Stringer Trade Worth

[bulldogtragic]

Sam Landersberger did a story on it this year, the take away is:

"EVERY AFL club is free to trade its future first-round pick in this year’s exchange period."

[GVGjr]

This from late September article in the Geelong advertiser would indicate that they can trade the 2018 pick

GEELONG may have to look at trading a future first-round pick in order to bring Western Bulldogs star Jake Stringer to the club next year, according to former list management guru Chris Pelchen.

The Cats have been strongly linked to the 23-year-old premiership forward and Stringer has indicated Simonds Stadium is his preferred destination for the 2018 season.

Pelchen said given the Cats could currently only offer pick 20, some manoeuvring would need to be done in order to satisfy the Bulldogs at the trade table.

“I would suggest that if the Bulldogs are dealing with Geelong — and I say `if’ because I think there will be multiple suitors — then they would be looking more at a selection in next year’s draft rather than this year,” Pelchen said.

“It’s clear that there is going to be significant discussion around Jake and I can understand why Geelong would have an interest in him because he can play forward and through the midfield, so he provides great versatility.

“The fact that next year’s draft is stronger, I think they (the Bulldogs) will speculate will Geelong finish as high next year, maybe not, so therefore the draft selection becomes higher.

“If I was the Bulldogs I would be pursuing an early selection in next year’s draft and potentially a second-round pick in this year’s draft to go with it. I think that will be about what the market value would be.

“But it will come down to whether the Bulldogs value having a future selection because I think next year’s draft is even stronger than this year’s, particularly at the top end.”

Geelong is expected to be a big player during this year’s trade period and has been linked to several high profile players, including Stringer, Giants forward Devon Smith, out-of-favour Bulldog Stewart Crameri and former Cats star Gary Ablett.

Pelchen said there had been some “unfair criticism” of Geelong’s list following its disappointing exit from the finals, but added that it needed to target forwards in the off-season to take the load off Tom Hawkins inside-50.

“I think what probably let them down this

year, particularly late in the year, was their lack of scoring power,” he said.

“Tom Hawkins struggled for consistency and while he provides a focal point and continues to be a big, powerful athlete, the fact he wasn’t hitting the scoreboard really hurt Geelong and they started to rely on peripheral players to contribute significantly to the score, more so than what would be considered normal at the top end of the ladder.

“So I think they really need to bulk up their forward half.”

Essendon has also been strongly linked to Stringer, who kicked 24 goals from his 16 matches this season.

[bulldogtragic]

If we can get entrenched with Geelong GCS, hopefully Saad and any other Suns players can get to us a little easier by adjusting the trade balance. Some cash to Geelong might ease that too. Do one nice, large trade.

Grab Schache. Trade period over. More points for next year.

[GVGjr]

Now that is cleared up, the Cats are a likely top 5 side in 2018. All things being equal that could be pick 14.
Close to being on the money but I suspect the Cats would want something coming back this year perhaps an exchange for our pick 27 for their pick 33. We could probably live with that.

[Dry Rot]

Now that is cleared up, the Cats are a likely top 5 side in 2018. All things being equal that could be pick 14.
Close to being on the money but I suspect the Cats would want something coming back this year perhaps an exchange for our pick 27 for their pick 33. We could probably live with that.

Even if we pay a chunk of Stringer's salary?

[GVGjr]

Even if we pay a chunk of Stringer's salary?

If we pay money then we shouldn't need to even it up this year.

Pick 33 is probably what they have earmarked for Ablett anyway.

[bulldogtragic]

Even if we pay a chunk of Stringer's salary?

No. If they want all the good players I'd want:

Dogs: 2017 Picks 19 & 22, 2018 1st
Cats: 2017 Stringer & 27, 2018 4th

They should make the GF if we help them land both Stringer & Ablett.
So say they lose, take the upgrade & 4th out the argument, it's 2017 Pick 19 & 2018 Pick 17. Two picks on the 1st & 2nd round border.
Then it's how much money to get them to agree.

[Happy Days]

Okay. Purely hypothetically speaking here, and we'd probably get finished by the AFLPA for this, but;

If we don't trade Stringer, he walks out and doesn't play a minute of footy this year, and then goes to Essendon on a contract similar to the one Motlop got from Port, then wouldn't the compensation leave us better off (with a pick in next year's draft) than if we were to trade him this year for 2x ~25?

Can we do this? Is it legal? It doesn't necessarily feel moral, but who *really* cares?

[bulldogtragic]

Okay. Purely hypothetically speaking here, and we'd probably get finished by the AFLPA for this, but;

If we don't trade Stringer, he walks out and doesn't play a minute of footy this year, and then goes to Essendon on a contract similar to the one Motlop got from Port, then wouldn't the compensation leave us better off (with a pick in next year's draft) than if we were to trade him this year for 2x ~25?

Can we do this? Is it legal? It doesn't necessarily feel moral, but who *really* cares?

He's not a free agent. If he doesn't turn up to work, he doesn't get paid though. I'm happy to salary cap bank that.

[GVGjr]

Okay. Purely hypothetically speaking here, and we'd probably get finished by the AFLPA for this, but;

If we don't trade Stringer, he walks out and doesn't play a minute of footy this year, and then goes to Essendon on a contract similar to the one Motlop got from Port, then wouldn't the compensation leave us better off (with a pick in next year's draft) than if we were to trade him this year for 2x ~25?

Can we do this? Is it legal? It doesn't necessarily feel moral, but who *really* cares?

Needs to have played a couple years more to qualify for FA status. He would be an out of contract player.

[comrade]

Regardless of what happens this week, the entire thing has been a masterclass in how not to work the media.

The Essendon media mafia have absolutely gone to town and we've been reduced to playing the villain because we had the 'gall' to explore trade options for a contracted player.

Why hasn't anyone brought up the fact that Essendon have turned this into a complete circus by trading away pick 11 for Smith?

They've convinced Stringer to nominate them, and now have left him in purgatory, hoping that his current team blinks and gets bent over, rather than just offering up a fair and equitable deal that allows both the player and club to move on quickly and quietly.

It is dirty, scummy stuff from Dodoro and Connors, yet we're the bad guys. And this is putting aside all the rubbish we've put up with from Stringer the past 2 years, which also happens to have magically been pushed under the rug.

Where is Stevens and Landsberger?

[SonofScray]

Regardless of what happens this week, the entire thing has been a masterclass in how not to work the media.

The Essendon media mafia have absolutely gone to town and we've been reduced to playing the villain because we had the 'gall' to explore trade options for a contracted player.

Why hasn't anyone brought up the fact that Essendon have turned this into a complete circus by trading away pick 11 for Smith?

They've convinced Stringer to nominate them, and now have left him in purgatory, hoping that his current team blinks and gets bent over, rather than just offering up a fair and equitable deal that allows both the player and club to move on quickly and quietly.

It is dirty, scummy stuff from Dodoro and Connors, yet we're the bad guys. And this is putting aside all the rubbish we've put up with from Stringer the past 2 years, which also happens to have magically been pushed under the rug.

Where is Stevens and Landsberger?

The loudest voices in the media re: Stringer have all been ex EFC players or known fans. It has been a real scummy campaign from these pricks.

[mjp]

It is dirty, scummy stuff from Dodoro and Connors, yet we're the bad guys. And this is putting aside all the rubbish we've put up with from Stringer the past 2 years, which also happens to have magically been pushed under the rug.

It's our fault it has gone this way, not Essendon's.

Much like Hawthorn with Mitchell last year, the Bombers HAD to trade pick 11 to get Smith...otherwise they wouldn't have gotten him and there WERE other suitors. With Jake, clearly the financial terms they have offered him have added to his (and his agents) resolve to leave. Again, like the Hawks last year, they simply picked the low hanging fruit and grabbed Smith as soon as they could...in theory, that left them with time to work through the Stringer 'problem'.

Our club is between a rock and a hard place with the media. If the club speaks out about WHY they wanted to consider the trade of Jake, well, that further diminishes his value AND further annoys a player who might still be in the tri-colours next year. If they don't, well - we can already see what happens if they don't...we look weak and indecisive and everything else AND - just like Gold Coast last year, are publicly made out to be the bad guy and 'unwilling to compromise'. I will say though that the persistent comments from outside the club about it being '...impossible for him to go back...' are concerning, although - as I have already said, if any of our players were to come out and comment (which they clearly have been told NOT to do!) saying that they want Jake back and he is a great bloke yadayadayada, well that would just be petrol on the fire.

Remember that a fair deal leaves both parties feeling unsatisfied with the outcome and it just seems that in this case everyone wants to be considered the winner. Truthfully - in all trades - the team who ends up with the best player is the winner...in this case, that is going to be the team that gets Stringer. It just sucks that it most likely wont be us.

[comrade]

It's our fault it has gone this way, not Essendon's.

Much like Hawthorn with Mitchell last year, the Bombers HAD to trade pick 11 to get Smith...otherwise they wouldn't have gotten him and there WERE other suitors. With Jake, clearly the financial terms they have offered him have added to his (and his agents) resolve to leave. Again, like the Hawks last year, they simply picked the low hanging fruit and grabbed Smith as soon as they could...in theory, that left them with time to work through the Stringer 'problem'.

It wasn't done to give them more time to work on the Stringer problem. If we were offered pick 11 straight up, we would have taken it. They effectively prioritised getting Smith in order to force us to take a significantly lesser deal, banking on the fact that Stringer has been convinced by Essendon and his management to leave the Dogs by any means necessary. Using that pick on Smith has now just drawn out the Stringer deal. Seems like a shitty way to treat a potential recruit, yet we're the bad guys for being un-reasonable.

Then again, it seems pretty obvious that Stringer cares about one thing (himself) so seeing his former club getting bent over probably isn't keeping him up at night.

It's not like Essendon (or Stringer) have been clean skins which just proves we've handled this terribly from a PR perspective,

[Topdog]

Mjp multiple Bulldogs have already said they'd be happy to have him back