With the 7853th posting of Fremantle's trading blunders, it got me thinking which clubs are consistently improving or wrecking players coming their way? I don't mean which are trading good or bad players, but whether traded players in or out are doing better or worse.
Eg. Fremantle obviously has had players get better since leaving in general and worse on arriving.
I contrast it with my club (Port) who have an admirable record of improving players - the latest being Rodan, following a line of fringe players/delisted players from other clubs such as Mahoney, Bishop, etc. Whilst players going the other way have rarely reached the same heights - Josh Carr and Nick Stevens two of the latest whose careers stagnated on leaving.
So which other clubs are particular good or bad at saving/wrecking careers?
If I was a fringe player I'd shudder at going to Fremantle or Richmond, whilst a trade to Port or Sydney and it'd be a good chance of being a career lifeline (unless you are already a total squib like Lonie on arrival - there are limits ).
Eg. Fremantle obviously has had players get better since leaving in general and worse on arriving.
I contrast it with my club (Port) who have an admirable record of improving players - the latest being Rodan, following a line of fringe players/delisted players from other clubs such as Mahoney, Bishop, etc. Whilst players going the other way have rarely reached the same heights - Josh Carr and Nick Stevens two of the latest whose careers stagnated on leaving.
So which other clubs are particular good or bad at saving/wrecking careers?
If I was a fringe player I'd shudder at going to Fremantle or Richmond, whilst a trade to Port or Sydney and it'd be a good chance of being a career lifeline (unless you are already a total squib like Lonie on arrival - there are limits ).