Recommitted Tim Kelly [exploring trade options home to West Coast]

[RoversFC]

We drafted him as an unknown WAFL player at pick 24 and he has walked into our side and had a stellar season as a goal kicking inside midfielder who was one of our players invited by the AFL to attend the Brownlow Medal, and you are telling me his value is around the same as what he was drafted??

Please elaborate for me why we would trade him this year if the deal is going to be the exact same as next year??

If anything we will simply get a better deal next season as you won’t likely finish as high on the ladder getting us a better return pick, and Fremantle might come to play harder next season.

So if all that is on the table is a pick in the 20’s... please elaborate why we would trade him now instead of next season??

Makes no sense for us to move him now.

Let’s be clear also, your in a premiership window and your loosing gaff, who are you going to bring in to keep you a premiership threat??

Would be dumb not to throw a lot at the deal as you need him badly for next season given your midfield is going to be substantially weakened

None of what I said had anything to do with you having to trade Kelly. I was simply pointing out how absurd it is that you would only consider two first rounders for Kelly, something you didn’t even pay for Dangerfield who is definitely the better player.

Do you have to trade Kelly? No I don’t care wtf you do with him. If he wants out and Geelong are holding him to your 2 first round ransom then I have a problem. But just the simple fact that you would only consider, not even the ridiculous thought that 2 first rounders was the starting point, just the fact you would only consider keeping someone who presumably wants to go home for 2 first rounders instead of giving us a blowy as a side gift for the trade, just anbsolutely blows my mind. I wouldn’t expect a team to give up 2 first rounders for Gaff if we matched forcing a trade.

Love the stab you threw as well. You’re in the exact same position as us, if not worse. Name your young guns minus Kelly. You’re the 2014 Brooklyn Nets of the AFL.

 

[raffrox]

None of what I said had anything to do with you having to trade Kelly. I was simply pointing out how absurd it is that you would only consider two first rounders for Kelly, something you didn’t even pay for Dangerfield who is definitely the better player.

Do you have to trade Kelly? No I don’t care wtf you do with him. If he wants out and Geelong are holding him to your 2 first round ransom then I have a problem. But just the simple fact that you would only consider, not even the ridiculous thought that 2 first rounders was the starting point, just the fact you would only consider keeping someone who presumably wants to go home for 2 first rounders instead of giving us a blowy as a side gift for the trade, just anbsolutely blows my mind. I wouldn’t expect a team to give up 2 first rounders for Gaff if we matched forcing a trade.

Love the stab you threw as well. You’re in the exact same position as us, if not worse. Name your young guns minus Kelly. You’re the 2014 Brooklyn Nets of the AFL.

Points for the Nets reference because i think it a a good one.

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

All of those issues are relevant to Kelly in making his decision but they have no bearing on the trade price (which you guys dont seem to get).

The relevant points are is he peforming to a high level? Yes
Is WCE's first pick going to be 17ish? Yes
Does that pick have as much value to Geelong as normal this year because of FS bidding? No
At his performance level is he likely to get a R1 in a trade next year while OOC? Probably
Is there a real chance WCE have an earlier R1 next year? (Ie finish lower on the ladder) Probably.

Giving all that can you give me one reason as to why Geelong would trade Kelly for a pick in the teens? There isn't one, WCE supporters just don't engage with this point. If you could accept this we could toss out 95 % of the posts in this thread that have no chance of happening and discuss the 5% that are realistic.

The one point is that I expect Kelly has just played his best season for you and 2019 will be a drop off due to the second year home blues (not Perth home directly - his partner in Geelong is likely to be really home sick).

So at the end of a great season - 20018 draft pick 17 is fair value.
I expect a drop off and he will be out of contract meaning value in October 2019 will be more likely at the 20 to 30.

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

So what deal you think his worth?

about pick 17.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

The one point is that I expect Kelly has just played his best season for you and 2019 will be a drop off due to the second year home blues (not Perth home directly - his partner in Geelong is likely to be really home sick).

So at the end of a great season - 20018 draft pick 17 is fair value.
I expect a drop off and he will be out of contract meaning value in October 2019 will be more likely at the 20 to 30.

We agree to disagree then. I think he will keep playing well and hold value.

But regardless my point is still correct, an end R1 has much less value to Geelong this year than in a normal year. If that's WCE's offer there will be no trade this year.

 

[TheKITC]

Well lets just shut down Bigfooty then. Have you had a read of any other trade forum? It's all the same. The Tim Kelly and Cailtlin Miller homesickness stories are as loud as it can get without saying "we want to come home". If you want to ignore that then good luck to you.

No hang on, you said that evidence beyond opinion and speculation has "been posted many times before". You're back pedaling and now relying on weight of forum opinions as evidence Wasn't it much the same type of incessant speculation said about Dustin Martin and Josh Kelly by North posters last season? How'd that work out? I've seen this many times before, but without any you know, actual proof... it's simply speculation. That you're claiming it as fact and attacking anyone who refutes or questions it says more about you and your posting than anything else.

You also stated that it's "generally agreed on by most realists" that Kelly wants to go home and maybe he does (I'm doubtful at this stage), but all I see is fans of the Perth clubs beating the drum and attempting to spread the fire. If that's your opinion of realism then I'm sorry to tell you, but you're very deluded.

 

[BigCat1]

None of what I said had anything to do with you having to trade Kelly. I was simply pointing out how absurd it is that you would only consider two first rounders for Kelly, something you didn’t even pay for Dangerfield who is definitely the better player.

Do you have to trade Kelly? No I don’t care wtf you do with him. If he wants out and Geelong are holding him to your 2 first round ransom then I have a problem. But just the simple fact that you would only consider, not even the ridiculous thought that 2 first rounders was the starting point, just the fact you would only consider keeping someone who presumably wants to go home for 2 first rounders instead of giving us a blowy as a side gift for the trade, just anbsolutely blows my mind. I wouldn’t expect a team to give up 2 first rounders for Gaff if we matched forcing a trade.

Love the stab you threw as well. You’re in the exact same position as us, if not worse. Name your young guns minus Kelly. You’re the 2014 Brooklyn Nets of the AFL.

Thanks Football Authority. Stick to basketball. Three teams have completey rebuilt their lists for over a decade while staying up the top without early picks. You will have two picks in the mid 20s. That’s the bottom line. How you got them, who you lost or what they are technically called who gives a rats.

I’d definitely trade one of our best players (that we don’t have to) with 120 of his best games to come for kid with a 50% chance of playing 40 development games. Where do we sign.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

None of what I said had anything to do with you having to trade Kelly. I was simply pointing out how absurd it is that you would only consider two first rounders for Kelly, something you didn’t even pay for Dangerfield who is definitely the better player.

Do you have to trade Kelly? No I don’t care wtf you do with him. If he wants out and Geelong are holding him to your 2 first round ransom then I have a problem. But just the simple fact that you would only consider, not even the ridiculous thought that 2 first rounders was the starting point, just the fact you would only consider keeping someone who presumably wants to go home for 2 first rounders instead of giving us a blowy as a side gift for the trade, just anbsolutely blows my mind. I wouldn’t expect a team to give up 2 first rounders for Gaff if we matched forcing a trade.

Love the stab you threw as well. You’re in the exact same position as us, if not worse. Name your young guns minus Kelly. You’re the 2014 Brooklyn Nets of the AFL.

No idea why you keep bringing up dangerfield as he was a free agent not a trade scenario, aw both know that wasn’t dangerfields market value.

If dangerfield tried to walk out the year prior what do you think we would have had to have traded for him?

How are we in the exact same position when we finished 8th and you finished second? Do you see us competing for a flag in 2019? Most don’t, but you are in a flag window and need to make the most of it and go all out for a flag.

Your competing for a flag in 2019, and your off season will see you losing an A grade midfielder while bringing in nothing.

To not go after kelly for 2 1st rounders and go all out for the premiership is just stupid.

Imagine if you make the grand final and lose by 2-3 goals. Would you regret not trading for kelly?

 

[raffrox]

No idea why you keep bringing up dangerfield as he was a free agent not a trade scenario, aw both know that wasn’t dangerfields market value.

If dangerfield tried to walk out the year prior what do you think we would have had to have traded for him?

How are we in the exact same position when we finished 8th and you finished second? Do you see us competing for a flag in 2019? Most don’t, but you are in a flag window and need to make the most of it and go all out for a flag.

Your competing for a flag in 2019, and your off season will see you losing an A grade midfielder while bringing in nothing.

To not go after kelly for 2 1st rounders and go all out for the premiership is just stupid.

Imagine if you make the grand final and lose by 2-3 goals. Would you regret not trading for kelly?

Tim Kelly is not worth two first rounders thats why.

What would be stupid is any team doing that trade.

 

[RoversFC]

Thanks Football Authority. Stick to basketball. Three teams have completey rebuilt their lists for over a decade while staying up the top without early picks. You will have two picks in the mid 20s. That’s the bottom line. How you got them, who you lost or what they are technically called who gives a rats.

I’d definitely trade one of our best players (that we don’t have to) with 120 of his best games to come for kid with a 50% chance of playing 40 development games. Where do we sign.

Aww cmon mate, no need to cry. It was your supporter who started the petty insults. You guys got 1 more premiership than us and have played the same amount of grand finals since 2005. Don’t act like you guys are so much better than us. Go ahead with most other teams, but your subtle stab has no effect on us Eagles.

If you guys stick by your 2 first rounders for someone who has played one season and may want to go home (I’m assuming he does for a trade to happen), then I wonder what you guys would’ve demanded for Dangerfield after the 2016. 5 first rounders and Duggan or Sheed at that time? Maybe Gaff even back then. How much would you guy demand for the best players in the game, if you demand that for Kelly. I know you don’t have to trade him, but damn Daniel, don’t act like 2 first rounders isn’t a ridiculous overs trade for you guys. Unless you don’t want into account every single trade in history.

 

[RoversFC]

No idea why you keep bringing up dangerfield as he was a free agent not a trade scenario, aw both know that wasn’t dangerfields market value.

If dangerfield tried to walk out the year prior what do you think we would have had to have traded for him?

How are we in the exact same position when we finished 8th and you finished second? Do you see us competing for a flag in 2019? Most don’t, but you are in a flag window and need to make the most of it and go all out for a flag.

Your competing for a flag in 2019, and your off season will see you losing an A grade midfielder while bringing in nothing.

To not go after kelly for 2 1st rounders and go all out for the premiership is just stupid.

Imagine if you make the grand final and lose by 2-3 goals. Would you regret not trading for kelly?

Well the fact you traded for Dangerfield is kind of why I’m referring to it.If I’m going by your logic you would’ve had to trade a first rounder for the next ten years to get him with a year still left on his contract. But because he was a free agent, you only had to give up 1 + a second rounder.

I took what you were saying as a stab. Saying our list is aging without any really good young players, that should mean we should break the bank for Kelly. That’s why I said your in the same position, old with no young stars.

If we lost in the GF by 2-3 goals I 100% would not look back and think if we traded for Kelly we would’ve won the premiership. That’s just such a ridiculous statement I’m sorry. There are so many factors I would consider before I consider an off season trade. Especially not giving up most probably 2 100+ gamers for Tim Kelly.

 

[BigCat1]

Aww cmon mate, no need to cry. It was your supporter who started the petty insults. You guys got 1 more premiership than us and have played the same amount of grand finals since 2005. Don’t act like you guys are so much better than us. Go ahead with most other teams, but your subtle stab has no effect on us Eagles.

If you guys stick by your 2 first rounders for someone who has played one season and may want to go home (I’m assuming he does for a trade to happen), then I wonder what you guys would’ve demanded for Dangerfield after the 2016. 5 first rounders and Duggan or Sheed at that time? Maybe Gaff even back then. How much would you guy demand for the best players in the game, if you demand that for Kelly. I know you don’t have to trade him, but damn Daniel, don’t act like 2 first rounders isn’t a ridiculous overs trade for you guys. Unless you don’t want into account every single trade in history.

Ha ha uncontracted free agents you mean??? Very similar to this situation. Use one of your basketball analogies.

In the actual real world let me know one single player under 24 (contracted or not) that finishes top 5 in his clubs B&F and is traded for a pick in the 20s

Yeah the eagles have definitely been on a par with Geelong and TK is worth a pick in the 20s. You said it so it’s true.

Also stop with the hysteria of first round picks. You don’t and won’t have one under 20 this year! Your not talking 14 and 15

That’s like claiming Todd Elton was a first rd pick when it was still going until pick 30 that year.

 

[BigCat1]

Especially not giving up most probably 2 100+ gamers for Tim Kelly.

Factually incorrect again. Players picked btw 20 and 30 have a 50% chance of not playing 40 games. Leaving aside the standard of those games. Will they ave over a goal a game and collect over 500 possessions

 

[RoversFC]

Ha ha uncontracted free agents you mean??? Very similar to this situation. Use one of your basketball analogies.

In the actual real world let me know one single player under 24 (contracted or not) that finishes top 5 in his clubs B&F and is traded for a pick in the 20s

Yeah the eagles have definitely been on a par with Geelong and TK is worth a pick in the 20s. You said it so it’s true.

Also stop with the hysteria of first round picks. You don’t and won’t have one under 20 this year! Your not talking 14 and 15

That’s like claiming Todd Elton was a first rd pick when the it was still going until pick 30 that year.

So when do first round selections stop according to you? It’s called a first round pick, it’ll be pushed back 1 or 2
Spots from where it would usually be, such a big difference.

I never once claimed Tim Kelly had to be traded, let alone trade for 1 first round pick. Like I’ve said before, it was said It could be considered which says not only is there a 50/50 chance of you guys saying yes or no, but there is also a 50% chance that 2 first round picks wouldn’t even be enough for you to pick up the phones.

You got Kelly with picks later than us. I’m not saying that means you should take picks that were higher than he was, but don’t act like they’re trash now when you’ve done great with later picks.

I wouldn’t expect a team to cough up 2 first rounders for Gaff if we matched, and I wouldn’t expect the Eagles to demand that be the case if Gaff said he wanted to go home. So for that to be the case for Kelly, you can see why I think it’s ridiculous.

 

[RoversFC]

Factually incorrect again. Players picked btw 20 and 30 have a 50% chance of not playing 40 games. Leaving aside the standard of those games. Will they ave over a goal a game and collect over 500 possessions

If you don’t believe in your list to pick up 2 kids from the whole of Australia that could play 100 games then I’m glad they’re not recruiting for my club. Injuries always play a factor, but can’t just choose to decide when that’s the case. Kelly could tear his Achilles and ACL round 1 next year and lose his career, the same scenario as the kids you could’ve drafted.

 

[BigCat1]

If you don’t believe in your list to pick up 2 kids from the whole of Australia that could play 100 games then I’m glad they’re not recruiting for my club. Injuries always play a factor, but can’t just choose to decide when that’s the case. Kelly could tear his Achilles and ACL round 1 next year and lose his career, the same scenario as the kids you could’ve drafted.

You said your not offering two picks in the 20’s?? No way you said. Not a chance. Not a converted first round pick. So it’s one chance and a long long chance to find somebody better. Stuff better even remotely ball park. I’m not a list manager but you do understand facts don’t you. That’s the ave. Of full time AFL recruitment teams. Like the ones that work at the great WCE

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Tim Kelly is not worth two first rounders thats why.

What would be stupid is any team doing that trade.

His worth about pick 8-10 in the draft, then anything after that will need to be beneficial to us. Your first pick is going to be something like 19-20, hence why another late first round pick would make it about right.

2x end of first round picks are about right for kelly. Unless you can find an earlier pick for us, I would rather just wait and take your first pick next year than your pick this season, or take Fremantle first pick as they will probably be on the rise a little more and interest will spike.

The other possibility is Fremantle second round pick and Sean Darcy as floated around. I’m not as keen on that thought

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Well the fact you traded for Dangerfield is kind of why I’m referring to it.If I’m going by your logic you would’ve had to trade a first rounder for the next ten years to get him with a year still left on his contract. But because he was a free agent, you only had to give up 1 + a second rounder.

I took what you were saying as a stab. Saying our list is aging without any really good young players, that should mean we should break the bank for Kelly. That’s why I said your in the same position, old with no young stars.

If we lost in the GF by 2-3 goals I 100% would not look back and think if we traded for Kelly we would’ve won the premiership. That’s just such a ridiculous statement I’m sorry. There are so many factors I would consider before I consider an off season trade. Especially not giving up most probably 2 100+ gamers for Tim Kelly.

Point is you are in a premiership window and Kelly is a top player who can add a lot of value, you would be silly not to make a serious play when your window is open.

It doesn’t open very often or have your chance up the top, to say you will just stay up there because you have great kids is way more naive than my post. You need to cease the moment while your in the premiership window, and if that means giving up 2x end of first rounders for kelly then you would be silly not to do it.

You need quality players not young kids in your premiership window.

Gaff has gone. You need to bring in talent to help improve your chances next year, not 2020.

 

[Taylor]

His worth about pick 8-10 in the draft, then anything after that will need to be beneficial to us. Your first pick is going to be something like 19-20, hence why another late first round pick would make it about right.

2x end of first round picks are about right for kelly. Unless you can find an earlier pick for us, I would rather just wait and take your first pick next year than your pick this season, or take Fremantle first pick as they will probably be on the rise a little more and interest will spike.

The other possibility is Fremantle second round pick and Sean Darcy as floated around. I’m not as keen on that thought

Tim Kelly wouldn't get picked ahead of the first dozen players in the draft.

Even if you consider that he was the earliest taken player of his age when he was and he has played a year now to show what he has, clubs will still take the teenager.

I would expect him to get picked around the late teens by a club in premiership contention who need to inject mature bodies right now.

 

[WilloTree]

The other possibility is Fremantle second round pick and Sean Darcy as floated around. I’m not as keen on that thought

Nor am I.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Tim Kelly wouldn't get picked ahead of the first dozen players in the draft.

Even if you consider that he was the earliest taken player of his age when he was and he has played a year now to show what he has, clubs will still take the teenager.

I would expect him to get picked around the late teens by a club in premiership contention who need to inject mature bodies right now.

It’s about weighing up an untried kid who could turn out to be a complete dud vs a known quality player. Fremantle pick 6 could come into play and consideration, or Sean Darcy and your second pick possibly if we were to consider it.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Nor am I.

So what exactly do you believe will get you a deal that Geelong would consider worthwhile trading him 12 months early for?

Fremantle will most likely hold a higher pick next year in the first round, west coasts first pick will drop a little without gaff/nic nat.

Knowing the above is likely to happen, as well as Kelly improving. Why would Geelong be tempted by a second round pick??

Makes no sense at all.

 

[Smithy06]

No hang on, you said that evidence beyond opinion and speculation has "been posted many times before". You're back pedaling and now relying on weight of forum opinions as evidence Wasn't it much the same type of incessant speculation said about Dustin Martin and Josh Kelly by North posters last season? How'd that work out? I've seen this many times before, but without any you know, actual proof... it's simply speculation. That you're claiming it as fact and attacking anyone who refutes or questions it says more about you and your posting than anything else.

You also stated that it's "generally agreed on by most realists" that Kelly wants to go home and maybe he does (I'm doubtful at this stage), but all I see is fans of the Perth clubs beating the drum and attempting to spread the fire. If that's your opinion of realism then I'm sorry to tell you, but you're very deluded.

Here you go. Straight from his manager’s mouth. Do you need more?

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...ides-keen-to-bring-kelly-back-home-21416/amp/

 

[Smithy06]

No hang on, you said that evidence beyond opinion and speculation has "been posted many times before". You're back pedaling and now relying on weight of forum opinions as evidence Wasn't it much the same type of incessant speculation said about Dustin Martin and Josh Kelly by North posters last season? How'd that work out? I've seen this many times before, but without any you know, actual proof... it's simply speculation. That you're claiming it as fact and attacking anyone who refutes or questions it says more about you and your posting than anything else.

You also stated that it's "generally agreed on by most realists" that Kelly wants to go home and maybe he does (I'm doubtful at this stage), but all I see is fans of the Perth clubs beating the drum and attempting to spread the fire. If that's your opinion of realism then I'm sorry to tell you, but you're very deluded.

Oh sorry I didn’t realise you were you chasing a diary entry by Tim or Caitlin? A peer reviewed journal article maybe. I could scour the internet for all the previous interviews and news articles that would be sufficient evidence to most. Clearly not you though. So I won’t waste my time. I’d rather watch the Bachelor. DYOR

 

[TheKITC]

Here you go. Straight from his manager’s mouth. Do you need more?

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...ides-keen-to-bring-kelly-back-home-21416/amp/

Oh sorry I didn’t realise you were you chasing a diary entry by Tim or Caitlin? A peer reviewed journal article maybe. I could scour the internet for all the previous interviews and news articles that would be sufficient evidence to most. Clearly not you though. So I won’t waste my time. I’d rather watch the Bachelor. DYOR

Yep, you really showed me up on this one. An article from 'zero hangar' Why don't you quote me some facebook posts or people from another forum? I don't mean to be too harsh on you, but it's just embarrassing now.

You have scoured the internet and don't pretend you haven't (google search link is your giveaway buddy). Why is it that you couldn't find an article from a reputable source and have come up with this random website, with an 'article' from June? Why haven't The Age ran it? The West Australian? Geelong Advertiser? You seem like the type of person who would buy from danoz direct

Feel free to get the last word in though and attempt to take the moral high ground. People aren't really laughing at you, we're laughing with you