Dangerfield for Jones

I see where you're going here, Roost, but I don't think we should underestimate the distabalising effect of getting rid of your heart & soul player and captain (again). Junior Mac should have taught us that and even Barassi's defection. I don't think there'd be much gained here and if anything it could send us backwards. I'm not saying Jones is a better player than Dangerfield necessarily, but it's too fraught with risk.

For the record, IMO, Jones is more consistent, but Dangerfield is a game breaker.

Can anyone think of a club with enough cash in the cap to get Dangerfield?

Maybe only us and Dogs.

But it may only be a case of a differential of $100-$200k. In which case, Dangerfield may well sign with a club (with a deemed brighter future) for slightly less than what we're offering.

Dangerfield for Jones

I see where you're going here, Roost, but I don't think we should underestimate the distabalising effect of getting rid of your heart & soul player and captain (again). Junior Mac should have taught us that and even Barassi's defection. I don't think there'd be much gained here and if anything it could send us backwards. I'm not saying Jones is a better player than Dangerfield necessarily, but it's too fraught with risk.

For the record, IMO, Jones is more consistent, but Dangerfield is a game breaker.

Well said AF and I agree completely.

Even though Dangerfield would rate as a better player, for me Jones is completely off the table.

I don't care who he would be traded for, it would damage any culture we have been struggling to build - both internally and externally.

For me he is an under valued A grader of the competition and would rather see the club target gun midfielders like Dangerfield to join him and the developing Tyson and Viney.

Pick 2 for Dangerfield or nothing, that's a better deal than any other club would be willing to offer no one else is going to give up a star and St. Kilda don't want him, they just want picks, and if Adelaide don't want that they're looking at pick 6 at best in next years Free Agency period. Pick 2 or nothing.

3 and Toumpas or Trengove

Pick 3 and steak knives ie Blease or similar.

Beats the hell out of what they would get from Free Agency compensation.

We are so used to getting bent over we are suggesting way overs.

Could make pick 3 pick 2 to get it over the line but any more is paying too much.

I think we are no hope of getting him, but agree it would be pick 3 and a surplus player like Tapscott/Strauss/ Blease or what we could trade them for.

As stated in an earlier post, no one has a higher pick than us, except the Saints and next year if he left as a FA, they would get a pick after their first, which could be 10 or so.

If they want a star player, then that is another question, as we could be easily outbid.

again with the delusion that an asset like Blease has any value in the market

a few clubs would take him for nothing and that's about it

adding him to pick 3 is still just pick 3

I reckon it would be hard for Adelaide to knock back Pick 3 or 2 and Toumpus and a second round?

But it may only be a case of a differential of $100-$200k. In which case, Dangerfield may well sign with a club (with a deemed brighter future) for slightly less than what we're offering.

To a player at Dangerfields level, 100-200k on your AFL contract is spare change. The amount someone with that sort of profile can earn off the field is 2-3 times what he can earn on the field. Wondering why Buddy cut the (sports) agent who negotiated his $10mil deal? Because the new (celebrity) agent he signed can triple that amount with off field deals/ endorsements.