4 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Agree with Kane Cornes on this one.

The player should be nominating the state rather than a specific club within that state.

Port have not expressed any interest in this trade 

2 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Agree with Kane Cornes on this one.

The player should be nominating the state rather than a specific club within that state.

I doubt that Nibbler was only set on going to Adelaide. He has a huge amount of goodwill at the club to send him to SA and is not doing his negotiations through the media. If an announcement has been made it's likely to either be because a) Port aren't interested in him/can't bring him in (salary/picks etc), or b) Melbourne and Adelaide have already reached an understanding of what a deal looks like. I suspect the latter.

3 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Agree with Kane Cornes on this one.

The player should be nominating the state rather than a specific club within that state.

That's all good and well if both clubs are interested. Fair chance he's management had reached out to both clubs and Port said thanks but no thanks. No real point in playing charades if everyone already knows there's only one club with interest.

Certainly other states would love their leaving players to nominate a return to Victoria rather than 1 specific club out of 9.

I'm shocked that the Nibbler to Adelaide trade is being run on such amicable lines. I thought from reading the expert commentary in the media that it was yet another example of the club's poor culture and sheer incompetence.

34 minutes ago, Freddy Fuschia said:

I'm shocked that the Nibbler to Adelaide trade is being run on such amicable lines. I thought from reading the expert commentary in the media that it was yet another example of the club's poor culture and sheer incompetence.

If he was a better player the medija would be slamming us for it

Nibbler just asked to get back to SA. He only nominated Adelaide today because Adelaide has shown the most interest and both clubs have presumably reached an 'in principle' agreement. Look for this to be done and dusted early in the trade period, allowing both clubs to focus on other trades.

This is how good clubs and good players/managers do business. 

I can understand why people would want to ask for pick 25, but when we've farewelled the guy publicly, acknowledged he's moving home on compassionate grounds and agreed to trade him, i feel like we've given up a lot of leverage to trade with, i see the Crows offering us a late pick and we don't really have anywhere to go from there. 

1 minute ago, Ted Lasso said:

I can understand why people would want to ask for pick 25, but when we've farewelled the guy publicly, acknowledged he's moving home on compassionate grounds and agreed to trade him, i feel like we've given up a lot of leverage to trade with, i see the Crows offering us a late pick and we don't really have anywhere to go from there. 

Once again, the leaking boat has forced our hand.

Whoever leaked this story 2 weeks out from the end of the H&A season needs to be shot

39 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

Nibbler just asked to get back to SA. He only nominated Adelaide today because Adelaide has shown the most interest and both clubs have presumably reached an 'in principle' agreement. Look for this to be done and dusted early in the trade period, allowing both clubs to focus on other trades.

This is how good clubs and good players/managers do business. 

It’s Adelaide. Somehow they’ll ask for Petty, a first round pick, send us another McAdam and have Tex’s racism added to our cultural issues by the end of trade week whilst they offer us a future 4th.

41 minutes ago, Ted Lasso said:

I can understand why people would want to ask for pick 25, but when we've farewelled the guy publicly, acknowledged he's moving home on compassionate grounds and agreed to trade him, i feel like we've given up a lot of leverage to trade with, i see the Crows offering us a late pick and we don't really have anywhere to go from there. 

He is still a Premiership player, regular best 22, missed about 2 games in 4 years and is in contract.

This won't be a firesale trade and I would imagine we will get a reasonable deal, maybe a touch unders due to the circumstances, but not a disaster.

Any truth?

7 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Any truth?

Oh for goodness sake where do people come up with this [censored]? 🙄🙄🙄

3 hours ago, Redleg said:

He is still a Premiership player, regular best 22, missed about 2 games in 4 years and is in contract.

This won't be a firesale trade and I would imagine we will get a reasonable deal, maybe a touch unders due to the circumstances, but not a disaster.

And been with the Demons for about 10 years. He has put in the time, whatever his reasons, if he wants to go, then he should be given that right.  In his prime st this stage of his career, keeps getting better. 
 

good luck to him

This story leaking and then way we have handled it really hurts us from negotiating point of view but if we don’t get the McAdam pick back for Nibbler as a minimum then the recruitment team really should be shown the door. 
 

2 hours ago, 640MD said:

And been with the Demons for about 10 years. He has put in the time, whatever his reasons, if he wants to go, then he should be given that right.  In his prime st this stage of his career, keeps getting better. 
 

good luck to him

We are giving him that right and are trading him.

I was only talking about what we get in the trade and why we shouldn't be shafted.

You seem to be suggesting that the club is against trading him, which it isn't.

Listen to this grub

 

8 minutes ago, Demonland said:

Listen to this grub

 

Another member of the media.

6 minutes ago, Demonland said:

Listen to this grub

 

Personally I think it’s great we honoured Nibbler although I do wish the messaging was a little firmer on the trade - if it needs to be.

But I will recognise we don’t know how much work has been done on a trade already and I suspect most of trade week is theatre. And ultimately he’s contracted to us so we do have the final leverage if Adelaide got really stupid. He can FIFO for games!

That said, getting lessons in the art of the deal from Hutchy who bought and sold a bunch of New Zealand radio stations at a massive loss, yeah nah.

I bet you could find Hutchy praising teams for ‘mature’ list management decisions in other years.

This is a classic case of being a good employer. He's been with the club more than 10 years, has clearly given everything and isn't a huge asset (from a financial/picks point of view like Petracca or Pickett). My view is this is likely his all time career best year so importance is overstated.

AFL clubs have a bit of a history with this kind of trade and trying to build goodwill for future trades (the anti-Dodoro if you will). Frankly will it matter if we get 35 instead of 28?

I think people overstate the whole ‘leverage’ angle with trading. The industry is quite small and everyone has a fair idea of players worth.

Sure, there is a little haggling here and there but truly shafting a club is very counterproductive for future dealings 

Edited September 2, 20241 yr by BW511

13 minutes ago, Kit Walker said:

This is a classic case of being a good employer. He's been with the club more than 10 years, has clearly given everything and isn't a huge asset (from a financial/picks point of view like Petracca or Pickett). My view is this is likely his all time career best year so importance is overstated.

AFL clubs have a bit of a history with this kind of trade and trying to build goodwill for future trades (the anti-Dodoro if you will). Frankly will it matter if we get 35 instead of 28?

I could be the difference of missing out on a Max Holmes or getting him. I.e - 2020 AFL draft 

Reckon if you dug a little bit you'd find a clip of Hutchy calling for the league to get more mature and not be afraid of players requesting trades in-season.

1 hour ago, BW511 said:

I think people overstate the whole ‘leverage’ angle with trading. The industry is quite small and everyone has a fair idea of players worth.

Sure, there is a little haggling here and there but truly shafting a club is very counterproductive for future dealings 

Negotiation for Nibbler should be the same as others. It should be fair and a win/win for both parties.

Consensus seems to be the 2nd rounder that we gave them ,as it sounds reasonable. (Perhaps even generous on our part as events have turned out) 

Anything worse would represent a poor result for us and a win for Adelaide.

Adelaide would be seen as shabby in such an event , they could miss a good player/ person ,an easy deal becomes difficult, gets held up etc etc.

l’m sure Adelaide get that.

 

From 2:37

Pick 25 from Adelaide which we gave the Crows for McAdam.

It sounds fair that we get back 25 the pick we gave for McAdam.

ANB is a Premiership player, who never misses a game and regularly finished top 10 in the B and F.

McAdam is an injury prone player, who played 3 games with the Dees this year and 7 with the Crows last year and is older than ANB.

Yeah getting our pick back sounds fair, NOT!