Essendon set to trade pick No.11 as it attempts to secure Jake Stringer, Devon Smith and Adam Saad

[Bulldog4life]

ESSENDON on Monday conceded it had to sacrifice its No.11 draft pick to pull off the club’s stunning trade trifecta.

But that pick is no guarantee to land at the Western Bulldogs with the Jake Stringer deal still a long way off.

It is believed the Bombers have urged Stringer, 23, to boost his fitness levels over summer because they want to deploy him for large stints in the midfield next season.

But the 2015 All-Australian faces an anxious wait with trade talks set to continue into next week as the clubs debate his value.

Coach Luke Beveridge’s men on Monday told the Bombers they want pick 11 as a minimum return or they will keep Stringer to his contract next season.

Gold Coast could throw a spanner in the works by claiming pick 11 from the Dons in exchange for speedster Adam Saad and No.19.

Essendon champion Matthew Lloyd on Monday said the Dons could then on-trade the No.19 pick for Stringer.

But that proposal would be rejected by the Dogs, who are adamant on claiming an earlier selection for their three-time leading goalkicker and premiership star.

Bombers football boss Rob Kerr said the club had devised a strategy to secure Stringer, Saad and Devon Smith while keeping homesick South Australian Aaron Francis, who is contracted until 2019.

“(But) the reality is pick 11 probably has to be involved somewhere along the line,” Kerr said on Monday.

“We’ve had a chat to the Bulldogs, I think there’s a little bit of work to do there. But we’re keen to try and get a deal done over the course of the next 10 days, so we’ll keep at it.”

In a boost for the Dogs, on Monday Fremantle high-flyer Hayden Crozier nominated Whitten Oval as his preferred destination.

But the future of ruckman Tom Campbell is unclear. The hardened big man is exploring his options following the arrival of versatile tall and free agent Jackson Trengove.

The Dogs missed out on Port Adelaide speedster Jarman Impey, who is set to be traded to Hawthorn in exchange for a draft pick.

The Hawks’ first selection is No.32.

Kerr said his club held “really fruitful” discussions with Greater Western Sydney as they look to add goalkicker Smith.

Essendon could land the injury-hit forward with a second-round pick and holds No.28 in this year’s draft.

There was minimal interest in Francis from the Crows and Port Adelaide on Monday.

Kerr said the Bombers had done their homework on Stringer amid explosive allegations in the Herald Sun about his personal life.

“Obviously you do your due diligence and we’ve spoken to Jake a number of times,” he said.

“We’re confident Jake can be a very good player for Essendon and we believe our culture is a strong culture and the senior players have bought into it, so it would be a good move for Jake and for Essendon.”

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/essendon/essendon-set-to-trade-pick-no11-as-it-attempts-to-secure-jake-stringer-devon-smith-and-adam-saad/news-story/42bce7b266b2ac56645d3f0d2049b50c

[GVGjr]

If we were to lose Campbell then we do need another tall who can rotate through the ruck. Roughead can't go it alone and English needs at least another season. Trengove and Boyd are more just short term fill ins.

[bulldogtragic]

If we were to lose Campbell then we do need another tall who can rotate through the ruck. Roughead can't go it alone and English needs at least another season. Trengove and Boyd are more just short term fill ins.

Need to rookie a mature ruck, seeing they can play from round 1. Griffin or Clarke could be some cover.

[ledge]

We won't except less than pick 11 then goes to say they are doing swaps that will end up with them offering 19.
Contradicts itself badly.

[ledge]

Need to rookie a mature ruck, seeing they can play from round 1. Griffin or Clarke could be some cover.

What's to say we don't use Jong ,we did last year and look at the Tigers this year.
Do you need so many on your list nowadays?

[GVGjr]

Need to rookie a mature ruck, seeing they can play from round 1. Griffin or Clarke could be some cover.

Worth considering but I'd say it's unlikely though. I'd like to keep Campbell unless we had something coming back that assists in that area.

[Ghost Dog]

Worth considering but I'd say it's unlikely though. I'd like to keep Campbell unless we had something coming back that assists in that area.

So Trengrove will be doing minimal rucking?

[bulldogtragic]

What's to say we don't use Jong ,we did last year and look at the Tigers this year.
Do you need so many on your list nowadays?

I'm more talking about injury insurance. I don't want Bonts rucking, no Dunks and coming off an ACL no to Jong either. If I was Campbell I would follow Honey and look for a fresh start else where. So a mature rookie for a year or two until English is ready, isn't too bad a solution in case Roughy gets another rare injury.

[GVGjr]

So Trengrove will be doing minimal rucking?

Trengove should be seen as adding to that depth not replacing a full time ruckman.

[hujsh]

What's to say we don't use Jong ,we did last year and look at the Tigers this year.
Do you need so many on your list nowadays?
Roughead injured round 1. ACL, year over.

What's the plan now?

[GVGjr]

I'm more talking about injury insurance. I don't want Bonts rucking, no Dunks and coming off an ACL no to Jong either. If I was Campbell I would follow Honey and look for a fresh start else where. So a mature rookie for a year or two until English is ready, isn't too bad a solution in case Roughy gets another rare injury.

I tend to agree, sure the players you mentioned can take the odd throw in around the ground but we need to use the likes of Boyd and Trengove before planning on a Bontempelli taking the centre square contests.
If Schache was to arrive, then you might have enough cover but that would still just leave us with one full time ruckman in Roughead who does struggle with injuries from time to time

[GVGjr]

Roughead injured round 1. ACL, year over.

What's the plan now?

This is why I was challenging our approach during the trade time 12 months ago. We should have replaced Minson with someone who could take a turn in the ruck and it didn't have to be a full time ruckman type.
As it was we started the season with injuries to both Roughead and Campbell and Campbell rucked the start of the season under done.

I don't see a problem with having some insurance.

[hujsh]

This is why I was challenging our approach during the trade time 12 months ago. We should have replaced Minson with someone who could take a turn in the ruck and it didn't have to be a full time ruckman type.
As it was we started the season with injuries to both Roughead and Campbell and Campbell rucked the start of the season under done.

I don't see a problem with having some insurance.

I believe at the time I was in agreement with you but came around to the clubs way of thinking over the Summer.

After this year it perplexes me that people are saying we have enough or too much depth in the ruck. We have at least one rookie spot available so I also see no harm getting a mature state player or Zac Clarke for example even as a break in case of emergency type.

[Flamethrower]

Need to rookie a mature ruck, seeing they can play from round 1. Griffin or Clarke could be some cover.

Ex Demon Jake Spencer is available - I'd be looking at offering him a rookie contract.

[Twodogs]

Worth considering but I'd say it's unlikely though. I'd like to keep Campbell unless we had something coming back that assists in that area.


If Campbell could stay on the park we wouldn't be having this conversation. But we have to decide on whether we gamble on his durability. We did this year and got burned. Will it be any different next year?

[FrediKanoute]

We won't except less than pick 11 then goes to say they are doing swaps that will end up with them offering 19.
Contradicts itself badly.

Its Essendon arrogance. They will try to bully the trade and then claim that we refused to deal. If they trade 11 then Stringer stays

[Mantis]

How the hell is Campbell described as 'hardened'? The bloke is put together with crepe paper and balser wood.

[BornInDroopSt'54]

Read (The Age) that Essendon looking at offering Pick 11 plus pick 46 for Stringer and pick 26. That may get it done.

[GVGjr]

Read (The Age) that Essendon looking at offering Pick 11 plus pick 46 for Stringer and pick 26. That may get it done.

It would be a great result for Essendon but a poor result for us.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Read (The Age) that Essendon looking at offering Pick 11 plus pick 46 for Stringer and pick 26. That may get it done.

No thanks.

[hujsh]

Read (The Age) that Essendon looking at offering Pick 11 plus pick 46 for Stringer and pick 26. That may get it done.
Nope.

*Walks away, doesn't talk to Essendon until the next day.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Read (The Age) that Essendon looking at offering Pick 11 plus pick 46 for Stringer and pick 26. That may get it done.

Hope JMac laughs out loud when Dodoro presents that to him, gets up and walks away from the table.. and says 'pick 11 Dodo by tomorrow or else he's staying. No counter offers. Thats it. Take it or leave it but you won't waste anymore of our time.'

[The Doctor]

Foxsport saying pick 11 going to GWS for smith

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/bomber-bound-essendon-and-gws-have-agreed-to-a-deal-regarding-devon-smith/news-story/96998133616c30f82cb0338637a29db2

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Foxsport saying pick 11 going to GWS for smith

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/bomber-bound-essendon-and-gws-have-agreed-to-a-deal-regarding-devon-smith/news-story/96998133616c30f82cb0338637a29db2

Then Jake stays or up steps another suitor.

[Grantysghost]

Jake Niall reporting pick 11 to GWS for Smith and a couple of second rounders.

http://bit.ly/2g3l3QM

[GVGjr]

Yep that appeals to be a done deal. Smith to Essendon for pick 11 with 2nd rounders going back to GWS

[bulldogtragic]

And the Stringer negotiations are officially over (to me)

[Grantysghost]

Yep that appeals to be a done deal. Smith to Essendon for pick 11 with 2nd rounders going back to GWS
If we wanted 11 for Jake seems unlikely Essendon can manufacture an acceptable deal now 11 is gone.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

If we wanted 11 for Jake seems unlikely Essendon can manufacture an acceptable deal now 11 is gone.

The only way is with their 2018 first rounder.

[bulldogtragic]

The only way is with their 2018 first rounder.

They could finish higher next year. I'd only do that with their pick 29 this year or a suitable player.

[hujsh]

If we wanted 11 for Jake seems unlikely Essendon can manufacture an acceptable deal now 11 is gone.


The only way is with their 2018 first rounder.
Or Daniher (I wish!)

[GVGjr]

It's not over yet, there is a bit more to play out here.
Essendon now have a 2018 2nd round pick and two 2nd round picks this year. Colyer likely to be going to WA.

There could still be a trade with Richmond

[bulldogtragic]

It's not over yet, there is a bit more to play out here.
Essendon now have a 2018 2nd round pick and two 2nd round picks this year. Colyer likely to be going to WA.

There could still be a trade with Richmond

So Stringer for 17? I'd hope not.

[GVGjr]

So Stringer for 17? I'd hope not.

I'd say 17 and a 2nd rounder for next year is a chance.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

I'd say 17 and a 2nd rounder for next year is a chance.

What a putrid outcome. Yet again we become trade chumps.

[Ozza]

Looks to me like Essendon called our bluff.

[hujsh]

What a putrid outcome. Yet again we become trade chumps.
Or they accepted they can't satisfy everyone's demands and made their choices. We have no obligation to accept their offers

[bulldogtragic]

Looks to me like Essendon called our bluff.

Hopefully we are not bluffing.

[Topdog]

I'd say 17 and a 2nd rounder for next year is a chance.

That would be a bloody awful trade IMO. Not sure we could sell that as a win

[bulldogtragic]

That would be a bloody awful trade IMO. Not sure we could sell that as a win

Yep, you can't sell that anything other than us pulling our own pants down.

[GVGjr]

That would be a bloody awful trade IMO. Not sure we could sell that as a win

We might not be able to sell it as a win but we now have to make the choice if we truly believe we can have him back or if we take the best offer.

[1eyedog]

I'd say 17 and a 2nd rounder for next year is a chance.

Is that really what we meant all along when we said that Jake was worth a high first round pick?

[bulldogtragic]

I'd say 17 and a 2nd rounder for next year is a chance.

If 24 or 29 go for Saad. How will they get 17?

[GVGjr]

Is that really what we meant all along when we said that Jake was worth a high first round pick?

Not at all, we put a high price on his services and it hasn't panned out that way

[Ozza]

Hopefully we are not bluffing.

Hmmm, I think the whole 'if we don't get the right deal, he'll stay at the dogs' is a bluff. Hard to walk things back from the (poor) way in which we came out with putting him on the table.

I hope I'm proven wrong - but am fearful that Bevo's initial press on this will prove to have been a disaster.

[Ghost Dog]

The Geelong coach said of Jake " We knew he was good, but not that good". Comparisons were being made with Ablett for a while there ( anyone remember that? ). We may look back in history and say 11 was too cheap.

Dale Morris said if Jake comes back they will welcome him with open arms. " He's one of us".
Nothing brings people together like sport and Bevo is the man to reconcile if Jake has to stay.

[Topdog]

We might not be able to sell it as a win but we now have to make the choice if we truly believe we can have him back or if we take the best offer.

If we weren't serious we should have accepted 11 for 26&Stringer

[GVGjr]

If we weren't serious we should have accepted 11 for 26&Stringer

And we would have been crucified if we did that as well.

[Topdog]

And we would have been crucified if we did that as well.

That's because it would have been weak but this new deal is even worse. Again if we weren't serious about a high first rounder as the price we should have accepted early

[lemmon]

I don't see why their 2018 first rounder isn't part of the conversation?

[GVGjr]

I don't see why their 2018 first rounder isn't part of the conversation?

Only because of the stronger draft. That would be a very hard sell for them. They might do it though if we were to give something back. Low chance I would say.

[Ozza]

Essendon's 1st round draft pick next year could be 14-18 - they would be in the mix for top 4 next season.

Is 14-18 next year better than 11 this year given that next years draft is predicted to be a lot better?

[Bulldog4life]

Hmmm, I think the whole 'if we don't get the right deal, he'll stay at the dogs' is a bluff. Hard to walk things back from the (poor) way in which we came out with putting him on the table.

I hope I'm proven wrong - but am fearful that Bevo's initial press on this will prove to have been a disaster.

Can see your point Ozza. This from Age today.

The Bulldogs will be forced to reassess their strategy in relation to their demands for Stringer with few in the industry thinking the contracted 23-year-old could return to the club after his coach Luke Beveridge made it clear post-season it was best for both parties if Stringer made a fresh start.

[Bulldog4life]

AFL Trades 2017: How Essendon can still meet demands for Jake Stringer and Adam Saad

ONE down, two to go.

Essendon secured the first of three trade targets on Thursday morning, tying up a deal with Greater Western Sydney for forward Devon Smith.

However, complex negotiations for the remaining two players hoping to arrive at the Bombers during this year’s exchange period — Jake Stringer and Adam Saad — hang in the balance.

Essendon shipped its prized Pick 11 to GWS in exchange for Smith, also receiving Pick 24, while swapping later selections in next year’s bumper draft. It was the first domino to fall in 2017.

It was a dramatic opening move from Essendon. After all, both the Western Bulldogs and Gold Coast had also been eyeing off the club’s first selection in deals for Stringer and Saad respectively.

It left the Dons with Picks 24 and 29 to negotiate with when they next meet the Dogs and the Suns.

While the Suns might consider one of those for Saad, the Dogs are almost certain to demand more for Stringer — a 23-year-old premiership player and All-Australian capable of cracking the AFL’s elite.

There is yet ways for Essendon to satisfy for the Western Bulldogs’ demands for Stringer, most notably by offering future picks in order to finally resolve the situation. However, given how highly next year’s crop of junior talent is being rated by recruiters, doing so has its risks.

Involving a third club in negotiations is also a possibility. Despite no contact being made between the active parties yet, Richmond looms as an ideal candidate to get involved in the deal.

The Tigers have the luxury of holding Picks 15 and 17 in this year’s draft, but could earn more draft points by trading away one of those selections in a bundled deal for the two Bomber picks.

Essendon’s Picks 24 and 29 are collectively worth more draft points than Richmond’s Pick 15, which alone could be enough to satisfy the Western Bulldogs in a deal for Stringer.

The benefit for the Tigers? More draft points to match a bid for highly rated father-son prospect Patrick Naish. The benefit for the Dons and the Dogs? Pick 15 to include in a deal for Stringer.

However, even if that far-fetched hypothetical plays out, it still leaves Saad waiting in the wings.

Essendon’s next selection in the draft is Pick 47 — not enough to tempt the Gold Coast into a trade.

While either Pick 24 or 29 might do, offloading one of those selections would ultimately come down to the Bombers being forced to decide who they rate higher — Stringer or Saad.

Perhaps this is where a future selection comes into Essendon’s thinking. Could they offer a second-round pick in next year’s draft for the Suns speedster, should Picks 24 or 29 be sent elsewhere?

Gold Coast has not ruled out the possibility of Saad, contracted for 2018, being traded to another Victorian club, should Essendon not meet its demands for the defender.

Earlier this week, Gold Coast list boss Scott Clayton said of the 23-year-old: “We do hear his preference, but it’s about the city.”

Carlton has been strongly linked to Saad and is monitoring the situation closely.

Much like the Bombers planned to use Saad’s likely addition to play youngster Andrew McGrath through the midfield, the Blues would love the freedom to play Sam Docherty out of the centre.

Regardless of what is playing out elsewhere, Essendon has some thinking to do. But the club’s intelligent list boss Adrian Dodoro has been in this situation before.

Can he work another miracle? Only time will tell.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-trades-2017-how-essendon-can-still-meet-demands-for-jake-stringer-and-adam-saad/news-story/8c76a4878d365c14e1363dab28b6ca26

[GVGjr]

Does pick 15 seem about right? Not great but not bad.

[bulldogtragic]

Does pick 15 seem about right? Not great but not bad.

Pick 15 for me only works with us getting a player of a quality that you might trade 15 into 10.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Pick 15? No, no and no.

We said an early first round pick. Then we said Pick 11. At what point do we stop moving the goal posts?

Talk of next year's first round doesn't excite me either. Every year we hear about the incoming "superdraft", which by the time it rolls around we hear about how it "drops off after pick 10". If Essendon acquire all 3 of their trade targets, I suspect it'd be a Pick 14-18 which once again is bloody ordinary compensation for a Pick 5/AA/Leading Goal Kicker/Premiership player.

Only way I consider 15 or next year's first is if they attach a young player to it, and that they won't do.

[Topdog]

Pick 11 is unders. Pick 15 even more so but from the tigers point of view they couldn't trade away pick 17 and still get more points, no need to do 15 IMO

[GVGjr]

Pick 15? No, no and no.

We said an early first round pick. Then we said Pick 11. At what point do we stop moving the goal posts?

Talk of next year's first round doesn't excite me either. Every year we hear about the incoming "superdraft", which by the time it rolls around we hear about how it "drops off after pick 10". If Essendon acquire all 3 of their trade targets, I suspect it'd be a Pick 14-18 which once again is bloody ordinary compensation for a Pick 5/AA/Leading Goal Kicker/Premiership player.

Only way I consider 15 or next year's first is if they attach a young player to it, and that they won't do.

It's all good to stand firm and if your happy to have Stringer back then that works however, if we genuinely don't believe it's in our best interest to have him at the club then we possibly need to be a bit flexible.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

It's all good to stand firm and if your happy to have Stringer back then that works however, if we genuinely don't believe it's in our best interest to have him at the club then we possibly need to be a bit flexible.

Let's say he doesn't get traded. There are still 2 options:

1 - He rebuilds his relationships with key individuals at the club and does what he says he was going to do elsewhere - turn it around.

2 - He sits the year out like McCarthy did.

Being flexible is exactly why we aren't taken seriously in negotiations. I will be livid if we cave to the best offer simply because we wanted to get rid of him. If that's the case, from the moment we announced Stringer was tradeable we've designed a 101 manual on how to shoot yourself in the foot.

I am more than happy for Jake to sit out 12 months if it means we stand firm to our word. We have no obligation to accept rubbish and in turn help strengthen a competitor.

[GVGjr]

And in 12 months time if we haven't repaired the damage?

[The Bulldogs Bite]

And in 12 months time if we haven't repaired the damage?

We lose him for zilch. So be it.

Bend over backwards for Essendon now and the precedent is well and truly set for any future negotiations with clubs: hold firm, because they won't.

[GVGjr]

We lose him for zilch. So be it.

Bend over backwards for Essendon now and the precedent is well and truly set for any future negotiations with clubs: hold firm, because they won't.

I was more concerned with having an out of sorts Stringer around the playing group for a year.

It's going to be an almighty challenge to repair the relationship with the coach and the player given it was played out in public.

[westdog54]

And in 12 months time if we haven't repaired the damage?


We lose him for zilch. So be it.

Bend over backwards for Essendon now and the precedent is well and truly set for any future negotiations with clubs: hold firm, because they won't.

Exactly. Essendon will still need to do a deal with us of some description or they can go to the draft and hope they don't miss him.

[Topdog]

It's all good to stand firm and if your happy to have Stringer back then that works however, if we genuinely don't believe it's in our best interest to have him at the club then we possibly need to be a bit flexible.

Which brings us back to..... If we weren't serious about our position we should have accepted 11 for 26

[BornInDroopSt'54]

Without really knowing the full extent of Jake's transgressions it seems like Stringer stays. Essendon are tossers who think the world owes them even after they disgraced our AFL brand.
Unless some creative deal involving two 2nd rounders or a future pick happens, Jake's chance to prove himself will be with us.
Come on down the new Jake Stringer. Redemption is the best human story.

[hujsh]

I was more concerned with having an out of sorts Stringer around the playing group for a year.

It's going to be an almighty challenge to repair the relationship with the coach and the player given it was played out in public.
If he doesn't straighten up then he literally doesn't enter the club if that's such a concern. No AFL, no VFL.

[Bulldog Revolution]

We lose him for zilch. So be it.

Bend over backwards for Essendon now and the precedent is well and truly set for any future negotiations with clubs: hold firm, because they won't.

Someone will still have to trade for him next year - he wont be an unrestricted free agent - we might not get an amazing price, but we may decide thats ok