Recommitted Michael Hurley?

[Ants]

You may not care what the saints paid, but the price they were willing to pay is relevant when discussing what price clubs will be willing to pay for Hurley.

Sydney gained something like 12 points out of the Bird trade. They wanted to get rid of him to clear up cap space. The trade valued him at next to nothing.

I fail to see how the other club goes about getting the deal done effects what is a reasonable offer for EFC. At the end of the day, we have to accept the price. Another club going "that's what Saints paid" while we're going "that's less than Carlisle" isn't going to magically close the gap to what we would accept.

I suppose it comes down to a view on what would have happened if Sydney hadn't got involved. Would #5 have gone over in a straight swap? Gone into PSD? Gone with a pick for #5? Gone for Saints 2nd and something from 2017? Who knows. At the end of the day though, Essendon was very clear it was holding out for #5 as a minimum, we did hold out until we got the #5, and I can't see us not wanting the same for Hurley plus a little more.

Hardly unders when u factor in the suspension risk over the player (i.e. That Port have not been able to use Ryder's services at all this year), or treating any potential medical problem the players face as a result of being pumped full of unknown shit.

Personally, I think that medical element you're raising is ridiculous. Elite athletes take drugs all the time and stay elite athletes. History shows this. Ryder's medical record was one of his strengths, he's missed very few games over his career. On the suspension threat, at the time most believed that it was less than probable (which was right with the AFL tribunal, wrong with CAS), and that if it happened the suspension wouldn't be too long due to time served (the actual suspension was a shock to pretty much everyone). Which is all more than offset by the fact he was a contracted player who we wanted to keep, and our #1 ruck. If Port didn't want him badly, we were more than happy to keep him.

IMO the price should have been much higher, but I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[Dr Whoooooooo]

They are just not in great position to drive a hard bargain at the trade table on this one.

Again you nailed it ... post drugs ban - They are just not in great position to drive a hard bargain at the trade table on this one.

But Essendon fans will tell you diffrent ... but the club knows the wont stand in the way of any players, the AFL is on their side till the second Hurley nominates, then the support evaporates and the AFL will demand a deal to be done or the Bombers are in deep, deep trouble without any support.

I've taken exactly the same stance as the AFL - I would prefer to see Hurley stay a Bomber but if or when he nominates ... no hard balling from Essendon thanks, post drug bans.

 

[Suma Magic]

I fail to see how the other club goes about getting the deal done effects what is a reasonable offer for EFC. At the end of the day, we have to accept the price. Another club going "that's what Saints paid" while we're going "that's less than Carlisle" isn't going to magically close the gap to what we would accept.

I suppose it comes down to a view on what would have happened if Sydney hadn't got involved. Would #5 have gone over in a straight swap? Gone into PSD? Gone with a pick for #5? Gone for Saints 2nd and something from 2017? Who knows. At the end of the day though, Essendon was very clear it was holding out for #5 as a minimum, we did hold out until we got the #5, and I can't see us not wanting the same for Hurley plus a little more.

Personally, I think that medical element you're raising is ridiculous. Elite athletes take drugs all the time and stay elite athletes. History shows this. Ryder's medical record was one of his strengths, he's missed very few games over his career. On the suspension threat, at the time most believed that it was less than probable (which was right with the AFL tribunal, wrong with CAS), and that if it happened the suspension wouldn't be too long due to time served (the actual suspension was a shock to pretty much everyone). Which is all more than offset by the fact he was a contracted player who we wanted to keep, and our #1 ruck. If Port didn't want him badly, we were more than happy to keep him.

IMO the price should have been much higher, but I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Wasn't it the Saints holding out that they wouldn't do pick 5 straight swap? And then when the equivalent of pick 8.5 was organised they agreed to the deal?

I suppose it's somewhere in the middle of what they paid and what you accepted. Which is maybe around 1600-1700 points. And Hurley is definitely worth more than that.

 

[The 747]

IMO the price should have been much higher, but I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Not often I agree with EFC fans on trades but what you got for Ryder was unders for sure. It's been mitigated by him playing nowhere near as well for Port as he did in his last season for Essendon.

 

[cdcanman]

Frankly, I don't care what the Saints paid.

So you don't care what Saints paid...

So I'm not sure why my premise of using Carlisle's price we received, plus a bit more (equivalent to pick #30) isn't reasonable.

...but then used what Saints paid to make a point.

It's not reasonable to use what St Kilda paid for Carlisle as a guide as to what EFC might receive for Hurley because they are completely independent events. One has nothing to do with the other. Completely separate circumstances, likely different clubs involved. What happened in last year's trade period does not necessarily have any bearing on what will happen this year. It does not necessarily have any impact on setting value for players and trades this offseason. It's not like a court of law where precedent must be adhered to.

I agree that at the trade table other things will come into play such as what actual picks a club has, who plays more hard-ball, and how clubs (and watchers) rate any other players traded (such as putting a price on Bird above)

You should have just stopped after this sentence.

points are a handy way of capturing the full value of a trade

Points are not a handy way of capturing anything. They give no insight at all into the value of a trade for either side.

 

[McCraeBF]

Do you think if Hurley leaves that the bombers will go crazzy as they will have another $750k to spend add that to Watson not playing on and they might have over $1.6 to spend extra a year....

My point is that they will be getting 2 good players in this draft who that is well line up Bombers....anyone out of contract can walk to them great position to be in..

Could be a blessing in disguise loosing Hurley if they can draft well..

 

[Falchoon]

Carlisle was uncontracted, had not performed anywhere near the same level and had a 12 month ban looming over him. Yes Hurley has sat out for 12 months but a team doesn't risk picking him up just to have him sit on the sidelines. Hurley is worth far more and wouldn't have the same kind of discount applied to his value.

he's also 2.5 years older than Carlisle was, with a 5 year contract taking him to 32 years of age. it's getting on for what could nowadays be considered an undersized KPD

 

[Donakebab]

he's also 2.5 years older than Carlisle was, with a 5 year contract taking him to 32 years of age. it's getting on for what could nowadays be considered an undersized KPD

Yep, too old, too short, why on earth would anyone want him...

 

[Ambrosia]

he's also 2.5 years older than Carlisle was, with a 5 year contract taking him to 32 years of age. it's getting on for what could nowadays be considered an undersized KPD

He's not undersized for his position at CHB and surely the age factor is heavily mitigated by the fact that Hurley is the better footballer.

While Carlisle is taller I'd much rather have Hurley giving up height on an opposition forward than have Carlisle giving up speed on a fast leading forward.

 

[Lizard Lukin]

Do you think if Hurley leaves that the bombers will go crazzy as they will have another $750k to spend add that to Watson not playing on and they might have over $1.6 to spend extra a year....

My point is that they will be getting 2 good players in this draft who that is well line up Bombers....anyone out of contract can walk to them great position to be in..

Could be a blessing in disguise loosing Hurley if they can draft well..

"Blessing in disguise" losing an AA CHB in the prime of his career.........some have just got NFI.

 

[Dr Whoooooooo]

Do you think if Hurley leaves that the bombers will go crazzy as they will have another $750k to spend add that to Watson not playing on and they might have over $1.6 to spend extra a year....

My point is that they will be getting 2 good players in this draft who that is well line up Bombers....anyone out of contract can walk to them great position to be in..

Could be a blessing in disguise loosing Hurley if they can draft well..

I actually said something very similar ealier in thread ... I was told there are some in the Essendon camp that are thinking a complete rebuild is better than a partial patch up job.

Moving forward its going to be very tough competiting against GWS & GC ( injury free ) .... maybe best to bite the bullet now and postion yourself to develop a few years behind them in the cycle.

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

I actually said something very similar ealier in thread ... I was told there are some in the Essendon camp that are thinking a complete rebuild is better than a partial patch up job.

Moving forward its going to be very tough competiting against GWS & GC ( injury free ) .... maybe best to bite the bullet now and postion yourself to develop a few years behind them in the cycle.

And then be like Melbourne in the Neeld years.

You don't get rid of players like Hurley who offer experience and leadership when you are rebuilding a side or in our case refreshing the list.

 

[LB#16]

I actually said something very similar ealier in thread ... I was told there are some in the Essendon camp that are thinking a complete rebuild is better than a partial patch up job.

Moving forward its going to be very tough competiting against GWS & GC ( injury free ) .... maybe best to bite the bullet now and postion yourself to develop a few years behind them in the cycle.

You're essentially suggesting Essendon tank for the next few years and throw away their stars so they can spiritlessly avoid competing with GWS and GC. That would be a completely unassertive move.

 

[Dr Whoooooooo]

You're essentially suggesting Essendon tank for the next few years and throw away their stars so they can spiritlessly avoid competing with GWS and GC. That would be a completely unassertive move.

No Im suggesting you look to keep players you think are in your next premiership window side and position yourself as a club that can genuinely compete in 3-4 years time ... but you have to be bold.

Look ... if I was an Essendon supporter I'd be keen to hold onto Hurley but if HE decides to leave on THIS occasion blind Freddy can see Essendon are in no position to drive a hard bargain ... post drug suspensions.

The AFLPA have made their position very clear, the AFL have made their position very clear in public ... in private think they have also said under the current AFL climate going head-head with the AFLPA wont happen.

Sorry but the competition is more important than allowing Essendon to hold out for a "fairer deal" ... in this instance.

I feel for Essendon supporters the have been awesome through-out this whole saga ( no fault of theirs the club is in such deep poo - unlike say a team like Melbourne ) ... but such is life.

 

[RearNaked]

No Im suggesting you look to keep players you think are in your next premiership window side and position yourself as a club that can genuinely compete in 3-4 years time ... but you have to be bold.

Look ... if I was an Essendon supporter I'd be keen to hold onto Hurley but if HE decides to leave on THIS occasion blind Freddy can see Essendon are in no position to drive a hard bargain ... post drug suspensions.

The AFLPA have made their position very clear, the AFL have made their position very clear in public ... in private think they have also said under the current AFL climate going head-head with the AFLPA wont happen.

Sorry but the competition is more important than allowing Essendon to hold out for a "fairer deal" ... in this instance.

I feel for Essendon supporters the have been awesome through-out this whole saga ( no fault of theirs the club is in such deep poo - unlike say a team like Melbourne ) ... but such is life.

stringer straight swap will be the starting point because such is life

 

[Pannalstaroz]

stringer straight swap will be the starting point because such is life

Will be a short negotiation then.

 

[The Bomb]

Hurley will be at Essendon in 2017.

 

[Dr Whoooooooo]

Will be a short negotiation then.

well said ... but you have to admire their blind faith.

 

[DHepp21]

stringer straight swap will be the starting point because such is life

Unders. Throw in Bontempelli and their first.

 

[Vindicater]

Unders. Throw in Bontempelli and their first.

To be fair we could at least send them Dempsey back

 

[DHepp21]

To be fair we could at least send them Dempsey back

I'm generous. They can have Kommer as well.

 

[DERO]

I suspect one of the hurdles here is the fact that he will be a free agent at the end of 2017. The extension from Essendon will need to be generous.

 

[Flags_In_The_Bag]

Loyalty is underrated in footy. It ruined us when we traded away Caracella, Heffernan and Blumfield in the early 2000's. If good players want to stay you stick by them. Goes both ways though, I think Hurley will get much more out of his career if he stays with the Dons.

All depends who you follow, if you were another clubs supporter looking at trying to get him you would sing a different tune.

 

[DERO]

I don't think the bombers had any choice but to trade Caracella, Blumfield, Heffernan, Moorcroft and then Hardwick. There was some pretty poor salary cap management. The Mercuri deal and big money for Lloyd, Hird etc as well as changes to the cap hurt big time. It wasn't about loyalty, it was about dollars.

 

[In the Outer]

I don't think the bombers had any choice but to trade Caracella, Blumfield, Heffernan, Moorcroft and then Hardwick. There was some pretty poor salary cap management. The Mercuri deal and big money for Lloyd, Hird etc as well as changes to the cap hurt big time. It wasn't about loyalty, it was about dollars.

Yep. Forced to trade 3 premiership players 5 minutes after having lifted the premiership cup. And yes, total mismanagement of the cap. The Mercuri deal was just unfortunate. Dead set gun that would probably almost be the equal of the three players traded in the fire sale...