Trade Dunkley

[Bulldog4life]

Don't think he has by that article.

Just saw your sarcastic quote BTT.

[Bulldog4life]

There is no way we should go after Treloar based on this. You cannot have a situation where a player's personal life is torn across states.

To me if the Collywobbles don't want Treloar plus his huge salary and the fact he might struggle without his partner and child = a big red flag.

[SquirrelGrip]

The Bulldogs meanwhile are interested in Collingwood's Adam Treloar and believe it is not inconceivable they could trade for him and still keep midfielder Josh Dunkley.

The Dogs remain determined to hold onto Dunkley and reject offers from Essendon for the midfielder. Essendon is prepared to trade pick 8 to the Dogs.

Early picks are of little value to the Bulldogs because of the fact they have academy player Jamarra Ugle-Hagan coming in potentially at first pick, so the only way an Essendon offer could turn the Dogs' heads would be if it meant they brought in a ready-made player.

According to The Age, we could keep Dunkley and get Treloar. That would be a win.

[bulldogtragic]

BT, stop it!

Seriously, I am starting to view ending up with Dunkley as a loss!

Side note: I think I would still rather deal our #14 for Adelaide's 22 & 33 (1408 points) over North's 26 & 28 (1406 points) because it probably comes with a "don't take JUH at #1" handshake.

Can you imagine we did everything you outlined above and those pricks decide to make us use #2 on JUH?

*if* we got 7 & 8 and North were happy with 7, 8, 54, future 2nd & La Young, then yep that's another path to a good outcome. I hate Adelaide, probably not as much as you, but I just don't see it, but I'm sure Sam can manage that.

When you look at the fact GWS were going to land Setterfield, and trading down for points would've been a nice outcome. Then they used this strategy with players leaving to get pick 2 and land Tim Taranto and a few picks later Setterfield. It's an 'all in' play to do it, and the last time we went 'all in' when a gun midfielder wanted out of a contract that move was the key to winning a premiership.

We might have to trade down and have a traditional kind of approach because nothing is guaranteed. That's a pass mark, and maybe not as inspiring as other moves. But I really do hope in the dozens of scenarios Power and his team have, one of them is 'trade up'. In a bit over 48 hours we will know how the chips fell.

[comrade]

Collingwood have been burnt by the Beams deal and it seems like Treloar is showing some of the same red flags. I feel very sorry for the predicament they've put AT in, but I also don't want the Bulldogs holding the bucket and cleaning up another club's mess.

[GVGjr]

Power seems to be calling Essendon's bluff here saying that he isn't interested in a 3 way trade that delivers Dunkley to Essendon
Any deal for Dunkley needs to be a separate deal and any interest in Treloar will also be a separate deal.

I get the feeling that if AT comes to his senses with his financial demands he might be headed to us

If that happened how do we spread the midfield minutes among our group? With McLean out that will help a bit

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Power seems to be calling Essendon's bluff here saying that he isn't interested in a 3 way trade that delivers Dunkley to Essendon
Any deal for Dunkley needs to be a separate deal and any interest in Treloar will also be a separate deal.

I get the feeling that if AT comes to his senses with his financial demands he might be headed to us

If that happened how do we spread the midfield minutes among our group? With McLean out that will help a bit

The bolded part is a bit harsh GVG. If you signed a contract for 900K, helped your employer to back end it, then it got to your big pay day and they wanted to show you the door, would you help everyone out and take 2-300K less somewhere else?

It's a messy situation but I don't blame AT for actually wanting to be paid what was agreed upon. If he takes less to come to the Dogs, it's noble but stupid. If I am him, I'm holding Collingwood to account one way or another.

[Mofra]

Treloar 5 x $900k. It's a ridiculous contract to take on in a position which is not a position of need.

He'll be 28 at the start of the season and it's a five year deal. Do we really think a 32 year old burst mid is going to be worth $900k in 2025?
For that price we could snare an A grade KPD - Stephen May is on less. Lever is on ~$750 as per media reports, who knows what Weiering is on, Harris Andrews. That's the calibre of player in that contract range.

[soupman]

Collingwood have been burnt by the Beams deal and it seems like Treloar is showing some of the same red flags. I feel very sorry for the predicament they've put AT in, but I also don't want the Bulldogs holding the bucket and cleaning up another club's mess.

This is what I keep telling people.

Beams was a high profile player who fell in Collingwoods lap (as in they did not seek him out as a trade target) who had known issues with his body and off field and came at a severe cost to their trade assets and took up a huge part of their salary cap which they hadn't planned for and played a position they didn't need to bolster like that anyway.

Treloar fits basically everything there, with the only bonus being that he might cost less in trade assets because Collingwood are so stuffed if they keep him.

Who was the last player that was pushed out of their club for any reason that was a good idea to pick up? And how is putting a $700K unplanned divot in your salary cap for at least two years when you have Bont about to come out of contract a good thing?

[Topdog]

The bolded part is a bit harsh GVG. If you signed a contract for 900K, helped your employer to back end it, then it got to your big pay day and they wanted to show you the door, would you help everyone out and take 2-300K less somewhere else?

It's a messy situation but I don't blame AT for actually wanting to be paid what was agreed upon. If he takes less to come to the Dogs, it's noble but stupid. If I am him, I'm holding Collingwood to account one way or another.

Agree 100% and lets be honest even if he stays at Collingwood and they hate his salary they will still play him.

This is all a Collingwood stuff up and Treloar shouldn't be punished for that.

[Happy Days]

No one advocating for Treloar is actually advocating for Treloar at $900k right? Think we'd be mad to take him on at a cent over $600k, and even then it should cost us next to nothing to do so. Reports of us having to kick a potential top 10 pick are madness.

[comrade]

Who was the last player that was pushed out of their club for any reason that was a good idea to pick up? And how is putting a $700K unplanned divot in your salary cap for at least two years when you have Bont about to come out of contract a good thing?

I'm sure there have been a few but I can't think of one off te top of my head, especially at the whacky salary Treloar is on.

[GVGjr]

The bolded part is a bit harsh GVG. If you signed a contract for 900K, helped your employer to back end it, then it got to your big pay day and they wanted to show you the door, would you help everyone out and take 2-300K less somewhere else?

It's a messy situation but I don't blame AT for actually wanting to be paid what was agreed upon. If he takes less to come to the Dogs, it's noble but stupid. If I am him, I'm holding Collingwood to account one way or another.

I know what you are saying and the point I'm trying to make is that he accepted his contract to be back ended, albeit in good faith, but it's now an inhibiting condition of him getting away from an unfriendly work environment. I don't think that can be disputed
I feel sorry for him but he can't blame clubs being spooked by his contract

If he is happy to stay at Collingwood and work through the challenges then good luck to him. I'd be looking to move to a place where I could reach my playing potential and be a bit flexible with my financial requirements

[Topdog]

No one advocating for Treloar is actually advocating for Treloar at $900k right? Think we'd be mad to take him on at a cent over $600k, and even then it should cost us next to nothing to do so. Reports of us having to kick a potential top 10 pick are madness.

No chance. I'd want the Pies to be chipping in 30% each year to do the deal, which simply wont happen.

Having said that I think AT is nuts if he agrees to a significant pay cut to join us.

[Topdog]

I know what you are saying and the point I'm trying to make is that he accepted his contract to be back ended, albeit in good faith, but it's now an inhibiting condition of him getting away from an unfriendly work environment. I don't think that can be disputed
I feel sorry for him but he can't blame clubs being spooked by his contract

If he is happy to stay at Collingwood and work through the challenges then good luck to him. I'd be looking to move to a place where I could reach my playing potential and be a bit flexible with my financial requirements

Make no mistake him leaving would be a disaster for Collingwood as well. They are stuffed either way as no player is going to trust them with contract changes going forward.