Patrick Dangerfield

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

People stop posting in here until it's been confirmed!

Starting from now!

[SergeantScooch 23]

Who would everybody prefer to give up, Toumpas or Trengove?

There's really no argument here as to who we keep - Trengove has shown he has what it takes to be a star midfielder in our competition, unfortunately as many others he has been poorly managed as far as his injuries are concerned. Given the time off and the rehabilitation that he's putting himself through, he's going to come back an absolute animal, 2015 is going to be the Trengove and Viney show in that midfield.

Toumpas, while has "silky skills" doesn't seem to have the footy mongrel in him and it's painful to watch, the club already has an outside ball getter that gets flogged most weeks (mostly from the supporters than the other teams) that wears a number 4 on his back.

If we have the chance to make something out of this disastrous mistake of taking Toumpas over Wines we should make the most of it and move him on to greener pastures before we're looking at another Morton.

Edited September 23, 2014 by SergeantScooch

[beelzebub 22,271]

Jack or Jimmy

Keep Jack....

if thats the choice.

we know what Trenners could do but has been restricted. If...big IF he could regain then hes a very useful player with excellent decision making.

Toumpas is all conjecture.

easy choice

[The Chazz 4,077]

While most Demonlanders are willing to give Toumpas more time to make it as an AFL player, he isn't worth pick 4 anymore. He hasn't shown enough at AFL level to suggest he will develop into anything but a good/average mid-paced receiver with good foot skills.

And he is from SA and picks 2/3 will be Victorians, which have the advantage of less flight risk.

Tony, you have just confirmed everything I questioned in my post. Given your description of Toumpas, he would have to be rated a 2nd round pick at best, so do you really think Pick 3 and a 2nd round pick would get Dangerfield? And again, you aren't willing to give a Pick 4 from 2 years ago, one year of which was significantly impacted by injury, and a full year of being taught by numb nuts Neeld, the chance to develop under a proven and highly respected midfield development coach (Stone), and a premiership coach.

Then you add some cream to your argument by saying that pick 2/3 will be better options because they are Victorians.

Thanks.

[ManDee 7,092]

People stop posting in here until it's been confirmed!

Starting from now!

Until what has been confirmed?

And what right do you have to stop others from talking shlt. Including me.

[PaulRB 5,999]

LET'S DO THE MATHS!

I think we have to calculate how Adelaide can get a better deal this year than if they are to lose him to Free Agency next year.

If they lost him next year to us or anyone else they would get a band 1 compensation - on the basis it's still around. That would be the pick directly after their first pick in the 2015 National Draft.

So if they were to finish on the bottom of the ladder - with Dangerfield playing at the crows in 2015, they would get pick 2 (only) as FA compensation. In saying that if he played there next year (alongside Sloane, Walker, Talia, Smith, B.Crouch, Jacobs, etc.) I highly doubt they would finish anywhere in the bottom 3 let alone the bottom 5.

Therefore at best, they would be getting ~ Pick 6 for Dangerfield in 2015.

So pick 2 alone in 2014 could honestly be enough, that is already far higher than what they'll be getting in 2015. However a sweetener (like a player) will be required because what would stop the Saints jumping in and offering Pick 1.

In saying that pick 2 and 3 is completely ludicrous! YES I want Dangerfield as much as the rest of you, however based on the mathematics, pick 2 & 3 bares far too much currency where each can be used individually to attract an A or soon to be A grader of the competition with additional player or later pick sweeteners.

This is the KEY

AFC are looking at getting approx pick 6 for him as a FA in 2015, so offering better than pick 6 in 2014 is a better deal than AFC would otherwise get.

So Pick 3 would be a bonus for AFC. It's not what Dangerfield is worth, but the Hawks got pick 19 for Buddy.

Its then offering a deal that other Victorian based clubs cannot trump, i.e pick 3 plus a pick/player. I'd suggest we try another Tyson type deal that gains us a mid first round pick and we then trade pick 3 and pick 10 to the AFC for Dangerfield. That would be beyond every other Vic club bar the Saints, who seem to be uninterested in Dangerfield.

Pick 3 + 10 is unders for his value, but far more than the AFC would otherwise get (via FA compo) and beyond what they'd get from another club.

Then we'd need for Dangerfield to want to come and sign long term with the MFC $$$ + TLC.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

This is the KEY

AFC are looking at getting approx pick 6 for him as a FA in 2015, so offering better than pick 6 in 2014 is a better deal than AFC would otherwise get.

Unless they would prefer one more year of Dangerfield and in that time hope that the new coach can convince him to stay.

[PaulRB 5,999]

Exactly, hence our offer to Dangerfield has to be attractive enough that he'd be open to taking it next year, forcing the AFC to act now to secure a better deal.

[Scipio 5,868]

I would say the Judd to Carlton thing has been a massive fail. The club has built itself to an average middle rung team who really don't have a lot of upside.

The jury is still out on Ablett and GC. He is a great player but I would be very concerned at how his teammates fell in a heap when he wasn't on the ground to hold their hands.

It's a hard one to assess really, Judd and Carlton.

Their forward line would be infinitely more potent now if they'd kept Kennedy, but if they hadn't kept Judd, they might still be stuck on the bottom with us. Especially if their recruiting continued in terrible fashion.

But as it is, they are on the way down with the future looking bleak and I am very happy about that .

[rjay 23,993]

It's a hard one to assess really, Judd and Carlton.

Their forward line would be infinitely more potent now if they'd kept Kennedy, but if they hadn't kept Judd, they might still be stuck on the bottom with us. Especially if their recruiting continued in terrible fashion.

But as it is, they are on the way down with the future looking bleak and I am very happy about that .

I would say it's pretty easy to assess. They are not a premiership threat and nor are they likely to be one for quite a while, it's a fail.

[rjay 23,993]

Disagree.

Carltank did the same as us, terrible recruiting.

GC is still a very young team, how were we when we lost Jones last year? That's the point, bring MORE talent in then if you lose one you can cover.

Carlton have been a fail no matter which way you look at it. Judd has been a good player for them but has it helped there cause? no.

We were rubbish with or without Jones. GC as I say the jury is still out, of course they had to take Ablett but I would be concerned how they packed it in without him. These kids are not rookies anymore they have a bit of experience behind them.

[ignition. 1,421]

Who would everybody prefer to give up, Toumpas or Trengove?

From a playing/ talent perspective, I would rather give up Toumpas. I would also love to silence all the Wines over Toumpas claims.

Secondly I like Trengove's ability to lay tackles and shut down players, I think he can improve his inside game and get some of that old form back and improve it further. His leadership traits are also good to have.

Although Trengove's navicular injury is a massive concern and I hope he can honestly make a full recovery wherever he ends up. Furthermore he would be in the top 5 of highest paid players at the club so if he is traded we will gain further salary cap relief to target another quality player.

Either or for me really but if I had to pick one, I would rather keep Trengove on the basis his injury is progressing extremely well.

[AzzKikA 2,371]

Carlton have been a fail no matter which way you look at it. Judd has been a good player for them but has it helped there cause? no.

We were rubbish with or without Jones. GC as I say the jury is still out, of course they had to take Ablett but I would be concerned how they packed it in without him. These kids are not rookies anymore they have a bit of experience behind them.

Did they make finals with Judd? Even if they didn't go past the second round they still made it. It wasn't their stars that let them down, it was the bottom 10.

Yes we were rubbish but we were a lot worse without him, dunno how that was possible but it happened.

[Scipio 5,868]

I would say it's pretty easy to assess. They are not a premiership threat and nor are they likely to be one for quite a while, it's a fail.

In hindsight, their situation was a bit of 'damned if you do, damned if you don't. They pushed the top four when he was at his best, but in the end it was their poor recruiting that let them down - that was disguised when Judd was carrying the whole team on his shoulders.

Do you think Carlton expected that he'd still be carrying them into the top 4 right now? It was as successful as it could have been and probably more successful than if they kept Kennedy and didn't pursue Judd.

[Maggot 1977 263]

keep Trengove

[Fat Tony 4,479]

Tony, you have just confirmed everything I questioned in my post. Given your description of Toumpas, he would have to be rated a 2nd round pick at best, so do you really think Pick 3 and a 2nd round pick would get Dangerfield? And again, you aren't willing to give a Pick 4 from 2 years ago, one year of which was significantly impacted by injury, and a full year of being taught by numb nuts Neeld, the chance to develop under a proven and highly respected midfield development coach (Stone), and a premiership coach.

Then you add some cream to your argument by saying that pick 2/3 will be better options because they are Victorians.

Thanks.

Toumpas would be worth around #15-20 IMO and I would not be pushing him out the door. I still think he can develop into an AFL footballer. But the fact that Adelaide seem to be entertaining the idea of a trade reflects the poor compensation they would get if he walks next year. I cannot see any other Victorian club (other than maybe St Kilda) trumping #3 plus Toumpas and perhaps a swap of second rounders.

Adelaide have two real options: 1) trade Dangerfield for slight unders this year (i.e. a trade like #3 and Toumpas); or 2) try to sign him in the next year or lose him in FA for ~#10. Adelaide will probably look to do a trade if they think he is going anyway.

The real issue Melbourne will have is not convincing Adelaide, it's convincing Dangerfield.

[rjay 23,993]

In hindsight, their situation was a bit of 'damned if you do, damned if you don't. They pushed the top four when he was at his best, but in the end it was their poor recruiting that let them down - that was disguised when Judd was carrying the whole team on his shoulders.

Do you think Carlton expected that he'd still be carrying them into the top 4 right now? It was as successful as it could have been and probably more successful than if they kept Kennedy and didn't pursue Judd.

I think they expected him to take them to a flag, delusional I know.

Yes, Judd did cover a multitude of sins. If you think you can go out and buy the best talent but don't have the recruiting and development covered you're heading nowhere and despite scrapping into the finals a couple of times Carlton are heading nowhere.

Does this make a move from us for Danger good or bad. Neither, but there are lessons to be learnt.

[watchtheeyes 1,210]

Toumpas would be worth around #15-20 IMO and I would not be pushing him out the door. I still think he can develop into an AFL footballer. But the fact that Adelaide seem to be entertaining the idea of a trade reflects the poor compensation they would get if he walks next year. I cannot see any other Victorian club (other than maybe St Kilda) trumping #3 plus Toumpas and perhaps a swap of second rounders.

Adelaide have two real options: 1) trade Dangerfield for slight unders this year (i.e. a trade like #3 and Toumpas); or 2) try to sign him in the next year or lose him in FA for ~#10. Adelaide will probably look to do a trade if they think he is going anyway.

The real issue Melbourne will have is not convincing Adelaide, it's convincing Dangerfield.

This is where it gets interesting, because Adelaide hold some cards. Adelaide can go to Danger and say, "righto, we know you're not staying so we've organised a trade to Melbourne". Dangers like, "thats unacceptable" but Adelaide will say "too bad. If you don't like it, commit longer term otherwise that's where you're going."

He's not a free agent yet.

[dee-luded 2,958]

What exactly is the question mark on Dangers body? He's missed half a dozen games in as many years..

players with his sort of explosive pace, their hammy's & other leg muscles tire early in their lives. he may start to have issues around 29 Yrs...

[dee-luded 2,958]

The spanner in the works could be if we have to use a 2nd round pick on Billy!

yes, but I expect we'll get a PP before start of 2ndRnd ? If not, we will pickup a Pick around there in some fashion, to get it done. If the will is there.

[dee-luded 2,958]

We cannot afford to be bottom feeders any more, we also cannot afford to screw up high picks again. Trade for this Paddy fellow, use these high picks we have, why gamble on a maybe player if there is truly a superstar of the comp wanting to come to us, if he doesn't want to be traded to us it will not happen anyway.

There is always the possibility for the pick 2 & 3 players to become superstars and "tear up" the comp in future years, but where will we be when that happens? If we have Paddy playing for us do you really think we will be worse or the same as we are now? What will the kiddies be learning from a star like him? Did we improve with Vince and Cross coming into the team?

Isn't it funny that all you people saying that it's overs to give up pick 2&3 for Paddy and Pick 10 when Paddy himself was pick 10. Wonder what was being said about him coming to AFC, bet there was people very unhappy that they didn't pick Rioli or Taylor!

With his old mates Goody and Vince on board I think he will at the very least have a long think before deciding.

ONE solitary player, is Not going to change our fortunes from this year.

we need depth of talent if you hadn't noticed. so we need many around the 21Yrs - 24 yrs age bracket. If we can snag a marquis player then good, but only for one high pick, & a player we can let go.

[dee-luded 2,958]

I would say the Judd to Carlton thing has been a massive fail. The club has built itself to an average middle rung team who really don't have a lot of upside.

The jury is still out on Ablett and GC. He is a great player but I would be very concerned at how his teammates fell in a heap when he wasn't on the ground to hold their hands.

west coast did better out of that deal, & they now have a good culture instead of the blues.

[Fat Tony 4,479]

This is where it gets interesting, because Adelaide hold some cards. Adelaide can go to Danger and say, "righto, we know you're not staying so we've organised a trade to Melbourne". Dangers like, "thats unacceptable" but Adelaide will say "too bad. If you don't like it, commit longer term otherwise that's where you're going."

He's not a free agent yet.

Adelaide cannot force Dangerfield to Melbourne. He could just stay with Adelaide for next year and then leave as a FA. They don't have the cards.

[juzzk1d 1,354]

Adelaide cannot force Dangerfield to Melbourne. He could just stay with Adelaide for next year and then leave as a FA. They don't have the cards.

Correct. A trade has to be be agreed by both parties including the player himself to the trade. Dangerfield can simply refuse as he is in contract, wait till next year and off to Geelong.

Edited September 23, 2014 by juzzk1d

[Fat Tony 4,479]

Correct. A trade has to be be agreed by both parties including the player himself to the trade. Dangerfield can simply refuse as he is in contract, wait till next year and off to Geelong.

It might not be easy to get to Geelong (or Hawthorn or Collingwood) as a RFA as the contract would need to be huge to dissuade Adelaide from matching it.