Recommitted Tim Kelly [requested a trade to West Coast]

[Pure_Ownage]

I agree with pretty much everything except it was close to a deal being done .
Geelong never intended to trade kelly and should have just said no and not strung us along all trade period .

But that would have made them look like campaigners and its easier to just keep moving the goal posts and say we couldnt reach an agreement

Geelong never moved the goalposts they said they wanted 1 top 10 pick.
If your assertion that 3 R2s are worth a top 10 pick you would have just traded them to a 3rd club for a top 10 pick and Kelly would be playing for you now. There is a reason 16 clubs werent willing to do that deal with you because no one rates 3 R2s as worth a top 10 pick let alone a top 5 one. Points values are irrelevant.

Your logic is poor.

 

[ghostbat12]

Sorry you must not have followed the conversation, I didnt list every single thing a trade is based on, I purely said that trades are based on value now, not some mythical best case scenario in 2-3 years.

Just to be clear, there are now a bunch of West Coast supporters who would not trade Brander for Kelly in a straight swap

Meh whatever, it all goes in the mix. According to you, kelly has more value than, say Rozee.

As for brander, i am one of those. That trade will not happen. What we have seen so far is enough to know the talent. Not some mythical thing u believe in.

Plus, as your fans keep telling us, you have Krueger. So you don’t need him.

You will have picks as you do not have enough leverage for anything else.

Facts of life.

 

[ghostbat12]

Geelong never moved the goalposts they said they wanted 1 top 10 pick.
If your assertion that 3 R2s are worth a top 10 pick you would have just traded them to a 3rd club for a top 10 pick and Kelly would be playing for you now. There is a reason 16 clubs werent willing to do that deal with you because no one rates 3 R2s as worth a top 10 pick let alone a top 5 one. Points values are irrelevant.

Your logic is poor.

According to WCE, Geelong never communicated to WCE that’s what they wanted. And according to Information, trade was nearly done until Scott at last minute pleaded.

Therefore there was an agreement. There will be an agreement again. You make BIG assumptions that WCE wasn’t even close and you think what was in media was correct.

A reporter asked Wells if a top 10 is needed. What was he going to say? No? Reporter out words in his mouth and he went with it. Imagine him saying “nah we won’t need a top 10”.

And Geelong fans took that to mean that It’s what Geelong communicated to WCE. Because obviously, there were no other discussions. *sarcasm*

Come on. He is out of contract now. Leverage has shifted. Don’t be naive.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Meh whatever, it all goes in the mix. According to you, kelly has more value than, say Rozee.

As for brander, i am one of those. That trade will not happen. What we have seen so far is enough to know the talent. Not some mythical thing u believe in.

Plus, as your fans keep telling us, you have Krueger. So you don’t need him.

You will have picks as you do not have enough leverage for anything else.

Facts of life.

Check my team flair

Rozee has done more at AFL level than Brander has done at WAFL level and is 6 months out from his draft, its hardly a good comparison. He keeps his draft value because he has performed at AFL level and its closer to draft date. Geelong supporters (Pure_Ownage) would probably take Rozee if Kelly was definitely leaving and would be pretty happy about it all things considered

 

[foxdog50]

According to WCE, Geelong never communicated to WCE that’s what they wanted. And according to Information, trade was nearly done until Scott at last minute pleaded.

Therefore there was an agreement. There will be an agreement again. You make BIG assumptions that WCE wasn’t even close and you think what was in media was correct.

A reporter asked Wells if a top 10 is needed. What was he going to say? No? Reporter out words in his mouth and he went with it. Imagine him saying “nah we won’t need a top 10”.

And Geelong fans took that to mean that It’s what Geelong communicated to WCE. Because obviously, there were no other discussions. *sarcasm*

Come on. He is out of contract now. Leverage has shifted. Don’t be naive.

So in your eyes, what do you think is a fair and even deal is?

 

[Yamumluvsbigcox]

I am a Brander fan but Kelly has miles more trade value than him.

Sure i agree kelly is also 5 years older . Doesnt change the fact that i wouldnt trade him for kelly . Best KPP in his draft year . Freak talent who needs a few years development.
Why would we trade him if he doesnt want to go ?

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Sure i agree kelly is also 5 years older . Doesnt change the fact that i wouldnt trade him for kelly . Best KPP in his draft year . Freak talent who needs a few years development.
Why would we trade him if he doesnt want to go ?

You wouldnt but equally why would Geelong trade Kelly for a fringe tall? They wouldnt.

 

[Obeanie1]

Your draft picks are completely beside the point of the original post which is you wouldnt do a straight swap of Kelly for Brander.

If Geelong quite rightly dont want two shit firsts for Kelly but would settle for just Brander (which would never happen, but that is the hypothetical), all you Eagles supporter in your amazing list balance knowledge wouldnt then just keep the draft picks and use them the get the best KPP available at those picks and get Kelly while you are firmly in a premiership window?

Well hypothetically now its gone from two shit 2nd rounders not being good enough to two shit 1 st rounders not being good enough. Like really?

I think Ive been pretty clear. No to Brander. I expect the Eagles to say the same.

If Geelong want to play it tough we keep the picks and throw Kelly's contract plus some at Coniglio. If Giants force a trade two firsts is better than one.

 

[ghostbat12]

So in your eyes, what do you think is a fair and even deal is?

Our first and the current sydney’s 2nd.

Is Geelong going to give him 900k? No.

Therefore cannot ask for superstar-like picks.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

According to WCE, Geelong never communicated to WCE that’s what they wanted. And according to Information, trade was nearly done until Scott at last minute pleaded.

Therefore there was an agreement. There will be an agreement again. You make BIG assumptions that WCE wasn’t even close and you think what was in media was correct.

A reporter asked Wells if a top 10 is needed. What was he going to say? No? Reporter out words in his mouth and he went with it. Imagine him saying “nah we won’t need a top 10”.

And Geelong fans took that to mean that It’s what Geelong communicated to WCE. Because obviously, there were no other discussions. *sarcasm*

Come on. He is out of contract now. Leverage has shifted. Don’t be naive.

So you have no information other than WCE spin that Geelong never communicated what they wanted? Try again then.

Its also absolutely irrelevant to the point that no club ever trades pick 5 for 20 22 and 40. Since when has that ever happened? It doesnt.

 

[Yamumluvsbigcox]

You wouldnt but equally why would Geelong trade Kelly for a fringe tall? They wouldnt.

I dont care what geelong want . Kelly want out thats the difference
I would rather go after coniglio but if he re-signs kelly would do

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Well hypothetically now its gone from two shit 2nd rounders not being good enough to two shit 1 st rounders not being good enough. Like really?

I think Ive been pretty clear. No to Brander. I expect the Eagles to say the same.

If Geelong want to play it tough we keep the picks and throw Kelly's contract plus some at Coniglio. If Giants force a trade two firsts is better than one.

I'm not changing any goal posts with regards to draft picks FWIW since I havent engaged on this before, you would have to expect to be giving up at least this and next years first, and I'd argue that two picks that are about 15 + (especially when they inevitably get pushed out with academy and f/s) is serious unders for Kelly but maybe none of you rate him that highly but the guy is killing it this year

If nothing else, you guys that wouldnt do Brander for Kelly, I value the loyalty

 

[ghostbat12]

So you have no information other than WCE spin that Geelong never communicated what they wanted? Try again then.

Its also absolutely irrelevant to the point that no club ever trades pick 5 for 20 22 and 40. Since when has that ever happened? It doesnt.

Top 5 pick now?

F-me. Although you guys have at least given up on whole no1 pick thing.

Except our first this year was offered. But keep inventing what was actually offered.

 

[Warhorse]

I don't see how west coast can afford him. Surely will be on big money next year

 

[Yamumluvsbigcox]

I don't see how west coast can afford him. Surely will be on big money next year

Would geelong pay him more than selwood and dangerfield?

 

[Sully111]

Having a cracker of a year. Definitely heads west next year. Think he'd be a great fit at freo.

 

[Warhorse]

Would geelong pay him more than selwood and dangerfield?

Yes more than selwood. Dangerfield took massive unders to play for geelong so probably close

 

[Scotland]

Dangerfield is reportedly on $800k.

If Geelong are prepared to offer Kelly that much I suggest they do so asap.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Dangerfield is reportedly on $800k.

If Geelong are prepared to offer Kelly that much I suggest they do so asap.

A grade Mids are worth that.

 

[Scotland]

A grade Mids are worth that.

I'd be very surprised if Kelly is offered that from WC or Geelong. So either they don't always, or he isn't an A grade mid.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I'd be very surprised if Kelly is offered that from WC or Geelong. So either they don't always, or he isn't an A grade mid.

Think he is close, certainly performing as one anyway. Don’t think we will pay him that about 600k will be around the mark.

 

[Scotland]

According to the AFL in 2017 there were:

$500-600k: 53 players
$600-700k: 34
$700-800k: 23
$800k+: 25

There's fewer big money deals than people think. $500-600k looks about right to me. That places Kelly inside the top 15% comp wide so in the top 6 or 7 at any club. We'd have a bunch of guys in the $300-600k range eating up our cap. $12.4m doesn't go that far.

But yeah if Geelong think he's worth $800k whack it on the table.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Top 5 pick now?

F-me. Although you guys have at least given up on whole no1 pick thing.

Except our first this year was offered. But keep inventing what was actually offered.

You havent listened. Your poster keeps telling us we were offered the equivalent of pick 2 which is irrelevant as no one would ever trade 3 R2s for pick 10 let alone pick 2 regardless of the points values.

You should have actually read my post that you were responding to.

 

[ghostbat12]

You havent listened. Your poster keeps telling us we were offered the equivalent of pick 2 which is irrelevant as no one would ever trade 3 R2s for pick 10 let alone pick 2 regardless of the points values.

You should have actually read my post that you were responding to.

He was stating a fact. Points wise, which is based on stats, he is accurate. Now if people would do that trade, other things go into that such as no. Of spots available, perceived backlash etc. but stats wise, he is accurate.

Odds are that with 3xearly 20s picks, you are likely to hit with one very good player. That is not unreasonable. I get that a bird in one hand and all that but hey, Geelong takes players too from other clubs.

However, we aren’t exchanging picks between each other. We are trading a player for picks. So who cares. We also offered our first. Which you were about to accept. In the end you didn’t which is also admirable and I hope my club is also brave enough to do that at some stage. So I do get it.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

He was stating a fact. Points wise, which is based on stats, he is accurate. Now if people would do that trade, other things go into that such as no. Of spots available, perceived backlash etc. but stats wise, he is accurate.

Odds are that with 3xearly 20s picks, you are likely to hit with one very good player. That is not unreasonable. I get that a bird in one hand and all that but hey, Geelong takes players too from other clubs.

However, we aren’t exchanging picks between each other. We are trading a player for picks. So who cares. We also offered our first. Which you were about to accept. In the end you didn’t which is also admirable and I hope my club is also brave enough to do that at some stage. So I do get it.

I dont think WCEs offer was awful and i take your point. But statistically with a top 10 pick you are way more likely to get an a grader and a 200 gamer than in R2 which is why clubs dont trade top 5 picks for multiple mid range picks and why they only trade the really high picks for perceived A graders. Geelong probably felt they were more chance of replacing Kelly adequately with one high pick than 3 R2s and they were also getting an A grader on rookie wages in a year they are pushing for a flag. So they decided to keep him.

My point was more how hard is it to say 'we recognise no club would find 3 R2s as valuable as a top 10 pick but it was the best we could/would do' rather than trying to spin some crap that you offered a top 10 or even a top 5 pick (as your other poster was suggesting with pick 2). That is politician level spin as we were never offered that. Thats why i was annoyed with him (not you)because its disingenuous to say we knocked back something (a top 5 pick) that we were never offered and WCE didnt have the ability to offer even if they wanted to.