Recommitted Tim Kelly [requested a trade to West Coast]

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

sherrif

Premiership Player
Dec 7, 2012
4,623
10,378
AFL Club
Fremantle
If every player was eligible they could attract votes, quite a few would take votes off Kelly with one being Dangerfield.

Its a stacked deck.
A stacked deck. Yep the top deck 3 players from each team voted by the teams they play for. Geez those 4th, 5th and 6th ranked players would all win if just given a chance. Fifty four excellent player eligible in total. Kelly came second. Coaches rate him too. He came 4th in their award as well. Ill put you on ignore.
 

archiemoses

Premiership Player
Sep 15, 2007
4,856
4,175
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Liverpool
Being uncontracted only affects leverage, not the value of the player himself. Kelly is no lesser player because he happens to be uncontracted. On your reasoning, being uncontracted, he should move for nothing.

Geelong are well within their rights to request a top 10 pick as part of the trade as he is worth that. Now, being uncontracted, our leverage is not as good as it may be if in contract so we may not get that. But it doesn't mean he's going to walk for sfa. It wasn't that long ago that players only moved when out of contract. That didn't mean their value was diminished at all.
And leverage affects his trade compensation.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

archiemoses

Premiership Player
Sep 15, 2007
4,856
4,175
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Liverpool
There is absolutely no chance Kelly is traded for more than Lachie Neale. Zilch. Nada.

The fact that Neale is a better player than Kelly and contracted at the time means that the trade for Kelly will fall some where lower.

13 + 22 is more than fair.

Geelong will need Kelly to accept Freo to get a better deal but best they can hope for is pick 5. Freo won't pay more as that is what they can draft him at.
 

Rockford

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 22, 2006
10,145
4,957
Halls Head
AFL Club
Geelong
Not really. You would have had us covered with Kelly in your team. No doubt.

Indeed, they wouldn’t have even had to play Geelong in a Semi Final. Kelly was a catalyst for Cats’ early season form. Without Kelly I think Geelong would’ve finished outside the top 4 putting West Coast into the top 4 by default. Then reverse either (or both of) the Collingwood 1 point loss or Richmond 1 goal loss and West Coast are top 2 and looking at a home Prelim Final against GWS with a happy Tim Kelly playing in front of a home crow this weekend. Kelly trade or no, they underachieved this season but to take the position that having Tim Kelly for all of 2019 would’ve made no difference is a form of cognitive dissonance.
 
Jan 13, 2006
26,598
19,328
melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
geelong
Kelly would have improved our team, no doubt. But if you can't tell me what would have got the deal done, it's not worth indulging the hypothetical. What is the price we theoretically should have been willing to pay? If you can't say, what are you talking about?

We had the cattle to finish top 4 without him and didn't get it done. That is far more real, immediate and concrete than some silly sliding doors guessing game about how we might have got Kelly at the end of 2018, particularly when Geelong would have understandably wanted massive overs for a contracted player. I don't begrudge them for that. Nor do I lose any sleep over not coughing up.

No you didn't have the cattle this year. Others surpassed you. Friday showed Geelong was the superior side.

You finished 5th for a reason.

In the most likely scenario which was a top ten pick ( pretty sure this was made public to begin with anyway) but something equivalent otherwise behind doors. By the way these things always end up in the media leaks so simply look it to if you want to know roughly what was asked for.

More than likely, you have cost yourselves potential B2B as Kelly would gave been the difference between fifth and two home Perth finals and a grand final berth.

Huge miss and a lot of regrets id image
 
Sep 12, 2013
8,930
23,519
10 min from Optus
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Lakers Claremont
Though it worth returning to see whether the views on double standards by Geelong have changed. Following the Ablett sympathy card, the Cats are now wanting to low ball St Kilda to get Stevens back home to look after him and improve his mental health. I’m hearing a pretty reasonable pick is the request - possible 3rd rounder.

Does that mean the Cats will participate in swings and roundabouts?

Surely West Coast letting Masten go signals the club are making it possible for him to return. Last thing I expect Geelong would want is to add to Kelly’s anxiety and possible depression by trying to play hard for the second year when his number 1 priority is (and rightfully so) to make sure his family unit are best cared for.

It will be interesting if the community club of Geelong is true to it’s values. Otherwise it is no better than Hawthorn claiming to be the Family Club despite being one of the biggest owners of pockie machine that are hurting battling families!

Interesting times ahead.
 
Feb 9, 2015
4,650
9,169
AFL Club
Geelong
Though it worth returning to see whether the views on double standards by Geelong have changed. Following the Ablett sympathy card, the Cats are now wanting to low ball St Kilda to get Stevens back home to look after him and improve his mental health. I’m hearing a pretty reasonable pick is the request - possible 3rd rounder.

Does that mean the Cats will participate in swings and roundabouts?

Surely West Coast letting Masten go signals the club are making it possible for him to return. Last thing I expect Geelong would want is to add to Kelly’s anxiety and possible depression by trying to play hard for the second year when his number 1 priority is (and rightfully so) to make sure his family unit are best cared for.

It will be interesting if the community club of Geelong is true to it’s values. Otherwise it is no better than Hawthorn claiming to be the Family Club despite being one of the biggest owners of pockie machine that are hurting battling families!

Interesting times ahead.

Will West Coast be true to their community values though?

Will they low ball for a second year running, attempting to exploit a family situation in order to land a premium talent cheaply, or will they table a reasonable offer.

West Coast embarrassed themselves last year, but will they do it again?

Interesting times ahead
 
Sep 12, 2013
8,930
23,519
10 min from Optus
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Lakers Claremont
Will West Coast be true to their community values though?

Will they low ball for a second year running, attempting to exploit a family situation in order to land a premium talent cheaply, or will they table a reasonable offer.

West Coast embarrassed themselves last year, but will they do it again?

Interesting times ahead
Embarrassed? I don’t think so. Wells said he needed an excellent trade. West Coast came up with a deal he was ok with only to be over ruled by Chris Scott. OK to play hardball but hardly what you would call embarrassing.

OK to play hardball but to then ask Saints to help make it happen for Stevens,

There again, Scott has said he won’t comment on contracted players yet goes on 360 to talk down the value of Stevens. Another case of double swording!
 
13 plus 22 will get a top 5 pick.

But we wouldnt use it on Kelly.

Then 32 plus our 2020 1st would be offered.

You do see how there is a limit to what is needed here dont you?

The only land in which 13 + 22 gets you a top 5 pick is called fantasy land.
 
Still not getting the point.

Whatever it takes to get a top 5 pick is the maximum Kelly is worth.

BTW 13 and 22 would get pretty close to landing 5-7.

As soon as the Eagles hold a draft pick low enought to draft Kelly Geelong lose all real leverage.

It cost Port 11 23 and 30 to get 6 last year. You are not getting 5 for 13 and 22 unless the other list manager involved in the trade is drunk.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Feb 9, 2015
4,650
9,169
AFL Club
Geelong
Embarrassed? I don’t think so. Wells said he needed an excellent trade. West Coast came up with a deal he was ok with only to be over ruled by Chris Scott. OK to play hardball but hardly what you would call embarrassing.

OK to play hardball but to then ask Saints to help make it happen for Stevens,

There again, Scott has said he won’t comment on contracted players yet goes on 360 to talk down the value of Stevens. Another case of double swording!

Please tell me more about double swording.

Is it sexy, dangerous, or both?
 
Melbourne would draft Kelly at pick 3, surely.
Which club would commit to a $1,200,000 one year deal for a player entitled to go be with his family for mental health reasons and not play a single game for them? Especially when Kelly gets to carry his own contract into the draft and selecting him is agreeing to those terms, terms that will guarantee payment.

Kelly's manager jumps on the phone to a psychologist friend and she coaches Tim on how to come across as depressed when talking to his non WA club doctor, the doctor signs off on it and he flies back to Perth within 24 hours.

Above all the AFL hate bad press, so they will ensure a trade gets done.
 

archiemoses

Premiership Player
Sep 15, 2007
4,856
4,175
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Liverpool
We dont need to trade to get pick 5.

13 + 22 is more than fair.

All this posturing from Geelong and the thick stench of double standards is clouding their judgement.

I hope Kelly walks to the draft, Freo take him with their first and cats will be left licking their wounds.
 
Jul 26, 2007
31,928
33,145
Darwin
AFL Club
West Coast
It cost Port 11 23 and 30 to get 6 last year. You are not getting 5 for 13 and 22 unless the other list manager involved in the trade is drunk.

Ok. So that means all the Cats posters on here who are saying this draft is weak compared to last years are wrong? Maybe they are drunk?

You can't have it both ways people!

If this years draft is so weak multiple clubs want to trade out of the top 3>10 that would indicate trading for those picks won't cost what it cost last season!

The reports are you could throw a blanket over 3-15ish and land a similarly talented player and do the same from 16-40ish. So clubs are willing to trade a pick 3-10 for two cracks, one in the first and another in the 2nd.
 
Ok. So that means all the Cats posters on here who are saying this draft is weak compared to last years are wrong? Maybe they are drunk?

You can't have it both ways people!

If this years draft is so weak multiple clubs want to trade out of the top 3>10 that would indicate trading for those picks won't cost what it cost last season!

The reports are you could throw a blanket over 3-15ish and land a similarly talented player and do the same from 16-40ish. So clubs are willing to trade a pick 3-10 for two cracks, one in the first and another in the 2nd.
If the draft is weak then giving up your access to the 5th best player so you can get a player outside the top ten and another outside the top twenty would be less likely.
 

DanWA

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 13, 2013
21,219
14,902
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
East Fremantle Sharks
13+22 is more than generous

Some are sprouting 13 only

All depends if Kelly wants to play for West Coast or Geelong
 
Jul 26, 2007
31,928
33,145
Darwin
AFL Club
West Coast
If the draft is weak then giving up your access to the 5th best player so you can get a player outside the top ten and another outside the top twenty would be less likely.

Except multiple clubs (Melbourne, Carlton, Adelaide and Sait Kilda) have already said they want to do exactly that for various reasons.

Clubs and commentators are all saying after the top two the draft evens out. The top 10 quality isn't there as it was last season and in normal drafts.
 
13+22 is more than generous

Some are sprouting 13 only

All depends if Kelly wants to play for West Coast or Geelong
Anyone spouting 13 only is categorically wrong and clearly biased, that is not evidence 13 and 22 is generous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back