in trying to get him, that limit was clearly reached and both parties walked away pretty happy imo. You don't have to get deals done based on just principle. If the price is too much than walk away.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back