Bulldog ONLY Trade News
Collapse
X
-
Re: Bulldog ONLY Trade News
So my instant thought was 'were doing Harmes again'. But
Kennedy 2 years younger
Played 24 AFL games this year
Ave 17 disposals
Minimum chips contract, if Macrae goes, we're probably getting the same on field output from him.Comment
-
Re: Bulldog ONLY Trade News
I get where you're coming from GG, given the hand we have you'd prefer that:- salvage the best deal possible on the premis something is ALWAYS better than nothing
- we focus afterwards on addressing the circumstances that see this recurring problem (i.e. required players able to get to position to be pilfered for chips
If this were a one-off scenario, I'd agree. But whilst I think there are absolutely clear learnings for our club administrators to put into place, I think the other side of the dilemma is largely being gamified by the bigger clubs.
I think it's clear the big clubs have two fold strategies for acquiring top talent via other clubs:- free agency - its clear the big clubs are the winners from the current policy
- target players early, and use their influence over time to then influence them to get to final year of contract if not a free agent and instigate a trade to ONLY them
If we can't secure an equitable trade for Bailey Smith, amongst all the madness on display in other trade deals this week.then clearly the system is broken and we need to look at other tactics to employ that dissuade predator clubs from employing this strategy against us going forward.
We've been hit twice now, first by Brisbane with Dunkley... and it was a special kind of insult for them to trade out picks before doing a deal with us on Dunkley....
And now Geelong are lining up to take advantage of us..and what can we do??
Yes we need to come up with levers to try and sign players coming into their last year, but we also need a plan for when they don't comply.
I think the situation, if Geelong don't suddenly decide to become reasonable good-faith negotiators (and the heck should or would they?)calls for exploring a nuclear option that puts Geelong and other clubs and players like Mr Bailey Brandlenka Smith on notice that we'll smack them.
For mine that is somehow convincing a club like North or St Kilda or ANYONE but the big clubs to pick Bailey should he go in the draft, and then work out how to legally do that.
I really don't get that it would be draft tampering (more than is currently allowed) for us to trade with another club; should it become clear a deal with Geelong is not possible, that enables them to get ahead of a potential Geelong pick of Bailey Smith in the national or pre-season draft and maybe give us some draft capital out of it ourselves with pick swaps etc...
Doing it once, whilst not brilliant, would set a clear message for either:- other clubs to look elsewhere to ream a club for talent
- the AFL to step in and decide that Geelong and others can't continue to be able to manipulate talent this way
Rant over, I'll step off my platform now.Comment
-
Comment
-
Re: Bulldog ONLY Trade News
Clearly we are viewing the output of Macrae and Kennedy to be similar, except one we would be paying double.
It isn't a silly move, though I question why Kennedy would want to come across when he (surely) wouldn't be guaranteed inside mid minutes.W00F!Comment
-
Re: Bulldog ONLY Trade News
Isn't XOH just Garcia MK2? Similar style players, similar positions hard at it with not so great skills? and Garcia just re-signed for 3.Comment
-
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Comment
-
Re: Bulldog ONLY Trade News
I feel he's more outside and we're earmarking him for high half forward or wing. Garcia probably more inside or deep pressure forward.But then again, I'm an Internet poster and Bevo is a premiership coach so draw your own conclusions.Comment
-
Re: Bulldog ONLY Trade News
I get where you're coming from GG, given the hand we have you'd prefer that:- salvage the best deal possible on the premis something is ALWAYS better than nothing
- we focus afterwards on addressing the circumstances that see this recurring problem (i.e. required players able to get to position to be pilfered for chips
If this were a one-off scenario, I'd agree. But whilst I think there are absolutely clear learnings for our club administrators to put into place, I think the other side of the dilemma is largely being gamified by the bigger clubs.
I think it's clear the big clubs have two fold strategies for acquiring top talent via other clubs:- free agency - its clear the big clubs are the winners from the current policy
- target players early, and use their influence over time to then influence them to get to final year of contract if not a free agent and instigate a trade to ONLY them
If we can't secure an equitable trade for Bailey Smith, amongst all the madness on display in other trade deals this week.then clearly the system is broken and we need to look at other tactics to employ that dissuade predator clubs from employing this strategy against us going forward.
We've been hit twice now, first by Brisbane with Dunkley... and it was a special kind of insult for them to trade out picks before doing a deal with us on Dunkley....
And now Geelong are lining up to take advantage of us..and what can we do??
Yes we need to come up with levers to try and sign players coming into their last year, but we also need a plan for when they don't comply.
I think the situation, if Geelong don't suddenly decide to become reasonable good-faith negotiators (and the heck should or would they?)calls for exploring a nuclear option that puts Geelong and other clubs and players like Mr Bailey Brandlenka Smith on notice that we'll smack them.
For mine that is somehow convincing a club like North or St Kilda or ANYONE but the big clubs to pick Bailey should he go in the draft, and then work out how to legally do that.
I really don't get that it would be draft tampering (more than is currently allowed) for us to trade with another club; should it become clear a deal with Geelong is not possible, that enables them to get ahead of a potential Geelong pick of Bailey Smith in the national or pre-season draft and maybe give us some draft capital out of it ourselves with pick swaps etc...
Doing it once, whilst not brilliant, would set a clear message for either:- other clubs to look elsewhere to ream a club for talent
- the AFL to step in and decide that Geelong and others can't continue to be able to manipulate talent this way
Rant over, I'll step off my platform now.
If Geelong really think we've positioned another club to have the option to pounce on Smith in the draft, at worst we force them to use a first round pick on him, as opposed to them getting Smith for free via pre-season draft and also getting to use their pick 17 to improve their squad even further.Comment
-
Re: Bulldog ONLY Trade News
Will he stop Rozee waltzing out the front of stoppages?But then again, I'm an Internet poster and Bevo is a premiership coach so draw your own conclusions.Comment
-
Re: Bulldog ONLY Trade News
Stepping back on platform for one second.
If Geelong really think we've positioned another club to have the option to pounce on Smith in the draft, at worst we force them to use a first round pick on him, as opposed to them getting Smith for free via pre-season draft and also getting to use their pick 17 to improve their squad even further.
I'd be ok with either outcome.
I'd prefer to turn Bailey into a gun player that destroys Geelong though.BT COME BACK!
Comment
-
Re: Bulldog ONLY Trade News
Kennedy would do what Macrae is pigeon holed to do for us, for about a third of the cost.BT COME BACK!
Comment
Comment