The Official Matthew Pavlich Thread

[the mighty adelaide crows]

Re: Pavlich - What would You Give Up For Him?

to get pavlich i would give up :Meesen, Douglas,and perrie.and a few draft picks.then we will get him next year.

 

[Smoooothy]

Re: Pavlich - What would You Give Up For Him?

i'd like to know what afccomau's opinion is...

 

[Stiffy_18]

Re: Craigy's Interview On Pavlich.

This reluctance to do trades on Craig's part is really starting to give me the shits. He needs to realise that trading is equally important as drafting and developing and all the teams that have won the flags have had a great percentage of their premiership side acquired through trades!

I just get this sinking feeling in the stomach that Craig will **** this one up for us because he is too afraid to step on some toes in the playing group!

 

[Phhht]

Re: Pavlich - What would You Give Up For Him?

Hubby just mentioned that Clinton Grybass mentioned that Pav was all but stitched up with PORT ADELAIDE... anyone hear this?

Please dont tease us....

 

[crows4always]

Re: Pavlich - What would You Give Up For Him?

Pavlich is an elite AFL key position player. He is seriously being undervalued on this board. Freo would be right to want an exchange involving a young proven player eg Johncock, Thompson, Rutten, Reilly, a promising youngster eg Porplyzia, Griffen, Knights, Van Berlo and a high draft pick. I think people on this board need to start being a bit more realistic as to what it would take to bring Pav here. It's a pity that we can't just buy him off Freo like they do in the football leagues around the world as we have $. I'm not saying I want to give up these players, just that we will have to face up to the reality that the AFC will have to.

No Way

 

[bus24]

Re: Pavlich - What would You Give Up For Him?

to get pavlich i would give up :Meesen, Douglas,and perrie.and a few draft picks.then we will get him next year.

Yeh..... ok

Meesen - the talented ruckman, who will be an AFL footballer. Whereabouts, I don't have a clue.

Douglas - Yeh right pal . He's going absolutely nowhere. One of the most talented kids we've EVER drafted.

Perrie - I'm not opposed to moving him on

So in effect you want to trade away Perrie (probably best 22 in NC books) and Meesen and Douglas (2 first round selections) as well as a few draft picks.

You weren't in charge at Freo a while ago were you?

 

[jo172]

Re: Pavlich - What would You Give Up For Him?

You weren't in charge at Freo a while ago were you?

If he was it would certainly explain the Mcleod/Groom and Croad Trades!

 

[hoogs]

Re: Pavlich - What would You Give Up For Him?

Port have too many good WA players that are perfect tradebait. You need to trade with another club for 2 top 3 draft picks. Maybe number 1 and another top 8 or so. MHO

 

[Dandy_GO]

Re: Craigy's Interview On Pavlich.

This reluctance to do trades on Craig's part is really starting to give me the shits. He needs to realise that trading is equally important as drafting and developing and all the teams that have won the flags have had a great percentage of their premiership side acquired through trades!

I just get this sinking feeling in the stomach that Craig will **** this one up for us because he is too afraid to step on some toes in the playing group!

I fully support Craigs feelings on trading.
Football players lives revolve around their club. I don't think it's fair to expect players to give 100% for their club if that same club will happily trade them away to another club, effectively forcing them to make new friends, fit in with their new teammates, and even live in another city, if a player the club sees as superior or more useful is on offer.

I find it immensely hypocritical of supporters to whinge about blokes like Fergus Watts and then turn around and suggest we trade players who love this club and have given it nothing but their full and total commitment for the duration of the time they've been here.

What kind of message does constantly trading players give to the remaining players anyway? How can we expect 100% dedication from them when we don't give it in return? One of the reasons Craig has been a successful coach to date is because he has the players on his side. The evidence of this is in the resurgance of the careers of several of our players - most notably Andy McLeod. We all knew he wasn't Ayers's biggest fan, and his career was going downhill as the years went by under him. Under Craig, this has turned around, and I'm sure that the loyalty he shows to his players is a strong part of this.

I hate the "meat market" too.

The only times I'll support trading our players are 1. when they want to leave or 2. if both parties feel they'll get better opportunities at another club.

Loyalty from the club translates to loyalty from the players.

 

[Mad Dog]

Re: Pavlich - What would You Give Up For Him?

Van Berlo

van Berlo v Farmer at PS Training.


I'd like to see that...

 

[BWST]

Re: Craigy's Interview On Pavlich.

I fully support Craigs feelings on trading.
Football players lives revolve around their club. I don't think it's fair to expect players to give 100% for their club if that same club will happily trade them away to another club, effectively forcing them to make new friends, fit in with their new teammates, and even live in another city, if a player the club sees as superior or more useful is on offer.

I find it immensely hypocritical of supporters to whinge about blokes like Fergus Watts and then turn around and suggest we trade players who love this club and have given it nothing but their full and total commitment for the duration of the time they've been here.

What kind of message does constantly trading players give to the remaining players anyway? How can we expect 100% dedication from them when we don't give it in return? One of the reasons Craig has been a successful coach to date is because he has the players on his side. The evidence of this is in the resurgance of the careers of several of our players - most notably Andy McLeod. We all knew he wasn't Ayers's biggest fan, and his career was going downhill as the years went by under him. Under Craig, this has turned around, and I'm sure that the loyalty he shows to his players is a strong part of this.

I hate the "meat market" too.

The only times I'll support trading our players are 1. when they want to leave or 2. if both parties feel they'll get better opportunities at another club.

Loyalty from the club translates to loyalty from the players.

Fantastic post !! Agree 100 percent Dandy. Well thought out, and put across.

 

[jo172]

Re: Craigy's Interview On Pavlich.

I hate trading full stop under the current system. It seems dumb to allow players to change clubs if you're going to make it so difficult. Would love to see free agency in a similar vein to the NBA

 

[Crow-mo]

Re: Craigy's Interview On Pavlich.

Oh, so he's either going to Adelaide next year or he's not. Good, thanks for the update.

ha ha

 

[Crow-mo]

Re: Craigy's Interview On Pavlich.

couldn't agree less with Dandy,

not trying to be rude but that is a fairly naive, fairytales and puppy dog tails kinda of approach. it makes sense in theory, but not really in practice.

this is an industry, which requires mobility of labour. boo hoo.

I don't mean to suggest that trading of players needs to be gratuitous or such, but in certain circumstances it is part and parcel of the game.

 

[Dandy_GO]

Re: Craigy's Interview On Pavlich.

I somehow knew it'd be you to say that

Just how much mobility is required though? How many times do we have to uproot these people from their homes? In our "industry", every single employee is chosen by a club which may not necessarily be the club of his choice, or even in his city, but if he wants to play AFL then he's got no choice but to go play there (at least to start with). By the same token, every club has the opportunity, through the draft, to create a squad of players based on what they see as their needs. How much more "labour mobility" do you need than this? Find me an industry where anything like this (to the same scale - ie 100% of new recruits) occurs. Clubs shouldn't require much trading after this, unless something in their drafting and/or development process is failing. Trading is to some degree an admission of the failures of these two (and other) areas. I believe Craig feels we can overcome the need to trade by improving these areas, and a bi-product of this will be greater loyalty and morale amongst the players, leading to greater output and less instances of players returning home when out of contract.

 

[suburban_superstar]

Re: Pavlich - What would You Give Up For Him?

Of course Pavlich is worth a lot. He is a gun player. But all of the talk that Fremantle will play "hard ball" is wrong. They will do whatever they can to get as much as they can from the Crows. But take note of the word can - sometimes, you can only get so much in return, even for someone like Pavlich.

in which case, port is in a ideal position because they have more to offer.

 

[suburban_superstar]

Re: Pavlich - What would You Give Up For Him?

Port have too many good WA players that are perfect tradebait. You need to trade with another club for 2 top 3 draft picks. Maybe number 1 and another top 8 or so. MHO

id say two top three draft picks is a tad extreme, but it looks like we WILL have to trade for another high draft pick and im highly doubtful meesen is worth a top ten pick.

 

[hoogs]

Re: Pavlich - What would You Give Up For Him?

Thank God he's not Victorian. At least if he goes we'll be compensated. Feel sorry for the Eagles and Judd. PSD looms.

 

[Ad76]

Re: Craigy's Interview On Pavlich.

couldn't agree less with Dandy,

not trying to be rude but that is a fairly naive, fairytales and puppy dog tails kinda of approach. it makes sense in theory, but not really in practice.

this is an industry, which requires mobility of labour. boo hoo.

I don't mean to suggest that trading of players needs to be gratuitous or such, but in certain circumstances it is part and parcel of the game.

Mate, you have a valid point but for what it’s worth I’m with Dandy on this one.

You’re completely right about this being an industry – and a bloody big one at that. And there’s no doubt that trading is part and parcel of that, as you say.

Dandy’s point about Neil Craig’s rapport with the playing group can’t be ignored though.

I think we all agree that he has a proven record of getting the most from his players.
So, what we’re really weighing up here is:

The value of that rapport with the players and the effect that of changing his stance on trading would have on that.

Vs

The value of the trade itself, if we made it.

To me, that seems like the sticking point here. I don’t think that anyone is denying the realities that you’ve pointed out. Dandy and I are just placing more value in that rapport, and assuming that it would be more greatly affected. Let’s be honest, when you’re dealing with intangibles like this it really just comes down to our opinions here anyway. Besides, I’m sure you’ll agree that any effects are going to vary from player to player based on their different personalities.
Every industry, and company has it’s employees who will stay put based on loyalty and how they feel about their workplace when they could make more elsewhere. They also have their mercenaries who will go to the highest bidder.

So, why am I bothering to tell you stuff you already know? 
If we agree that even a relatively small proportion of the playing group are the types that would be affected by trading away a player who wanted to stay. Let’s say 20% ?
While these guys are professional athletes who you’d expect to product the same results, and put in the same effort regardless, it’s unrealistic to think that there wouldn’t be any effect on training and preparation when these guys spend so much time at the club as a group.

It is part and parcel of the game, as you say but there are consequences. With Craigy’s coaching style they’re greater than many other coaches, as these guys already have their expectations based on his stance. To change that now – industry or not – would in my opinion be damaging.


Disclaimer:
I’m not against any Pavlich trade. Draft picks, players that want to go (Meesen?), or that would volunteer if asked.

 

[Sanguinarius]

Re: Craigy's Interview On Pavlich.

if we dont throw the kitchen sink at pav and freo I will not be impressed.

as for trading, sorry dandy but i dont agree. to draw a fairly dubious analogy, if football players were in the armed service they could be moved every 2, 4, 6 or 8 years, get paided 1/4-1/2 as much and have to put their lives on the line - and it doesnt effect their loyalty. footy players signed up for this gig and should take all the good with the bad

 

[Sanguinarius]

Re: Pavlich - What would You Give Up For Him?

id say two top three draft picks is a tad extreme, but it looks like we WILL have to trade for another high draft pick and im highly doubtful meesen is worth a top ten pick.

we might be lucky here considering it's meant to be a weak draft and picks should come at a cheaper price.

first round pick from last year would be worth much more than a pick from this year

 

[Motown]

Re: Pavlich - What would You Give Up For Him?

we might be lucky here considering it's meant to be a weak draft and picks should come at a cheaper price.

first round pick from last year would be worth much more than a pick from this year

Well, wouldn't that mean Freo would ask for an even higher pick then, given the perceived lack of quality? The currency being traded is quality whether it's perceived or potential or whatever, not an an arabic numeral.

Given the current valuation of top ten draft picks, I think getting this is going to hurt a lot more than most give credit. In a "shallow" draft, I'd expect obtaining this pick to be problematic. Can anyone really see Richmond, Melbourne, Carlton, Saint supporters and the like accepting a trade for their top five pick for anything less than a "gun"? They'd storm the club offices. They'd have zero interest in facilitating a deal for Pav unless they were to come out well ahead.

 

[Crow-mo]

Re: Craigy's Interview On Pavlich.

I somehow knew it'd be you to say that

you shouldn't be so certain. I am heavy pro-players rights. they lack too many of them in this game. but this is a non-issue.

they should have the same rights as other workers, no less, no more.

Just how much mobility is required though? How many times do we have to uproot these people from their homes? In our "industry", every single employee is chosen by a club which may not necessarily be the club of his choice, or even in his city, but if he wants to play AFL then he's got no choice but to go play there (at least to start with).

plenty of industries require mobility as part and parcel of the gig. this is nothing new. having to sometimes move around as part of your job puts them on the same playing field as so many others.

nothing to see here.

By the same token, every club has the opportunity, through the draft, to create a squad of players based on what they see as their needs. How much more "labour mobility" do you need than this?

actually this is wrong. the clubs do not have the ability to address their needs, they are forced to rely on a restrictive and broadly ineffective mechanism that may or may not help.

Find me an industry where anything like this (to the same scale - ie 100% of new recruits) occurs.

agree, there aren't many industries where complete mobility and freedom of movement isn't available for the organisations to satisfy their labour needs. I know that's not what you meant, it's what you should have meant

Clubs shouldn't require much trading after this, unless something in their drafting and/or development process is failing.

clubs shouldn't need the ability to correct the outcomes of inappropriate and uncertain mechanism? are you sure.

Trading is to some degree an admission of the failures of these two (and other) areas. I believe Craig feels we can overcome the need to trade by improving these areas, and a bi-product of this will be greater loyalty and morale amongst the players, leading to greater output and less instances of players returning home when out of contract.

A good employer always values the welfare of their workers, and seeks to create an environment conducive to greater productivity, irrespective of industry. where your argument lacks substance, is the validation of your idea that a worker cannot do his job unless he is mollycoddled in every possible way. sometimes you just have to get on with it. a healthy environment is one which creates the best possible atmosphere - within the rules of the industry.

you seem to suggest that the poor petals cannot do the job they're paid for, unless we hold their hands. no sorry.

player trading is a fact of life for professional sports.

 

[Crow-mo]

Re: Craigy's Interview On Pavlich.

Mate, you have a valid point but for what it’s worth I’m with Dandy on this one.

You’re completely right about this being an industry – and a bloody big one at that. And there’s no doubt that trading is part and parcel of that, as you say.

Dandy’s point about Neil Craig’s rapport with the playing group can’t be ignored though.

I think we all agree that he has a proven record of getting the most from his players.
So, what we’re really weighing up here is:

The value of that rapport with the players and the effect that of changing his stance on trading would have on that.

Vs

The value of the trade itself, if we made it.

To me, that seems like the sticking point here. I don’t think that anyone is denying the realities that you’ve pointed out. Dandy and I are just placing more value in that rapport, and assuming that it would be more greatly affected. Let’s be honest, when you’re dealing with intangibles like this it really just comes down to our opinions here anyway. Besides, I’m sure you’ll agree that any effects are going to vary from player to player based on their different personalities.
Every industry, and company has it’s employees who will stay put based on loyalty and how they feel about their workplace when they could make more elsewhere. They also have their mercenaries who will go to the highest bidder.

So, why am I bothering to tell you stuff you already know? 
If we agree that even a relatively small proportion of the playing group are the types that would be affected by trading away a player who wanted to stay. Let’s say 20% ?
While these guys are professional athletes who you’d expect to product the same results, and put in the same effort regardless, it’s unrealistic to think that there wouldn’t be any effect on training and preparation when these guys spend so much time at the club as a group.

It is part and parcel of the game, as you say but there are consequences. With Craigy’s coaching style they’re greater than many other coaches, as these guys already have their expectations based on his stance. To change that now – industry or not – would in my opinion be damaging.


Disclaimer:
I’m not against any Pavlich trade. Draft picks, players that want to go (Meesen?), or that would volunteer if asked.

not a bad post at all

what's missing is the value of that rapport. you have presumed it is worth more, that I'd argue it is. there is value to be placed on loyalty and comfort, their is also a negative value to placed on complacency and a lack of a competitive edge.

it's all about measurement.

emperically we can easily deduce however that by observing large, successful professional sports organisations, that they place the value of new, better, more suited cattle, above the uncertainty created by player mobility. in fact many would argue, that the competitive desire to stay at a big club, rather than go to a smaller club, is one of the things that separates the wheat from the chaff.

players are competitive animals, they cross the white line, and they compete. how loved they feel, should not matter in the heat of battle. they deserve all the rewards and advantages these skills bring them, they do not deserve to be immune to the basic tenets of their industry.

 

[Crow-mo]

Re: Craigy's Interview On Pavlich.

if we dont throw the kitchen sink at pav and freo I will not be impressed.

as for trading, sorry dandy but i dont agree. to draw a fairly dubious analogy, if football players were in the armed service they could be moved every 2, 4, 6 or 8 years, get paided 1/4-1/2 as much and have to put their lives on the line - and it doesnt effect their loyalty. footy players signed up for this gig and should take all the good with the bad

absolutely. they should get ALL the good they deserve (they're short changed at the moment) and ALL the bad (protected from some of that) too.