Trade Discussion 2018 thread #1 - We’re gonna need a bigger boat for the wave pool!

Preliminary_Point2 · August 14, 2018, 6:24am

If we get Gaff are WC going to boo him?

choppsuey · August 14, 2018, 6:26am

Do we really want Gaff? Hardly think we need another outside runner. Inside/outside guys is what we need. Give me Shiel over Gaff every single day!

Preliminary_Point2 · August 14, 2018, 6:27am

Other than Zaka who else we got?

Riolio · August 14, 2018, 6:27am

I can’t decide. I’ll take both!

bloodychoir · August 14, 2018, 6:29am

Controversial, Gaff looked mentally shattered after the Brayshaw incident. Was it just realisation his finals were done and that he’d smashed a kid, or will it be a lingering psychological issue and he won’t be as aggressive at it as he was?

If he goes to Hawks yes to the latter

SplitRound · August 14, 2018, 6:32am

The giants one took just under 10 years to get to 50 games, with a delisting in the middle. Hard to go past that.

cul_de_sac · August 14, 2018, 6:42am

Dodoro was putting a quality list together before the saga hit and we were stripped of points, draft picks, players wanted to leave and no-one wanted anything to do with Essendon. You may also remember that we were kicked out of the finals

Keeping most of the list together under those circumstances is a massive achievement in itself. To then keep finding quality recruits at both the draft and trade table with one hand tied behind his back is just short of remarkable.

The saga should have killed the club, and Dodoro is one of the major reasons why it didn’t.

The damage control part of your post makes no sense whatsoever. What damage control? What over valued talls? The reason the media haven’t gone hard at us for it is because you’re talking nonsense

barnz · August 14, 2018, 6:47am

Could not think of a more perfect player for our rookie list.

alex.f.94 · August 14, 2018, 6:48am

we are so not getting any of gaff, sheil, beams, REID, or wallis.

2-30Brunswickst · August 14, 2018, 6:49am

I think you just have to look at how many All Australians he’s drafted to say he’s done a good job. Lack of finals can be blamed on a few other things.

HirdMentality · August 14, 2018, 6:58am

Gaff = Shiel

Gaff + 1st + 1st/2nd > Shiel

Gaff + Shiel = …

FTWinderlich · August 14, 2018, 7:05am

SAM REID SAM REID SAM REID

GET IT DONE

kingofthehill · August 14, 2018, 7:10am

Brain explosion.

Surely we don’t have the cap space to get Gaff and Shiel.

jonovdp · August 14, 2018, 7:10am

Sammy Reidy-ee

Melrose_Drive · August 14, 2018, 7:12am

Paper bags…brown ones that is.

Tippa-the-Iceberg · August 14, 2018, 7:14am

Perenially injured Sam Reid?

No thx

jonovdp · August 14, 2018, 7:15am

Wallis has Craig Bird written all over it

Reboot · August 14, 2018, 7:35am

World domination

Tippa-the-Iceberg · August 14, 2018, 7:36am

A boner I could hang the washing out on.

Ants · August 14, 2018, 7:50am

SplitRound:

Ants:

choppsuey:

Speedy_Gonzales:

Nope.

There was no free agency worry for GWS then with Treloar and also making a stand early days with outgoing players. He was one of the first few highly rated kids they lost IIRC.

Then you and I remember it differently. I thought the story was they low balled him cause they wanted to force his hand. They asked for 2x 1st round picks and ended up relenting with the 2nd round sweetener back the other way. And while he wasn’t a FA, he was out of contract and they had a huge salary cap squeeze on so there was a lot of reasons for them to see him leave. If Shiel nominated a club next year as a FA, GWS could just as easily match the offer and make the club trade for him.

Still reckon 2x 1st rounders (assuming ours would be ~10 this year and anywhere from 18-12 next year) would get it done with something coming back the other way.

I believe they can only match if they can fit the player in their salary cap. i.e. if the offer would bust the bank, they can’t match even if the plan is to then trade the player. Therefore, depending on the offer they might not be able to match and force a trade next year.

Did they ever talk about how that works? If you just have to match total years and total dollars, I reckon most teams would be able to match most offers. Sure, they might not have $1m spare next year, but how do you prove they won’t have $3m spare three years from now? Most of the team will have come out of contract by then.

That’s a really good point, because its been made clear before the match is definitely only the total contract, and not the same break-downs between years. So you’re right, you would think most clubs could find a way to argue that they can match it (even if that means currently contracted stars would have to be let go, which in reality won’t happen).