In today's Sun it says that Morton's relationship with Neeld was beyond repair and that, of course, WC really rated Morton and that he was a real chance for their starting 22 next year.
Now I understand that we were getting rid of players and that those players were not going to get us picks that we would use. Therefore we obviously made the decision to do the deal whatever we were offered. However to trade Morton for the lowest trade pick in the whole period and then be forced to pay part of his salary as well is just plain insulting.
At the very least, if we aren't capable of doing a deal with WC, then offer Morton a delist and contract termination and he could have gone to WC in ND or PSD for nothing. That is better for us than paying some of his salary. He would have taken the deal as he was desperate to get away from Neeld.
Likewise on the Gys deal we caved and upgraded picks for North as well, instead of for us, which might have got us Ray. Harrington said we were very close on Ray. Perhaps a better deal of an unpgrade for us would have got us Ray. I personally don't understand how Gys is not worth a fair bit more than Pedersen. Who is younger and has more upside and future at this point in time?
Until someone shows me why my view is wrong, I believe we are poor at negotiating. From what I have seen we have basically given what was asked of us on every single deal and trade including Hogan. GC got their Martin with pick 2 and we gave 3 & 13 with 20 back for Hogan. I am not upset about how it worked out but am just making the point. I also know that Viney was in there but so what, we wanted Viney at 26 and they wanted 3. Even with Dawes we gave 20 and then downgraded picks which again could have cost us Ray or another player.
I don't think that we have demonstrated an ability to do deals to our advantage.