He won’t be, Port will match to force a trade
9 Likes
Port can and will match any offer.
Anyone that wants Butters is highly likely to have to trade for him.
3 Likes
I think the idea is that if he would be to come to Essendon it would be overs.
Port will still match, they will/do have like for like money as us
3 Likes
Look I bloody love Butters, he is a superstar.
But I hate the thought of trying to inflate our W/L this year (by playing the wrong players) to convince him and Merrett that we are improving and I hate even more the thought of the capital we’d need to sacrifice to bring him in.
If you could get him as FA then obviously no brainer, but that ain’t happening.
5 Likes
Port have as much if not more than us. They have been planning for this
3 Likes
Good, then all it is - is a show and dance to extract more dough for the player.
Any other club paying overs for their talent is fine by me.
I’d rather be holding Brisbane to ransom over Bailey. But hey who doesn’t want Zac Butters in their side.
Him plus Durham and Caldwell would be a fearless group.
1 Like
Personally would prefer we built a side for the next couple of years
2 Likes
100% agree. but I will be equally angry and critical of the club when we don’t get Bailey and Butters.
1 Like
A lot of this was already discussed last year, and it was as recent as yesterday when Cal Twomey stated that Butters’ decision will likely be less about financial factors and more for other reasons. IMO, this would be more towards that return home factor and looking for team success.
Herald Sun wrote about it as well last year from Port’s view of the matter, ‘Industry sources said on Tuesday only a head-turning offer of three first-round draft picks, or a player such as St Kilda superstar Nasiah Wanganeen-Milera, would force Port to even consider a trade this year.’
No doubt that Port would match an offer financially after their original offer last year to Butters, and I would dare say he would pull much more than what Merrett and Petracca were attracting over the trade period last year. I would expect trading Merrett out this year wouldn’t warrant the same return as last, and I think what we saw in teams that made those offers to draw in elite talent (Sydney with Curnow) and teams that failed (Hawthorn with Merrett), was that you have to bleed and sacrifice to get the deal done.
1 Like
Yeah nah Port will match and will want what we wanted for Merrett
Three first round picks you say………We can go to the Hawthorn school of trade and swap our first round pick for 3 picks in the 20s and call them first rounders.
5 Likes
A best 22 player?
Fair enough.
I’d prefer a player who’s had about 3 or 4 years in the system than 7 if it’s about matching and trading. Just when I think about our list and when it might peak.
Thats just me. Butters is awesome though and like Merrett durable.
They will want 3 firsts and quality firsts, Butters is probably worth more than Merrett.
And I just don’t think the spend is worth it when we still have a lot of holes to fill
3 Likes
Butters is worth considerably more than Merrett. Way more.
Top 5 player in comp. Only 25.
6 Likes
Or we tank and hold the preseason draft over Port’s heads to force them into an amicable trade.
1 Like
We should tank and finish 18 this year, then get Butters and King via free agency with enormous financial offers (no trading, walk them through the preseason draft if need be). Take pick 1 to the draft and then back it up next year with Bewick. Get everybody fit and we’re well on our way to being a competitor.
1 Like
The whole “walk them to the PSD” thing is a big myth and no club will ever get a decent player this way
5 Likes
Strongly disagree. Merrett is a 6 time Crichton medallist. Butters has 0 Crichton Medals
12 Likes
Adelaide got Callum Ah Chee that way, didn’t they?
I get what you mean, though. If you do it with a player who demands a huge amount in a trade (Callum Ah Chee did not), I suspect you become fair game when someone from your club worth a fair bit wants out.