Welcome to Demonland: Jake Lever

[Beetle 4,317]

2 minutes ago, DV8 said:

What, do you think we'd get a better player at Pick 16 next year, compared to what we would get at Pick 10 this 2017 draft?

I don't think so.

Agreed. This next year is a superdraft stuff gives me the runs.

On top of what you've already said..the player drafted this year has already been in the system for a year and is further developed.

A club in our position wants players ready to go sooner rather than later..

[Beetle 4,317]

4 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Thanks.  That might take some thinking. Maybe get Crows 2018 2nd or 3rd round as a sweetener back to us

Yeah possibly...it did mention the possibility of other pick exchanges..I'd like to think that would be the case..

[Pennant St Dee 11,336]

56 minutes ago, praha said:

Eh. How many super drafts have Sydney, Hawthorn and Geelong not been part of the past decade? We have a core group of youngsters set. It's about filling in the pieces now which Lever helps do.

You get 2 drafts right close together and you set yourself up very well for multiple flag tilts

Cats in 99 & 2001 drafts got

Enright, Corey, Scarlett, Stevie J, Ablett, Chapman, Bartel and Kelly.

Hawks in 2001 & 2004 got

Hodge, Ellis, Mitchell, Franklin, Roughead & Lewis

[DaveyDee 421]

4 hours ago, mo64 said:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/trading-and-drafting/jake-levers-switch-from-adelaide-to-melbourne-edging-closer-20171010-gyy66o.html

We're getting closer. This years 1st rounder and next years 1st rounder for Lever plus pick 18 which Adelaide get for Cameron. Seems like swapping of other picks as well.

This will leave us without a 1st rounder next year, but picks 18 and 27 this year isn't too bad.

I think this article is on the money or very close to it. As I said earlier Lions were always going to be our partners to getting the deal over the line. 

[Skuit 9,263]

14 hours ago, rpfc said:

Or just 'liar'...

Pretty sure you don't stay married for 12 years unless you're a reasonably decent liar.

[Skuit 9,263]

So, according to the article:

Lever and 18 for 10 (2017) and 18ish (2018). Equals pick 10 (disregarding any supposed and speculative superdraft adjustments - arguably countered by cashing our currency now).

Or, Lever and 18 for 10 and Watts (28ish - 2017) and 18ish (2018). Equals 10 and 28ish (with the above considerations).

My guess: the Crows are looking to save face and want those 'two first-rounders' in at least name, even if equates to an overall poorer deal (scenario A). We will in turn accommodate their fragile grand-final choking egos to the utmost extent to which we were originally offering (the equivalent of 10 and 28 - scenario B) but look to turn this goodwill in our favour - perhaps by seeking a later pick from the Crows in addition.

Yet, we will have put our own internal price on Watts - be it 20 from Geelong or 30 from Sydney, and will be happy enough to come out on top of the overall ledger - so it may seem we get a bargain or pay slight overs.

[Dr.D 1,771]

8 minutes ago, Skuit said:

So, according to the article:

Lever and 18 for 10 (2017) and 18ish (2018). Equals pick 10 (disregarding any supposed and speculative superdraft adjustments - arguably countered by cashing our currency now).

Or, Lever and 18 for 10 and Watts (28ish - 2017) and 18ish (2018). Equals 10 and 28ish (with the above considerations).

My guess: the Crows are looking to save face and want those 'two first-rounders' in at least name, even if equates to an overall poorer deal (scenario A). We will in turn accommodate their fragile grand-final choking egos to the utmost extent to which we were originally offering (the equivalent of 10 and 28 - scenario B) but look to turn this goodwill in our favour - perhaps by seeking a later pick from the Crows in addition.

Yet, we will have put our own internal price on Watts - be it 20 from Geelong or 30 from Sydney, and will be happy enough to come out on top of the overall ledger - so it may seem we get a bargain or pay slight overs.

18ish? thats assuming we win the flag. 

i think pick 13 is closer to the mark.

so it would be:

out: pick 10 (this year), pick 13 (next year) jack watts

in: lever, pick 18 (this year)

[No10 323]

46 minutes ago, Skuit said:

So, according to the article:

Lever and 18 for 10 (2017) and 18ish (2018). Equals pick 10 (disregarding any supposed and speculative superdraft adjustments - arguably countered by cashing our currency now).

Or, Lever and 18 for 10 and Watts (28ish - 2017) and 18ish (2018). Equals 10 and 28ish (with the above considerations).

My guess: the Crows are looking to save face and want those 'two first-rounders' in at least name, even if equates to an overall poorer deal (scenario A). We will in turn accommodate their fragile grand-final choking egos to the utmost extent to which we were originally offering (the equivalent of 10 and 28 - scenario B) but look to turn this goodwill in our favour - perhaps by seeking a later pick from the Crows in addition.

Yet, we will have put our own internal price on Watts - be it 20 from Geelong or 30 from Sydney, and will be happy enough to come out on top of the overall ledger - so it may seem we get a bargain or pay slight overs.

Agree, it's a reasonable trade. Although doubt we'd get 20 from Geel. Watts' been seriously damaged in value and that's on the high side of estimates.

However Geel have their own issues with Menzel, good player, great skills, could take 33 and Menzel?

Balances the deal with Crows better and nets a good player.

 

Ok-  Menzel is FA. Ignore the above. Still a good player that could fill a role Watts had.

More relevantly- how amazing to be the BIG trade headline. Lever is a big fish. We've arrived.

Edited October 10, 2017 by No10

[Skuit 9,263]

16 minutes ago, Dr.D said:

18ish? thats assuming we win the flag. 

i think pick 13 is closer to the mark.

so it would be:

out: pick 10 (this year), pick 13 (next year) jack watts

in: lever, pick 18 (this year)

Yes, I was assuming we win the flag with the 'ish' as a small concession. Did you catch any of the latest season? I don't really want to spoil the ending, and it wasn't a realistic twist, but the Richmond Football ended up as the premiers.

[bing181 8,175]

8 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

Cos thats too much.

Hes not worth two top 20 picks, you don't just add an asset especially when pick 20 is so valuable.   We would need something back. 

Adelaide won't accept anything else than a first rounder plus something else (2nd round presumably).

Nor would we, and nor would you expect us to.

[bing181 8,175]

8 hours ago, mo64 said:

We won't get pick 20 for Watts. It will be more like pick 33.

We will if a) there are multiple clubs in the running (which seems to the case) and b) we make it clear that it's second rounder or nothing (which seems to be the case).

[bing181 8,175]

6 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Paul is for Jack. Mfc isnt.

You're right. MFC is for MFC.

As it should be.

[bing181 8,175]

1 hour ago, No10 said:

Watts' been seriously damaged in value and that's on the high side of estimates.

Yes, I know. A player's trade value is ultimately determined by what his football manager says in the press.

Every club will know exactly what they're getting, and they'll have their own criteria for evaluating each player. The rest is just background noise.

[CBDees 3,162]

Melbourne should pay pick 10 (2017) and our second round (2018) for Lever and no more!

Why should we be trying creative packaging to obtain another first round pick, when Lever was:

1) Not in their top 10 B&F; and 

2) Scored 1 vote in the Brownlow (same as O. Mac)?

[Deemented Are Go! 3,602]

4 minutes ago, CBDees said:

Melbourne should pay pick 10 (2017) and our second round (2018) for Lever and no more!

Why should we be trying creative packaging to obtain another first round pick, when Lever was:

1) Not in their top 10 B&F; and 

2) Scored 1 vote in the Brownlow (same as O. Mac)?

Because Adelaide are petulant tossers and we want to maintain our 'amicably workable' trading rep for the future.

[deelete my account 1,194]

3 hours ago, No10 said:

Agree, it's a reasonable trade. Although doubt we'd get 20 from Geel. Watts' been seriously damaged in value and that's on the high side of estimates.

However Geel have their own issues with Menzel, good player, great skills, could take 33 and Menzel?

Balances the deal with Crows better and nets a good player.

 

Ok-  Menzel is FA. Ignore the above. Still a good player that could fill a role Watts had.

More relevantly- how amazing to be the BIG trade headline. Lever is a big fish. We've arrived.

Whats going on with Menzel? Heard nothing so far. 

[blue and red in the head 95]

On 06/09/2017 at 7:29 AM, blue and red in the head said:

Would anyone do  our this year and next year first rounders (10 & ?) for lever and the crows first this year (16-18). Use the crows pick on lockie obrien a classy outside mid. 

Quoting myself here but called this trade a while ago and it’s looking like it may be the trade that gets us young lever.

[deelete my account 1,194]

42 minutes ago, CBDees said:

Melbourne should pay pick 10 (2017) and our second round (2018) for Lever and no more!

Why should we be trying creative packaging to obtain another first round pick, when Lever was:

1) Not in their top 10 B&F; and 

2) Scored 1 vote in the Brownlow (same as O. Mac)?

If thats a reason to not find a 2018 first round, then it could also be a reason not to recruit him. But cmon, bit disingenuous as lever is clearly a 21yo thats all about potential. He's tracking better than Rance at the same age. I think its justified in doing the 2018 1st pick and getting something back because its not solely about the intercept role. The Lever trade fills 3 holes. It pushes Tmac fwd and hibbo or hunt onto wing. We might have to pay more than 10 + 2018 2nd, but its worth it in the grand scheme of the team dynamic.

Edited October 10, 2017 by Deeprived Childhood

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 10,586]

34 minutes ago, CBDees said:

Melbourne should pay pick 10 (2017) and our second round (2018) for Lever and no more!

Why should we be trying creative packaging to obtain another first round pick, when Lever was:

1) Not in their top 10 B&F; and 

2) Scored 1 vote in the Brownlow (same as O. Mac)?

Absolutely.

I'm sure that it's been said before, but where do Adelaide get off thinking that two first rounders for Lever is anything like market value?  Two first rounders is what they parted with for Dangerfield and good as he may be, Lever is no Dangerfield.

Granted the Crows had a weaker hand with Dangerfield being a FA, but with Lever being out of contract, they don't exactly have a strong hand either.

Adelaide themselves were not prepared to part with two first round picks for that Carlton bloke (Bryce Gibbs was it) last year either.

Get real Crows, take it or Lever leaves for nothing.

[No10 323]

2 hours ago, bing181 said:

Yes, I know. A player's trade value is ultimately determined by what his football manager says in the press.

Every club will know exactly what they're getting, and they'll have their own criteria for evaluating each player. The rest is just background noise.

How do you even argue with this?

MFC have shown him the door. Jack will nominate a club. Not much leverage. Pretty simple reality.

Edited October 10, 2017 by No10

[No10 323]

55 minutes ago, Deeprived Childhood said:

Whats going on with Menzel? Heard nothing so far. 

Only heard Jimmy Bartel recently talking up Menzel as wanting a multi year deal, that Geel are majorly low balling and only 1yr.

It would seem there's a few Cats that aren't happy at the moment. Could be a spiteful exit, good terms for whomever wants to make a decent offer.

He's injury prone obviously, but very good when firing.

[Watts Jurrah Dunn? 735]

1 hour ago, Deeprived Childhood said:

Whats going on with Menzel? Heard nothing so far. 

I think it was Greg Denham the other day that said Freo are heavily into Menzel and he will be heading there.

[jnrmac 19,088]

9 hours ago, Pennant St Dee said:

You get 2 drafts right close together and you set yourself up very well for multiple flag tilts

Cats in 99 & 2001 drafts got

Enright, Corey, Scarlett, Stevie J, Ablett, Chapman, Bartel and Kelly.

Hawks in 2001 & 2004 got

Hodge, Ellis, Mitchell, Franklin, Roughead & Lewis

Yep its a given

2011 Rory Taggert, Josh Tynan, James Sellarm Jai Sheehan, Tom Couch, James Magner, Leigh Williams.

2010 Lucas Cook, Troy Davis, Daniel Nicholson, MIchael Evans, Kelvin Lawrence, Robert Cambell, Tom Macnamara, Tom McDonald, Jeremy Howe, Jordie McKenzie, Jake Spencer

We nailed those two drafts. Set us up for failure.... 

[Watts Jurrah Dunn? 735]

2 hours ago, CBDees said:

Melbourne should pay pick 10 (2017) and our second round (2018) for Lever and no more!

Why should we be trying creative packaging to obtain another first round pick, when Lever was:

1) Not in their top 10 B&F; and 

2) Scored 1 vote in the Brownlow (same as O. Mac)?

Because, by even the most conservative estimates, we've offered him 4 years at $750k, which is an A Grade salary.

Adelaide are quite rightly saying

- you've made Lever one of the highest paid 22 year olds in the game

- we've developed him beautifully

- you're going to get 200 games out of him

- your '17 and '18 first round picks aren't particularly special.  10 & 12 are hardly rolled gold top 5 picks.

[old55 21,374]

11 hours ago, Beetle said:

I took the article as saying what you've said, but we hand over our Watts compo as well...so:

Out: Pick 10, next years 1st round pick and Watts compo pick.

In: Lever, pick 18 (if Cameron deal gets done)

That looks about right - it's a good upgrade for the Crows on 10 + next years 2nd - 18 into our next years 2nd

10 + 12 (2018) + 29 (from Port) for

Lever + 18

If we could get 52 back too then it would be similar to 10 + next years 2nd.

I'd do those deals.

Edited October 10, 2017 by Fifty-5