How do you rate our Trade Period? 5 being Great and 0 being Disaster.

 

The club had an ageda and fulfilled it. 

Now make it work. 

FD did well getting Lever.  GOOD!

Balic cost us a throw away pick. Average!

So Fair o/All.

Who we pick up with the 3 ....2nd rounders in the Draft will show us what their made of.

With all the belly aching I'm surprised there aren't any 2 1 or 0's yet

The club achieved all its goals, I just wish one of those was not kicking Watts out for whatever they could get.  

Make no mistake, and just taking Adelaide's sookiness, and the rest of the competitions silence into account, without even including the media's weeping and gnashing and definitely not including the AFL's scrambling to check or change the rules.....  

WE KICKED ARSICLES

A real coin toss between uh oh and fair. I really don't know the Watts scenario but we seemed to have thrown him out with the bath water. Also think we paid a bit too much for Lever but I do think he is a great player. Balic is unknown and if he somehow turns out to be good then my uh oh turns out to be wrong. Just thaught we were a bit weak.

Well I'm banking on Taylor finding at least 2 good/very good footballers in the draft ... the picks where they are holds a different sort of appeal.  History tells us that there is talent available in the 20's & 30's in all drafts but the expertise required to find that talent is why we brought Taylor on board.

Let's face it,  we've maneuvered into picks 29,  31 & 35 in a deliberate way so Taylor may have earmarked some junior talent that he believes may well be available.

Lever in is a huge coup and we've freed up salary cap space with the departure of Jack Watts.  Trading for Balic with a negligible pick was well worth the punt too. 

If we end up adding 3 good/very good players to the list it will be a great result.  Do that every year and the list eventually becomes a very strong one. 

A bit bluh for me atm tbh.

By comparison to some previous years our preparedness to keep powder dry vanished. I thought pulling the trigger so early and enthusiastically for Lever meant we had something else in mind. Maybe we did..but when the self pronounced offer of 10 and 27 blew out....

No idea about Harley..reckon a bag of crisps was sufficient. Dockers won't do much with 66. 

I'll leave the other debacle alone.

We got Jake..thats good.About all that can be said. 

Fair for me. A bit underwhelmed.

The draft is lotto. Need to revist ib years to come but 3 picks in the 30's ....thats exciting for some i take it 

Interesting to see how that goes.

6/10

Quotes of Trade Week: 

It is difficult to negotiate when you are not prepared to walk away from the deal.

And

Best not to tell the world what chips you are prepared to play before negotiations even start.  Backing down is embarrassing.

A few clubs can learn those lessons for next year!

3 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Quotes of Trade Week: 

It is difficult to negotiate when you are not prepared to walk away from the deal.

And

Best not to tell the world what chips you are prepared to play before negotiations even start.  Backing down is embarrassing.

A few clubs can learn those lessons for next year!

A big lesson for many clubs will be - keep your cards close to your chest. MFC mishandled the Watts and Lever trades. It would be more embarrassing if we were the only club to do it - but we weren't. Bulldogs mishandled the Stringer trade, and GC clearly should have kept Weller out of the media leading into their trade with Fremantle. The moment Weller suggested to the media that GC would do all they could to get him to their club - he had given away enough insight into how much GC valued him. From there on in Fremantle knew they could get pick 2. It is the little things that players disclose that gives insight into how a club may be leaning. We did the same with Watts. We should have been more discreet about Jack Watts. If we had of been upfront, open, and honest with Jack Watts from the very start, then we may have been able to run a completely different narrative - and a more positive one. Even after Watts left he club (in the circumstances that he did) he was positive to all involved. We need to learn the lesson on this one. Irrespective of whether we overpaid on other trades, and give Watts away, we need to treat our players better. I was really disappointed in Goodwin. I would be surprised if someone like Paul Roos wasn't shaking his head the way Goodwin handled Jack Watts.

Get the man we wanted and the best player available in the draft: tick

Move on someone we no longer wanted for what he was worth (2nd rounder): tick

Pick up a depth player for a (very) low pick: tick

Hard to find fault.

Get man after ( tick ) even if spent needless amount

Moved on someone at throwaway pick ( and still paying ) tick

Pick up a no one for nothing..epitome of excellence ( tick )

All easily acquiscenced ( tick )

1 hour ago, KingDingAling said:

A big lesson for many clubs will be - keep your cards close to your chest. MFC mishandled the Watts and Lever trades. It would be more embarrassing if we were the only club to do it - but we weren't. Bulldogs mishandled the Stringer trade, and GC clearly should have kept Weller out of the media leading into their trade with Fremantle. The moment Weller suggested to the media that GC would do all they could to get him to their club - he had given away enough insight into how much GC valued him. From there on in Fremantle knew they could get pick 2. It is the little things that players disclose that gives insight into how a club may be leaning. We did the same with Watts. We should have been more discreet about Jack Watts. If we had of been upfront, open, and honest with Jack Watts from the very start, then we may have been able to run a completely different narrative - and a more positive one. Even after Watts left he club (in the circumstances that he did) he was positive to all involved. We need to learn the lesson on this one. Irrespective of whether we overpaid on other trades, and give Watts away, we need to treat our players better. I was really disappointed in Goodwin. I would be surprised if someone like Paul Roos wasn't shaking his head the way Goodwin handled Jack Watts.

perfect summary ding.

Like juggling raffle tickets in a cyclone....

Positives:

• We called our shot and we made it (Lever)
• We got Balic for a pick we almost certainly wouldn't be using

Negatives:

• We got screwed on the Lever deal
• We got screwed on the Watts Deal

I would have liked to see us grab a backup ruck as well, but there wasn't a huge amount of talent out there, so we'll leave that out. 

Landed our biggest fish since a young ruckman fresh off pick 2 in the draft, Jeff White, came home.

Easy vote for '5 - great'.

21 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

Landed our biggest fish since a young ruckman fresh off pick 2 in the draft, Jeff White, came home.

Easy vote for '5 - great'.

^

 

Probably paid slightly overs for Lever but the rest of the period was fine.

I don't think trading Watts will come back to hurt us (I still wish him all the best). If we find a couple of gems with our 2nd rounders it will obviously help.

 

13 hours ago, Jibroni said:

Probably paid slightly overs for Lever

Without agreeing or disagreeing, there's no "slightly" in the trade period. You're dealing with the draft selections that clubs hold. If they want 10 and you've only got 30, you can't compromise and agree to meet in the middle on 20. It's not like a housing auction where bids go can up in increments of $1000. When you're trading picks, there are almost always big gaps between picks/offers.

10 hours ago, bing181 said:

Without agreeing or disagreeing, there's no "slightly" in the trade period. You're dealing with the draft selections that clubs hold. If they want 10 and you've only got 30, you can't compromise and agree to meet in the middle on 20. It's not like a housing auction where bids go can up in increments of $1000. When you're trading picks, there are almost always big gaps between picks/offers.

I understand that but I still would not have traded 2 first rounders. 1 first, 2 seconds with Lever and a third coming back to us should have been enough hence my comment "slightly overs".

the hardest part of any trade period is convincing a player to join your club

we got our man in lever

getting rid of watts is neither here nor there for me as, sadly, he's always been a neither here nor there player

On 20/10/2017 at 1:59 PM, Sir Why You Little said:

The club had an ageda and fulfilled it. 

Now make it work. 

We need another good ruck man and a fast midfielder who can kick straight. Gawn is injury prone. Even if he wasn’t or miraculously remains injury free he needs someone to relieve him during games for a rest. Hopefully these are also part of “the agenda.”

If Lever is the missing piece to creating a solid defensive unit then it's a great win. If Lever is a ten year player we have done well to get him to our club. I'm not too worried about "overs" or "unders" even though I think we paid overs and got unders on our two main deals.

I'm more concerned about how Lever affects the "balance" and "harmony" of the playing group. Have we created a situation where we can't hold all our talent? Is Watts the last to leave or will others feel uneasy in their workplace and want out? Will we now show more or less desire? Does the Watts trade relay the message to the playing group that we're serious about success? Or will they all just have their hands out for more money?

I don't know. I think we are a better team going forward and maybe everyone will have got the message to at least turn up to pre-season in good shape! So yeah, a win.

History will judge it.  Will respond further in 5years