Chris Dawes?

[LongWait]

Re: Chris Dawes?

All good points LW. I would say we've under-utilised the draft since 2000 and over-used recycled players. Apart from 2002 when we had 3 picks in the top 20, we've never had a really strong hand of high picks in any given year - we've always had a penchant for trading out 2nd/3rd round picks, even when we've had a clutch of really high picks in some years and decided to trade them out (like 2003).

As you say, a good mix of the two philosophies is what's needed, but just as importantly it is crucial to understand the worth of a) the draft pick in question and b) the player being recycled - IMO we've been poor in establishing the true worth of players we are trading in and have paid overs on just about every single one (including Barry Hall) in the last few seasons, which goes back to my point about us being poor negotiators. Also when there are multiple suitors (as is the case with Dawes) sometimes it is best just to walk away and hold onto the pick/s, because invariably you'll pay overs.

I think from memory we used pick 47 on Hall. Wasn't overs given we got two good seasons from him when we were in Premiership mode. Aker and Hudson were also good trades at the time and we didn't pay overs. Our trading record under Fantasia (cue howls of derision) isn't as bad as it's sometimes portrayed on here.

Anyway, it seems you and I broadly agree on strategy and hope that the club negotiates well in whatever it does. I thought it was a promising sign that we didn't flinch when Gold Coast and then Melbourne went hard for the Mini Draft picks. We didn't fall in love with the deal and immediately counter with a higher offer. We seem to have known our walk away price and when it was exceeded, we walked.

It looks like we haven't fallen in love with the Dawes trade either. We have put a bid on the table and others have raced in as well to make their offers to Dawes and bids to Collingwood. We should walk on this trade as well if the price asked exceeds our valuation on the trade. Whether you agree with the bid we are alleged to have made is another matter - but the signs are there that we are not being reckless, nor naive.

[Mantis]

Re: Chris Dawes?

It looks like we haven't fallen in love with the Dawes trade either. We have put a bid on the table and others have raced in as well to make their offers to Dawes and bids to Collingwood. We should walk on this trade as well if the price asked exceeds our valuation on the trade. Whether you agree with the bid we are alleged to have made is another matter - but the signs are there that we are not being reckless, nor naive.

Are you certain we have?

I know we have approached Dawes with an offer, but have we approached Collingwood?

[LongWait]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Are you certain we have?

I know we have approached Dawes with an offer, but have we approached Collingwood?

I don't know what the bid is but I do know that discussions with Collingwood have taken place.

What are you getting at?

[G-Mo77]

Re: Chris Dawes?

So it looks like it's Melbourne. Can't say I'm that upset.

[azabob]

Re: Chris Dawes?

So it looks like it's Melbourne. Can't say I'm that upset.

Why are you saying it's Melbourne?

[G-Mo77]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Why are you saying it's Melbourne?

Just reading reports and putting 2 + 2 together. Doesn't seem like we're pushing that hard from what I've read. Could be leaks from player managers or Collingwood to talk up a bit of extra currency.

[Sedat]

Re: Chris Dawes?

I think from memory we used pick 47 on Hall. Wasn't overs given we got two good seasons from him when we were in Premiership mode. Aker and Hudson were also good trades at the time and we didn't pay overs. Our trading record under Fantasia (cue howls of derision) isn't as bad as it's sometimes portrayed on here.

Hall was 33yo and just missed half a season after effectively being kicked out of Sydney. It's a credit to him that he played so well for us but a 3rd round pick on its own was significant overs - in any event, Sydney was supposed to throw pick 55 back to us as part of the deal so it was only going to be an 8 pick downgrade but we somehow ended up forgetting/not submitting the paperwork for this added pick. The same thing happened with the Vesz/Everitt trade - sloppy work. They are smallish things in isolation but they add up. The additional pick in the Hall trade for example could have been used by Dalrymple on a young project instead of picking up a fringe dud or retaining a veteran like Eagle one year too long.

Aker and Hudson trades were both under Clayton's watch and I thought both were good trades - Aker would have been a great trade if he was able to get a kick in the 09 PF and then retired that season after a 4th premiership. Hudson and pick 43 for pick 30 and 38 was a bargain outlay considering a dud like Cameron Wood commanded pick 14 outright in the same trade period.

[azabob]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Just reading reports and putting 2 + 2 together. Doesn't seem like we're pushing that hard from what I've read. Could be leaks from player managers or Collingwood to talk up a bit of extra currency.

Got ya. Neeld & Co seem fairly confident in getting him to agree.

Could work out for the best.

[Sedat]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Recycled players: Why do you reckon Sydney can pull it off so well. Why do clubs like us always struggle with that.

Sydney has had some misses - Everitt (x2), Paul Chambers, Henry Playfair spring to mind. Didn't they get David Spriggs as well?
What Sydney are good at in the main is identifying 'unsexy' players who can provide a role and who are under-valued by the rest of the competition. Marty Mattner, Ted Richards, Rhyce Shaw, Kennedy, McGlynn all good examples. None of the other clubs were rushing the door down to get these players at the time, and they have all played their roles well once at the Swans.

[LongWait]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Hall was 33yo and just missed half a season after effectively being kicked out of Sydney. It's a credit to him that he played so well for us but a 3rd round pick on its own was significant overs - in any event, Sydney was supposed to throw pick 55 back to us as part of the deal so it was only going to be an 8 pick downgrade but we somehow ended up forgetting/not submitting the paperwork for this added pick. The same thing happened with the Vesz/Everitt trade - sloppy work. They are smallish things in isolation but they add up. The additional pick in the Hall trade for example could have been used by Dalrymple on a young project instead of picking up a fringe dud or retaining a veteran like Eagle one year too long.

Aker and Hudson trades were both under Clayton's watch and I thought both were good trades - Aker would have been a great trade if he was able to get a kick in the 09 PF and then retired that season after a 4th premiership. Hudson and pick 43 for pick 30 and 38 was a bargain outlay considering a dud like Cameron Wood commanded pick 14 outright in the same trade period.

I know what you think of Fantasia so I won't go there But I think you are not giving credit for the Hall trade. We all know the circumstances that lead to the trade, but your perception of pick 47 being overs doesn't equate for me with the output we got for Hall and doesn't acknowledge that we really wanted him - and Hall's output for us showed that we were right to have that view. We made a Prelim immediately and Hall kicked 80 goals that year. It was a really good trade for us and well worth pick 47.

[Mantis]

Re: Chris Dawes?

I don't know what the bid is but I do know that discussions with Collingwood have taken place.

What are you getting at?

That's fine.. I'm hearing that we are awaiting Dawes response before progressing, but if you have heard we have had discussions with Coll I'll take it that we have.

[azabob]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Sydney has had some misses - Everitt (x2), Paul Chambers, Henry Playfair spring to mind. Didn't they get David Spriggs as well?
What Sydney are good at in the main is identifying 'unsexy' players who can provide a role and who are under-valued by the rest of the competition. Marty Mattner, Ted Richards, Rhyce Shaw, Kennedy, McGlynn all good examples. None of the other clubs were rushing the door down to get these players at the time, and they have all played their roles well once at the Swans.

Mark Seaby, if you really sat down and thought about it they probably have a 50/50 strike rate, so are they really that good at it? Or due to law of averages they do it so often they have to get lucky, some of the time?

[Sedat]

Re: Chris Dawes?

But I think you are not giving credit for the Hall trade.

It's not about the picking up of Hall - he was a terrific acquisition - it was about establishing his worth at the time he was traded. He was out of contract for starters, Sydney had clearly had enough of him and wanted him out of the club, he was 33yo and in the games he played in 2009 he was moving around like the Queen Mary, and hardly any other clubs were interested in him. We could have just let him go through to the PSD with 99% surety that he would still be there.

In the end we agreed to a pick downgrade in the 3rd round, but somehow this ended up being a straight out 3rd round pick. Had we secured the downgraded 3rd round pick (as was initially agreed to between the clubs), Tutt could have been selected at pick 55 (nobody else had him on their radar), freeing up pick 31 to get any number of players - Sam Reid, Allen Christensen, Nathan Vardy, Ben Stratton, Sam Shaw all notables that were still available at pick 31. Instead we had 1 less ND pick than we otherwise should have, and chose to upgrade Mulligan onto the main list. Like I said, smallish things can manifest into bigger things.

[LongWait]

Re: Chris Dawes?

It's not about the picking up of Hall - he was a terrific acquisition - it was about establishing his worth at the time he was traded. He was out of contract for starters, Sydney had clearly had enough of him and wanted him out of the club, he was 33yo and in the games he played in 2009 he was moving around like the Queen Mary, and hardly any other clubs were interested in him. We could have just let him go through to the PSD with 99% surety that he would still be there.

In the end we agreed to a pick downgrade in the 3rd round, but somehow this ended up being a straight out 3rd round pick. Had we secured the downgraded 3rd round pick (as was initially agreed to between the clubs), Tutt could have been selected at pick 55 (nobody else had him on their radar), freeing up pick 31 to get any number of players - Sam Reid, Allen Christensen, Nathan Vardy, Ben Stratton, Sam Shaw all notables that were still available at pick 31. Instead we had 1 less ND pick than we otherwise should have, and chose to upgrade Mulligan onto the main list. Like I said, smallish things can manifest into bigger things.

The PSD approach is supposition on your part - you can't know the unknowable and can't know that we could have picked Hall up before anyone else in the PSD. It only takes one club to take the risk and we miss out. Getting greedy is rarely a good negotiating or trading tactic in my experience.

Hall's value at the time was whatever someone was prepared to pay for him - not what you and I might think someone would hypothetically or theoretically pay for him. We were prepared to pay pick 47 and Sydney accepted. We got good value for that pick - so I maintain that it was a good trade at a good price.

The rest of the stuff you've mentioned is about your view of Fantasia's incompetence. I haven't got a clue about that and won't comment.

[Sedat]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Hall's value at the time was whatever someone was prepared to pay for him

Quite right - Kerry Packer once sold Channel 9 for $1bn to Alan Bond