Trading talk thread

[AnnieH]

Hey. I'm hearing more and more gossip about that little turd Staker coming to Sydney.

Surely it can't be true?

It's gunna be a hate relationship. I can feel it in my waters.

[liz]

Not a troll at all mate. ROK is a very good player but his heart can't be with Sydney 100% given he only played with us this year because he had to and I would much rather an extra first round pick over 2-3 more years of service from him. Given we are in a rebuilding stage I think that's pretty reasonable. I'm all for keeping older players around to assist the younger players but I think we would still have more than enough even if we didn't keep ROK.

It was bad enough reading this stuff about ROK not wanting to be at Sydney at the start of this year, while he was just playing mediocre (by his standards) footy. I am really struggling to see how anyone who actually watched his last 2/3rds of the season could find any creditable evidence for him not wanting to be around.

The value of ROK vs the value of a draft pick has been done to death in this thread and I doubt anyone from either side of the argument is going to convince others to change their stance on this.

[Nico]

Should we be worried about Lewis Johnston?

Yep, the worry I have with Johnstone is his foot injury. He appears to have had the moon boot on for a terrible long time and I will be a lot happuer when someone reports him as running laps etc. Egan from Geelong will never play again because of a foot injury. There seems to have been a lot more foot injuries in the last few years than ever before. Foot injuries have been a rarity in past decades.

[BSA5]

Yep, the worry I have with Johnstone is his foot injury. He appears to have had the moon boot on for a terrible long time and I will be a lot happuer when someone reports him as running laps etc. Egan from Geelong will never play again because of a foot injury. There seems to have been a lot more foot injuries in the last few years than ever before. Foot injuries have been a rarity in past decades.

It was actually some genetic thing wrong with his foot, something he'd had from birth which the club found and needed to fix, rather than an "injury" as such. To me, that could mean one of two things: it will never bother him again, or he'll be dogged by foot problems for the rest of his career.

So yeah, bit of a worry, but could be nothing.

[Captain]

I had a foot operation 3 weeks ago for a similar injury - 2 months in a cast then will be 2 months in a moon boot. I asked the doctor when I could be able to run again and he laughed.

Look what happened with Matthew Egan - foot injuries are easily the worst (far worse than knees) and take the longest time to get over. Will be interested to see if he plays next year.

Good luck to the kid, I share his pain.

[Cardinal]

At least if ROK is going to be traded his B&F win will hopefully secure us a better deal.

[Hartijon]

At least if ROK is going to be traded his B&F win will hopefully secure us a better deal.

What club in their right mind would trade a B and F?

[caj23]

At least if ROK is going to be traded his B&F win will hopefully secure us a better deal.

OMG this is ridiculous

I'll start with some of the obvious reasons first

1. No club was willing to offer a 1st rounder last year, what makes you think they will do so this year when he is 1 year older

2. ROK signed a 3 (or 4?) year deal last year. Did you ever consider that he is a person and perhaps has made plans over the next few years based on the fact that he would be in Sydney for that length of time (i.e. bought a house, a business, booked his new child into childcare etc.). You talk like you are playing monopoly.

3. 2010 is a bit of an unknown for the club, in my mind we could finish anywhere between 4th and 14th. Who's to say that we won't repeat 2004 and be on the start of a new era with the younger players blooded over the last couple of seasons. It's not completely out of the realms that we could be a genuine premiership contender again by 2011.

4. You don't trade quality players for no good reason. Especially for a player in a weak draft that may or may not come good. Even with a high pick this years draft is a minefield and there are potentially alot of busts.

I could go on but these reasons should be enough. God, someone on another footy forum wants to trade Goodes Don't you just love this time of year

[Mr Magoo]

Yep lets get rid of goodes, rok, b1, b2 and any other player over 25 because you dont win a premiership with older players in your team.

Who trades their stars unless they are forced to. The draft is not the panacea to premeirship glory. A whole lot of things have to fall your way including some lucky picks in the draft but to suggest that you trade proven talent for unknown 17 year olds is just plain crazy.

Even Hawthorn during its rebuilding phase only gave away talent that they knew was mostly flawed . They still kept a core bunch of older guys (ie crawford, mitchell etc).

[caj23]

Even Hawthorn during its rebuilding phase only gave away talent that they knew was mostly flawed . They still kept a core bunch of older guys (ie crawford, mitchell etc).

They were also a rabble and had no other choice. That's the common theme with those teams that have rebuilt through the draft (St Kilda and Carlton), they were finishing in the bottom 4 over an extended period of time.

You don't finish mid table then decide you're going to rebuild with youngsters, particularly when the Gold Coast/West Sydney and compromised drafts over the next few years will make it very difficult to do so

[Cardinal]

As others have said in the past, we really should have started gutting the team in 2007 whilst player's trade values were at their peak.

Whilst it's nice to be sentimental, the novelty wears off pretty quick after a few years of mediocrity with no long term prospect of success in sight. Whilst I?m all for some flexibility of tenure for Club Champions (ie Goodes and Kirk) I wouldn?t be making too many concessions for what players are left from our grand final tilts.

The era is over and youth and rebuilding are where it?s at ? that means earning football currency to invest in the future where we can.

BTW: I think it?s great ROK?s form has provided other clubs with a reminder of why they should have taken him last year. Granted the amount of money he was asking was allegedly high, but as he has shown he is worth it and would be a valuable contributor.

[Lucky Knickers]

If our tradeable swans are the following
- Moore
- Ablett
- Buchanan
- Malceski

Any two of those to Dons for Lovett and a 3rd round?

[caj23]

As others have said in the past, we really should have started gutting the team in 2007 whilst player's trade values were at their peak.

I don't disagree with you there, and the list management at the end of last year was very ordinary

Whilst it's nice to be sentimental, the novelty wears off pretty quick after a few years of mediocrity with no long term prospect of success in sight. Whilst I?m all for some flexibility of tenure for Club Champions (ie Goodes and Kirk) I wouldn?t be making too many concessions for what players are left from our grand final tilts.

Buchanan and to a lesser degree Ablett and Bevan are the only tradable ones remaining with any trade value. I can't see any team offering more than a 3rd round pick for any of them so what's the point?

The era is over and youth and rebuilding are where it?s at ? that means earning football currency to invest in the future where we can.

I think we started that in 2009, however I dont subscribe to "rebuilding is where it's at". The Cats never bottomed out and the only reason that the Blues, Saints and Hawks went the youth road was because they were basket cases with no other choice. Bombers and Tigers also went that road and they are nowhere near a premiership

BTW: I think it?s great ROK?s form has provided other clubs with a reminder of why they should have taken him last year. Granted the amount of money he was asking was allegedly high, but as he has shown he is worth it and would be a valuable contributor.

Yes it's great for us, but it doesn't change the fact that nobody would trade a first rounder/fit him under their salary cap last year and it's even less likely that they would this year so it's all a bit moot

[caj23]

If our tradeable swans are the following
- Moore
- Ablett
- Buchanan
- Malceski

Any two of those to Dons for Lovett and a 3rd round?

Bombers wouldn't accept that, he'll finish top 5 (possibly top 3) in their B & F

[Lucky Knickers]

Bombers wouldn't accept that, he'll finish top 5 (possibly top 3) in their B & F

They wouldn't give up a 3rd round?
They woudln't like the players?