What's the benefit of being easy to trade with?

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

Why is their a growing collection of people here that start their posts with:

"I got smashed around here for last year suggesting... "

???

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Why is their a growing collection of people here that start their posts with:

"I got smashed around here for last year suggesting... "

???

Best offense is a good defense.

 

[Mitchell54]

If we're after a player that a club doesn't want to let go at least they know we aren't going to lowball them and possibly try and convince the player if interest to be traded to Hawthorn instead of Essenscum

 

[Davo23]

The advantage is you get more deals done. Players know you get deals done and are more likely to commit knowing we won't leave them stranded.

And, when we says that’s our final offer, it really is and we’re not playing games.

In other words, if Hawthorn says “no”, it means “no”.

 

[crazywildhorse]

Why is their a growing collection of people here that start their posts with:

"I got smashed around here for last year suggesting... "

???

My idea was to avoid the first half dozen of the posts being insults and outrage at the suggestion

 

[KermitJagger]

Outcomes based on our trading would say that we haven't really got ripped off for any trade we made from about 2008 onwards. Free Agent compensation on the other hand...

 

[BaliHawk]

a bit of respect on how our club does business - in an industry that struggles to gain trust/respect the Hawks generally go about the job in high regard


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[tommyk72]

I can’t recall a single trade where, in hindsight, we got bent over. Even the Sammy and Lewis ones I don’t think we got bent over. The benefits of letting them go we’re significant in terms of next level development. They also would have retired before our next cup. Their value to us was therefor minimal, and the lower pick value and easy trade generated good will and respect.

Tell me where we’ve been bent over?

 

[Messenger]

No, the only poor performance deal I remember was the Veale deal. I lived in Perth at that time and could only follow what the West Australian and Channel 7 put out.

Ryan O'Keefe. I'm pretty sure that was the Pelican's trade.

Spida Everitt didn't go smoothly either.

 

[flinchfree]

Nobody rates draft picks as high as big footy and the media, it's all numbers so people think it's simple math

.........

Well, agree.

With minimal hopes that Crypto-man won't chase me with abusive private messages and stupid on thread tete a tete, I will re-iterate my earlier point re this odd fixation some supporters have with assigning a very specific draft pick presumed to equate to a players worth to us......

It's dumb.
We wanted the player, were not ridiculously fixated over whether 5-10 draft order picks would hold us from bringing him in, and moved on the trade.

Unless you're talking a top 15 young talent, the rest is educated guess work.
Assigning estimated growth and potential - both physical and mental, realized and future work ethic, personality traits and competitive ambition - much of it is feel not science.
It's what makes the great recruiters, the great identifiers of talent and whether it can be harnessed, invaluable.

Once again, Clarko and GW will make many on here red-faced when output on the field is measurable and highly watchable, in comparison to some arbitrary pick number of some kid who may or may not have been available to us at the time of our drafting, and who may or may not develop and become a superior player.

I'm strapped in, lets go.

 

[crazywildhorse]

I can’t recall a single trade where, in hindsight, we got bent over. Even the Sammy and Lewis ones I don’t think we got bent over. The benefits of letting them go we’re significant in terms of next level development. They also would have retired before our next cup. Their value to us was therefor minimal, and the lower pick value and easy trade generated good will and respect.

Tell me where we’ve been bent over?

The main one was O’Meara. But, to a certain extent we didn’t have much option with Hill either. He wanted to go to his family, we said sure, and were left with no genuine bargaining power. It was ok, but more on the basis of ‘what else could we have done?’.

And regarding Messengers note, on O’Keefe, I am still not really sure what happened, I thought more Sydney were unwilling to let him go. On Everitt, that was never going to end well, he was toxic.

 

[tommyk72]

The main one was O’Meara. But, to a certain extent we didn’t have much option with Hill either. He wanted to go to his family, we said sure, and were left with no genuine bargaining power. It was ok, but more on the basis of ‘what else could we have done?’.

And regarding Messengers note, on O’Keefe, I am still not really sure what happened, I thought more Sydney were unwilling to let him go. On Everitt, that was never going to end well, he was toxic.

I’m not going to make a judgement on Jags for another few seasons. We didn’t trade for 2017. If he goes on to a win a brownlow or a norm smith would that change your mind?

O’keefe wasn’t due to us being too nice. Was due to Sydney playing games and upping their deal if I remember correctly.

 

[f4zz]

Pity o'keefe never went through. Would have won the 2012 cup if he was with us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[threesixpio]

One word, and one so easily forgotten;

Threepeat

 

[Agent Smith]

Well, agree.

With minimal hopes that Crypto-man won't chase me with abusive private messages and stupid on thread tete a tete, I will re-iterate my earlier point re this odd fixation some supporters have with assigning a very specific draft pick presumed to equate to a players worth to us......

It's dumb.
We wanted the player, were not ridiculously fixated over whether 5-10 draft order picks would hold us from bringing him in, and moved on the trade.

Unless you're talking a top 15 young talent, the rest is educated guess work.
Assigning estimated growth and potential - both physical and mental, realized and future work ethic, personality traits and competitive ambition - much of it is feel not science.
It's what makes the great recruiters, the great identifiers of talent and whether it can be harnessed, invaluable.

Once again, Clarko and GW will make many on here red-faced when output on the field is measurable and highly watchable, in comparison to some arbitrary pick number of some kid who may or may not have been available to us at the time of our drafting, and who may or may not develop and become a superior player.

I'm strapped in, lets go.

If I may...

In summary, we don't treat the process like a pissing contest.

 

[Agent Smith]

Pity o'keefe never went through. Would have won the 2012 cup if he was with us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Would we have had the desire and the fortitude to threepeat if we did?

 

[Stranglers]

It's odd that people seem to dwell on us paying overs when we generally win at the trade table. Burgoyne trade - absolute win. Gunston trade - absolute win. Gibson trade - absolute win. Hale trade - absolute win. Anderson trade to Norf - HUGE win.

Add T. Mitchell and McEvoy to that list as well, I reckon. And when you factor in the players we have traded out (eg. Savage, Lowden, Hallahan, Willo etc) and what they achieved AFTER being traded, I'd say we've won a lot more trades than we've lost. All while having a reputation of being even-handed that makes other clubs and players want to go to the negotiating table with us. Pretty good deal in my mind.

 

[Messenger]

I’m not going to make a judgement on Jags for another few seasons. We didn’t trade for 2017. If he goes on to a win a brownlow or a norm smith would that change your mind?

O’keefe wasn’t due to us being too nice. Was due to Sydney playing games and upping their deal if I remember correctly.

O'keefe was us offering him a contract and then bickering over picks. Couldn't deliver.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

O'keefe was us offering him a contract and then bickering over picks. Couldn't deliver.

I thought we had essentially agreed to terms with Sydney, but Carlton offered RO'K more $$$$, which then stalled the deal as Carlton wouldn't offer Sydney the picks, and we wouldn't offer RO'K the $$$.

 

[play2win]

trading is inherently part of the hawthorn culture, and of course we trade for mutual benefit. we expect our players to buy into our culture and part of that is to act on their behalf and in their interests. if you embrace hawthorn then hawthorn will embrace you.
value the player, not the trade.

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

Interesting thread, have often wondered the same thing. I take the point about the players being confident we will get the deal done making us an attractive proposition if they want a trade.

I like the way we trade. Not to much talk, then.... BANG Quite frankly the posturing by some of the other clubs is laughable.

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

Add T. Mitchell and McEvoy to that list as well, I reckon. And when you factor in the players we have traded out (eg. Savage, Lowden, Hallahan, Willo etc) and what they achieved AFTER being traded, I'd say we've won a lot more trades than we've lost. All while having a reputation of being even-handed that makes other clubs and players want to go to the negotiating table with us. Pretty good deal in my mind.

I have a St Kilda friend who still tells me to this day they won on the McEvoy trade, not because they got Savage but because of the pick which they used for Acres I think. Meanwhile we have three-peated and they have... yeah rightio, you won that trade

 

[HR Roughnstuf]

I thought we had essentially agreed to terms with Sydney, but Carlton offered RO'K more $$$$, which then stalled the deal as Carlton wouldn't offer Sydney the picks, and we wouldn't offer RO'K the $$$.

correct

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

Also agree with those that have made the point that draft picks are overrated. It's not the number of the pick, it's what you do with it. We have shown that we are able to draft quality players at all levels of the draft so I am not fussed if it seems like we have given away too much in term of draft picks.

 

[HairyO]

1. Player happiness.
2. Quid pro quo.