by daysofourlives » Wed Aug 10, 2016 7:52 pm
by JK » Wed Aug 10, 2016 7:55 pm
Jim05 wrote:Will get a couple of first rounders for him. No chance of walking, we have the AFL backing on that
by Jim05 » Wed Aug 10, 2016 10:47 pm
JK wrote:Jim05 wrote:Will get a couple of first rounders for him. No chance of walking, we have the AFL backing on that
Legit question mate, whats the deal with players that choose to leave - I thought they were meant to be treated as FA's, so if say Hurley leaves to a nominated club, they aren't forced to give anything up are they? Meaning the Bombers would have to settle for the compensation pick?
by JK » Thu Aug 11, 2016 9:25 am
Jim05 wrote:JK wrote:Jim05 wrote:Will get a couple of first rounders for him. No chance of walking, we have the AFL backing on that
Legit question mate, whats the deal with players that choose to leave - I thought they were meant to be treated as FA's, so if say Hurley leaves to a nominated club, they aren't forced to give anything up are they? Meaning the Bombers would have to settle for the compensation pick?
No. If he elects to go to the Grievence Tribunal and wins he would be classed as a delisted free agent and we receive no compo whatsoever.
by Dogwatcher » Thu Aug 11, 2016 9:42 am
by bennymacca » Thu Aug 11, 2016 9:45 am
Dogwatcher wrote:What are the guarantees that the Essendon players are going to come back as they were quality wise?
Is there a risk that a year of, not just from the game but the routines of footy, has softened the body (I'm not necessarily talking fitness)?
by Dogwatcher » Thu Aug 11, 2016 9:54 am
by Jim05 » Thu Aug 11, 2016 9:56 am
Dogwatcher wrote:What are the guarantees that the Essendon players are going to come back as they were quality wise?
Is there a risk that a year of, not just from the game but the routines of footy, has softened the body (I'm not necessarily talking fitness)?
by Jim05 » Thu Aug 11, 2016 9:58 am
JK wrote:Jim05 wrote:JK wrote:Jim05 wrote:Will get a couple of first rounders for him. No chance of walking, we have the AFL backing on that
Legit question mate, whats the deal with players that choose to leave - I thought they were meant to be treated as FA's, so if say Hurley leaves to a nominated club, they aren't forced to give anything up are they? Meaning the Bombers would have to settle for the compensation pick?
No. If he elects to go to the Grievence Tribunal and wins he would be classed as a delisted free agent and we receive no compo whatsoever.
OK, so IF he wanted out, the Bombers would obviously be keen not to head down that path and would likely orchestrate the best deal they could get for him. Problem is that if he's set on a particular club and no others, the club wouldn't have to offer up much? (ala Dangerfield to the Cats)
by Grahaml » Thu Aug 11, 2016 2:01 pm
by Dogwatcher » Thu Aug 11, 2016 2:03 pm
Grahaml wrote:I'm sure you'll get something, but I just can't see anyone giving 2 first round picks.
Geelong didn't give up anything near 2 first rounders for Dangerfield, so why would Hurley be worth more?
With the threat of him leaving for nothing if they don't deal, I think you're looking more like a second round pick or depth player.
by carey » Thu Aug 11, 2016 2:23 pm
Dogwatcher wrote:Grahaml wrote:I'm sure you'll get something, but I just can't see anyone giving 2 first round picks.
Geelong didn't give up anything near 2 first rounders for Dangerfield, so why would Hurley be worth more?
With the threat of him leaving for nothing if they don't deal, I think you're looking more like a second round pick or depth player.
I think the days of gifting first round picks for established talent are gone - for now.
It doesn't seem to be the way clubs want to trade.
by Dogwatcher » Thu Aug 11, 2016 2:39 pm
carey wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:Grahaml wrote:I'm sure you'll get something, but I just can't see anyone giving 2 first round picks.
Geelong didn't give up anything near 2 first rounders for Dangerfield, so why would Hurley be worth more?
With the threat of him leaving for nothing if they don't deal, I think you're looking more like a second round pick or depth player.
I think the days of gifting first round picks for established talent are gone - for now.
It doesn't seem to be the way clubs want to trade.
Unless your Port, North or Richmond.
by Jim05 » Thu Aug 11, 2016 2:50 pm
Grahaml wrote:I'm sure you'll get something, but I just can't see anyone giving 2 first round picks.
Geelong didn't give up anything near 2 first rounders for Dangerfield, so why would Hurley be worth more?
With the threat of him leaving for nothing if they don't deal, I think you're looking more like a second round pick or depth player.
by Grahaml » Thu Aug 11, 2016 4:43 pm
Jim05 wrote:Grahaml wrote:I'm sure you'll get something, but I just can't see anyone giving 2 first round picks.
Geelong didn't give up anything near 2 first rounders for Dangerfield, so why would Hurley be worth more?
With the threat of him leaving for nothing if they don't deal, I think you're looking more like a second round pick or depth player.
He won't leave for nothing as its too big of a risk to take as there is no guarantee of him winning.
If he decides to go a first rounder would be required as a bare minimum
by Jim05 » Thu Aug 11, 2016 6:40 pm
Grahaml wrote:Jim05 wrote:Grahaml wrote:I'm sure you'll get something, but I just can't see anyone giving 2 first round picks.
Geelong didn't give up anything near 2 first rounders for Dangerfield, so why would Hurley be worth more?
With the threat of him leaving for nothing if they don't deal, I think you're looking more like a second round pick or depth player.
He won't leave for nothing as its too big of a risk to take as there is no guarantee of him winning.
If he decides to go a first rounder would be required as a bare minimum
That doesn't make sense. If he walks as a delisted free agent he'll get to the club he picks, so how would that affect him winning? If anything, it would be the opposite and he would refuse to agree to a trade to assure the club he goes to is as strong as possible.
I like though how you've gone from 2 first rounders to 1 pretty quickly though. But he's an inferior player to Dangerfield and Essendon have a much weaker position IMO than Adelaide did, so I can't see him getting close to the mid first round, mid second round pick Geelong gave up. Pick 20-25 is my estimate. Or probably more likely a similar pick and a later pick (40-50) for a decent fringe player at another club. Ellis-Yolman from Adelaide being a prime example. Essendon just have such little bargaining power and clubs aren't throwing first rounders around like they used to.
by Grahaml » Thu Aug 11, 2016 7:26 pm
by Jim05 » Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:37 pm
Grahaml wrote:Those trades aren't as straight forward as you suggest. Treloar's price was offset by a second round and 5th round pick being swapped too and Carlisle's pick 5 price also involved a swap of picks 14 and 24.
You're right about Dangerfield going to the PSD but that's the suggestion with Hurley. The feeling is that as the club was found guilty of breaches of workplace safety that it wouldn't have a strong position to argue against Hurley's contract being voided by the grievance tribunal. There's also the worry about more legal action, just to keep a bloke who wants out. I'd have thought Essendon have had more than enough of legal proceedings.
by tigerland09 » Sat Aug 13, 2016 4:13 pm
by stan » Sat Aug 13, 2016 4:55 pm
tigerland09 wrote:Ballantyne to West Coast
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |