On 25/09/2014 at 01:40, watchtheeyes said:

What do the Hawks have that would compensate the Crows...?

A lot more good, spare players than we do.

  On 25/09/2014 at 02:50, Norm Smith said:

If he doesnt come to the dees ill catch every aussie salmon at Moggs Creek.

Great fun! Can I join you NSC?

  On 25/09/2014 at 01:48, Theo said:

This week a contributor to the rumour file on 3aw said that Dangerfield has just bought a property outside Geelong.

Is this the same guy who said he saw Balme driving down the Geelong Hwy with Danger in the passenger seat and Chip in the boot?

  On 25/09/2014 at 02:52, ManDee said:

I remember it well.............Melbourne .....Luke......ascook! What a stunning pick, zero games, gone.

No it was Luke ..........................Tapscott.

  On 25/09/2014 at 03:00, Redleg said:

No it was Luke ..........................Tapscott.

I stand corrected. 2 picks later Nathan Fyfe............................

The snowball effect on Demonland is ridiculous.

A couple of people come out with 'my mate reckons he's off to Geelong' and now people are wallowing in pity as if it's fact.

The only facts I've heard are what has come directly from the Crows and directly from us - they are open to trading him, we are open to trading for him. We have the goods to give Adelaide the best deal possible, as well as the most money to Paddy himself. I'm quite content to go with what these facts infer - we are still a very good chance of getting Dangerfield to the Demons.

  On 25/09/2014 at 02:59, Moonshadow said:

Is this the same guy who said he saw Balme driving down the Geelong Hwy with Danger in the passenger seat and Chip in the boot?

I'm telling you right now -- Balme has met with Dangerfield.

I can also tell you that I've not heard about them having "secured" his services, but as I said a few days ago, they were very excited that he is committed to coming home.

Again, I think it's culminating in a move this year, and we have the best assets this year to get him, unless stars start changing hands.

I think we've reached the point of no return for Dangerfield.

He just needs a little bit of time to realise it.

Reading this thread is putting me on an emotional roller coaster.

  On 25/09/2014 at 03:14, Django said:

The snowball effect on Demonland is ridiculous.

A couple of people come out with 'my mate reckons he's off to Geelong' and now people are wallowing in pity as if it's fact.

The only facts I've heard are what has come directly from the Crows and directly from us - they are open to trading him, we are open to trading for him. We have the goods to give Adelaide the best deal possible, as well as the most money to Paddy himself. I'm quite content to go with what these facts infer - we are still a very good chance of getting Dangerfield to the Demons.

There's a reason this is all being discussed publicly now.

Ease them into the idea. Make it too hard to go backwards.

Momentum building.

It'll become a self-fulfilling prophecy if we play it right.

I have faith in PJ & Roos to do that.

And if it falls flat, I have faith in their ability to still get a good result for the club some other way.

Not blind faith, but their track record is bloody good.

Did i go to early with my choice of avatar?

This is how I see things:

1. Dangerfield appears more likely than not to leave the crows.

2. More likely that Dangerfield leaves this year rather than next.

3. Melbourne have the best hand in terms of picks to satisfy Adelaide.

4. Melbourne not Dangerfield's preferred destination but we're not as far down the list as we often are given the Roos, Goodwin, Vince factor.

5. If Dangerfield commits to talking to other clubs it's likely that relations will sour further with Adelaide.

6. If Dangerfield's preferred destination/s can't come anywhere what we can offer, negotiations may break down.

7. If negotiations break down, Dangerfield may feel he's gone too far down the path of leaving and therefore can't back down. Melbourne might then have an opportunity to swoop.

  On 25/09/2014 at 02:54, Redleg said:

You know that is not feasible.

If a player doesn't want to go to a club when he has a contract with another club, he is entitled to dig his heels in.

What I know is draft, free agency and salary cap regulated sports.

The AFL is now a member of all three regulations now - and is, by an embarrassing distance, the worst run.

There is no room in those sports for players to stop trades unless they have a 'No Trade Clause' in their contract. An NBA, NFL, and MLB player can be traded without their consent, just as kids in the AFL are drafted to clubs without their consent.

Darren Jarman once did what was reasonable and refused to come the club that picked him in the draft - the Demons.

Soon, the same will be said of players who refused trades - it will be a thing of the past.

You simply cannot run a competitive league with the rules set up the way they are now.

Free Agency is not the problem - the half baked regulations and rules of the AFL salary and player movement infrastructure is the problem.

i thought under the afl rules dangerfield can't talk to other clubs or receive offers

but i guess i'm just old fashioned

Reading this thread is putting me on an emotional roller coaster.

Here is an anecdote (or an antidote...):

A couple of years ago, one of the best players in the NBA was traded to the LA Lakers, a perennial finalist and mythological franchise, in a deal that was passable from the standpoint of the club losing said player.

However, NBA Head Office stepped in and nixed the trade.

They said publically that the deal was not good enough for the club losing the player. However, a few weeks later a deal was struck with the LA Clippers, a perennial basket case, for that player to go there and change the dynamic of the league and Los Angeles Basketball in general.

If Gillon cares about his league that he is running (into the ground), then he will take note of the ancillary powers at his disposal...

Danger to the Dees would be one of the bigges coup's in the AFLs history

And for that reason I can't see it happening - Why would Danger (apart from Vince and Goodwin factors whic is something but not as big as a lot make out to be) want to come to this basket case? I know we're better off field then we have been for years but onfield there is still a lot of work to do.

If he leaves the Crows - which I am not even sure why he's in a big rush to do so, he can walk next year anyway and go to whatever club he wants..... Why bother with trying to get a trade done....

  On 25/09/2014 at 03:40, rpfc said:

Here is an anecdote (or an antidote...):

A couple of years ago, one of the best players in the NBA was traded to the LA Lakers, a perennial finalist and mythological franchise, in a deal that was passable from the standpoint of the club losing said player.

However, NBA Head Office stepped in and nixed the trade.

They said publically that the deal was not good enough for the club losing the player. However, a few weeks later a deal was struck with the LA Clippers, a perennial basket case, for that player to go there and change the dynamic of the league and Los Angeles Basketball in general.

If Gillon cares about his league that he is running (into the ground), then he will take note of the ancillary powers at his disposal...

You're referring to "basketball reasons", one of the biggest disgraces in US sports history, and an absolute stain on Stern's legacy. All New Orleans were able to achieve with the trade with the Clippers was helping them become the worst team in the league and earn the #1 pick as mediocrity is death in the NBA. It was less about getting New Orleans good players (the Lakers were sending them all-stars Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom as part of the deal), but pandering to whining owners lamenting that the Lakers had been able to pull off another major deal just after the lockout ended. If that slop ever happened here I'd be filthy.

Importantly, NBA teams are privately owned. New Orleans at the time couldn't attract an owner, so the league was looking after them. Lakers coach Phil Jackson expressed concern over their conflict of interest 12 months before the nixed trade, to no avail. So it's a murky situation that is unlikely to be repeated.

To me if he wants out there are only three clubs that will be in any position to offer Adelaide what they would want.

St Kilda Pick 1 and most likely second round pick

Melbourne Pick 2 and second round pick or Pick 2 and Three(based on MFC getting this) and a swap of later picks for Danger and Crows first round pick

Western Bulldogs Pick 5 and 6(based on getting this pick for Higgins) and swap of picks later in the draft

All three clubs have the money, it would be just getting him to commit. Once he does any of these three clubs will be able to meet Adelaides needs

  On 25/09/2014 at 03:30, Goodvibes said:

This is how I see things:

1. Dangerfield appears more likely than not to leave the crows.

2. More likely that Dangerfield leaves this year rather than next.

3. Melbourne have the best hand in terms of picks to satisfy Adelaide.

4. Melbourne not Dangerfield's preferred destination but we're not as far down the list as we often are given the Roos, Goodwin, Vince factor.

5. If Dangerfield commits to talking to other clubs it's likely that relations will sour further with Adelaide.

6. If Dangerfield's preferred destination/s can't come anywhere what we can offer, negotiations may break down.

7. If negotiations break down, Dangerfield may feel he's gone too far down the path of leaving and therefore can't back down. Melbourne might then have an opportunity to swoop.

The way I see it is that all 3 parties have now discussed the potential for a trade in the media. They are slowly softening the blow to the fans in Adelaide that he is leaving. I would assume that the deal has been approved in principle by both clubs. There is no other reason for strategic leaking of information like this, if Adelaide weren't open to trading him they would deny any rumour of a trade. It's now up to PD to decide whether he would like to come to the MFC & for the MFC to convince him as GNF has mentioned already. Perhaps this is going to be played out in the media much the same as Roos did when he decided to coach the MFC. That's my take anyway.

  On 25/09/2014 at 03:50, drdrake said:

To me if he wants out there are only three clubs that will be in any position to offer Adelaide what they would want.

St Kilda Pick 1 and most likely second round pick

Melbourne Pick 2 and second round pick or Pick 2 and Three(based on MFC getting this) and a swap of later picks for Danger and Crows first round pick

Western Bulldogs Pick 5 and 6(based on getting this pick for Higgins) and swap of picks later in the draft

All three clubs have the money, it would be just getting him to commit. Once he does any of these three clubs will be able to meet Adelaides needs

So basically hed be choosing Brendan McCartney or Alan Richardson or the Paul Roos/Goodwin partnership

If I was a player I know where Id be heading

Roos happy to play the Danger game

  On 25/09/2014 at 03:53, Whispering_Jack said:

Roos happy to play the Danger game

It says we are 'yet to officially offer him a contract'. I was under the impression we can't officially offer anything until trade week anyway?

  On 25/09/2014 at 03:53, hogans_heroes said:

Basically choosing between Brendan McCartney, Alan Richardson or the Paul Roos/Goodwin partnership

If I was a player I know where Id be heading

Yes but that is based on the assumption that Danger is so desperate to leave the Crows he'll go to any of the Dees/Dogs/Saints. When he can wait it out see what happens at the Crows then walk to any club he wants

IT don't make sense

THe only other factor is if the Crows want to trade Danger to get max Compo - Can anyone confirm do players have a clause in their contract that they have to agree to a trade

So we're really back to Danger saying no I don't want to got to club A B C I'll wait to 2015 and walk to club D

I love the idea of Danger at the Dees but surely it's a very long shot

  On 25/09/2014 at 01:39, PartyBoy said:

Welcome aboard TH.

please note: you won't be taken seriously until you've posted 10,000 times.

Dangerfield to the Hawks is my tip,

Ah, equalisation working beautifully.

  On 25/09/2014 at 03:50, drdrake said:

To me if he wants out there are only three clubs that will be in any position to offer Adelaide what they would want.

St Kilda Pick 1 and most likely second round pick

Melbourne Pick 2 and second round pick or Pick 2 and Three(based on MFC getting this) and a swap of later picks for Danger and Crows first round pick

Western Bulldogs Pick 5 and 6(based on getting this pick for Higgins) and swap of picks later in the draft

All three clubs have the money, it would be just getting him to commit. Once he does any of these three clubs will be able to meet Adelaides needs

Surely Higgins couldn't be getting offers that would attract that kind of compensation. We'll be lucky to get that band 1 compensation for Frawley and that's only because it looks to be turning into a bidding war.