Nasher

Yep, there's a lot of years of pent-up "jeez I hate that bastard" I'm carrying. It's going to take some time to get over it I reckon. *blink* Oh there, it's gone. Welcome Mr Lewis, I've been a fan for years!

You trying to scare him off or something?

Not at all, I'd be stoked if I were a West Coast fan. Business decisions are always about risk though so that's where I'd be coming from if I were the West Coast list manager; whether or not I was front loading the risk too much.

Yes, there is a chance a pick will amount to nothing, I just raised those players because there's a risk the pick will amount to a good player. If the worst scenario eventuated, they'd be giving a 10 year player, and taking on three years of salary cap burden (assumption from me but I think a safe one) for a single year flag shot boost, which is also no guarantee anyway. These are all considerable risks to take on. Hawthorn also go in to the negotiations in an inherently desperate position. They wouldn't be trading their reigning B&F, Brownlow medal winning star with only a year to go on his contract unless it was of the utmost urgency. That doesn't give them a great deal of leverage.

Exactly. West Coast would be looking at a third round pick going "that's a Dean Kent, or a Mark Hutchings. Hawthorn shouldn't get shot at a 10 year player *and* salary cap relief so we can get one year out of a player". The true compensation for Hawthorn is urgent salary cap relief. The exchange of picks is just to satisfy the AFL rules for a proper deal.

Exactly my thoughts too. Interesting times. I love trade week(s).

So? For whatever reason, which can only be salary cap related, Hawthorn needed to offload him. For the same reasons I outlined earlier in the Lewis thread, when I said Melbourne would not sell the farm for a short term prospect, this counts doubly so for Mitchell who will only play there for one year before moving in to coaching. It's the right price for a one year player, no matter how good.

Yep, that's the context for my comments. I don't have your sources but what you said sounded right to me. Melbourne fans can probably hold off on the "Essendon are bastards to trade with" calls for a few years after this. I'm not unhappy though.

If that was the deal, I'd be amazed if the coaching years weren't counted in the salary cap. It's almost identical to Fat Phil isn't it?

Okay then. Elaborate on how this is "fishy" and how they've colluded outside of how any other clubs do deals.

Using your network to get stuff done isn't colluding.

Yep. Melbourne playing funny buggers on Hibberd when our second round pick would have got it done in the opening hour of trade week suggests more irons in the fire to me.

Nothing mate, Mahoney is just scratching his arse and arguing with Essendon about which year's second round pick we'll give for Hibberd. That's what olisik said (38 times) anyway, so it must be true.

Interesting to consider what deal would have gotten this done. Someone on BF said the only reason Hawthorn pulled the plug on any deal was because Melbourne low-balled (and I believe that as much as I believe any of this), however I can't see then being in any position to get much for a 30 year old. There's no doubt he's a very good player, but the MFC is not going to mortgage its future for a player who might only have a year or two remaining, when it's unlikely that we will be flag contenders during Lewis' stay here. I'd have thought something like our third round pick, or upgrading their second round pick or something like that, but for them that's essentially scrap value for the player who came second in their B&F. I can't see the MFC coming at anything more for a short term prospect. They must be bloody desperate for salary cap relief if this is the path they have taken. Damn shame he's not a FA!

Snort. I wondered the same thing. Draft someone to do the actual playing in his stead?

We're in a lucky position that we're able to put our feet up and wait - Cam Pedersen remaining on the list enables this. Weideman becoming a good player depends on him being able to develop the right size, which is obviously not a given, but obviously has all the other aspects to his game already, i.e. smarts and skills. It might be a long wait, but it will be worth it.

One thing I've always wanted to get a good handle on, which is impossible from the outside, is how much value there is in goodwill between clubs when it comes to trading. If it's as I suspect, Hawthorn taking a dump in the very small AFL trading nest probably doesn't help them much either.

This is exactly why in the "if Hawthorn get Mitchell and O'Meara thread then..." I said they'd have to pay. Something would have to give. Even if we don't get Lewis in the end, it is very nice to know that they've utterly shat off the old brigade in order to bring in all these high priced new young players. They've thrown the players loyalty and goodwill back in their face, when they've all been paid unders for years to keep the cap under control and the dynasty alive. I wonder what the team dynamic will be like when Mitchell, Vickery, O'Meara rock up for the first time. Great stuff!

We were told to expect pace and dashes off half back, but his toughness caught me off guard. Not afraid to fly for a mark, lay a tackle, or get crunched when necessary. I really hate to stereotype, but it totally belies his looks. What an absolute gift from the footy gods.

Thanks for passing it on - like others have said, I love a good rumour. "A Hawthorn supporter", though. It'd be a bit like me opening a post with "A Melbourne supporter told me...", when we all know that most of us know SFA.

The club's strategy seems to be to back ourselves to develop our stars in house rather than pay a single player the "premium for moving" you need to get players to consider going.

I wonder why it's Hawthorn so anyway - they're not the only club that are a flag threat, and they're not the only club with money. I reckon a big part of why everyone is silent on this except fans is that because that the people who are involved don't think it's an issue. It could be that the reason so many players seem to choose Hawthorn (or Collingwood) is because that's the club that pursued them the hardest have gave them the most compelling deal. Clubs always have a strategy when it comes to recruiting players, it could be that Melbourne's discussion goes, "yeah look we'd love Tom Mitchell, but with our talented young list we're not prepared to offer him that sort of money because we'll have a salary cap later, if Hawthorn want to throw everything at one last flag, let them go nuts...", or "yeah look we'd love Tom Mitchell, but we're not prepared to sacrifice ourselves out of the 2016 and 2017 drafts, or lose any of our key young talent, in order to get the deal done with Sydney. If Hawthorn want to throw everything at one last flag, let them go nuts...". Next time someone ends up at a function with Todd Viney when he's in one of his candid moods, ask him about it.

The chances of this rule being abolished are so close to zero that all you do is waste the finite seconds of your life mentioning it. Players rights type rules are never going to regress.

If Hawthorn get Mitchell and O'Meara, then... They will have to pay for them. I'll save the wrist slashing until I see the outcome.

I don't think Redleg is referring to it being leaked to the media.