FA & Trade Whispers

[Moonshadow 17,678]

 

1 hour ago, McQueen said:

Second rounder for Lewis.

Third rounder for Hibberd.

2017 First rounder for Prestia

 

Edit. Having posted that, I don't believe Lewis is worth anywhere near a 2nd rounder

Edited October 14, 2016 by Moonshadow

[Seraph 1,824]

 Hawks are all over the place!

" Wright said Lewis did not want to go to Melbourne as far as he knew."

Seems like a blatant lie to me. 

Also said that the Sam Mitchell move had nothing to do with salary cap space.

Incredible. Why trade him then?

Edited October 14, 2016 by Seraph

[Cards13 9,117]

2 hours ago, DemonDave said:

He might be cheap in trading terms, but Rockliff comes with a $650,000 price tag attached to him next year, that's a heck of a lot of coin, and the reason I suspect most clubs are baulking at a ready-made boost to their playing stocks. It seems we're now starting to mimic US sports trading patterns, in that clubs offload players not for their playing worth, but for salary cap relief.

 

A player renegotiates a new contract with his new club. He doesn't come with the contract he signed with the previous club, the 2 parties negotiate a new deal but they can tie in the previous club for a portion of it as we have seen.

[SaberFang 7,151]

Seems like damage control from Wright.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

This thread is making concentrating at work very difficult.

[old dee 24,000]

2 minutes ago, Seraph said:

 Hawks are all over the place!

" Wright said Lewis did not want to go to Melbourne as far as he knew."

Seems like a blatant lie to me. 

Also said that the Sam Mitchell move had nothing to do with salary cap space.

Incredible. Why trade him then?

My father told me a long time ago don't tell pork pies unless you have an exceptional memory.

Once you start it is difficult to remember who you told what and when.

Edited October 14, 2016 by old dee

[deelete my account 1,194]

9 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

 

I would agree on this response. Collectively to acquire Prestia, Hibberd & Lewis with those 3 picks, it's a solid injection of quality and starting 22 players. In isolation, none of these trades are particularly exceptional on their own, and possibly overs. But taken as a whole, it's a big upgrade and immediately assigns Bugg, Kennedy, Michie etc, aka our bottom 3 into depth and working much harder to improve and get a spot.

Edited October 14, 2016 by DominatrixTyson

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 10,962]

20 hours ago, The Song Formerly Known As said:

It's nice to be considered/chosen rather than laughed and snorted at.
Been a while since that happened...

Think about why this would be the case, we are probably around the 3rd or 4th ranked Victorian club.  If you were to look at the development side of things and accept that Hawthorn and probably Geelong are in for a slide in the next few years (North are a given), then we are probably only second to the Bulldogs depending on how our development continues with respect to St Kilda.  I can't see Collingwood or Essendon being anything other than mid table teams and Carlton would take a big hit if they lost Gibbs.

So for players wanting to leave their present clubs and wanting to be in Victoria, we should really represent a pretty attractive option.  For whatever reason Collingwood seems to be an attractive option for players, but you would think that is now based on reasons other than list attractiveness - I guess there will always be some attraction to the big four Vic clubs on the basis of their size/market presence.

I do wonder how much good players on the move this year such as Jaeger, Presita & Tom Mitchell may have been put off by a lack of willingness of Melbourne to pay overs for them either salary or trade wise?

[McQueen 17,867]

2 minutes ago, Choke said:

This thread is making concentrating at work very difficult.

My manager just rang me.

So rude.

[DeeZee 7,445]

There's no possible way Lewis could play with Hawthorn next year is there?

After these shenanigans it's looking a realistic prospect he will be a Dee.

[markc 975]

wow , this has been a entertaining morning.... So glad to see its another club and not us 

keeps me refreshing the page 

no matter what happens , it does prove we don't leak like we used to and just maybe we are on the way up 

[Ted Lasso 19,549]

Imagine in two years time after everything the club has been through we tried to trade Nathan Jones to the WCE so he could start his coaching career early when actually we were trying to bring in a guy who'd played 0 games in 2 seasons through injury.

this is like ripping the heart out of a clubs culture, i would be shocked if they make finals next year the way this is going.

[Mt. Dee-Maaan 608]

Mitchell says Hodgey texted him saying "Did you just get traded for pick 88?" #TradeSENtral

 

WOWWWW.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

2 minutes ago, DeeZee said:

There's no possible way Lewis could play with Hawthorn next year is there?

After these shenanigans it's looking a realistic prospect he will be a Dee.

My gut says no, but remember Lin Jong toured the Collingwood facilities earlier this year and then signed with the bulldogs.

He could stay.

I hope he doesn't though, would be a massive get for us (especially if we get him cheap).

[Ungarie boy 233]

This has the hallmarks of a classic comedy sketch where a smug, arrogant, super confident smooth talker is trying to take two hot girls (who are best friends) to dinner at the same time.Things seem to be going swimmingly despite numerous close shaves of almost getting caught out, but then one makes a lot of noise courtesy of some very expensive champagne which should have helped "seal the deal", bringing unwanted attention; noting things failing quickly here super-hunk redouble his interest in other said girl but then cannont understand why she is so upset after having witnessed what just happened with her friend - while sipping on a glass of  cheap wine he supplied BYO.  

The next day our hero is being consoled by a dimwitted friend on the vagaries of women, wondering what he had done wrong!!!!

Edited October 14, 2016 by Ungarie boy

[drdrake 3,203]

There is a very small window to get the Lewis deal done. At the moment he is making a decision whilst extremely [censored] off, soon though his Hawthorn Team mates will clam him down and convince him to stay.  We need him to come out today asking to be traded to Melbourne, I don't think we will get him if it goes beyond tomorrow.

[ArtificialWisdom 4,045]

34 minutes ago, Ungarie boy said:

Well considering the cards vested parties are willing to play, would something like this work:

Melbourne give up Dunn and 2nd round pick to Brisbane
Melbourne give up 3rd round pick to Hawthorn
Brisbane give up Rockliff to Gold Coast
Hawthorn give up next years first round pick to Gold Coast
Hawthorn give up Lewis to Melbourne
Hawthorn give up 2nd round pick to Gold Coast
GC give up pick 19 or 24 to melbourne
GC give up O'Meara to Hawthorn

* Melbourne give Essendon next years 2nd rounder as 19/24 is to high!

Break it down to each club's perspective. Switched Rockliff with Hanley since he is apparently going to the suns so that makes more sense for this deal:
Melbourne:
IN: Lewis, 24  
OUT: Dunn, 28, 48
GC:
IN: Rockliff Hanley, 2017 Haw 1st, 23 (form Freo) 
OUT: O'Meara, 24
Brisbane:
IN: Dunn, 28,
OUT: Hanley
Hawthorn:
IN: O'Meara
OUT: 2017 1st, Lewis, 23

Brisbane is a horrible loser in that deal. I like the thought and its not too far off but. Somewhere you would need to find more for Brisbane to agree to that. 

[DistrACTION Jackson 10,201]

2 minutes ago, drdrake said:

There is a very small window to get the Lewis deal done. At the moment he is making a decision whilst extremely [censored] off, soon though his Hawthorn Team mates will clam him down and convince him to stay.  We need him to come out today asking to be traded to Melbourne, I don't think we will get him if it goes beyond tomorrow.

I disagree. He's had probably over a week to think about everything and would have likely already made his mind up.

Plus I doubt teammates would get involved in this type of thing as they are all their own man.

He will do what is best for himself and no one else.

[Seraph 1,824]

3 minutes ago, drdrake said:

There is a very small window to get the Lewis deal done. At the moment he is making a decision whilst extremely [censored] off, soon though his Hawthorn Team mates will clam him down and convince him to stay.  We need him to come out today asking to be traded to Melbourne, I don't think we will get him if it goes beyond tomorrow.

Word on the grapevine is that the relationship between Lewis and Clarkson is essentially beyond repair and he wont return to the Hawks if he is still there (which obviously he will be). 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 17,014]

Purely hypothetically, if it turns out we could only have one of Jordan Lewis or Michael Hibberd for basically the same trade price, which should we do?

Edited October 14, 2016 by La Dee-vina Comedia
typo

[Return to Glory 8,453]

3 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Purely hypothetically, if it turns out we could only have one of Jordan Lewis of Michael Hibberd for basically the same trade price, which should we do?

Hibberd.

[old dee 24,000]

1 minute ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Purely hypothetically, if it turns out we could only have one of Jordan Lewis of Michael Hibberd for basically the same trade price, which should we do?

Hibberd he is younger. I think there is only a year perhaps two left in Lewis.

I am not into providing Super top ups for fading players.

[DeeZee 7,445]

It's all the intangibles Lewis would bring, the experience, leadership, training habits and an insight into the Hawthorn will to win mentality that would be invaluable to us.

[darkhorse72 1,925]

I think we could end up with both.  But at what cost?

Reported that our talks are continuing with the hawks over Lewis.  More of an interesting week coming up.  

 

 

 

[daisycutter 29,892]

13 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Purely hypothetically, if it turns out we could only have one of Jordan Lewis or Michael Hibberd for basically the same trade price, which should we do?

welly purely hypothetically, both