2021 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Ruck'n'Roll]

The statement above relating to Dawson only nominating Adelaide as has always been a point of contention with me with pre-agents.

Can someone clear up for me please, whether we're now only obliged to deal wiitb deal Adelaide considering Dawson is not a RFA? I thought this was only applicable to RFA? This has been a grey area of mine for a while now.

If Port offer us better trade deal & exceeds Adelaide's contractor offer for Dawson, taking into consideration it also meets his go home to SA desire, can he still reject Port"s offer? If so, what is the point of RFA if pre-agent players can force their clubs to deal witb only 1 club?

I believe when push comes to shove the player can still refuse to be traded. I believe it's the hand GC's McPherson in trying to play.

No other team came for Mummy either.

I think that's an assertion that lacks a bit evidence wise.

[bloodspirit]

The statement above relating to Dawson only nominating Adelaide as has always been a point of contention with me with pre-agents.

Can someone clear up for me please, whether we're now only obliged to deal wiitb deal Adelaide considering Dawson is not a RFA? I thought this was only applicable to RFA? This has been a grey area of mine for a while now.

If Port offer us better trade deal & exceeds Adelaide's contractor offer for Dawson, taking into consideration it also meets his go home to SA desire, can he still reject Port"s offer? If so, what is the point of RFA if pre-agent players can force their clubs to deal witb only 1 club?

Dawson doesn't have to sign on with anyone he doesn't want to. That doesn't mean we can't deal with Port (given that Dawson is a reasonable guy and he has said his priority is returning to SA so he might be open to reconsidering his preference for the Crows) but we would have to persuade him to accept Port as a destination. That's also on Port to attract him, including by offering him a competitive salary, desirable role etc. I suspect Port have less cap space and were maybe not able to match Adelaide's $$ offer, plus Adelaide has less talent in their 22 and so they have correspondingly more room to let Dawson shine onfield. Additionally it seems JD may have a sentimental attachment to the Crows, and who knows what other factors are at play.

Bottom line is: we can't make Dawson go anywhere. We can only negotiate and persuade. Same situation applies to RFAs assuming we're prepared to match the destination club's offer.

Really hoping we get the Crows own first round pick 2022. But not confident. I think either we will, and we'll give something back. Or we'll get Melbourne's first rounder 2022 plus something extra.

- - - Updated - - -

Isn't McPherson still contracted? In which case it's different again. Not a player I know really anything about.

[gloveski]

Still bugs me that players that are not Restricted free agents or free agents are nominating clubs and most of the time hiding behind the go home factor .
Gold Coast will continue to get raided if this continues to be allowed .
If you want to go home after a handful of years in the system your current club should be able to get the best deal possible for you by dealing with all clubs in that state .
Current examples this year Cerra wants to go home , Freo should be able to deal him to any of the Victorian clubs
Dawson we should be able to deal him to either of the SA clubs

King next year might prefer to stay at the Gold Coast than end up at a struggling Victorian club


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Markwebbos]

Right now Port are insisting on a first rounder for Ladhams, but everyone knows he's surplus to requirements and this is tough talk... At the same time, Crows are offering way unders for JD (their best offer I heard was pick 17 and a SWAP of future thirds). Lets be frank. They acted in bad faith yesterday and could do with being taught a lesson.

I'm sure we have been getting in JD's manager's ear about the possibility of Port. If Port would give us something like Ladhams and pick 16 for him, I reckon we'd take it, and I reckon Port would too, given their "extreme" interest.

If we tried to do the same deal, as things stand via Crows, we'd need them to hand over two first rounders so we could hand one to Port. So dealing with Port would work way better for us.

However, it's going to be on less $$ so less attractive to JD. I also don't know how much of their Dawson Dollars Port have now spent on Finlayson?

[waswan]

I believe when push comes to shove the player can still refuse to be traded. I believe it's the hand GC's McPherson in trying to play.



I think that's an assertion that lacks a bit evidence wise.

Hawks were into him but no one was matching GWS dollars.

[0918330512]

Right now Port are insisting on a first rounder for Ladhams, but everyone knows he's surplus to requirements and this is tough talk... At the same time, Crows are offering way unders for JD (their best offer I heard was pick 17 and a SWAP of future thirds). Lets be frank. They acted in bad faith yesterday and could do with being taught a lesson.

I'm sure we have been getting in JD's manager's ear about the possibility of Port. If Port would give us something like Ladhams and pick 16 for him, I reckon we'd take it, and I reckon Port would too, given their "extreme" interest.

If we tried to do the same deal, as things stand via Crows, we'd need them to hand over two first rounders so we could hand one to Port. So dealing with Port would work way better for us.

However, it's going to be on less $$ so less attractive to JD. I also don't know how much of their Dawson Dollars Port have now spent on Finlayson?

Unless we pay part of Dawson’s salary to make up the difference between Port & the Crows to make Port a more attractive option and Port pays part (maybe the equivalent amount?) of Ladhams’ back ended contract that we’d be liable for?

[Markwebbos]

Right now Port are insisting on a first rounder for Ladhams, but everyone knows he's surplus to requirements and this is tough talk... At the same time, Crows are offering way unders for JD (their best offer I heard was pick 17 and a SWAP of future thirds). Lets be frank. They acted in bad faith yesterday and could do with being taught a lesson.

I'm sure we have been getting in JD's manager's ear about the possibility of Port. If Port would give us something like Ladhams and pick 16 for him, I reckon we'd take it, and I reckon Port would too, given their "extreme" interest.

If we tried to do the same deal, as things stand via Crows, we'd need them to hand over two first rounders so we could hand one to Port. So dealing with Port would work way better for us.

However, it's going to be on less $$ so less attractive to JD. I also don't know how much of their Dawson Dollars Port have now spent on Finlayson?

But at the same time, if Crows could (hypothetically) persuade Port to accept their pick 33 and something else for him, then I think the Dawson deal could be on.

Crows hand over pick 33, Melbourne's 2022 first, something else to sweeten the deal. Get JD
We hand over JD, get Melbourne's 2022 first, Ladhams
Port hand over Ladhams, get Crows pick 33 and whatever else it takes for them

In effect, if Crows can satisfy Port's demands for Ladhams, with whatever picks that is (33 and future third) and we are happy to get Ladhams and an end of first rounder for JD, it's a deal

[Aprilbr]

Is anybody else feeling like we should have just taken the number 17 plus steak knives that was offered to us a few days back? Unless we can somehow get the Crows to change their mind and give us next year's first pick for them its looking like we won't get anything much better than that original deal? Let's hope our game of poker can pay off but I'm not sure it will.

[liz]

I don't really understand the Swans' purported interest in Ladhams, nor Ladhams purported interest in Sydney.

[troyjones2525]

Still bugs me that players that are not Restricted free agents or free agents are nominating clubs and most of the time hiding behind the go home factor .
Gold Coast will continue to get raided if this continues to be allowed .
If you want to go home after a handful of years in the system your current club should be able to get the best deal possible for you by dealing with all clubs in that state .
Current examples this year Cerra wants to go home , Freo should be able to deal him to any of the Victorian clubs
Dawson we should be able to deal him to either of the SA clubs

King next year might prefer to stay at the Gold Coast than end up at a struggling Victorian club


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

100% agree with this and the AFL along with the AFLPA need to get on board and make this a requirement that players need to abide to from next year! You can't say you want to "go home" then only nominate 1 club when there are more than 1 club in each state now!

The clubs need some protection too as they send a lot of time and money on these kids and mostly get screwed over after a few years when the brats decide they want to go back to where they grew up!

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

[bloodspirit]

It's striking how much salary cap space is worth in pick/DVI terms.

To me, it's startling that the Suns have handed over a first round pick to dump a bit of salary and Freo's future second and some other pocket change exchanges. Let's say the Suns were paying Brodie $350K for next season and that's $100K overs based on his performances to date. That's a pretty cheap way to buy a first round pick if you ask me. And it is the perfect trade for Freo. No way can Geelong complain about that return for Clark given that they haven't been playing him.

I'm can't help being a bit bitter about some clubs seeming to score at the trade table and us often getting unders. I can't remember many trades in recent history where I felt - at the time - that we came out in front (except perhaps some pick swaps for points to pay for Academy players - but they're easy to achieve). Perhaps someone can remind me of times (past 5-10 years only please) where we got overs for our players or paid unders to get someone in (the much more common scenario).

Getting the Pies' second rounder for Sam Murray was a rare win. Were there more like that that I'm forgetting about? Cheer me up, please!

[mcs]

I don't really understand the Swans' purported interest in Ladhams, nor Ladhams purported interest in Sydney.

I do not either Liz. Not the fit we need in my opinion - if we are going to run out chasing a ruckman, should be looking for a pure ruckman, not a ruck/fwd. Don't think Ladhams quite offers that (but happy to be proven incorrect if he does come).

[Markwebbos]

I don't really understand the Swans' purported interest in Ladhams, nor Ladhams purported interest in Sydney.

I'm assuming he'd play initially as a fwd/ruck until becoming Hickey's successor. Do you not think he's capable of being a number one ruck?

[RogueSwan]

I don't really understand the Swans' purported interest in Ladhams, nor Ladhams purported interest in Sydney.

It's trade season, nothing has to seem reasonable or make sense

[bloodspirit]

Freo making out like bandits!

At first I couldn't understand why the Pies traded back their first pick in this draft for a pick next year when their focus has been securing the points they need to pay for Daicos this year. But I think I have figured it out. The Pies have already traded out all their picks from next year (except their first) and now have enough points to pay for Daicos and probably a bit extra, especially since it's now seeming increasingly likely that Daicos won't go pick 1. So now they need to get back in to the 2022 draft and can afford to shed a few points in the process.

Great work by Freo - making the most of the Cerra situation - two top 10 picks plus the especially valuable pick 19 (first pick of the second day) PLUS Clark plus Brodie. Losing Cerra hurts but if they draft well they can make it work for them - a bit like Essendon did last year when they lost Daniher and Saad. We need to try and do the same - but can we do it when the Crows are lowballing us?!

- - - Updated - - -

I'm assuming he'd play initially as a fwd/ruck until becoming Hickey's successor. Do you not think he's capable of being a number one ruck?

I don't know if he's good enough to be #1 ruck but it sounds like he won't ever be as good as Hickey. He isn't a great tap ruckman - more a powerful beast in the middle of the ground, a bit like Nank but with less footy nous.

Also, what then becomes of McLean and Amartey? They won't be getting a game if Buddy, Ladhams and McDonald play even if we let Reid go.