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

[Nugett]

We're not easy beats, but we do get 'stuck' by our word to players.

That's called having integrity. I know that I wish I worked for a company that stuck by its word towards it's employees. A happy employee is a productive employee.

 

[cryptor]

Some people still think a trade has to have a winner and a loser. I’m not talking about years down the track judging how it eventuated. I’m talking about right then and there as soon as the deal is announced.

Clubs lke Essendon seem to go into it looking to win and have the other club lose. Hawthorn on the other hand are looking for the win-win. It gets the deal done quicker and everyone involved is left happy.

Why would we care whether or not anyone outside of Hawthorn is happy? Because with only 17 other clubs and a limited pool of players available to move clubs in any given year you can’t afford to limit who will deal with you.

And if they do decide to continue dealing with you despite hostilities then you’ll still be limited due to them being on guard with you. Any questions you ask or offers you make will be met with a lot of skepticism. They’ll be less likely to agree and more likely to over analyze the deal to find out where they’re getting screwed over. That just leaves room for another club to move in.

And like I suggested, it’s a relatively small and limited industry as far as players go. They don’t live in bubbles, they know what certain clubs are like. We want to remain an attractive proposition to players. They see what we went through to ensure we got O’Meara. They’re not going to want to risk nominating a club that’s going to throw in the towel early and leave them stranded at a club they’ve publicly committed to leaving or at the mercy of the PSD.

 

[threesixpio]

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.

How dumb have Norf looked this year?

 

[Suntory Boss Coffee]

Didn't we have the JOM deal done early but Cochroache vetoed it?

 

[Beachy]

Simply we are happy to pay the price for something we believe in. Big boy, Tom Mitchell are recent examples. Most ones we have come out on top so out list management team are amazing. Who could rebuild during a season. Us


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cs61]

Clarko has said we are ‘meticulous’ in who we target. All the posters’ wide eyes were on Kelly, Whitfield etc, when we have gone for value, and need once again.

Everyone said we had “nothing” to play with in this year’s list turnover due to O’Meara and Mitchell last year. However we have again filled a glaring need through astute drafting, and go into next year with a full hand of draft picks and cap space for free agents.

Others can debate who won individual trades if they want, but I recall people saying it was ‘impossible’ for us to get Mitchell and O’Meara last year, and we got them both. People said we had no young players coming through, yet I see Burton, Hardwick, Sicily, Brand, Glass. People say we traded out of the draft yet we managed to add Morrison, Cousins, and Hanrahan last year with the ‘nothing’ picks we had.

This year was the year our trading was apparently going to really catch up with us, but Impey now adds a new dimension to our half back/outside running group. In an even draft after the first round, Wright no doubt will be trying to make every pick count once again.

We get deals done because we have belief in our long term strategies, and that we are targeting the right players, without throwing all our cards at one player. We weren’t short sighted last year, the media’s hysteria was. We are well aware of the full array of options available to us to get strongwr, and we go into next year with cap space for free agents, all our early draft picks in a good draft, and a reputation of being professional and good to deal with. Not too bad of a situation to be in for a side who traded out their future.

 

[Brishawk]

Clarko has said we are ‘meticulous’ in who we target. All the posters’ wide eyes were on Kelly, Whitfield etc, when we have gone for value, and need once again.

Everyone said we had “nothing” to play with in this year’s list turnover due to O’Meara and Mitchell last year. However we have again filled a glaring need through astute drafting, and go into next year with a full hand of draft picks and cap space for free agents.

Others can debate who won individual trades if they want, but I recall people saying it was ‘impossible’ for us to get Mitchell and O’Meara last year, and we got them both. People said we had no young players coming through, yet I see Burton, Hardwick, Sicily, Brand, Glass. People say we traded out of the draft yet we managed to add Morrison, Cousins, and Hanrahan last year with the ‘nothing’ picks we had.

This year was the year our trading was apparently going to really catch up with us, but Impey now adds a new dimension to our half back/outside running group. In an even draft after the first round, Wright no doubt will be trying to make every pick count once again.

We get deals done because we have belief in our long term strategies, and that we are targeting the right players, without throwing all our cards at one player. We weren’t short sighted last year, the media’s hysteria was. We are well aware of the full array of options available to us to get strongwr, and we go into next year with cap space for free agents, all our early draft picks in a good draft, and a reputation of being professional and good to deal with. Not too bad of a situation to be in for a side who traded out their future.

We did target Whitfield though...we don't land every player we target. But you are right, we do target specific players.

 

[cs61]

Yeah, we also spoke to Rockcliff, Lever and probably Gaff. But didnt go beyond our means for the first two when others offered more.

 

[Snakelilbandit]

You just have to look at how Gold Coast are handling Gary, Bulldogs Stringer and Adelaide Lever to understand why Hawks deal with trades this way. When have you ever heard Clarko or our captain or president bad mouthing a player for leaving or talking about how we won't let them go unless we get X in the trade?

When Hill left it was all about how we're disappointed to lose such a talent but understand that family comes first. Not he's chasing money or we're not letting him go unless we get X pick or 'a good deal'. When asked about what we wanted in return the answer was we'll work with Fremantle to get the deal done.

Adelaide uninvited lever to their b&f FFS when he's still employed by them, while this year we invited Sammy back to be involved and Clarko gave Hill a big hug after a game.

If you think about these clubs as work places, I know which one I'd want to work at.

Sent from my HUAWEI RIO-L02 using Tapatalk

 

[Noneedforaname]

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


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We have either Goo or Whitey fit, we would have won. ROK doesnt even need to enter the conversation.

 

[Hawker55]

We have either Goo or Whitey fit, we would have won. ROK doesnt even need to enter the conversation.

I’ve always thought we win 2012, we don’t win the three that come after. There was a hunger there that only losing a GF could get you.

 

[Furn2]

Whats funny with the Jom trade is that while we gave up more than we were planning to, we actually went Keyser Soze on GC.

 

[Noneedforaname]

I’ve always thought we win 2012, we don’t win the three that come after. There was a hunger there that only losing a GF could get you.

Mmmm. Maybe. Im not convinced on that. Bird in the hand and all that for mine.

Must say, Im glad that theory doesnt work for the swine.

 

[Aramis]

I think Hawthorn just truly know what they want and what they don't want, they know whats necessary and don't feel the need to "1 up" the other clubs in trading.....

Most trades are horses for courses and we understand (imo the best out of any of the 18 clubs) we are all in it together, trade time is a period where you keep your friends close and your enemies closer....

 

[Hawks1976]

We have either Goo or Whitey fit, we would have won. ROK doesnt even need to enter the conversation.

Kick straight we win end of story one that got away

 

[badgrill]

You just have to look at how Gold Coast are handling Gary, Bulldogs Stringer and Adelaide Lever to understand why Hawks deal with trades this way. When have you ever heard Clarko or our captain or president bad mouthing a player for leaving or talking about how we won't let them go unless we get X in the trade?

When Hill left it was all about how we're disappointed to lose such a talent but understand that family comes first. Not he's chasing money or we're not letting him go unless we get X pick or 'a good deal'. When asked about what we wanted in return the answer was we'll work with Fremantle to get the deal done.

Adelaide uninvited lever to their b&f FFS when he's still employed by them, while this year we invited Sammy back to be involved and Clarko gave Hill a big hug after a game.

If you think about these clubs as work places, I know which one I'd want to work at.

Sent from my HUAWEI RIO-L02 using Tapatalk

And look at Clarko and Bud after this year's match - nothing but love there, even after everything that happened.

Aka Professionalism.

 

[Davo-27]

i think that we are the only club that values proven talent above the lottery and media coverage that comes with draft picks, this seems like a directive under Clarko, earlier in Clarkos career we had a directive of getting players under 23 and going to the draft with high picks, but with GW being better at trading and getting late pick value, which is better than his high end drafting ability, they are playing to GW strengths.

being easy to deal with is how GW closes deals to allow us time for multiple deals, as you can see from some clubs, they delay the trade and half the delayed trades dont go through, also the drawn out trades dont allow for room to do other trades as you are trying to get 1 thing done and cant trade with others as you dont know what it will ultimately cost, herefore limiting other trades you may want to make...

overall its to 1) make trade happen quickly to allow for more trades, 2) we dont value picks as highly (which is correct) 3) to guarantee a player who has picked us as the club he wants to goto that we dont let those players down (we create a reputation for ourselves that we get things done), i would say they are the main reasons

 

[Rushed_Behind]

Something just dawned on me as I was reading through the trade threads.

Imagine being stringer or Ablett(purely football. Can't imagine how he is feeling) now. You've declared your desire on coming to a club and all they're doing is playing chicken. Yes it's a business but if you really want a player just pay.

We were doing our utmost trying to satisfy clubs for JOM and others in the past. I think it makes the welcome to a new club easier to feel wanted. Just a thought. Probably naive but hey what the hell?

 

[Agent Smith]

i think that we are the only club that values proven talent above the lottery and media coverage that comes with draft picks, this seems like a directive under Clarko, earlier in Clarkos career we had a directive of getting players under 23 and going to the draft with high picks, but with GW being better at trading and getting late pick value, which is better than his high end drafting ability, they are playing to GW strengths.

being easy to deal with is how GW closes deals to allow us time for multiple deals, as you can see from some clubs, they delay the trade and half the delayed trades dont go through, also the drawn out trades dont allow for room to do other trades as you are trying to get 1 thing done and cant trade with others as you dont know what it will ultimately cost, herefore limiting other trades you may want to make...

overall its to 1) make trade happen quickly to allow for more trades, 2) we dont value picks as highly (which is correct) 3) to guarantee a player who has picked us as the club he wants to goto that we dont let those players down (we create a reputation for ourselves that we get things done), i would say they are the main reasons

I think Melbourne are tying to follow our lead a little. All their supporters must be back from the snow as they've inundated social media, losing their collective nut. Fun to watch though.

 

[dipper86]

Anyone that believes there is good will at the trade table is living in a magical fantasy land.......Clubs will do whats best for its football club first and foremost.
The issues at the trade table currently is that its not a two way street, We pay a premium for payers and when we sell we undersell. It was all good and well when we were in the window, needing to top up players paying overs to have a premiership tilt, but now that we are rebuilding a different tact is needed. We have to be hard arses, like we were with both the Hay and Thompson trades when we first implemented our rebuild in the mid 2000's....We are leaking too many draft picks for my liking and not getting value when we sell.. We're easy to trade with because we have shown we can be rorted.

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

I think Melbourne are tying to follow our lead a little. All their supporters must be back from the snow as they've inundated social media, losing their collective nut. Fun to watch though.

They are melting, like their snow

 

[Davo23]

They are melting, like their snow

The beautiful sunny weather in Victoria is driving Demon supporters away from the snowfields?

How horrible for them!

 

[Snoref]

Fact is we do overpay for the players we want and undersell when we trade for players who want out.

This means that we send a message that if you commit to us we will commit to you.

This also means we get ripped at the trade table.

Taking the impey trade if it was another club im sure he would of gone for way less.

People who suggest that there is goodwill created with other clubs you're very naive- theres no such thing its each club for themselves.

 

[Gralin]

Fact is we do overpay for the players we want and undersell when we trade for players who want out.

This means that we send a message that if you commit to us we will commit to you.

This also means we get ripped at the trade table.

Taking the impey trade if it was another club im sure he would of gone for way less.

I don't agree with this
most of the time the price we have paid has ended up looking cheap considering the result we get out of the trade
we are more likely to sell for unders to help players get to their preferred destination but that is better than being Gold Coast

 

[Snoref]

I don't agree with this
most of the time the price we have paid has ended up looking cheap considering the result we get out of the trade
we are more likely to sell for unders to help players get to their preferred destination but that is better than being Gold Coast

Im not saying we don't get value on the players we trade in, im just saying that we don't maximise the value.