Trade rumours

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,137]

53 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Anyone actually watched Hartlett the last couple of seasons?

average. 

Yeah- looked set to really establish himself a couple of years ago but has stagnated since then.  He'd be an interesting acquisition as some who, like Watts, might benefit from a change of scenery.

[nosoupforme 3,085]

1 hour ago, Knuckles said:

I have heard very similar things about Watts for the majority of the second half of this season.

My source is third hand so have not posted previously. However putting it together with what you have heard makes me think there's something in it. 

Watts is old news now , he has been on on the trade table  since the early days at Melbourne. More since Neeld  almost stuffed his career. Get over it he won't leave . You just have to put up with it.

[Akum 2,660]

4 hours ago, CHF said:

I sit half a world away from the Melbourne Football Club but regularly exchange emails with a mate of mine that is much closer to the club. The latest mail says that Hogan is no chance to leave the club at this stage or in the foreseeable future. Watts is a different story. Discussion on a possible trade will only be entertained if we get value for him. Currently, MFC would prefer to keep him on the list and see how he responds. 

MFC will look to get in Lever plus a 23-25yo mid to build the list for a real tilt at the flag over the next 4-5 years.

Take this in any way you wish and keep in mind this is a trade rumours board and that is exactly what this is, a rumour.

Great post and killer "inside mail". But the bit I've bolded doesn't quite ring true to me.

Only because the one thing I do feel certain about is that if Watts simply wouldn't be looking around if he was sure that we wanted him. He would just keep to his contract and wouldn't need to do anything.

So I find it hard to believe that "MFC would prefer to keep him on the list". Perhaps some at the club might feel that, but the ones whose opinions count are the coaches. This to me is the big difference from previous times his position on the list has come up.

So what do the coaches think is "value for him"? There's a huge spectrum of DL opinions about this - where do the coaches lie on this spectrum? 

The thing is, other clubs know all this and won't be bluffed into bidding high for him if they think the coaches will be satisfied with a mid to late second-rounder, for example.

[Akum 2,660]

21 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

Yeah- looked set to really establish himself a couple of years ago but has stagnated since then.  He'd be an interesting acquisition as some who, like Watts, might benefit from a change of scenery.

Weren't they (Watts & Hartlett) in the same draft?

[Sir Why You Little 34,405]

Jack was always on the edge this year after being unfit in the preseason

 

[Demon Disciple 10,885]

3 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Jack was always on the edge this year after being unfit in the preseason

 

Is it possible he had his papers' stamped before the season started as a result?

[Sir Why You Little 34,405]

Just now, Demon Disciple said:

Is it possible he had his papers' stamped before the season started as a result?

Quite Possibly. Both Roos and Goodwin dropped him

he had numerous chances

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,137]

45 minutes ago, Akum said:

Weren't they (Watts & Hartlett) in the same draft?

Picks 1 and 4 in the 2008 draft.

Hartlett was shopped around last year but there were no buyers as he was on a big contract to Port.

[FireInTheBennelly 4,022]

If we're seriously shopping Wattsy around we must have some [censored] hot targets in mind. For the last 2 years it's been clear that JW is the ONLY player on our list that can kick to a forward's advantage. Everyone else just kicks anywhere into space, straight at the spare defender, sits it on our FWD's head to get smashed, or holds it up waiting for all the defenders to get back.

The one area we lack is skills, JW has sublime kicking skills, but he's well lacking in marking ability. Given he's predominantly a FWD, if he goes we're going to need 2 players to come into the team to replace him (no not a direct swap, other trade deals need to happen). One needs to be able to kick to advantage into F50, Gaff, Hartlett, do they have the skills(?), who else? The other needs to be able to take contested marks and convert, Lynch, Brown would be perfect, a Brisbane kid, who else?

I really dread thinking about what's going to happen next year if we lose a skillful player like Jack without replacing his skills. The turnovers, oh the turnovers!

[Demon Disciple 10,885]

22 minutes ago, FireInTheBelly said:

If we're seriously shopping Wattsy around we must have some [censored] hot targets in mind. For the last 2 years it's been clear that JW is the ONLY player on our list that can kick to a forward's advantage.

Maybe we interested in Gaff after all

[ignition. 1,413]

I don't understand the constant speculation of Hogan returning to WA. To my understanding his mother lives in Melbourne.

[Skuit 9,109]

Stringer to Essendon is set in some fateful stone in at least my mind. Something about the name/player/clubs involved but it's as good as mentally done for me. Motlop to the Festival State isn't far behind in this regard. Trengove to the Bullgogs seems a given. Excess GWS players to Carlton as per usual. We're running out of the slimmer-pickings. Hope there's still some bargains for us. Menzel maybe?

[Lucifers Hero 36,973]

6 hours ago, Akum said:

Great post and killer "inside mail". But the bit I've bolded doesn't quite ring true to me.

Only because the one thing I do feel certain about is that if Watts simply wouldn't be looking around if he was sure that we wanted him. He would just keep to his contract and wouldn't need to do anything.

So I find it hard to believe that "MFC would prefer to keep him on the list". Perhaps some at the club might feel that, but the ones whose opinions count are the coaches. This to me is the big difference from previous times his position on the list has come up.

So what do the coaches think is "value for him"? There's a huge spectrum of DL opinions about this - where do the coaches lie on this spectrum? 

The thing is, other clubs know all this and won't be bluffed into bidding high for him if they think the coaches will be satisfied with a mid to late second-rounder, for example.

Maybe be some within the List Management Committee want to keep him and some don't.  Then the 'rumour' as to whether he is going depends on who a source is talking to inside the club. 

There does seem to mixed messages in the rumours.  Jack made it clear he does not want to leave the Dees so I agree the initiatives are certainly not coming from him.

#letjackstay

Edited September 27, 2017 by Lucifer's Hero

[DistrACTION Jackson 6,369]

3 hours ago, ignition. said:

I don't understand the constant speculation of Hogan returning to WA. To my understanding his mother lives in Melbourne.

easy click bait

[Spook the magpie 9]

Dees put him on the table and want him out - decreases his value - 3rd round pick 47 from Port . Move on Jack 

Lever a Definite Dee 

Motlop will stay at Cats - stringer to the bombers 

[CHF 2,585]

6 hours ago, Akum said:

Great post and killer "inside mail". But the bit I've bolded doesn't quite ring true to me.

Only because the one thing I do feel certain about is that if Watts simply wouldn't be looking around if he was sure that we wanted him. He would just keep to his contract and wouldn't need to do anything.

So I find it hard to believe that "MFC would prefer to keep him on the list". Perhaps some at the club might feel that, but the ones whose opinions count are the coaches. This to me is the big difference from previous times his position on the list has come up.

So what do the coaches think is "value for him"? There's a huge spectrum of DL opinions about this - where do the coaches lie on this spectrum? 

The thing is, other clubs know all this and won't be bluffed into bidding high for him if they think the coaches will be satisfied with a mid to late second-rounder, for example.

I think that there is a very clear understanding in the market of the position Watts is in at the moment. The club do not need to 'shop him around' or put him on the table but they would listen to any approaches that were made. I believe that they have a very clear idea of the ambitions they have for this trade period and how to achieve them.

As to what is the value of Jack Watts I think that is a very fluid concept dependent upon the perception of the club making the offer and the way that the trade period unfolds over the ten days. Circumstances might dictate that we need a pick in a particular range to close a deal. In a case like that we may take a deal to close a deal that we thought would be to our long term advantage. 

[GCDee 3,004]

23 minutes ago, Spook the magpie said:

Dees put him on the table and want him out - decreases his value - 3rd round pick 47 from Port . Move on Jack 

Lever a Definite Dee 

Motlop will stay at Cats - stringer to the bombers 

Haha. Nice one.

I'm not a JW fan after this year but there is no chance he is shipped off for a third.

[Cards13 9,117]

40 minutes ago, Spook the magpie said:

Dees put him on the table and want him out - decreases his value - 3rd round pick 47 from Port . Move on Jack 

Lever a Definite Dee 

Motlop will stay at Cats - stringer to the bombers 

That sounds like a stretch on Watts, if that's all we get for him. 

[Dwight Schrute 16,712]

1 hour ago, Spook the magpie said:

Dees put him on the table and want him out - decreases his value - 3rd round pick 47 from Port . Move on Jack 

Lever a Definite Dee 

Motlop will stay at Cats - stringer to the bombers 

We are happy to keep him if we don't get value and he is contracted. Give us Impey or we'll throw in something and have Hartlett 

[Maldonboy38 5,807]

The more (less?) we hear about the Lever deal it sounds very positive for the Dees, but trying to get my head around how we make it happen is starting to make my heaed hurt. 

If we could score one of a player like Hall, Saad, Martin from GC, Gaff from WCE, or Hartlett from PA, then the tade period would be a huge success. 

Seeing JW in Adelaide just doesn't sit too well with me. At the end of 2015 I was done with him and wanted him gone, only to see the very best of him in 2016. 2017 we saw his best AND worst in the same game. As mentioned above our kicking skills are below par and one of our dire needs is to reduce opposition scores from our unforced turnovers. Jack is easily the best kick in our team. If we give him over now, our pathetic turnover rate becomes potantially worse. I am torn between keep or trade. 

[Lucifers Hero 36,973]

The problem with Hartlett is he is on, mega $$ when Port went OTT in 2015 when North were chasing him big time.   Port gave him a 5 year deal to go with the mega $$.  They regretted it and last year tried to trade him for sal cap reasons and wanted a first round pick.  His 2016 was average and there were no takers for his $600k pa contract.  After meeting with a number of Melb clubs he stayed at Port. He had two good years 2014 and 2015, got his big contract and then very little.

So, if one of the reasons for trading Jack is to make sal cap room for Lever then Hartlett won't help.  I would rather keep Jack at least he kicks goals and relieves in the ruck! 

[DemonLad5 1,637]

If we offload Jack for a packet of chips i'll spew

[Redleg 37,447]

6 hours ago, Skuit said:

Stringer to Essendon is set in some fateful stone in at least my mind. Something about the name/player/clubs involved but it's as good as mentally done for me. Motlop to the Festival State isn't far behind in this regard. Trengove to the Bullgogs seems a given. Excess GWS players to Carlton as per usual. We're running out of the slimmer-pickings. Hope there's still some bargains for us. Menzel maybe?

There was a grab last night on the news, where Stringer answered a young bombers girl who said she wanted him to come to the Bombers and he said "hope so".

Therefore I think he will declare the Bombers as his target soon.

[Wiseblood 24,636]

6 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

The problem with Hartlett is he is on, mega $$ when Port went OTT in 2015 when North were chasing him big time.   Port gave him a 5 year deal to go with the mega $$.  They regretted it and last year tried to trade him for sal cap reasons and wanted a first round pick.  His 2016 was average and there were no takers for his $600k pa contract.  After meeting with a number of Melb clubs he stayed at Port. He had two good years 2014 and 2015, got his big contract and then very little.

So, if one of the reasons for trading Jack is to make sal cap room for Lever then Hartlett won't help.  I would rather keep Jack at least he kicks goals and relieves in the ruck! 

We're at an interesting point in this sage.  It does seem as though Jack is on the table, as most media outlets both in paper and on radio have confirmed his meeting with Port, which suggests that we've told him he is up for trade if a club will take him on.  Port look to be one club who are keen.

The other part is - do we need to clear salary cap room for Lever?  I don't think we have to.  I know we will have to re-sign some key players over the next few years, but with a rise in the salary cap I can see us fitting in Lever without too many problems.  At any rate I think PJ and Mahoney will be all over this sort of stuff and wouldn't jeopardize our future for one player.

Hartlett is an interesting one, although I'm not sure how keen we will be.  On his day he can play some good footy, but those days seems few and far between.  

There is plenty to play out here, but I have confidence (blind faith?) that our FD will do the right thing.

[Die Hard Demon 1,152]

5 minutes ago, DemonLad5 said:

If we offload Jack for a packet of chips i'll spew

If it meant we could feed the guys on our list who are prepared to put the effort in contest after contest, week after week.. Then i'll take the packet of chips.