2019 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Auntie.Gerald]

Given all clubs have many combinations in draft trade strategy ie plan A, Plan B, Plan C etc I think that if Essendon can not meet in the middle and be fair and reasonable then we have had a perfect diversion to be working on other deals

If they aren’t budging then it hasn’t taken up much of our time at all

Yet it creates an opportunity for us via other players / clubs feeling a sense of urgency to take up our offer first

Danihers team would know our approx limits given he put his neck out to say he wants a trade

No big deal ?

If picks 5/6 through to pick 10 were described as standouts by kineear beatson then there wouldn’t be so much concern

But because he said it’s a weaker draft and the first two players are so far ahead of the remaining top 10 picks it makes it so confusing for us not in the know

[tasswan]

Ps

Did anyone else see how softly softly the media on afl.com positioned this info re Jon Patton no1 draft pick in 2011

130 goals
89 games
26yrs of age

—//-


"I feel we're getting there," Giants list manager Jason McCartney told SEN Radio.

"They haven't been unreasonable … Jon, in his position, he's fit and healthy. The reason he didn't play the back-half of the year was more a mental thing.

"Our position is we're after a mid-third-round pick and we're trying to work that out with Hawthorn and what they've got and what can go back the other way."

This both staggers me and give me the @@@@@s.
I understand that GWS might need cap room but if Patton played for a Vic club and was being chased by GWS, the "media" would be flogging the story and saying how hes worth 2 1st rounders as he was a number 1 pick.
Really pisses me off.

[707]

Sunday morning with a fuzzy head and I read more stuff to hurt my brain.

The only player we should consider sending to Essendon is Jones who we won't get fair compensation for given how Saints appear bereft of ways to get their deals done.

I'm all for walking away from Daniher, it's become a Dodo circus of stupid demands. Let's take Saints 2020 second for Jones and move on. We're rebuilding nicely, a stupid JD deal could derail that. Please walk away from the Dodo.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

[B][I]Joe Who? is coming here to take my place. That's the funniest thing I've heard in years.

Yep, watching a team mortgage its future by bringing in a super expensive outside player is always funny - unless your a supporter of that team, then it's not funny at all.
Just a couple is words of advice to those RWOers promising to tear up memberships or drop the Swans over a trade deal: if you love the team then you are going to find it very hard to keep to such a promise.

[royboy42]

Never been so much hot air floating around as with this Daniher thing.

All that has actually happened is that Sydney have been made aware that he would like to play with us.

Sydney has acknowledged that fact.

Dodoro has made silly, ambit claims as to what Essendon want.

Melbourne press and tv full of crazy conjecture.about insane potential deals; each one sillier than the next.

Not one word from Sydney or Daniher.

Sometime Wednesday an announcement will be made.

Until then, it's all guesswork based on nothing.

[MattW]

Never been so much hot air floating around as with this Daniher thing.

All that has actually happened is that Sydney have been made aware that he would like to play with us.

Sydney has acknowledged that fact.

Dodoro has made silly, ambit claims as to what Essendon want.

Melbourne press and tv full of crazy conjecture.about insane potential deals; each one sillier than the next.

Not one word from Sydney or Daniher.

Sometime Wednesday an announcement will be made.

Until then, it's all guesswork based on nothing.

Beautifully put.

[Agent 86]

Just a couple is words of advice to those RWOers promising to tear up memberships or drop the Swans over a trade deal: if you love the team then you are going to find it very hard to keep to such a promise.

Haha. We tend to say things in the heat of the moment that we don’t really mean. But, having said that, if we buy the Dodo BS (& the Lloyd bias) and get shafted for a JD deal (I’d love to have him here, btw) then it’s gonna put a serious strain on the relationship.

[Markwebbos]

Today’s version of events from AFL.com.au utter madness. I’m with everyone else, walk away from JD and wait until 2020.

Four days to go: How the 10 biggest trades get done - AFL.com.au

Joe Daniher to Sydney

The snag: Essendon, quite simply, does not want to trade Daniher this year. It will take a 'Godfather' offer from Sydney to get this done. But, can the Swans produce that?

The deal: Sydney will be working frantically to produce something special. It currently has picks No.5 and 25, but that won't be enough. Pick No.9 could be coming its way in a trade taking Tom Papley to Carlton, though there has been some suggestion Essendon wouldn't even consider dual top-10 picks for Daniher. Instead, it wants ready-made replacements, of which there are very few in the upcoming NAB AFL Draft. Reports late last week indicated the Bombers would like a player to be involved in the deal. Whether that player arrives via the Swans, or a third party coming to their rescue, remains to be seen.

[Steve]

This is exactly what I've been wondering.....it makes no sense to go about it this way, this year. It made complete sense (and should have for Daniher as well) to wait a year and waltz up to Sydney as a free agent. It shows a lack of common sense and logic from both parties.....this is very confusing for Swans fans who have come to expect measured and sensible decisions from their club.

Two things I see are:

1) We may well have had that approach - sow the seeds via Harley for a FA move next year. But to get that sort of commitment from Daniher we would have had to go pretty hard with our sell and get him excited about what living and playing in Sydney would be like. But then Daniher went away, thought about it and decided he didn’t want to wait a year and came back asking if we could do it now. And perhaps on reasonable money, not demanding a massive contract $ wise.

2) He is a restricted FA, and his circumstances actually make that tricky if we wait until next year. Essendon can match a bid, even if just to force a trade, as Adelaide we’re going to with Dangerfield. We won’t be in a position next year to offer as much via a trade, even more so with the Academy players to account for.

If he has a poor year (including ongoing injury), maybe Essendon don’t match the bid. But that’s hardly a win for us as in that case we made a significant pre-commitment to a player we may not want anymore.

Alternatively, if he plays 22+ games and is AA, we’d have to make an enormous financial offer to dissuade Essendon from matching (and pay what he’s probably worth anyway in that scenario), or be forced into a trade where they’d be asking for a hell of a lot again.

So on balance, if he has asked to come a year early, maybe we’ve considered the risk/reward and felt paying a higher price in a trade would be offset by i) locking him in now and avoiding any bid-matching uncertainty next year, and ii) getting him on less of a salary than we’d probably have to offer via FA.

All that still has to be reasonable if we’re to trade this year - but it feels like we’ve made a commitment to him one way or the other, so we would still bend a fair way this year if it came to it.

[Agent 86]

Smells to me like the arrogance of Essendon not liking it when players want out of the cult. The Fantasia - Port deal was as good as done but something has happened behind closed doors that we’ll probably never know about.

Vic teams (well, some) don’t value the go-home factor when it means players going the other way.

Don’t do deals with the devil.

[Markwebbos]

Two things I see are:

1) We may well have had that approach - sow the seeds via Harley for a FA move next year. But to get that sort of commitment from Daniher we would have had to go pretty hard with our sell and get him excited about what living and playing in Sydney would be like. But then Daniher went away, thought about it and decided he didn’t want to wait a year and came back asking if we could do it now. And perhaps on reasonable money, not demanding a massive contract $ wise.

2) He is a restricted FA, and his circumstances actually make that tricky if we wait until next year. Essendon can match a bid, even if just to force a trade, as Adelaide we’re going to with Dangerfield. We won’t be in a position next year to offer as much via a trade, even more so with the Academy players to account for.

If he has a poor year (including ongoing injury), maybe Essendon don’t match the bid. But that’s hardly a win for us as in that case we made a significant pre-commitment to a player we may not want anymore.

Alternatively, if he plays 22+ games and is AA, we’d have to make an enormous financial offer to dissuade Essendon from matching (and pay what he’s probably worth anyway in that scenario), or be forced into a trade where they’d be asking for a hell of a lot again.

So on balance, if he has asked to come a year early, maybe we’ve considered the risk/reward and felt paying a higher price in a trade would be offset by i) locking him in now and avoiding any bid-matching uncertainty next year, and ii) getting him on less of a salary than we’d probably have to offer via FA.

All that still has to be reasonable if we’re to trade this year - but it feels like we’ve made a commitment to him one way or the other, so we would still bend a fair way this year if it came to it.

Those are some pretty fair points. Us getting him for “free” hinges on us making an offer the Bombers cannot match. Presumably they could set aside $ to match any RFA bid.

But he would be out of contract and could in theory walk for nothing next year.

[liz]

Smells to me like the arrogance of Essendon not liking it when players want out of the cult. The Fantasia - Port deal was as good as done but something has happened behind closed doors that we’ll probably never know about.

Vic teams (well, some) don’t value the go-home factor when it means players going the other way.

Don’t do deals with the devil.

To be fair, it's no different to the Swans (club and fans) not liking it when Papley wants to move to Melbourne. We grow attached to players and see it as some kind of betrayal when their priorities don't align with ours.

We don't know what happened with Fantasia, but if the club did manage to talk him into staying, good on them. Most of us would love to wake up tomorrow and read that Jones has decided to stay, or the Papley allure of moving to Melbourne has evaporated. Just as we were (most of us) very happy when ROK decided to stay all those years ago.

(I suspect a lot of us - myself included - would also love to wake up tomorrow to the news that Daniher has fallen back in love with the Essendon football club and the city of Melbourne.)

[Markwebbos]

I read that Bombers captain Heppell flew to Adelaide and talked Fantasia round. I imagine they hope that they can do the same with Daniher.

Would we have been prepared to pay the price West Coast just paid for Tim Kelly?

[MattW]

Two things I see are:

1) We may well have had that approach - sow the seeds via Harley for a FA move next year. But to get that sort of commitment from Daniher we would have had to go pretty hard with our sell and get him excited about what living and playing in Sydney would be like. But then Daniher went away, thought about it and decided he didn’t want to wait a year and came back asking if we could do it now. And perhaps on reasonable money, not demanding a massive contract $ wise.

2) He is a restricted FA, and his circumstances actually make that tricky if we wait until next year. Essendon can match a bid, even if just to force a trade, as Adelaide we’re going to with Dangerfield. We won’t be in a position next year to offer as much via a trade, even more so with the Academy players to account for.

If he has a poor year (including ongoing injury), maybe Essendon don’t match the bid. But that’s hardly a win for us as in that case we made a significant pre-commitment to a player we may not want anymore.

Alternatively, if he plays 22+ games and is AA, we’d have to make an enormous financial offer to dissuade Essendon from matching (and pay what he’s probably worth anyway in that scenario), or be forced into a trade where they’d be asking for a hell of a lot again.

So on balance, if he has asked to come a year early, maybe we’ve considered the risk/reward and felt paying a higher price in a trade would be offset by i) locking him in now and avoiding any bid-matching uncertainty next year, and ii) getting him on less of a salary than we’d probably have to offer via FA.

All that still has to be reasonable if we’re to trade this year - but it feels like we’ve made a commitment to him one way or the other, so we would still bend a fair way this year if it came to it.

Great post.

[waswan]

We could front end a deal to make it unmatchable
Let the Papley trade make it work or walk away
No point getting into protracted discussion with Dod*ckhead