Trade Dunkley

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Catching up on this thread, and its awesome to see so many posts from WOOFer's out there we've not heard from in a while. Great to see some familiar faces posting again!

It's nice to see that out of the ashes of Dunk's likely imminent and likely messy departure we can all convene around the fire, once more to converse about all things Bulldogs.

Hunker down for what is likely to be a very interesting and stressful trade and draft period.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

My guess is they don't expect us to let him walk to the PSD, and the fact he's out of contract and we care for him will mean that in the end we will have to accept less than we want. So they know that part.

So do we, hence using the media last night to say guess what we will let him walk to the PSD.

So now ridiculously in my opinion it's down to a game of poker. Surely there's an easier way.

I'm with the Lions, they have the stronger hand, there's no way we walk away with nothing and players never change nominated club (or very very rarely) it happens 99 percent of the time.

It's interesting, also slightly juvenile.

I hear what you're saying GG, but I kinda think Josh has shown himself to be quite transactional. I don't think it's beyond the pale for him to get to a point where he should the trade not resolve, he'd be fine signing up for a year with us and then working to get his way to Brisbane as a restricted free agent at the end of 2023.

From what we have seen to date, there doesn't appear to be any burned bridges between Dunks and the club. And similarly when he couldn't get to Essendon he didn't throw his toys out of the cot.

I'm not trying to find ways to get him to stay with us. He clearly wants to leave, I get it. Yep let's work out a deal. But I don't think Brisbane have quite the same amount of leverage as you think.

Dunkley now knows that Brisbane thought that much of him that they were prepared to offer him a huge contract, but yet not enough to adequately prepare the likely capital to secure him.

The offer that Brisbane put up was an ambit claim and their subsequent trading of pick 15, reinforces to Dunkley that they are prepared to screw him if push comes to shove.

I think we need to be clear in our intent that we will either walk him to the draft and either let a non-challenger with cap space take him.. or we'll pick him ourself before Brisbane's pick.

Do we want to do that. Nope. Are we prepared to. I hope so. And given Brisbane's behaviour I therefore don't think Pickering and Dunkley at some point might be open to a 1 yr deal and then Dunkley can better determine his own future at the end of 2023 with much less intrigue, drama and uncertainty than the last two times he's wanted to move.

And given he'd be restricted, we too would have some surety of getting closer to market value compensation either via trade or FA compensation.

[bornadog]

I have been thinking about what YHF and GVGjr have said that a one year of Dunkley would be fine and we pickup something end of next year. I would rather we just get a deal done, and if we don't get what we want then let him go to PSD. He has said his goodbye's and I have wiped him as a Dogs player (still a BullGod).

So, Brisbane stop being unprofessional, and get the deal done, and Pony up.

[Mofra]

My guess is they don't expect us to let him walk to the PSD, and the fact he's out of contract and we care for him will mean that in the end we will have to accept less than we want. So they know that part.

So do we, hence using the media last night to say guess what we will let him walk to the PSD.
It sounded more like Pickering's frustration than the Bulldogs doing

[Topdog]

If Henry is worth pick 18 then of course we aren't doing Dunkley for a small upgrade of a pick

[azabob]

Hopefully Rayner accepts the offer and we can drive this hime with one headlight to 4,000 posts!

Jee is smug enough with this thread.

Did you see the way he demanded that the thread title be changed back to what he originally had it at!!

Quite frankly not sure he has the conviction to see it through to 4,000 posts.

[GVGjr]

I'm trying very hard to reserve judgement until the conclusion of the trade period but it is difficult trying to envision what Brisbane is going to do to get this deal done.

My frustration stems from the fact that Brisbane clearly rate Dunkley based on both the length and value of contract they've offered him. The onus is on Brisbane to get the deal done. I don't understand how they intend to get the deal done while they are unwilling to provide a player from their best 22 or adequate draft compensation in two first rounders.

Brisbane's actions so far have been a massive contradiction to a player they chased hard and intended to reward financially with a massive contract.
The offer to get a deal done however, of two late first round picks being contingent on getting a 2nd, 3rd and future 3rd rounder back is an insulting response for someone they're committing so heavily to.
Clubs are aware that there will always be winners and losers in trades because the currency being dealt with is so fluid and not consistent but if both parties can at least get close to a mutually acceptable deal there is no need for it to get to the point where walking a player into the PSD is being discussed.
They've have a stronger hand but in my opinion they're playing it poorly.
We have a pragmatic list manager who's looking for an acceptable deal and flagged this early on that he was open to picks either this year or next or even a player being added to the mix.
This will come back and bite Brisbane somewhere down the track unless they lift their game.

[Grantysghost]

If Henry is worth pick 18 then of course we aren't doing Dunkley for a small upgrade of a pick

The Cats offered 38 apparently. They all think they're Ballers at the MGM Grand these list managers! Andrew Mackie ffs.

[azabob]

I hear what you're saying GG, .

Please don't breath more air into GG narrative that Brisbane are in the right and bulldogs are in the wrong.

[SonofScray]

“If you send him to the PSD, you get nothing”

Not really. We reduce the risk of an opponent in a final benefitting from 25 plus touches, 5 plus tackles, a goal or two and a bunch of marks and clearances around the ground.

You don’t date within the division. ^old ice hockey saying

[Scraggers]

“If you send him to the PSD, you get nothing”

Not really. We reduce the risk of an opponent in a final benefitting from 25 plus touches, 5 plus tackles, a goal or two and a bunch of marks and clearances around the ground.

You don’t date within the division. ^old ice hockey saying

I agree … it also lets the rest of the league know Sam Power is not a pushover and will fold at the last minute. From there we get in his ear about how much better it would be to play at the Bulldogs and not Norf.

[Topdog]

Yeah we clearly still benefit with dunkley at North as opposed to Brisbane

[Grantysghost]

Interesting article.

A bit hysterical but the theatre is what they love.

I don't get how we can be so high and mighty when we've failed (twice) to create an environment he wants to be at.

No blame but he doesn't want to play for us so you've lost your upper hand.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/staggered-bulldogs-irate-as-brisbane-deal-falls-apart/news-story/22454149d3a6238a94321095b8bec279

[BornInDroopSt'54]

Rayner or preseason draft please!

[jazzadogs]

Interesting article.

A bit hysterical but the theatre is what they love.

I don't get how we can be so high and mighty when we've failed (twice) to create an environment he wants to be at.

No blame but he doesn't want to play for us so you've lost your upper hand.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/staggered-bulldogs-irate-as-brisbane-deal-falls-apart/news-story/22454149d3a6238a94321095b8bec279

I imagine the frustration for Power would be increased by having his own hands tied for the last two years by Darcy and JUH. Lions are trying to have the best of both worlds.

[Grantysghost]

I imagine the frustration for Power would be increased by having his own hands tied for the last two years by Darcy and JUH. Lions are trying to have the best of both worlds.

I get your point JD but I just feel as supporters we have to accept we are about to be screwed!
I'd prefer we cop it, and maybe grab a small forward or concentrate on deals to make us better.
Other than Lobb we've really done not much (from the outside) and we need to strengthen.
The Dunkley stuff now feels a distraction.
I have faith in Sam :)

[Bulldog4life]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lx9ITKRfSyY

Discussing Dunkley.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lx9ITKRfSyY

Discussing Dunkley.

David King is by far the best analyst / footy mind in the media.

Won't always agree with him, but he typically has sound reasoning and analysis.

On this occasion, IMO he is spot on.

[AshMac]

“If you send him to the PSD, you get nothing”

Not really. We reduce the risk of an opponent in a final benefitting from 25 plus touches, 5 plus tackles, a goal or two and a bunch of marks and clearances around the ground.

This is an outstanding point I hadn’t considered

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Lions send pick 25 to Geelong for a whole host of later picks/future picks.

I think they are now positioned to offer us 21 and F1, which is likely to be 15-18.

Hope we reject it - that's a rubbish deal. Effectively two early second rounders.

[Grantysghost]

Lions send pick 25 to Geelong for a whole host of later picks/future picks.

I think they are now positioned to offer us 21 and F1, which is likely to be 15-18.

Hope we reject it - that's a rubbish deal. Effectively two early second rounders.

That will get it done I think.

[GVGjr]

Lions send pick 25 to Geelong for a whole host of later picks/future picks.

I think they are now positioned to offer us 21 and F1, which is likely to be 15-18.

Hope we reject it - that's a rubbish deal. Effectively two early second rounders.

They have a future 2nd as well

It could end up something like a F1, F2 and an upgrade of our #30 to their #21 which will get the Lobb deal over the line.
Without doing the numbers, I think the scope is there now to get the deals done.

[bulldogtragic]

Lions send pick 25 to Geelong for a whole host of later picks/future picks.

I think they are now positioned to offer us 21 and F1, which is likely to be 15-18.

Hope we reject it - that's a rubbish deal. Effectively two early second rounders.

100%

[bulldogtragic]

They have a future 2nd as well

It could end up something like a F1, F2 and an upgrade of our #30 to their #21 which will get the Lobb deal over the line.
Without doing the numbers, I think the scope is there now to get the deals done.

Pick 21, maybe Pick 20 next year and a 9 pick upgrade for Dunkley?

[GVGjr]

Pick 21, maybe Pick 20 next year and a 9 pick upgrade for Dunkley?

There will be some other swaps, I think we also get a F3 for the Lobb deal.

[Bulldog4life]

Brisbane made promises to 4 players to get them into their club it appears without any forward planning at all. But, expecting us to fold under the pressure. Talk about overstretching. Imagine if we did this in the Marra and Darcy drafts. Couldn't be done.

[chef]

That's a terrible deal considering it should be 2 first rounders for him.

I'd be happy to walk away and send him to the PSD if he won't extend with us.

[Axe Man]

Lions send pick 25 to Geelong for a whole host of later picks/future picks.

I think they are now positioned to offer us 21 and F1, which is likely to be 15-18.

Hope we reject it - that's a rubbish deal. Effectively two early second rounders.

And the cats get the pick they need for Ollie Henry.

[bulldogtragic]

There will be some other swaps, I think we also get a F3 for the Lobb deal.

So picks 21 (actually 23+), circa 20, 50 and a 9 pick upgrade????

[bulldogtragic]

That's a terrible deal considering it should be 2 first rounders for him.

I'd be happy to walk away and send him to the PSD if he won't extend with us.

Yep. I’d be physical sick. A whole bunch of nothings for a gun. Give me the PSD.

[Grantysghost]

Brisbane made promises to 4 players to get them into their club it appears without any forward planning at all. But, expecting us to fold under the pressure. Talk about overstretching. Imagine if we did this in the Marra and Darcy drafts. Couldn't be done.

They're pretty confident in their ability hey.

Imagine us getting Marra and say Taranto.

[Bulldog4life]

I heard on SEN that a club can only use one future pick if it is RD one. Or words to that effect. Maybe a Woofer knows more.

[hujsh]

Has anyone told the club I want Cam Rayner? Because maybe they just don't know my stance. I'd like him please. Pass it on

[bulldogtragic]

I heard on SEN that a club can only use one future pick if it is RD one. Or words to that effect. Maybe a Woofer knows more.

Unless they changed the rules this year, it is trade you first and have 2, 3, & 4 in tact. Or keep 1st and trade any of the others.

Brisbane are covered to offer a future first and second to us if they wanted to. I wouldn’t accept it. But yes.

[chef]

Yep. I’d be physical sick. A whole bunch of nothings for a gun. Give me the PSD.

And I'd be worried that every club will think Sam is a light touch and will try to walk over him.

Got to hold our ground.

[bulldogtragic]

And I'd be worried that every club will think Sam is a light touch and will try to walk over him.

Got to hold our ground.

It’s has to be a player of some quality now, with a first or nothing. A handful of nothing as you rightly say, hurts us in a lot of ways.

[GVGjr]

So picks 21 (actually 23+), circa 20, 50 and a 9 pick upgrade????

I'm not sure how you are doing the math but in the scenario I suggested #21 moving to #23 is to satisfy Freo. We get Lobb for #30 and I'd be asking for a F3 back.

From Brisbane F1 might be pick #15 F2 might be #33.
We might be able to get something from them this year as well as they have more than covered their point requirements.

How would you do it?

[DOG GOD]

I’ve got the feeling that when this deal is done, 98% of woofers will be like WTF.
I’ll get the lube ready.

[Bulldog4life]

Unless they changed the rules this year, it is trade you first and have 2, 3, & 4 in tact. Or keep 1st and trade any of the others.

Brisbane are covered to offer a future first and second to us if they wanted to. I wouldn’t accept it. But yes.

Thanks BT. But how can any club offer a future first and future second when you have said the above.

[Grantysghost]

I’ve got the feeling that when this deal is done, 98% of woofers will be like WTF.
I’ll get the lube ready.

I've been handing out the KY for a while now ;)

[bulldogsthru&thru]

It's not sounding promising....why does it feel like in all of this, we're losing the star player, brisbane is gaining him and the premiers somehow come out on top with the picks. You'd think clubs would want to stop giving Geelong an upper hand

[bulldogtragic]

Brisbane Picks in Draft Point Form:

21, 34, 35, 36, 38, 48, 55, 56

878, 542, 522, 502, 465, 302, 207, 194 = 3,612

3,612
-2,400 (Ashcroft Pick 1)
-------

1,212 (about Pick 10 for Fletcher)


So they're covered for Fletcher and Ashcroft. Some good future picks to Hawthorn for Gunston. So they've got all three in the bag.

They can offer a Future First & Second. I wouldn't take it.

They can offer Future First and a decent player. I take it.

They can try to package two of their current THREE second rounder next year for a contending team's future first. And then trade two late first rounders to us. In theory, it fits our demand.

[bornadog]

This seems to be getting worse

[bulldogtragic]

Thanks BT. But how can any club offer a future first and future second when you have said the above.

By trading in extra second rounders. Right now Brisbane have three Second Rounders. They can trade them, or try to package them up for for a team next year for a team's first rounder. If a club has a high Father/Son or Academy pick next year. This would be a perfect trade for both clubs.

Brisbane offer us two end of first round picks next year. Theoretically what we asked for.

[bulldogtragic]

This seems to be getting worse

Yep. Was updating 38 into it as you posted.

They don't need any more draft points now.

[bulldogtragic]

They need to satisfy us

They can and I think will offer 2 x First Rounders. As demanded. Just not good ones most likely.

Say a club has a Top 10 Academy or F/S next year. They trade their future first now, for two Brisbane Future Seconds to stockpile draft points. That secures the kid a year in advance, Brisbane get the extra first to offer without including a player into the trade.

[Bulldog4life]

They can and I think will offer 2 x First Rounders. As demanded. Just not good ones most likely.

Say a club has a Top 10 Academy or F/S next year. They trade their future first now, for two Brisbane Future Seconds to stockpile draft points. That secures the kid a year in advance, Brisbane get the extra first to offer without including a player into the trade.

Hope that club is North.

[bornadog]

They can and I think will offer 2 x First Rounders. As demanded. Just not good ones most likely.

Say a club has a Top 10 Academy or F/S next year. They trade their future first now, for two Brisbane Future Seconds to stockpile draft points. That secures the kid a year in advance, Brisbane get the extra first to offer without including a player into the trade.

Well we might have Croft as a F/S

[The Doctor]

Right now Brisbane have three Second Rounders.

Brisbane went the 2nd rounder they acquired from GWS to Gold Coast.

[bulldogtragic]

Brisbane went the 2nd rounder they acquired from GWS to Gold Coast.

Right you are! Bugger, using an iphone and didn't see the other column.

If they can somehow engineer another second rounder, then they might try this on.

[Bulldog4life]

Callum Twomey
@CalTwomey
·
2h
Clubs are looking to see if there are provisions within rules that could allow them to trade out their future first and second-round picks to unlock deals. Exemptions are allowed in the 'two first-rounders in four years' rule. Could shape a few of the big deals to come.

[Mofra]

Thanks BT. But how can any club offer a future first and future second when you have said the above.
Brisbane have traded extra future second round picks in, and can apply tot he AFL for dispensation to trade a future first and second.
By rumour, Brisbane and Port have both made appeals to the AFL this year (Brisbane for Dunkley picks, Port for JHF picks)

[bulldogtragic]

Brisbane have traded extra future second round picks in, and can apply tot he AFL for dispensation to trade a future first and second.
By rumour, Brisbane and Port have both made appeals to the AFL this year (Brisbane for Dunkley picks, Port for JHF picks)

If they can trade some fringe players. Say Mathison upgrading their Future 3rd into a Future 2nd, and another player upgrading a Future 4th into a Future 3rd. Then they can package up two Future Seconds to go fishing for a Future First. To then offer 2 x Future Firsts. If they can pull it off, it's very clever, but infuriating as two Future end of First Rounders ain't very good although meeting our demand.

[Grantysghost]

They need to satisfy us

That's where the KY comes in handy.

[bulldogtragic]

If they can trade some fringe players. Say Mathison upgrading their Future 3rd into a Future 2nd, and another player upgrading a Future 4th into a Future 3rd. Then they can package up two Future Seconds to go fishing for a Future First. To then offer 2 x Future Firsts. If they can pull it off, it's very clever, but infuriating as two Future end of First Rounders ain't very good although meeting our demand.

Looking at Twomey's take on the next draft Jed Walter is a Top 10 Pick next year. He's a GCS Academy Pick. Plus several others likely to be matched on bids.

As an example... If GCS can upgrade their Future Second (maybe circa Pick 25) into a late Future First (say Pick 15-18) for a Pick or two this year and/or Future Fourth. Or say a player, Fiorini to Collingwood for this upgrade maybe. Or if they get Geelong’s Future First in return for Bowes and hand Geelong back their second Rounder.

Then GCS trade that Future First to Brisbane for 2 x Future Second Rounders. Now GCS have at a guess Pick 10 worth of Draft Points, to secure Walter. It also gives them more flexibility if Walter goes higher, to try to 'trade up' the order before the expected bid.

[ReLoad]

I think I’m not so much interested in what picks we get, but rather what we do with them.

We’re not going to take as many picks as Brisbane will give us numbers wise, so perhaps we have a player in mind?

Sam, do your magic!

[Grantysghost]

I think I’m not so much interested in what picks we get, but rather what we do with them.

We’re not going to take as many picks as Brisbane will give us numbers wise, so perhaps we have a player in mind?

Sam, do your magic!

For thou art wise.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

I wish bad things for the Lions. I hope karma bites them... like it would be amazing now if they not only missed out on Dunkley, but someone put an early bid on Jaspa Fletcher and forced them to scramble for more points.

[kruder]

[QUOTE=Yankee Hotel Foxtrot;813355]I wish bad things for the Lions. I hope karma bites them... like it would be amazing now if they not only missed out on Dunkley, but someone put an early bid on Jaspa Fletcher and forced them to scramble for more points.[/QUOTE

The defensive gods have been hitting them with Karma 4 straight years. If you cant defend you can play in the big dance.

[Hotdog60]

What's to stop the Bummers from grabbing Dunkley if he's there at their turn. They would be doing a happy dance getting him for nothing after the failed attempt to screw us last time.

[Scraggers]

What about if Brisbane get the right to trade both first and second round picks next year. They trade them with GWS for picks (say) 3 & 15. This pics are on-traded to us for Dunkley. GWS then get fodder for their academy player in 2023. Brisbane get Dunkley; Bulldogs get two first rounders.

[F'scary]

Dunkley is one of the best inside mids in the comp + he can play as a marking forward. He is a beast, physically. He is easily worth the equivalent of the 12 + 19 paid by Tiggers to GWS for Taranto. I would prefer him to go to norf for nix rather than fold to the Brions.

[F'scary]

What's to stop the Bummers from grabbing Dunkley if he's there at their turn. They would be doing a happy dance getting him for nothing after the failed attempt to screw us last time.

I would prefer they get him rather than the Brions who traded out their capital deliberately.

[Hotdog60]

I would prefer they get him rather than the Brions who traded out their capital deliberately.

I agree and at this stage I would rather he ends up anywhere rather than the Lions unless they find a way to pony up. A term I heard recently.

[jeemak]

It's not sounding promising....why does it feel like in all of this, we're losing the star player, brisbane is gaining him and the premiers somehow come out on top with the picks. You'd think clubs would want to stop giving Geelong an upper hand

It's soft avoidance of restraint of trade, to appease the players.

[jazzadogs]

Michael Whiting (Qld based afl journo) proposing pick 21, future 1st (tied to Lions) and future 2nd (tied to GWS) as the trade. He confirmed that Brisbane traded their future 2nd to Gold Coast, and kept the GWS Future 2nd - which is likely a better pick.

I would prefer that they got someone to accept the future 2nd and 21 for a 15ish pick this year, but 3 likely quality picks is still a decent result - as long as we're not throwing anything back.

[jeemak]

That's where the KY comes in handy.

The psychosexual nature of your contributions is becoming more prominent and I dread to see the result of this thread being drawn out over another 600-700 posts.

[bulldogtragic]

Michael Whiting (Qld based afl journo) proposing pick 21, future 1st (tied to Lions) and future 2nd (tied to GWS) as the trade. He confirmed that Brisbane traded their future 2nd to Gold Coast, and kept the GWS Future 2nd - which is likely a better pick.

I would prefer that they got someone to accept the future 2nd and 21 for a 15ish pick this year, but 3 likely quality picks is still a decent result - as long as we're not throwing anything back.

21 and the Future Second was for Pick 15. Which required 3 picks back to them.

So are they dropping all the picks they wanted back? After downgrading our request. Seems a strange one.

[bulldogtragic]

Whiting updated his Twitter to say the GWS 2nd actually went and he was wrong.

So it’s 21, Future 15-18, Future 33-36.


No gooda.

[jazzadogs]

Whiting updated his Twitter to say the GWS 2nd actually went and he was wrong.

So it’s 21, Future 15-18, Future 33-36.


No gooda.

Thanks BT. Agree if it's Brisbane's 2nd then it's not good enough.

[bulldogtragic]

Thanks BT. Agree if it's Brisbane's 2nd then it's not good enough.

You’d think an AFEL journo, QLD based, would have access to AFEL info before tweeting things out… Not a great look for them.

[Grantysghost]

The psychosexual nature of your contributions is becoming more prominent and I dread to see the result of this thread being drawn out over another 600-700 posts.

The sir psycho sexy outro was one of the first things I learnt on the guitar, I blame Kiedis Flea and Frusciante.


https://youtu.be/kt4Pj8QzUpo

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Anyone see that pest Browne's tweet about a super trade in the works? Apparently involves picks 1,2,3,8 and 12 or something mostly involving Eagles, Port and North. But he mentioned cats and lions also involved. Not sure how. I suspect it maybe results in brisbane getting 18 that they flip to us along with their first next year....

[Go_Dogs]

Work your magic Sam.

This feels like it’s heading in the wrong direction, which gives me comfort Sam will save the day.

[DOG GOD]

Anyone see that pest Browne's tweet about a super trade in the works? Apparently involves picks 1,2,3,8 and 12 or something mostly involving Eagles, Port and North. But he mentioned cats and lions also involved. Not sure how. I suspect it maybe results in brisbane getting 18 that they flip to us along with their first next year....

It had something to do with WC lose pick 2 and Rioli and get 8 and 12
Port get JHF and Rioli and lose pick 8 haha
GWS get pick 1
NM get picks 2 and 3 after giving up pick 1 and JHF
I didn’t read anymore after that.
Not going to happen

[ratsmac]

It had something to do with WC lose pick 2 and Rioli and get 8 and 12
Port get JHF and Rioli and lose pick 8 haha
GWS get pick 1
NM get picks 2 and 3 after giving up pick 1 and JHF
I didn’t read anymore after that.
Not going to happen

Yeah same here, I gave up due to the amount of early bs. I thought I was missing something because nothing made sense. Sort of like the Dunkley deal. The team with the good player is the team getting shafted. Maybe that's the new current era of trading ( insert finger on chin emoji)

[azabob]

A few minute grab with Pickering on the Dunkley trade.

Initial answer to the question are you confident he gets to Brisbane. He says "hope so" and then quickly changes his words.

Seems Pickering is daring us to walk him to the PSD.

https://player.whooshkaa.com/episode?id=1049709

[azabob]

Liam Pickering has seems to have really done a mis-service to Brisbane and Josh and undervalued what he believed the dogs would ask for.

Clearly Pickering thought we wouldn't ask for two first round draft picks.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Liam Pickering has seems to have really done a mis-service to Brisbane and Josh and undervalued what he believed the dogs would ask for.

Clearly Pickering thought we wouldn't ask for two first round draft picks.

Just shows his incompetence. If a player manager can't read the market then players should probably look elsewhere.

[Grantysghost]

Liam Pickering has seems to have really done a mis-service to Brisbane and Josh and undervalued what he believed the dogs would ask for.

Clearly Pickering thought we wouldn't ask for two first round draft picks.

He doesn't come across as the wisest bloke.

A mate played cricket with him at North and wasn't a huge fan.

[bulldogtragic]

Pickering doesn't sound confident. Instead of blaming us for our requests, he should be pressuring Brisbane to make an offer commensurate to 6 years X $750,000 for a B&F player.

Pickering clearly believes Sam Power might force Dunkley into the PSD.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

I just want this over with one way or another. If Dunkley goes to the lions, north or stays with us for a year and rots in the vfl, I want to move on from him. He's done forever as a bulldog in my eyes.

[bulldogtragic]

Oh, and Pickering says the reason Dunkley is leaving because he wants to live in QLD. Last time I checked, the Gold Coast was in Queensland...

Perhaps this should be the compromise to allow Dunkley to move to QLD and for us to get a fair return.

[azabob]

Oh, and Pickering says the reason Dunkley is leaving because he wants to live in QLD. Last time I checked, the Gold Coast was in Queensland...

insert picture >>>clutching at straws<<<

[Dancin' Douggy]

While we're on the subject of Liam Pickering.

The Hutchy and Pickers 'show' on SEN is one of the worst things the human race has ever spewed up in it's entire history.

[bulldogtragic]

insert picture >>>clutching at straws<<<

Not a great advertisement for Pickering's abilities, that interview. Hardly sounds like he's trying to help the parties come together, to the disservice of his client. He sounds like the Brisbane Footy Manager trotting out those lines abouyt dogs getting nothing and hurting their draft hand if they dont agree to what ever Brisbane offers..

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Oh, and Pickering says the reason Dunkley is leaving because he wants to live in QLD. Last time I checked, the Gold Coast was in Queensland...

Perhaps this should be the compromise to allow Dunkley to move to QLD and for us to get a fair return.

Josh wants to have his cake and eat it too. He wants nothing to do with us, wants to live in qld but also wants to compete in the finals knowing full well it'll screw us over. He does not give 1 sh*t about the club that gave him a start and developed his career. He's the blandest of generic characters you'll ever get and I think the boos will be on Ryan levels.

[Grantysghost]

While we're on the subject of Liam Pickering.

The Hutchy and Pickers 'show' on SEN is one of the worst things the human race has ever spewed up in it's entire history.

Agree absolutely nauseating.

[Grantysghost]

Not a great advertisement for Pickering's abilities, that interview. Hardly sounds like he's trying to help the parties come together, to the disservice of his client. He sounds like the Brisbane Footy Manager trotting out those lines abouyt dogs getting nothing and hurting their draft hand if they dont agree to what ever Brisbane offers..

I just listened to that an it's very clear he's on the Lions side to me.
Thinks what they've offered is around the mark.
Hutchy chipping in saying he's worth a pick in the teens, he's got to be joking.

Dogs are playing hard ball and actually might walk him to the draft. Pickering's little jab that dogs supporters wouldn't be happy is panic mode ha.

[SonofScray]

Tuned in to that.

I think it’s dawned on them that we are being fair dinkum. Fair enough too, especially in an environment where if a player who wants out just could have waited another year to exercise free agency, perhaps it signals to the players that if you are going to try this stuff on, you better have made sure you can get there with your manager before tying us up.

[azabob]

Not a great advertisement for Pickering's abilities, that interview. Hardly sounds like he's trying to help the parties come together, to the disservice of his client. He sounds like the Brisbane Footy Manager trotting out those lines abouyt dogs getting nothing and hurting their draft hand if they dont agree to what ever Brisbane offers..

Yep, I was staggered by it.
Clearly he doesn’t get involved to help get deals across the line.
Where as for example Paul Connors stable of agents are always working the phones bringing in other clubs to get shit done, either directly or indirectly

[Bulldog4life]

Taranto to Richmond for picks 12 & 19. That is our starting point. Dunkley a better player, B & F winner and premiership player. As Johno said Brisbane should have done this deal first before worrying about Gunston and their points for the draft. This is their key signing.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Taranto to Richmond for picks 12 & 19. That is our starting point. Dunkley a better player, B & F winner and premiership player. As Johno said Brisbane should have done this deal first before worrying about Gunston and their points for the draft. This is their key signing.

Was Taranto uncontracted?

[Bulldog4life]

Was Taranto uncontracted?

Not sure. Just judging him compared to Dunks, Another example is West Coast paid the world to get Tim Kelly from Geelong.

[azabob]

Was Taranto uncontracted?

Yes he was.

[bornadog]

Oh, and Pickering says the reason Dunkley is leaving because he wants to live in QLD. Last time I checked, the Gold Coast was in Queensland...

Perhaps this should be the compromise to allow Dunkley to move to QLD and for us to get a fair return.

GC don't have the cap space

[mjp]

He sounds like the Brisbane Footy Manager trotting out those lines abouyt dogs getting nothing and hurting their draft hand if they dont agree to what ever Brisbane offers..

Well...as a manager he SHOULD be on the side of whatever his client wants - which is to play for Brisbane.

I'm not annoyed with Pickering's take...to me it just seems like he is doing his job. Why SEN give him a media platform to do this from though? THAT I simply cannot answer...

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

At this point, I'm happy to walk him to the PSD rather than engage with Brisbane's bad faith negotiating tactics. I'd rather ensure they miss him and we get nothing, rather than accept Brisbane's ever shrinking-in-value ultimatums. That only strengthens them and weakens us.

Accepting a laughable deal now would do nothing but confirm that we are absolute pushovers and will continue to cost us a premium in all future negotiations with other clubs down the track.


Brisbane convinced Dunkley to choose them. From that point on Brisbane are accountable for making that deal happen, obviously within commercial reason.

I don't see the Dog's team being unreasonable in their expectations from the sound bites we've heard from Sam Power and the media. Two years ago we were adamant that Essendon needed to cough up 2 high value first round picks. I think the fact that this time round we seemed willing to look at 2 mid to late 1sts highlights Sam and Co understand the changed circumstances and are showing a willingness to negotiate in good faith. It ain't like Sam Power is trying to channel Dodoro here!


Brisbane have a professional responsibility to have prepared for all probable contingencies before securing Josh's agreement to join...especially given their high draft capital father/son commitments. It doesn't look as if they've factored in or prepared for any any other possible scenarios other than the Bulldog's just capitulating.

Indeed it seems Brisbane's strategic planning to secure Josh was based on a a chips all in 'The they'll take what we offer' strategy, and their 'nuanced' plan B was, 'If they refuse Plan A we'll increasingly worsen each offer thereafter until they fold'.
No flexibility or preparations around what if the Dog's want a player? What if they just say no and he goes to the draft?
I'm actually surprised a little bit by the arrogance and lack of professionalism from Brisbane on this to be honest. I mean I despise them, but I did think in recent years they actually were fairly professional operators.

Nope. I'd rather risk Dunkley going for nothing and ending up at any of the bottom 8 clubs via the PSD than taking a putrid offer and watching Brisbane get their cake and eat it too.

Now, as for how we got here with Dunkley out of contract, thats on us at the Dog's. I think the club really should've gone into trade period last year and asked Josh to either commit to a new deal at the end of 2021 or else we're happy to help you explore options again. We should never have let him get to an uncontracted position and be forced into playing a stupid game of trade chicken.

[Bulldog4life]

At this point, I'm happy to walk him to the PSD rather than engage with Brisbane's bad faith negotiating tactics. I'd rather ensure they miss him and we get nothing, rather than accept Brisbane's ever shrinking-in-value ultimatums. That only strengthens them and weakens us.

Accepting a laughable deal now would do nothing but confirm that we are absolute pushovers and will continue to cost us a premium in all future negotiations with other clubs down the track.


Brisbane convinced Dunkley to choose them. From that point on Brisbane are accountable for making that deal happen, obviously within commercial reason.

I don't see the Dog's team being unreasonable in their expectations from the sound bites we've heard from Sam Power and the media. Two years ago we were adamant that Essendon needed to cough up 2 high value first round picks. I think the fact that this time round we seemed willing to look at 2 mid to late 1sts highlights Sam and Co understand the changed circumstances and are showing a willingness to negotiate in good faith. It ain't like Sam Power is trying to channel Dodoro here!


Brisbane have a professional responsibility to have prepared for all probable contingencies before securing Josh's agreement to join...especially given their high draft capital father/son commitments. It doesn't look as if they've factored in or prepared for any any other possible scenarios other than the Bulldog's just capitulating.

Indeed it seems Brisbane's strategic planning to secure Josh was based on a a chips all in 'The they'll take what we offer' strategy, and their 'nuanced' plan B was, 'If they refuse Plan A we'll increasingly worsen each offer thereafter until they fold'.
No flexibility or preparations around what if the Dog's want a player? What if they just say no and he goes to the draft?
I'm actually surprised a little bit by the arrogance and lack of professionalism from Brisbane on this to be honest. I mean I despise them, but I did think in recent years they actually were fairly professional operators.

Nope. I'd rather risk Dunkley going for nothing and ending up at any of the bottom 8 clubs via the PSD than taking a putrid offer and watching Brisbane get their cake and eat it to.

Now, as for how we got here with Dunkley out of contract, thats on us at the Dog's. I think the club really should've gone into trade period last year and asked Josh to either commit to a new deal at the end of 2021 or else we're happy to help you explore options again. We should never have let him get to an uncontracted position and be forced into playing a stupid game of trade chicken.

From what I read Dunkley had a contract from us in front of him since early this year.

[Bulldog4life]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/starting-to-accept-it-dogs-great-disappointed-as-bombshell-draft-option-hangs-over-stars-exit/news-story/6d6fc899a97ef0f297fc6594c39c5580

Johno

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Yes he was.

Well then that's the market price. This whole nominate a club thing is bs. You want to live in a certain state then maybe look for another profession.

[Grantysghost]

Well...as a manager he SHOULD be on the side of whatever his client wants - which is to play for Brisbane.

I'm not annoyed with Pickering's take...to me it just seems like he is doing his job. Why SEN give him a media platform to do this from though? THAT I simply cannot answer...

It's a regular show they have on Saturday mornings here MJP.
Hutchy owns SEN and "Pickers" is his best mate.
You're right he should be looking after his client but I personally think choosing the Lions in the first place or leading him to believe they were an option was an error on his part.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Well then that's the market price. This whole nominate a club thing is bs. You want to live in a certain state then maybe look for another profession.

100%.

It won't happen, given how strong the player's union is, but I think the whole imbalance of power in trading needs to be addressed, so we avoid these silly theatrics and posturing.

Players have way too much control which reduces a club to having to resort to threats of 'sending the player to the PSD draft.' as their only negotiation lever when faced with a player who wants to leave.

[jeemak]

You could genuinely hear the panic in Pickering's voice. You could tell the entire interview was staged to make us look unreasonable, even to the point of Hutchy chiming in with the "why does he want to leave the Bulldogs" questions that were left unanswered but clearly had an inference.

As for Johno, what is he, a self hating Bulldog? Scared for us to hold our ground because he's used to losing and being beaten up. He's probably just trying to be impartial, I guess.

This is entirely on Brisbane, as Purps laid out really well a few posts above, they've not thought this through outside of screwing us and possibly their targeted player.

[Rocket Science]

Fancy having the temerity, the absolute cheek, to expect fair compensation when another mob comes for your best and fairest winner entering the prime of his career.

There's this asinine subtext that because Dunkley's driven his departure we're not entitled to seek what he's actually worth and should just get on with the business of making rivals better.

It's the same dipshits who'll be lining up to pin a blue ribbon on Brisbane for winning trade week by poaching Dunkley for a relative song.

I really hope we're not bluffing with the PSD threat because it'd warm the heart watching him be the big dog down at Arden Street.

[mjp]

Players have way too much control which reduces a club to having to resort to threats of 'sending the player to the PSD draft.' as their only negotiation lever when faced with a player who wants to leave.

It's not really a lever. They could make it a lever (of sorts) by providing 'free agent' style compensation to any club losing an out of contract player in the PSD. I actually don't understand how you can receive a 'guarantee' of compensation if you lose a Free Agent (who has done their 7 years or whatever) but NO compensation if you lose a player who is out of contract. Setting Dunkley aside, if Tanner Bruhn had wanted to go to North, they could have simply 'walked him' to the PSD and GWS would have received nothing...THAT right now seems really stupid.

And no matter that we don't/can't understand how the AFL work out the compensation for free-agents, it seems completely un-reasonable right now that Dunks could go to NM or Port or to whoever wants to pick him and we receive ZERO when (from my obviously biased perspective) we have done everything RIGHT in these negotiations.

Brisbane saying 'that's all we've got - bad luck' is not a trade position...I can't go to the Range Rover dealership (sorry - not a car person and don't know if this example holds) and demand a car on the basis that I 'WANT IT' and it 'FITS MY NEEDS' but not have enough money to match the number on the sticker...they will send me next door to the 2nd hand car shop...

[dog town]

So what’s our best result from this? Pick 21 and a future first if Brisbane drop their request for more picks coming back from us? No chance of a player being involved this late with medicals etc.

I’m usually pretty pragmatic with this stuff but finding this hard to swallow. It is very tempting to send him into the draft but I do think we will take the two picks in the end. Is the consensus that we then use 21 for Lobb?

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

You could genuinely hear the panic in Pickering's voice. You could tell the entire interview was staged to make us look unreasonable, even to the point of Hutchy chiming in with the "why does he want to leave the Bulldogs" questions that were left unanswered but clearly had an inference.

As for Johno, what is he, a self hating Bulldog? Scared for us to hold our ground because he's used to losing and being beaten up. He's probably just trying to be impartial, I guess.

This is entirely on Brisbane, as Purps laid out really well a few posts above, they've not thought this through outside of screwing us and possibly their targeted player.

I actually didn't take Johnno's remarks as anti-Bulldog position. I think his response just articulated, in Johnno's usual inarticulate way, what the options were and that it would be a shame if the Dog's got nothing for him, but that he's coming around to that being a likely scenario.
If anything I think Johnno is slightly lobbying for us by trying to insinuate to Brisbane in a public forum that 'Sam Power just might do it.. he'll let him walk to the draft; he's a cold-ass honky.'

[bulldogtragic]

I actually didn't take Johnno's remarks as anti-Bulldog position. I think his response just articulated, in Johnno's usual inarticulate way, what the options were and that it would be a shame if the Dog's got nothing for him, but that he's coming around to that being a likely scenario.
If anything I think Johnno is slightly lobbying for us by trying to insinuate to Brisbane in a public forum that 'Sam Power just might do it.. he'll let him walk to the draft; he's a cold-ass honky.'

That was take away too fwiw.

[jeemak]

I actually didn't take Johnno's remarks as anti-Bulldog position. I think his response just articulated, in Johnno's usual inarticulate way, what the options were and that it would be a shame if the Dog's got nothing for him, but that he's coming around to that being a likely scenario.
If anything I think Johnno is slightly lobbying for us by trying to insinuate to Brisbane in a public forum that 'Sam Power just might do it.. he'll let him walk to the draft; he's a cold-ass honky.'


That was take away too fwiw.

Nets for both of you.

[1eyedog]

100% he even stated at the end of the article that Dunkley is top shelf and Brisbane need(ed) to do better.

[bulldogtragic]

Nets for both of you.

You started this mother*!*!*!*!ing thing! Done! :D

[Topdog]

Pick in the teens should be right.........

https://i.imgur.com/QSUjISu.png

[azabob]

Well...as a manager he SHOULD be on the side of whatever his client wants - which is to play for Brisbane.

I'm not annoyed with Pickering's take...to me it just seems like he is doing his job. Why SEN give him a media platform to do this from though? THAT I simply cannot answer...

On the flip side

Isn’t Pickerings job is to advise Josh?

Isn’t Pickerings job to help get Dunkley to Brisbane?

Isn’t Pickerings job to know what trade value the dogs are likely to want?

Isn’t Pickerings job to know what Brisbane are willing to trade to get Dunkley and take into account what else Brisbane need to get done?

Seriously how daft is Pickering? Why wouldn’t he have the foresight to contract Dunkley for an extra year to avoid all this?

Let’s not forget Pickering advising Josh to ask for a trade to Essendon.

I’d say Pickering is not doing his job very well at all.

[mjp]

Isn’t Pickerings job is to advise Josh?

To be fair - we don't know what he has 'advised' Mr Duncclee to do. What we know is that now Duncerly has decided he wants to "take his talents to bris-vegas" he SEEMS to be supportive of that move (publicly).

For all we know he has been saying to the Brians all along that they will need 2x 1st round picks etc and the Brians have said "don't you tell us how to do it, we'll do what we want" blah blah.

I don't think Pickering should be using his public platform to criticise the Bulldogs for not accepting a clearly inadequate offer for Danklee to change clubs but don't really have an issue with the rest of what he is doing...

[bulldogsthru&thru]

A little more sense can be found here from Bartel and Stevens

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/revealed-the-two-deals-that-have-dogs-standing-their-ground/news-story/55d56b64065b3567b0cca0d191e19a5f

[Swoop]

The onus is on the club that has lured the player to make the trade happen. Pickering's role within that is to protect the best interests of his client and ensure the deal is made. The Bulldogs haven't waivered and have been clear from the onset of what they believe is fair value for Dunkley.

It is up to the manager and in turn Brisbane to make the deal happen before Wednesday. At this point, there is an element of gamesmanship and arrogance which is drawing out this whole process. The Bulldogs simply need to wait until their adequate compensation is met, or allow him to enter the PSD. In reality, there is no more for us to do, other then wait for Brisbane to meet our request.

Pickering making these statements is purely part of the game they are playing by trying to put public pressure on the Dogs. We simply need to hold our nerve and be patient. It's not our fault Brisbane decided to prioritise Ashcroft/Fletcher, and Gunston ahead of Dunkley. That was Brisbane's choice. Pickering and Dunkley would be better served asking these questions of Brisbane. If he is so valuable, why don't you offer the Bulldogs a fair trade that matches his apparent value?

If the deal falls through, it is on Brisbane for not making it happen.

[GVGjr]

Well...as a manager he SHOULD be on the side of whatever his client wants - which is to play for Brisbane.

I'm not annoyed with Pickering's take...to me it just seems like he is doing his job. Why SEN give him a media platform to do this from though? THAT I simply cannot answer...

I see it a bit differently and think Pickering is coming up short.
Player managers have a big role in getting their players to the clubs. The job isn't finished until the paperwork is signed and having messed up with the Essendon move 2 years back if he was my manager I'd be insisting on two things:
- As stated in my B&F speech the club has been very good to me and helped me get to where I am now. I fully expect the club that courted me the hardest and is putting a substantial contract in front of me to make sure the Bulldogs receive suitable compensation. Not overs but a fair deal needs to be struck.
- As my manager and given that I was poorly advised last time I expect you to be working the phones until the deal goes down not at country race meeting that you are paid to attend and not working on a 3 hour radio show.
I'm your priority during trade week so earn your money.

And finally, if I end up in the PSD because Brisbane are trying to get me on the cheap our association is done.

I honestly think Colin Young will be working harder for Rory Lobb than Pickers is for Dunkley.

[Swoop]

I see it a bit differently and think Pickering is coming up short.
Player managers have a big role in getting their players to the clubs. The job isn't finished until the paperwork is signed and having messed up with the Essendon move 2 years back if he was my manager I'd be insisting on two things:
- As stated in my B&F speech the club has been very good to me and helped me get to where I am now. I fully expect the club that courted me the hardest and is putting a substantial contract in front of me to make sure the Bulldogs receive suitable compensation. Not overs but a fair deal needs to be struck.
- As my manager and given that I was poorly advised last time I expect you to be working the phones until the deal goes down not at country race meeting that you are paid to attend and not working on a 3 hour radio show.
I'm your priority during trade week so earn your money.

And finally, if I end up in the PSD because Brisbane are trying to get me on the cheap our association is done.

Spot on. It is a poor reflection on Pickering if he has advised his client TWICE to publicly formalise a trade request and not make that trade happen. I would argue Colin Young is in a similar position with Rory Lobb.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

I see it a bit differently and think Pickering is coming up short.
Player managers have a big role in getting their players to the clubs. The job isn't finished until the paperwork is signed and having messed up with the Essendon move 2 years back if he was my manager I'd be insisting on two things:
- As stated in my B&F speech the club has been very good to me and helped me get to where I am now. I fully expect the club that courted me the hardest and is putting a substantial contract in front of me to make sure the Bulldogs receive suitable compensation. Not overs but a fair deal needs to be struck.
- As my manager and given that I was poorly advised last time I expect you to be working the phones until the deal goes down not at country race meeting that you are paid to attend and not working on a 3 hour radio show.
I'm your priority during trade week so earn your money.

And finally, if I end up in the PSD because Brisbane are trying to get me on the cheap our association is done.

I honestly think Colin Young will be working harder for Rory Lobb than Pickers is for Dunkley.

If Dunks had even half the brain to think like this we'd never be in this situation to begin with. Alas here we are.

Pickering is heading into Ricky Nixon player agent territory with his incompetence.

[jeemak]

I see it a bit differently and think Pickering is coming up short.
Player managers have a big role in getting their players to the clubs. The job isn't finished until the paperwork is signed and having messed up with the Essendon move 2 years back if he was my manager I'd be insisting on two things:
- As stated in my B&F speech the club has been very good to me and helped me get to where I am now. I fully expect the club that courted me the hardest and is putting a substantial contract in front of me to make sure the Bulldogs receive suitable compensation. Not overs but a fair deal needs to be struck.
- As my manager and given that I was poorly advised last time I expect you to be working the phones until the deal goes down not at country race meeting that you are paid to attend and not working on a 3 hour radio show.
I'm your priority during trade week so earn your money.

And finally, if I end up in the PSD because Brisbane are trying to get me on the cheap our association is done.

I honestly think Colin Young will be working harder for Rory Lobb than Pickers is for Dunkley.

That's exactly what Dunkley should be saying, but can you actually imagine that coming out of his mouth? The thought seems preposterous to me.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

That's exactly what Dunkley should be saying, but can you actually imagine that coming out of his mouth? The thought seems preposterous to me.

Well the only way it could happen is if his dad programs those words in his brain. The guys a robot incapable of thinking for himself.

[WBFC4FFC]

I see it a bit differently and think Pickering is coming up short.
Player managers have a big role in getting their players to the clubs. The job isn't finished until the paperwork is signed and having messed up with the Essendon move 2 years back if he was my manager I'd be insisting on two things:
- As stated in my B&F speech the club has been very good to me and helped me get to where I am now. I fully expect the club that courted me the hardest and is putting a substantial contract in front of me to make sure the Bulldogs receive suitable compensation. Not overs but a fair deal needs to be struck.
- As my manager and given that I was poorly advised last time I expect you to be working the phones until the deal goes down not at country race meeting that you are paid to attend and not working on a 3 hour radio show.
I'm your priority during trade week so earn your money.

And finally, if I end up in the PSD because Brisbane are trying to get me on the cheap our association is done.

I honestly think Colin Young will be working harder for Rory Lobb than Pickers is for Dunkley.

Why wouldn’t Pickering have advised Dunks for a 1-year contract extension so as to avoid this issue now? Maybe he did. Who knows? I doubt it though.

In saying that, Dunks should have changed Managers 2-hrs ago with the Bummers debacle. Can see 15mins before the deadline on Friday that Bris will sweeten the current deal ever so slightly but not enough. If so, no deal!

Bris should have a look at the Bummers and their inability to trade. This will tarnish their reputation for years to come and their ability to attract talent, should they not offer fair value.

PS: Have it on good authority (pre Ruttons sacking at the Bummers) that there are attempts to remove Dodoro.

[bornadog]

Spot on. It is a poor reflection on Pickering if he has advised his client TWICE to publicly formalise a trade request and not make that trade happen. I would argue Colin Young is in a similar position with Rory Lobb.

Lobb was told he would be traded at end on 2022, but Freo liked his season and are now playing hard ball.

I am thinking right now that Lobb will come to us, but Dunkley still shaky on whether he makes it to Bris.

[GVGjr]

Why wouldn’t Pickering have advised Dunks for a 1-year contract extension so as to avoid this issue now? Maybe he did. Who knows? I doubt it though.

In saying that, Dunks should have changed Managers 2-hrs ago with the Bummers debacle. Can see 15mins before the deadline on Friday that Bris will sweeten the current deal ever so slightly but not enough. If so, no deal!

Bris should have a look at the Bummers and their inability to trade. This will tarnish their reputation for years to come and their ability to attract talent, should they not offer fair value.

PS: Have it on good authority (pre Ruttons sacking at the Bummers) that there are attempts to remove Dodoro.

The 1 year deal might be an option if push comes to PSD shove. I want Dunkley to move to Brisbane but they can't put their hand on heart and say they've been more than reasonable with what they offered. Great for them and poor for us and it's wrong for Pickers to assume the supporters would be happy for us to eat a shit sandwich.

Re Dodoro, I think he is safe in his role and he's just got to improve the way he deals with other clubs.

[bulldogtragic]

The 1 year deal might be an option if push comes to PSD shove. I want Dunkley to move to Brisbane but they can't put their hand on heart and say they've been more than reasonable with what they offered. Great for them and poor for us and it's wrong for Pickers to assume the supporters would be happy for us to eat a shit sandwich.

Re Dodoro, I think he is safe in his role and he's just got to improve the way he deals with other clubs.

Exactly. There’s only one member on this forum that wants to eat that sandwich…

I think they eventually give us something. But if not, Dunkley is better to sign to a one year deal and have a go next year or if the compo is good (owing to a poor season) like a top 10 pick next year as compo, then everybody wins out of that plan b. Brisbane’s dream of Dunkley being the missing piece of a premiership puzzle gets delayed.

[dog town]

Exactly. There’s only one member on this forum that wants to eat that sandwich…

I think they eventually give us something. But if not, Dunkley is better to sign to a one year deal and have a go next year or if the compo is good (owing to a poor season) like a top 10 pick next year as compo, then everybody wins out of that plan b. Brisbane’s dream of Dunkley being the missing piece of a premiership puzzle gets delayed.We don’t want Dunkley here next year regardless in my view. This is a sideshow we can do without and it’s time to move on now even if we do make a stand.

[bulldogtragic]

We don’t want Dunkley here next year regardless in my view. This is a sideshow we can do without and it’s time to move on now even if we do make a stand.

That’s also a fair argument, I’ll pay that.

[FrediKanoute]

The onus is on the club that has lured the player to make the trade happen. Pickering's role within that is to protect the best interests of his client and ensure the deal is made. The Bulldogs haven't waivered and have been clear from the onset of what they believe is fair value for Dunkley.

It is up to the manager and in turn Brisbane to make the deal happen before Wednesday. At this point, there is an element of gamesmanship and arrogance which is drawing out this whole process. The Bulldogs simply need to wait until their adequate compensation is met, or allow him to enter the PSD. In reality, there is no more for us to do, other then wait for Brisbane to meet our request.

Pickering making these statements is purely part of the game they are playing by trying to put public pressure on the Dogs. We simply need to hold our nerve and be patient. It's not our fault Brisbane decided to prioritise Ashcroft/Fletcher, and Gunston ahead of Dunkley. That was Brisbane's choice. Pickering and Dunkley would be better served asking these questions of Brisbane. If he is so valuable, why don't you offer the Bulldogs a fair trade that matches his apparent value?

If the deal falls through, it is on Brisbane for not making it happen.

Couple of issues here:

1) its VERY much in the Dogs interest to make sure a deal happens. Losing Dunks to the PSD would be a disaster for the club;

2) agree Brissy are being sh*t here, but the reality is Dunk is out of contract and has chosen them. We are not in an open market bidding war;

3) We should be saying to Dunk's that if he signs a further 1 year deal we will negotiate a fair deal in 2023 for him;

4) If the onus is on the club, then how does that stack with the way we have played Lobb for the last 2 seasons?

Trade period sucks when you dont have the whhip hand and on both Dunks and Lobb we don't. Walking him to the PSD is a Lose situation for the WBD.

[bornadog]

Walking him to the PSD is a Lose situation for the WBD.

No it shows we are strong. If we allow clubs to walk over us then this will happen over and over again.

[Rocco Jones]

No it shows we are strong. If we allow clubs to walk over us then this will happen over and over again.

Idk if it shows we are strong but it shows we aren't walk overs, as you said. It sucks as a situation and we lose big time but yeah, we can't just yield. Not only does it make us look like walk overs, it makes us look like we talk crap and don't take it up.

[Grantysghost]

No it shows we are strong. If we allow clubs to walk over us then this will happen over and over again.

I seriously can't believe anyone is subscribing to letting him go for free.
I feel like I've entered the twilight zone.

The time to do the work and be a club that doesn't lose good players was over the past couple of years.

If we take a reasonable but less than perfect deal, it in no way affects future negotiations in any way.

Do you think next year if we have to deal with North they'll go, hey the dogs fold Sam Power is an idiot.

Sweet fancy Moses!

[hujsh]

I seriously can't believe anyone is subscribing to letting him go for free.
I feel like I've entered the twilight zone.

The time to do the work and be a club that doesn't lose good players was over the past couple of years.

If we take a reasonable but less than perfect deal, it in no way affects future negotiations in any way.

Do you think next year if we have to deal with North they'll go, hey the dogs fold Sam Power is an idiot.

Sweet fancy Moses!

It sets precedent that if you don't offer a reasonable deal and there's the means to prevent you getting our player then you won't get him.

I doubt it'd matter to North who're likely to finish bottom again but if say Melbourne came sniffing for Naughton it'd be handy for them to know they can either pay something close to his worth or lose him to one of the many other clubs happy to have him.

[Grantysghost]

It sets precedent that if you don't offer a reasonable deal and there's the means to prevent you getting our player then you won't get him.

I doubt it'd matter to North who're likely to finish bottom again but if say Melbourne came sniffing for Naughton it'd be handy for them to know they can either pay something close to his worth or lose him to one of the many other clubs happy to have him.

Fair enough, I hear that but don't agree.

It's like yep we showed them *walks away with nothing*

I don't think it sets a precedent either, every deal is different.

Melbourne would have nothing but respect for Power I'd say, this deal won't change that surely.

[hujsh]

Fair enough, I hear that but don't agree.

It's like yep we showed them *walks away with nothing*

I don't think it sets a precedent either, every deal is different.

Melbourne would have nothing but respect for Power I'd say, this deal won't change that surely.

If I saw our club accept that first deal and I worked at another club I'd consider Dogs open season if we can convince a Dogs player to leave.

Naughton for a future first and pick 17 with pick 33 and 42 coming back or we trade 17 and offer 30 instead. We know you'll do it so you don't get nothing so just save us some time Doggies and accept the first offer.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Fair enough, I hear that but don't agree.

It's like yep we showed them *walks away with nothing*

I don't think it sets a precedent either, every deal is different.

Melbourne would have nothing but respect for Power I'd say, this deal won't change that surely.

The key to any negotiation is leverage.

By coming from a place of scarcity and taking what you're given, regardless of value, that's submission of leverage that your other competitors are chalking in mind while scouring your list for targets.

[GVGjr]

The key to any negotiation is leverage.

By coming from a place of scarcity and taking what you're given, regardless of value, that's submission of leverage that your other competitors are chalking in mind while scouring your list for targets.

I'd say it's respect, if you don't respect the people you are dealing with you will look to squeeze everything out of the deal.
We might lose this one but next time out of contract players, their managers and other clubs aren't going to take things for granted.

I get we will probably compromise more than we want to but there also has to be a point where we say stuff it.

[DOG GOD]

Taranto was the barometer for me…also uncontracted

Dunkley is by far a better player at the moment.

Taranto got 12 and 19

If we get 21 and say 36 then that is a very poor result. I don’t care how anyone looks at it.

The reality was that Bris NEVER had the picks to pay what Dunkley is worth and once they traded 15, that was like a smack in the face with a dead fish, giving us the finger in the meantime.

[hujsh]

Taranto was the barometer for me…also uncontracted

Dunkley is by far a better player at the moment.

Taranto got 12 and 19

If we get 21 and say 36 then that is a very poor result. I don’t care how anyone looks at it.

The reality was that Bris NEVER had the picks to pay what Dunkley is worth and once they traded 15, that was like a smack in the face with a dead fish, giving us the finger in the meantime.

I can't see that. Worst case I think we accept future first and 21. I'd like something on top of that but I think Brisbane would at least be willing to part with those 2 picks once it gets to Wednesday arvo. They're moving pieces around to get their points and maybe they'll have some change to throw in that gets us more equal to Tarranto deal on points (not that points is really what matters to us).

[bulldogtragic]

I can't see that. Worst case I think we accept future first and 21. I'd like something on top of that but I think Brisbane would at least be willing to part with those 2 picks once it gets to Wednesday arvo. They're moving pieces around to get their points and maybe they'll have some change to throw in that gets us more equal to Tarranto deal on points (not that points is really what matters to us).

I bet GCS will get a late Future first. Then BL package up a big draft points trade for it. Then two future late picks. That’s how I’d attack it unless a player wants to come to us. They have at least two ‘live’ realistic options if we reject 21 and FF. This way also works for them as they have enough points right now for Ashcroft & Fletcher.

Will thrr we h do it though, that’s the question I have. Probably yes if they think Dunkley is a huge difference next year.

[Topdog]

I honestly still believe there is a heck of a lot of time for things to play out.

Still not crucifying Brisbane as trade period is 2 weeks, no need to get things done in week 1

[GVGjr]

Taranto was the barometer for me…also uncontracted

Dunkley is by far a better player at the moment.

Taranto got 12 and 19

If we get 21 and say 36 then that is a very poor result. I don’t care how anyone looks at it.

The reality was that Bris NEVER had the picks to pay what Dunkley is worth and once they traded 15, that was like a smack in the face with a dead fish, giving us the finger in the meantime.

They won't offer that. They will offer F1 and a F2 (GWS Pick) and I suspect we will try for a swap of picks 30 for 21 this year. We would then ship 21 to Fremantle for Lobb an would try and get a F3 back from Fremantle.

[bulldogtragic]

They won't offer that. They will offer F1 and a F2 (GWS Pick) and I suspect we will try for a swap of picks 30 for 21 this year. We would then ship 21 to Fremantle for Lobb an would try and get a F3 back from Fremantle.

That GWS Future pick went to GCS according to afel and the QLD afel journo.. They have their future second and Geelongs future second. Not good picks.

[GVGjr]

That GWS Future pick went to GCS according to afel and the QLD afel journo.. They have their future second and Geelongs future second. Not good picks.

Thanks, just looked at a report and it appeared they had 2 x F2nd rounders.

[bulldogtragic]

Thanks, just looked at a report and it appeared they had 2 x F2nd rounders.

There was some apparent confusion, but the QLD AFEL journo confirmed it yesterday.

[bulldogtragic]

Sam Landsberger:

Respected recruiters reckon Dunkley is worth a First and Second Rounder.

GCS won’t try a last minute attempt to trade for him

[Boots]

I don’t think the issue here is “leverage” or “reputation”. Brisbane are trying to be too cheeky and have over-committed, making a promise to Dunkley they can’t honour. It sucks a bit for them (both Dunkley and the Lions) that Taranto went for so much, but it doesn’t change the fact they want two father-sons and an elite kid in a trade period where they just don’t have the capital. They are making their choice by preferring those father sons and Gunston.

Yes, there are echoes with Lobb, and it could be argued we have over-promised there too. But that’s ultimately more to do with his contract status. If Dunkley was contracted we’d do the same and nobody would bat an eyelid.

The reason to stand firm on the trade has nothing to do with Sam Power’s reputation, and everything to do with acceptable standards for behaviour in the trade period. Brisbane, and to a lesser extent Dunkley’s manager, shouldn’t be allowed to get away with this sort of shit. No way should Dunks’ manager have gone to a club with nothing to trade when everyone knew what we’d ask for.

If Brisbane can’t pony up and Dunks doesn’t want another year from us, he should go to the PSD not because it’s better dor the club (it’s not), but because it’s better than rewarding shit behaviour by players, managers, and clubs.

[bulldogtragic]

I don’t think the issue here is “leverage” or “reputation”. Brisbane are trying to be too cheeky and have over-committed, making a promise to Dunkley they can’t honour. It sucks a bit for them (both Dunkley and the Lions) that Taranto went for so much, but it doesn’t change the fact they want two father-sons and an elite kid in a trade period where they just don’t have the capital. They are making their choice by preferring those father sons and Gunston.

Yes, there are echoes with Lobb, and it could be argued we have over-promised there too. But that’s ultimately more to do with his contract status. If Dunkley was contracted we’d do the same and nobody would bat an eyelid.

The reason to stand firm on the trade has nothing to do with Sam Power’s reputation, and everything to do with acceptable standards for behaviour in the trade period. Brisbane, and to a lesser extent Dunkley’s manager, shouldn’t be allowed to get away with this sort of shit. No way should Dunks’ manager have gone to a club with nothing to trade when everyone knew what we’d ask for.

If Brisbane can’t pony up and Dunks doesn’t want another year from us, he should go to the PSD not because it’s better dor the club (it’s not), but because it’s better than rewarding shit behaviour by players, managers, and clubs.

Amen. 97.73% of us agree with you.

[Boots]

Amen. 97.73% of us agree with you.

I just voted so it’s now 97.76

[bulldogtragic]

I just voted so it’s now 97.76

Even better!

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

It's not really a lever. They could make it a lever (of sorts) by providing 'free agent' style compensation to any club losing an out of contract player in the PSD. I actually don't understand how you can receive a 'guarantee' of compensation if you lose a Free Agent (who has done their 7 years or whatever) but NO compensation if you lose a player who is out of contract. Setting Dunkley aside, if Tanner Bruhn had wanted to go to North, they could have simply 'walked him' to the PSD and GWS would have received nothing...THAT right now seems really stupid.

And no matter that we don't/can't understand how the AFL work out the compensation for free-agents, it seems completely un-reasonable right now that Dunks could go to NM or Port or to whoever wants to pick him and we receive ZERO when (from my obviously biased perspective) we have done everything RIGHT in these negotiations.

Brisbane saying 'that's all we've got - bad luck' is not a trade position...I can't go to the Range Rover dealership (sorry - not a car person and don't know if this example holds) and demand a car on the basis that I 'WANT IT' and it 'FITS MY NEEDS' but not have enough money to match the number on the sticker...they will send me next door to the 2nd hand car shop...

Absolutely. You aptly describe the absurd unintended consequences of the AFL's attempt to somehow try to remain half-pregnant when it comes to implementing change to the rules, mechanisms and underpinning philosophies around player movement.

I strongly suspect that when they first 'workshopped' the current free agency rules, the AFL and player association definitely foresaw the need to gradually move towards a model more resembling that of a major US professional sport's league. I'm sure they thought that the gradual move would mitigate any supporter backlash to an increase in players changing teams.

I think the time has come to really make the changes required to remove the need for clubs to engage the way they currently must do. It does no one any favours from a professional point of view, and cheapens the whole thing to tabloid drama (no doubt intentionally)

[FrediKanoute]

No it shows we are strong. If we allow clubs to walk over us then this will happen over and over again.

Its going to happen over and over again. The solution is to put a contract in front of someone like Dunkly the year before his deal expires and say sign it or we trade you. That's what Premier/La Liga/Seria A etc do. They would never let a guy like Dunks run down his contract. They would sooner sell him and get some coin back to reinvest than let him walk.

In terms of where we are now taking all of the emotion out of it and doing the best thing for our football club the decision ahs to be to broker a deal and reinvest to those picks. Its got nothing to do with being a strong/uncompromising negotiator.

Essendon could have had Dunks 2 years ago for 2 first rounders and they would probably have got past the Elimination final with him last year. We let him go for nothing then this year and sure it may feel great, but the reality is we have missed on a couple of picks that could turn into something special. Dunks was a pick in the 20's. Turning that into a future first and second is a win. May not be as much of a win as we would like, but its a win.

[FrediKanoute]

I seriously can't believe anyone is subscribing to letting him go for free.
I feel like I've entered the twilight zone.

The time to do the work and be a club that doesn't lose good players was over the past couple of years.

If we take a reasonable but less than perfect deal, it in no way affects future negotiations in any way.

Do you think next year if we have to deal with North they'll go, hey the dogs fold Sam Power is an idiot.

Sweet fancy Moses!

I agree. Pride and principle are fine, but you still need to make sensible decisions.

[hujsh]

Its going to happen over and over again. The solution is to put a contract in front of someone like Dunkly the year before his deal expires and say sign it or we trade you. That's what Premier/La Liga/Seria A etc do. They would never let a guy like Dunks run down his contract. They would sooner sell him and get some coin back to reinvest than let him walk.

In terms of where we are now taking all of the emotion out of it and doing the best thing for our football club the decision ahs to be to broker a deal and reinvest to those picks. Its got nothing to do with being a strong/uncompromising negotiator.

Essendon could have had Dunks 2 years ago for 2 first rounders and they would probably have got past the Elimination final with him last year. We let him go for nothing then this year and sure it may feel great, but the reality is we have missed on a couple of picks that could turn into something special. Dunks was a pick in the 20's. Turning that into a future first and second is a win. May not be as much of a win as we would like, but its a win.

It's an idea with merit but the problem is as soon as we say that we're going to trade Dunkley he decides where he wants to go, picks the worst possible trading partner because he gets off on that, and we find ourselves doing the same dance with did with Dodo a couple years ago. Maybe there's a way to make it work here with a bit more thought than I'm giving it.

[FrediKanoute]

Taranto was the barometer for me…also uncontracted

Dunkley is by far a better player at the moment.

Taranto got 12 and 19

If we get 21 and say 36 then that is a very poor result. I don’t care how anyone looks at it.

The reality was that Bris NEVER had the picks to pay what Dunkley is worth and once they traded 15, that was like a smack in the face with a dead fish, giving us the finger in the meantime.

Yeah, but Taranto chose a club who could deal. Dunks didn't. This is all on him. Don't let anyone forget that. His bullsh*t speach at the B&F nearly made me puke. its not an open market. Hence the reason we should never allow ourselves to lose control of a situation - offer the renewal the year before and if they don't take it trade them whilst you have currency.

[FrediKanoute]

It's an idea with merit but the problem is as soon as we say that we're going to trade Dunkley he decides where he wants to go, picks the worst possible trading partner because he gets off on that, and we find ourselves doing the same dance with did with Dodo a couple years ago. Maybe there's a way to make it work here with a bit more thought than I'm giving it.

It happens all the time in Europe and at the end of the day its why you get no real sense of loyalty belonging. When Gareth Bale wanted to go to Real Madrid he was contracted. Spurs got £100m for him. Sure we then p*sed it away on 6 players worth diddly (Eric Lamela was the honorable exception to the no so magnificent 7), but we didn't let a valuable asset walk. Spurs learnt their lesson from the scumbag Sol Cambell. Would you do it with everyone? No, but gee in hindsight we should have been stronger on Dunks after the sh*t he pulled with Essendon.

[GVGjr]

Brisbane saying 'that's all we've got - bad luck' is not a trade position...I can't go to the Range Rover dealership (sorry - not a car person and don't know if this example holds) and demand a car on the basis that I 'WANT IT' and it 'FITS MY NEEDS' but not have enough money to match the number on the sticker...they will send me next door to the 2nd hand car shop...

From a player perspective they have champagne tastes but wanting to pay a home brew price..

[Grantysghost]

Yeah, but Taranto chose a club who could deal. Dunks didn't. This is all on him. Don't let anyone forget that. His bullsh*t speach at the B&F nearly made me puke. its not an open market. Hence the reason we should never allow ourselves to lose control of a situation - offer the renewal the year before and if they don't take it trade them whilst you have currency.

Vote Fredi FFS!

You make too much sense.

Maybe it’s being used to the PL and the reality of deals, walking away with nothing does nothing but damage your reputation and your self.

We let it get to where it has with Dunks, he then screwed us for a second time picking the Lions.

Would it be nice to be spiteful and send him to Norf, probably but I’d rather draft some good kids and win that way.

When the next deals roll around not one recruiter is going to think back to this deal when broaching the next, these guys are pros not school kids dealing marbles.

What the Tigers chose to pay for Taranto shouldn’t have any say in what the Lions pay for Dunkley. If the Tigers overpaid (which they may have) should every one else? Clubs have to judge worth as they see it. Dunkley is a good player but he’s not the second coming.

Emotion doesn’t come into it and never should.

[Swoop]

The presumption that Dunkley is out of contract, therefore Brisbane hold the upper hand is incorrect. If Brisbane want Dunkley, they must trade for him. There is no scenario where Dunkley ends up at Brisbane without trading for him.

Brisbane have until Wednesday to secure another first rounder and package it up with their future first to get the deal done. This is not impossible, and if they want him, they need to make some more moves to make it happen.

[Grantysghost]

From a player perspective they have champagne tastes but wanting to pay a home brew price..
It was their initial offer, it’s part of the game and doubt very much they thought it would be accepted. I would’ve thought some massaging of that and we would’ve been close to a deal. Not sure why we took such offence, be offended at Dunks for screwing us twice and choosing the Lions.
All we’ve done is piss in Dunkley’s pocket and tell him how wonderful he is whilst taking it all out on the team he chose.
Weve been into a contracted Lobb all year so we are hardly innocent in this regard either.

[jeemak]

It happens all the time in Europe and at the end of the day its why you get no real sense of loyalty belonging. When Gareth Bale wanted to go to Real Madrid he was contracted. Spurs got £100m for him. Sure we then p*sed it away on 6 players worth diddly (Eric Lamela was the honorable exception to the no so magnificent 7), but we didn't let a valuable asset walk. Spurs learnt their lesson from the scumbag Sol Cambell. Would you do it with everyone? No, but gee in hindsight we should have been stronger on Dunks after the sh*t he pulled with Essendon.

I agree with this. We should have shopped Dunkley last year, but probably thought we were in line for a crack again this year which in hindsight was probably something we knew wasn't the case post Christmas - and ultimately too late.

[jeemak]

It was their initial offer, it’s part of the game and doubt very much they thought it would be accepted. I would’ve thought some massaging of that and we would’ve been close to a deal. Not sure why we took such offence, be offended at Dunks for screwing us twice and choosing the Lions.
All we’ve done is piss in Dunkley’s pocket and tell him how wonderful he is whilst taking it all out on the team he chose.
Weve been into a contracted Lobb all year so we are hardly innocent in this regard either.

Let's not conflate the Lobb situation with this one. A deal for Lobb will get done, we're attempting to deal in good faith it appears.

Brisbane's first offer was in bad faith, and then moving on the key pick in the deal was objectively arrogant. You're giving them a free pass for not trying to come up with a reasonable offer.

Walking Dunkley to the preseason draft likely results in Dunkley playing for the Bulldogs again. It's risky, but it's one worth taking in my view.

[Happy Days]

I agree with this. We should have shopped Dunkley last year, but probably thought we were in line for a crack again this year which in hindsight was probably something we knew wasn't the case post Christmas - and ultimately too late.

Why did we know post Christmas? I didn’t know until we lost to Freo the first time.

[FrediKanoute]

Vote Fredi FFS!

You make too much sense.

Maybe it’s being used to the PL and the reality of deals, walking away with nothing does nothing but damage your reputation and your self.

We let it get to where it has with Dunks, he then screwed us for a second time picking the Lions.

Would it be nice to be spiteful and send him to Norf, probably but I’d rather draft some good kids and win that way.

When the next deals roll around not one recruiter is going to think back to this deal when broaching the next, these guys are pros not school kids dealing marbles.

What the Tigers chose to pay for Taranto shouldn’t have any say in what the Lions pay for Dunkley. If the Tigers overpaid (which they may have) should every one else? Clubs have to judge worth as they see it. Dunkley is a good player but he’s not the second coming.

Emotion doesn’t come into it and never should.

Now voted - scraps are better than the moral high ground - we already have that. Everyone knows that Dunks is a scumbag.

[jeemak]

Why did we know post Christmas? I didn’t know until we lost to Freo the first time.

I think internally we'd have been concerned with our preparation.

[GVGjr]

It was their initial offer, it’s part of the game and doubt very much they thought it would be accepted. I would’ve thought some massaging of that and we would’ve been close to a deal. Not sure why we took such offence, be offended at Dunks for screwing us twice and choosing the Lions.
All we’ve done is piss in Dunkley’s pocket and tell him how wonderful he is whilst taking it all out on the team he chose.
Weve been into a contracted Lobb all year so we are hardly innocent in this regard either.

Is the request of two first round picks even late ones unreasonable given what Dunks offers as a player?
Is offering two first round picks but wanting a 2nd round pick and a 3rd rounder and a future 3rd round pick back to get the deal done unreasonable?
Is then promptly trading a first round pick unreasonable when we didn't jump at the 2nd option?

Power was clear going into the week what we expected and yes there would have been a compromise to be had.
He was also clear that we were flexible if it was picks this year or next, a combination of both or even if they could fold a decent player into the mix.
I'm comfortable we have acted in a responsible manner and that we haven't been bloody minded and I'm also sure Brisbane have gone into this with a completely different approach.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Yeah, but Taranto chose a club who could deal. Dunks didn't. This is all on him. Don't let anyone forget that. His bullsh*t speach at the B&F nearly made me puke. its not an open market. Hence the reason we should never allow ourselves to lose control of a situation - offer the renewal the year before and if they don't take it trade them whilst you have currency.

I'm 100% there with you on the club having to own the fact we're in this place. We could've removed all of this by being prudent and either securing his signature end of 2021, or looked to facilitate his preferred move then.

[Grantysghost]

Let's not conflate the Lobb situation with this one. A deal for Lobb will get done, we're attempting to deal in good faith it appears.

Brisbane's first offer was in bad faith, and then moving on the key pick in the deal was objectively arrogant. You're giving them a free pass for not trying to come up with a reasonable offer.

Walking Dunkley to the preseason draft likely results in Dunkley playing for the Bulldogs again. It's risky, but it's one worth taking in my view.

We’ve been into a contracted player, not sure that’s good faith but maybe we have different definitions.

Agree the first offer was average, but isn’t that how you deal in grown up land ? We all knew they had to secure points for Ashcroft so it’s not arrogant it’s practical for them, so there’s a lot of Dunks hate being projected their way.

No way Dunks can come back, this is serious twilight zone vibes or Glenn Close bunny boiler style Dunks stalking ! :) Let the poor bastard go he doesn’t want us.

[GVGjr]

That GWS Future pick went to GCS according to afel and the QLD afel journo.. They have their future second and Geelongs future second. Not good picks.

Just noticed this from Marc McGowan

Josh Dunkley

The Lions are feverishly stockpiling draft points to match certain bids for father-son guns Will Ashcroft and Jaspa Fletcher but that has complicated matters in their pursuit of Dunkley.

Luke Beveridge’s Western Bulldogs were none too impressed with Brisbane’s decision to trade down from 15 to 21 in a deal with the Giants that helped them accumulate more draft picks.

The Dogs still want two first-round picks for out-of-contract Dunkley but the Lions could instead “pony up” 21, a future first-round pick and either theirs or Geelong’s 2023 second-round selection.

Brisbane would likely want something back in that scenario but it’s not even certain that would appease the Bulldogs.

This one has the feel of a deadline-day deal.

BT they may have that extra 2nd rounder which might give us something to work with.

[Grantysghost]

Just noticed this from Marc McGowan

Josh Dunkley

The Lions are feverishly stockpiling draft points to match certain bids for father-son guns Will Ashcroft and Jaspa Fletcher but that has complicated matters in their pursuit of Dunkley.

Luke Beveridge’s Western Bulldogs were none too impressed with Brisbane’s decision to trade down from 15 to 21 in a deal with the Giants that helped them accumulate more draft picks.

The Dogs still want two first-round picks for out-of-contract Dunkley but the Lions could instead “pony up” 21, a future first-round pick and either theirs or Geelong’s 2023 second-round selection.

Brisbane would likely want something back in that scenario but it’s not even certain that would appease the Bulldogs.

This one has the feel of a deadline-day deal.

BT they may have that extra 2nd rounder which might give us something to work with.

That’s a good take. Not sure why we cracked it when they did what everyone knew they had to re points. Odd.

[jeemak]

We’ve been into a contracted player, not sure that’s good faith but maybe we have different definitions.

Agree the first offer was average, but isn’t that how you deal in grown up land ? We all knew they had to secure points for Ashcroft so it’s not arrogant it’s practical for them, so there’s a lot of Dunks hate being projected their way.

No way Dunks can come back, this is serious twilight zone vibes or Glenn Close bunny boiler style Dunks stalking ! :) Let the poor bastard go he doesn’t want us.

Lobb was a contracted player looking to leave, and one who was reportedly advised he would be traded. His club has decided he is required, but kind of isn't, and the two clubs are working it out most likely in a respectful manner.

And no, good negotiating isn't wasting time with bullshit offers like Brisbane's first offer. It's not grown up, it's immature and reflective of hacks having no idea what they're doing.

[GVGjr]

Just noticed this from Marc McGowan

Josh Dunkley

The Lions are feverishly stockpiling draft points to match certain bids for father-son guns Will Ashcroft and Jaspa Fletcher but that has complicated matters in their pursuit of Dunkley.

Luke Beveridge’s Western Bulldogs were none too impressed with Brisbane’s decision to trade down from 15 to 21 in a deal with the Giants that helped them accumulate more draft picks.

The Dogs still want two first-round picks for out-of-contract Dunkley but the Lions could instead “pony up” 21, a future first-round pick and either theirs or Geelong’s 2023 second-round selection.

Brisbane would likely want something back in that scenario but it’s not even certain that would appease the Bulldogs.

This one has the feel of a deadline-day deal.

BT they may have that extra 2nd rounder which might give us something to work with.

OK, it's been a long day and I'll check this again in the morning but what about:

We accept #21 this year, their F1st rounder and their Geelong linked F2nd (late 2nd round)
We give up Dunks, #39 a F3.
We ship #21 to Freo for Lobb and get a F3 back

We go into the draft this year with #11 and #30 and some late picks
Next year we have 2 x 1st rounders and 2 x 2nd rounders in a stronger draft.

I'm sure Brisbane will want more back and maybe we have something else to offer.

[FrediKanoute]

Is the request of two first round picks even late ones unreasonable given what Dunks offers as a player?
Is offering two first round picks but wanting a 2nd round pick and a 3rd rounder and a future 3rd round pick back to get the deal done unreasonable?
Is then promptly trading a first round pick unreasonable when we didn't jump at the 2nd option?

Power was clear going into the week what we expected and yes there would have been a compromise to be had.
He was also clear that we were flexible if it was picks this year or next, a combination of both or even if they could fold a decent player into the mix.
I'm comfortable we have acted in a responsible manner and that we haven't been bloody minded and I'm also sure Brisbane have gone into this with a completely different approach.

In their shoes though, they made an offer for Dunks we rejcted it. They had an offer for pick 15 which gave them draft picks they needed and they took it. The favt that this just put pressure on us is precisely why they did it. Absolutely this was a power play statement by Brissy. Essentially saying - show us your cards mate.

[FrediKanoute]

[QUOTE=GVGjr;813691]OK, it's been a long day and I'll check this again in the morning but what about:

We accept #21 this year, their F1st rounder and their Geelong linked F2nd (late 2nd round)
We give up Dunks, #39 a F3.
We ship #21 to Freo for Lobb and get a F3 back

We go into the draft this year with #11 and #30 and some late picks
Next year we have 2 x 1st rounders and 2 x 2nd rounders in a stronger draft.

I'm sure Brisbane will want more back and maybe we have something else to offer.

[GVGjr]

In their shoes though, they made an offer for Dunks we rejcted it. They had an offer for pick 15 which gave them draft picks they needed and they took it. The favt that this just put pressure on us is precisely why they did it. Absolutely this was a power play statement by Brissy. Essentially saying - show us your cards mate.

Do you really this it was a genuine and somewhat acceptable offer?

[Grantysghost]

Lobb was a contracted player looking to leave, and one who was reportedly advised he would be traded. His club has decided he is required, but kind of isn't, and the two clubs are working it out most likely in a respectful manner.

And no, good negotiating isn't wasting time with bullshit offers like Brisbane's first offer. It's not grown up, it's immature and reflective of hacks having no idea what they're doing.

I don’t pretend to know how this stuff works Jee, but they’ve got a reasonable track record of bringing in very good players.

Cameron, Neale, Daniher for eg and lesser lights like Mccarthy, Lyons, Adams, Ah Chee, Cockatoo; now Dunkley.

I’ve not heard they’re difficult to deal with anywhere and they’ve dealt with many teams.

[jeemak]

Perhaps they didn't have to sweat too much in the Daniher situation, given he was a FA. They gave up 12 for Cameron, and 6, 19 and 55 for Neale plus pick 30. Nothing too difficult there - and seemingly reasonable outcomes at the time for each.

This year they came to us with an expectation that we would compensate for their problems. That's a hack move.

[FrediKanoute]

Do you really this it was a genuine and somewhat acceptable offer?

No. I don't. I think it was an opening gambit and then GWS swooped in with a pick swap type deal, knowing Brisbane needed the points. I think that Brisbane saw the benefit of the trade and figured it would send a message to us that we had better pony up or else they would look at options.

[Go_Dogs]

Dunkley trade still not done?

I wonder if Josh loves or hates this drama.

Hold firm Sam.

[azabob]

It was their initial offer, it’s part of the game and doubt very much they thought it would be accepted. I would’ve thought some massaging of that and we would’ve been close to a deal. Not sure why we took such offence, be offended at Dunks for screwing us twice and choosing the Lions.
All we’ve done is piss in Dunkley’s pocket and tell him how wonderful he is whilst taking it all out on the team he chose.
Weve been into a contracted Lobb all year so we are hardly innocent in this regard either.

GG, if Brisbane thought we wouldn’t accept their offer and expected some “massaging” why did they then go and trade away pick 15 which is a key part of the proposed trade?

[Bulldog Revolution]

Sam Landsberger:

Respected recruiters reckon Dunkley is worth a First and Second Rounder.

GCS won’t try a last minute attempt to trade for him

I understand this thinking but I suspect the anonymous recruiters referenced don’t consider pick 21 or something in that range a real first rounder

In other words, their first rounders are so low they are effectively seconds

[MrMahatma]

Not all first rounders are created equal! A top 10 vs 18 or so. Big diff.

[bulldogtragic]

I understand this thinking but I suspect the anonymous recruiters referenced don’t consider pick 21 or something in that range a real first rounder

In other words, their first rounders are so low they are effectively seconds


Not all first rounders are created equal! A top 10 vs 18 or so. Big diff.

The exact point Sam is/will be making. Summarised in sentence form perfectly.

[jazzadogs]

OK, it's been a long day and I'll check this again in the morning but what about:

We accept #21 this year, their F1st rounder and their Geelong linked F2nd (late 2nd round)
We give up Dunks, #39 a F3.
We ship #21 to Freo for Lobb and get a F3 back

We go into the draft this year with #11 and #30 and some late picks
Next year we have 2 x 1st rounders and 2 x 2nd rounders in a stronger draft.

I'm sure Brisbane will want more back and maybe we have something else to offer.

I think getting 21, future 1st (Bris) and future 2nd (Geel) is a straight trade for Dunkley. We do not need to give them anything back. He is worth two good picks, and instead we are being offered one good pick and two average ones. Why would we give something back and further dilute an already below-standard deal?

I do agree that those picks are likely what we end up with.

[DOG GOD]

I think getting 21, future 1st (Bris) and future 2nd (Geel) is a straight trade for Dunkley. We do not need to give them anything back. He is worth two good picks, and instead we are being offered one good pick and two average ones. Why would we give something back and further dilute an already below-standard deal?

I do agree that those picks are likely what we end up with.

Agree..the fact that they wanted 30 and 39 back is farcical….

[Grantysghost]

GG, if Brisbane thought we wouldn’t accept their offer and expected some “massaging” why did they then go and trade away pick 15 which is a key part of the proposed trade?

My guess is their priority has always been the F/S picks and GWS made them an offer and they took it.

I guess it's a dynamic situation at times.

I think that was an interesting move, I would've thought 15 had to be part of the Dunkley deal but clearly they're backing themselves to get it done and why not with their track record.

[Topdog]

My guess is their priority has always been the F/S picks and GWS made them an offer and they took it.

I guess it's a dynamic situation at times.

I think that was an interesting move, I would've thought 15 had to be part of the Dunkley deal but clearly they're backing themselves to get it done and why not with their track record.

Yeah they have a good track record of getting it done and as a result I'm pretty relaxed about the whole thing.

Their track record is also of doing fair trades

[bulldogtragic]

A deep dive on the opposition strategy and landscape.

They have EIGHT picks with decent draft points (not including Pick 73 which has only 9 Points). Remembering they can only use the Draft Points for the amount of picks commensurate to the amount if list spots they have open. A ban on 'hidden points' was in several years ago, but temporarily lifted for us with Marra. Assuming the AFEL don't waiver, Brisbane need EIGHT spots as a starting position.

So they need 8 List Spots opened up to take all the draft points in. Assuming they move a pick for Gunston this year. Then they need SEVEN vacancies to use all the 7 Draft Picks or lose the draft points.

They have let go Berry, McStay, Robinson and Smith off their primary list. That's THREE more vacancies needed to use all the picks. (Cox and Uosis are rookies)

But they've brought in TWO player potentially, in Gunston & Dunkley. So they only have TWO 'net' vacancies opened up from their Primary List. So they are short FIVE list spots to use all picks/points.

They trade out Mathieson. They are now FOUR spots short of their Draft Picks/Points.

They have enough capital now for Gunston, Ashcroft & Fletcher so trading out Pick 21 with the most amount of Draft Points is a gamble for them. So for the sake of discussion, I will assume the most they could do is upgrade our 30 for 21, but not give the second rounder this year up altogether.

So they need to move on FOUR more players, or perhaps cut three more and trade another one. They need to cut their list further, or, it could make sense to include a player into a possible Dunkley trade. This option, means Brisbane Lions secure all of Dunkley, Gunston, Ashcroft & Fletcher. While they only trade out their Future First. Meaning for 2023 they still have 2 x Future Seconds, 1 Future Third and 2 x Future Fourths. So their 2023 Draft Hand is also very strong. That's an outstanding return for Brisbane and get all four targets this year, and still have 5 picks next year in the bag already without anything for Mathieson included.

So from an overall perspective by adding a player of first round value to the trade, they free up another list spot to help bring in all their good draft point picks, secure Dunkley, Gunston, Ashcroft & Fletcher and maintain 5+ Picks in the 2023 National Draft.

So you can make a case that Brisbane should look at including a player to trade us (of first round value) for numerous reasons, unless they are really going to cut deep into their list. I can only really see Rayner or potentially at a push Lohmann as potential candidates.

If I were Brisbane, i'd look at a player that is surplus to need and at a high-ish current value. Would Ballarat kid Lohmann taken at the end of the First Round last year suffice us if we can't get Rayner? Perhaps with a draft point trade of 30 & 39 for 21 & 55 (or 48 if not used on Guhnston). Then trading Pick 21 to Freo for Lobb with a Future Third coming back.

The end result of this period possibly:

2022: Pick 11, 48 or 55, 69 (or a rookie upgrade from Scott, McNeil, Sweet or Roarke most likely) - & - Jones (Mature KPD), Lobb (Mature KPF/2nd Ruck), Lohmann (small forward in his second year), with sizeable salary cap opened up, and one rookie draft pick or two if Parker isn't re-contracted - OUT: Dunkley, Cordy, and four others off the primary list with four being uncontracted in Schache, Wallis, Martin & Butler. An extra might be Hunter if that eventuates.

2023: First Round x 2, Second Round, Third Round x 2, Fourth Round


To me, Brisbane 'win', Freo 'win', and we secure a mature KPF/2nd Ruck (who kicked 36 goals this year), Small Forward taken from last years First Round (from Ballarat and a future ambassador to be the 'blonde twins' with Weightman) and another 2023 First Rounder as compensation for Dunkley. All assuming we can't use money to pry Rayner out. While having some money to a raid a Free Agent in 2023.

Does this work for you?


Math as it stands:

Lions Current Draft Points: 878, 543, 522, 502, 465, 302, 207, 194 = 3,613 Points

Say Gunston trade for Pick 48, meaning subtract 302 DPS:

3,311 - Draft Points
-2,400 - Ashcroft
------
911 - Draft Points - Fletcher as high as Pick 14 without deficit

[Scraggers]

Brisbane can also go into trade deficit can’t they?

[GVGjr]

Brisbane can also go into trade deficit can’t they?

Yes they can.

[MrMahatma]

Saw Lohmann live on his debut against Pies I think it was. Lively player. Looks a goer. Including him would be fine with me.

I mean, if we rated Lohmann as a first rounder last year, and they then offered us him and 2023 first rounder, that’s the 2 first rounders. Doesn’t necessarily help us with Lobb.

[bornadog]

A deep dive on the opposition strategy and landscape.

They have EIGHT picks with decent draft points (not including Pick 73 which has only 9 Points). Remembering they can only use the Draft Points for the amount of picks commensurate to the amount if list spots they have open. A ban on 'hidden points' was in several years ago, but temporarily lifted for us with Marra. Assuming the AFEL don't waiver, Brisbane need EIGHT spots as a starting position.

So they need 8 List Spots opened up to take all the draft points in. Assuming they move a pick for Gunston this year. Then they need SEVEN vacancies to use all the 7 Draft Picks or lose the draft points.

They have let go Berry, McStay, Robinson and Smith off their primary list. That's THREE more vacancies needed to use all the picks. (Cox and Uosis are rookies)

But they've brought in TWO player potentially, in Gunston & Dunkley. So they only have TWO 'net' vacancies opened up from their Primary List. So they are short FIVE list spots to use all picks/points.

They trade out Mathieson. They are now FOUR spots short of their Draft Picks/Points.

They have enough capital now for Gunston, Ashcroft & Fletcher so trading out Pick 21 with the most amount of Draft Points is a gamble for them. So for the sake of discussion, I will assume the most they could do is upgrade our 30 for 21, but not give the second rounder this year up altogether.

So they need to move on FOUR more players, or perhaps cut three more and trade another one. They need to cut their list further, or, it could make sense to include a player into a possible Dunkley trade. This option, means Brisbane Lions secure all of Dunkley, Gunston, Ashcroft & Fletcher. While they only trade out their Future First. Meaning for 2023 they still have 2 x Future Seconds, 1 Future Third and 2 x Future Fourths. So their 2023 Draft Hand is also very strong. That's an outstanding return for Brisbane and get all four targets this year, and still have 5 picks next year in the bag already without anything for Mathieson included.

So from an overall perspective by adding a player of first round value to the trade, they free up another list spot to help bring in all their good draft point picks, secure Dunkley, Gunston, Ashcroft & Fletcher and maintain 5+ Picks in the 2023 National Draft.

So you can make a case that Brisbane should look at including a player to trade us (of first round value) for numerous reasons, unless they are really going to cut deep into their list. I can only really see Rayner or potentially at a push Lohmann as potential candidates.

If I were Brisbane, i'd look at a player that is surplus to need and at a high-ish current value. Would Ballarat kid Lohmann taken at the end of the First Round last year suffice us if we can't get Rayner? Perhaps with a draft point trade of 30 & 39 for 21 & 55 (or 48 if not used on Guhnston). Then trading Pick 21 to Freo for Lobb with a Future Third coming back.

The end result of this period possibly:

2022: Pick 11, 48 or 55, 69 (or a rookie upgrade from Scott, McNeil, Sweet or Roarke most likely) - & - Jones (Mature KPD), Lobb (Mature KPF/2nd Ruck), Lohmann (small forward in his second year), with sizeable salary cap opened up, and one rookie draft pick or two if Parker isn't re-contracted - OUT: Dunkley, Cordy, and four others off the primary list with three being uncontracted in Schache, Wallis & Butler. The extra might be Hunter if that eventuates.

2023: First Round x 2, Second Round, Third Round x 2, Fourth Round


To me, Brisbane 'win', Freo 'win', and we secure a mature KPF/2nd Ruck (who kicked 36 goals this year), Small Forward taken from last years First Round (from Ballarat and a future ambassador to be the 'blonde twins' with Weightman) and another 2023 First Rounder as compensation for Dunkley. All assuming we can't use money to pry Rayner out. While having some money to a raid a Free Agent in 2023.

Does this work for you?


Math as it stands:

Lions Current Draft Points: 878, 543, 522, 502, 465, 302, 207, 194 = 3,613 Points

Say Gunston trade for Pick 48, meaning subtract 302 DPS:

3,311 - Draft Points
-2,400 - Ashcroft
------
911 - Draft Points - Fletcher as high as Pick 14 without deficit

Wow great analysis. They have to draft three players in - Ashcroft, Fletcher and one other.

[bulldogtragic]

Saw Lohmann live on his debut against Pies I think it was. Lively player. Looks a goer. Including him would be fine with me.

I mean, if we rated Lohmann as a first rounder last year, and they then offered us him and 2023 first rounder, that’s the 2 first rounders. Doesn’t necessarily help us with Lobb.

A draft points trade. Our 30 & 39 (1,075 DPs) to Brisbane for their 21 & 48/55 (1,180/1,085). Doesn't hurt Brisbane really, even at Pick 48 just 105 DPs (= Pick 64), at Pick 55 they actually gain 10 Points). If they wanted our Pick 69 and we weren't going to use it on a 'live pick' but a rookie upgrade (which we can do with a later pick), they can have those 90 DPs and it breaks everything even on Pick 48, and gives them a net gain on Pick 55. They should do it out of 'good will' seeing that it doesn't hurt /actually helps them and helps us a smidge.

[bulldogtragic]

Wow great analysis. They have to draft three players in - Ashcroft, Fletcher and one other.

Without knowing, I suspect they will upgrade some rookies. They will need to have 7 spots open. At least 3 drafted as you say. They might have some 'free hit' academy types later on in this draft. To reduce the need for too many late speculative picks, some rookie upgrades will reduce that eventuality.


The question with a Future First & Player Trade idea is this:

What gets Brisbane closer to the GF/Premiership next year?

Dunkley or, Future First & Rayner/Lohmann etc.

[Happy Days]

Saw Lohmann live on his debut against Pies I think it was. Lively player. Looks a goer. Including him would be fine with me.

I mean, if we rated Lohmann as a first rounder last year, and they then offered us him and 2023 first rounder, that’s the 2 first rounders. Doesn’t necessarily help us with Lobb.

Do we rate him higher than Steve Tiller though?

[bulldogtragic]

Saw Lohmann live on his debut against Pies I think it was. Lively player. Looks a goer. Including him would be fine with me.

I mean, if we rated Lohmann as a first rounder last year, and they then offered us him and 2023 first rounder, that’s the 2 first rounders. Doesn’t necessarily help us with Lobb.

Being that he played for (effectively) our academy team you’d think our scouts and club would have a really good read on him and if it’s something we would want. One way or the other.

[jeemak]

Do we rate him higher than Steve Tiller though?

How we ever let Tiller go is beyond me.

[Scorlibo]

Being that he played for (effectively) our academy team you’d think our scouts and club would have a really good read on him and if it’s something we would want. One way or the other.

Just looking back at some of the pre-draft ratings last year, looks like he was a bit of a bolter, and ended up going pick 20. So I'd guess that it would be unlikely that we rated him higher than the pick 20 where he was taken, and therefore wouldn't rate him more highly than the pick 21 that the Lions hold now.

[Bulldog4life]

Sam Landsberger:

Respected recruiters reckon Dunkley is worth a First and Second Rounder.

GCS won’t try a last minute attempt to trade for him

Means little to me. A first rounder can be 1 or 18. Should be an early, middle or late first rounder. Same with second rounder. Huge difference.

[jeemak]

Means little to me. A first rounder can be 1 or 18. Should be an early, middle or late first rounder. Same with second rounder. Huge difference.

Perhaps only respected recruiters from Brisbane and Essendon were asked.

[Bulldog4life]

No. I don't. I think it was an opening gambit and then GWS swooped in with a pick swap type deal, knowing Brisbane needed the points. I think that Brisbane saw the benefit of the trade and figured it would send a message to us that we had better pony up or else they would look at options.

But we don't need to pony up Fredi. They do.

[bulldogtragic]

Means little to me. A first rounder can be 1 or 18. Should be an early, middle or late first rounder. Same with second rounder. Huge difference.

Yep. Late firsts and seconds infamously include Christian Howard & Jason Tutt. While better placed first and second rounders picks is Bontempelli & Zack Merrett (Crameri). Or Bailey Smith & Rhylee West.

Even two future late firsts is highly speculative (circa 20). That’s the range give or take of Webb, Collins and Hrovat. Sure there’s a Naughton or Richards if the first is high enough, or a Dunkley every now again, but two late firsts (or late first and second as suggested) is far from certain. While Dunkley is a certain thing. Not sure who these recruiters are. Perhaps as Jeemak says, Essendon & Brisbane ones.

[Bulldog4life]

The Salty Bulldog��
@TheSaltyBulldog
·
16h
�� Bulldogs fans, if Brisbane don’t offer two first-round draft picks in exchange for Josh Dunkley, would you let Dunkley walk to the Pre Season Draft and lose him for nothing?
Yes
70.6%
No
29.4%
933 votes
·
7 hours left

[GVGjr]

The Salty Bulldog��
@TheSaltyBulldog
·
16h
�� Bulldogs fans, if Brisbane don’t offer two first-round draft picks in exchange for Josh Dunkley, would you let Dunkley walk to the Pre Season Draft and lose him for nothing?
Yes
70.6%
No
29.4%
933 votes
·
7 hours left

The only problem with these votes on Twitter/FB etc is that some of them may not be Bulldog supporters.
No such problem here on WOOF :)

[Bulldog4life]

The only problem with these votes on Twitter/FB etc is that some of them may not be Bulldog supporters.
No such problem on WOOF :)

True G true.

[bornadog]

True G true.

You know he is a grandson of Wally Donald

[bulldogtragic]

The only problem with these votes on Twitter/FB etc is that some of them may not be Bulldog supporters.
No such problem here on WOOF :)

Why vote with the rest, when you can vote with the best!

[Bulldog4life]

You know he is a grandson of Wally Donald

Who G or Salty Dog?

[bornadog]

Who G or Salty Dog?

haha

[EasternWest]

How we ever let Tiller go is beyond me.

I'll not brook Tiller trash talk. My guy.

[bulldogtragic]

Fox Sports ‘verdict’:

Verdict: Bulldogs receive Pick 21, future first-round pick and future second-round pick – Lions receive Dunkley, Pick 29 and future third-round pick.


In effect: 1st, 2nd & second round upgrade - for - Dunkley and Third. Which is really just one future first rounder circa pick 16-20 (as the upgrades cancel each other out).

Less than the 1st & 2nd respected recruiters Sam Landsberger quoted.

[bulldogtragic]

We don’t have pick 29. Not sure they mean Pick 39.

They have Lobb to us for Pick 30.

????

That changes their verdict to a smidge over one Future First Rounder.

It finishing up Pick 11, 21, 65, Lobb, Jones & Future First

[jeemak]

I'll not brook Tiller trash talk. My guy.

Cool your jets pussycat. I was a Tiller man through and through, was devo he didn't get more opportunity.

[jeemak]

Fox Sports ‘verdict’:

Verdict: Bulldogs receive Pick 21, future first-round pick and future second-round pick – Lions receive Dunkley, Pick 29 and future third-round pick.


In effect: 1st, 2nd & second round upgrade - for - Dunkley and Third. Which is really just one future first rounder circa pick 16-20 (as the upgrades cancel each other out).

Less than the 1st & 2nd respected recruiters Sam Landsberger quoted.

The vested interests at this time of year are desperate for any deal to be done, because of the copy/ content it would deliver.

[bulldogtragic]

The vested interests at this time of year are desperate for any deal to be done, because of the copy/ content it would deliver.

You mean their story where we trade them a pick we don’t have isn’t quality sports journalism? I’m confused.

[ratsmac]

Fox Sports ‘verdict’:

Verdict: Bulldogs receive Pick 21, future first-round pick and future second-round pick – Lions receive Dunkley, Pick 29 and future third-round pick.


In effect: 1st, 2nd & second round upgrade - for - Dunkley and Third. Which is really just one future first rounder circa pick 16-20 (as the upgrades cancel each other out).

Less than the 1st & 2nd respected recruiters Sam Landsberger quoted.
How does ggf sound!

Do they think we are that stupid. Send us a real offer or we both miss out. Rayner is a starting point and we'll work it out from there

[GVGjr]

Fox Sports ‘verdict’:

Verdict: Bulldogs receive Pick 21, future first-round pick and future second-round pick – Lions receive Dunkley, Pick 29 and future third-round pick.


In effect: 1st, 2nd & second round upgrade - for - Dunkley and Third. Which is really just one future first rounder circa pick 16-20 (as the upgrades cancel each other out).

Less than the 1st & 2nd respected recruiters Sam Landsberger quoted.

I think they've been reading some of our thoughts on WOOF. It might be around the mark if it's going to land us Lobb and I think we could get something else from Freo coming back to us as well.

[bornadog]

We don’t have pick 29. Not sure they mean Pick 39.

They have Lobb to us for Pick 30.

????

That changes their verdict to a smidge over one Future First Rounder.

It finishing up Pick 11, 21, 65, Lobb, Jones & Future First

I bet that is all they will offer, but will we take it?

[GVGjr]

OK here is a different take on what we could do with the Dunkley trade. A bit of a circuit breaker.

Would 3 x 2nd round picks be enough? I know the initial reaction is no way but I think it gives us some opportunities especially after reading suggestions we should give picks #30 and #39 or Lobb.

So it's essentially Dunkley and a F3 for pick #21 and 2 x F2nd rounders.

Pick #21 would be used to get the Lob deal done and I would be asking Freo for something else back perhaps a F3.
This means we still have picks #30 and #39 to be used in this years draft because we need to bring some new players in and we would have 2 additional 2nd rounders for next year.

The alternative is some of the other trades that have been suggested.

It's going to be a hard sell for supporters now doubt but I think it stacks up better than a F1 and F2.
It's the extra pick after the Lobb trade that appeals to me.

[chef]

OK here is a different take on what we could do with the Dunkley trade. A bit of a circuit breaker.

Would 3 x 2nd round picks be enough? I know the initial reaction is no way but I think it gives us some opportunities especially after reading suggestions we should give picks #30 and #39 or Lobb.

So it's essentially Dunkley and a F3 for pick #21 and 2 x F2nd rounders.

Pick #21 would be used to get the Lob deal done and I would be asking Freo for something else back perhaps a F3.
This means we still have picks #30 and #39 to be used in this years draft because we need to bring some new players in and we would have 2 additional 2nd rounders for next year.

The alternative is some of the other trades that have been suggested.

It's going to be a hard sell for supporters now doubt but I think it stacks up better than a F1 and F2.
It's the extra pick after the Lobb trade that appeals to me.

Why wouldn't we get that future 1st off them?

[Scraggers]

My preference would be a player (Rayner my preferred) and future round one pick. But I don’t think it will be that simple; so … pick 21 and future first round plus two future second round and we will give back future 3rd round.

If we want to include Lobb in this conversation, we will give then pick 30 and a future fourth. He is not worth more than that

[bulldogtragic]

OK here is a different take on what we could do with the Dunkley trade. A bit of a circuit breaker.

Would 3 x 2nd round picks be enough? I know the initial reaction is no way but I think it gives us some opportunities especially after reading suggestions we should give picks #30 and #39 or Lobb.

So it's essentially Dunkley and a F3 for pick #21 and 2 x F2nd rounders.

Pick #21 would be used to get the Lob deal done and I would be asking Freo for something else back perhaps a F3.
This means we still have picks #30 and #39 to be used in this years draft because we need to bring some new players in and we would have 2 additional 2nd rounders for next year.

The alternative is some of the other trades that have been suggested.

It's going to be a hard sell for supporters now doubt but I think it stacks up better than a F1 and F2.
It's the extra pick after the Lobb trade that appeals to me.


No. That’s a horrible outcome. Just horrible.

Brisbane or us, should be rolling the mid range picks to GCS future late first which I expect them to acquire. Then the offer is two future picks 16-20. Not great, but that’ll do if we can get a player we want.

Edit:

I’d do Lobb and Future 4th for 30.

Package up those three seconds to GCS for their late Future First and something (if Lions don’t do the work).

Then it’s Pick 11, 39, 69, Jones, Lobb & 2 x Future Firsts.

[GVGjr]

Why wouldn't we get that future 1st off them?

We can but we lose out on a pick. We need #21 for Lobb and it's #21 and a F1 for Dunks.

[Happy Days]

So we’d get less for Dunks and pay more for Lobb?

That’s a capitulation.

[Topdog]

I'd want Power sacked if we did that deal. Future 2nd rounders from Brisbane and Fremantle are likely going to be in the late 30s.

Late 1sts are pretty bad but I can accept that they dont have much else to play with, late 2nds, they can go and ....

[bulldogtragic]

Mofra mentioned Starcevich as a maybe out.

What’s is he and Pick 21 worth in an upgrade into the first this year? Woukd Sydney, GWS or Collingwood be interested? (Lions on trading 14-18 to us?

[Happy Days]

Starcevich is a good defender who is maybe a little overhyped by virtue of his position being one for the I Am Very Smart And You’re Watching The Game Wrong crowd, and also that he doesn’t have to play on Charlie Cameron. But him and the future first is probably enough.

[chef]

We can but we lose out on a pick. We need #21 for Lobb and it's #21 and a F1 for Dunks.

We shouldn't be the ones accommodating Brisbane/Dunks to get this done.

If Power doesn't stick to his 2 firsts guns from his stand last week I'd hope we move him on. They want him that badly they should be paying our price.

[bornadog]

We shouldn't be the ones accommodating Brisbane/Dunks to get this done.

If Power doesn't stick to his 2 firsts guns from his stand last week I'd hope we move him on. They want him that badly they should be paying our price.

Two firsts is what we want - I agree. However, what is the alternative we would accept?

I think a future first and a player must be involved plus pick 21

[chef]

Two firsts is what we want - I agree. However, what is the alternative we would accept?

I think a future first and a player must be involved plus pick 21

Alternative is future 1st and a player valued around a first rounder.

Or we honestly tell Dunks you can either go in the PSD and try your luck or extend a year and we'll try again next spring.

[Grantysghost]

Two firsts is what we want - I agree. However, what is the alternative we would accept?

I think a future first and a player must be involved plus pick 21

Future first and pick 21 does it for me.

Clearly prefer a pick lower than 21 if possible, so we need to hold for that but if that's legit all they can conjure then sadly that's where it sits.

[azabob]

Starcevich is a good defender who is maybe a little overhyped by virtue of his position being one for the I Am Very Smart And You’re Watching The Game Wrong crowd, and also that he doesn’t have to play on Charlie Cameron. But him and the future first is probably enough.

Starcevich automatically becomes best 22 and in a position we are desperate for. A midsized defender who can defend.

[GVGjr]

Starcevich automatically becomes best 22 and in a position we are desperate for. A midsized defender who can defend.

I can't see any scenario where they offer him as part of a deal.

[bulldogtragic]

Who’d have thought, Cooney is close:

1148

Just not Robertson as player. Melbourne probably wants a bite more.

[GVGjr]

Who’d have thought, Cooney is close:

1148

Just not Robertson as player. Melbourne probably wants a bite more.

He's not bad at it. The fact that he has looked at the total picture is a good thing but there would be some late picks swaps to balance it all out.

[bulldogtragic]

He's not bad at it. The fact that he has looked at the total picture is a good thing but there would be some lat picks swaps to balance it all out.

Yep, some tinkering for sure but looks pretty solid. With an authority on here mentioning Dev not likely to Victoria, I can only guess others names would be Rayner or Lohmann as a full into that trade.

A first, a player we want & Lobb is enough for Power to take it I’d think.

[GVGjr]

Yep, some tinkering for sure but looks pretty solid. With an authority on here mentioning Dev not likely to Victoria, I can only guess others names would be Rayner or Lohmann as a full into that trade.

A first, a player we want & Lobb is enough for Power to take it I’d think.

We won't get get Dev and if it's to be any player it might be Lohmann (still unlikely) but in the scenario that Cooney suggests Brisbane would demand a lot more coming back. They can't lose pick 21 without getting something back to cover points.

[bulldogtragic]

We won't get get Dev and if it's to be any player it might be Lohmann (still unlikely) but in the scenario that Cooney suggests Brisbane would demand a lot more coming back. They can't lose pick 21 without getting something back to cover points.

Yep. Depending on the quality of player I’d throw them back 30 or 39, but look to upgrade 69 into 56 our way, depending on the player.

Then it’s Dunkley & 30/39, 69?

For First, Good BL player, Lobb and upgrade 69>56?

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Who’d have thought, Cooney is close:

1148

Just not Robertson as player. Melbourne probably wants a bite more.

It's actually a pretty good effort.

[westbulldog]

I think we should stop singing to Brisbane's or anyone else's tune and also stop trying to accommodate Dunkley, he gets what WE decide he gets and we get what is best for the Dogs.

[bulldogtragic]

It's actually a pretty good effort.

Yeah, I usually pay not attention to anything he says. But whoever did this for him has argued a solid foundation for such a trade. It needs work as my above post, but all clubs could do a lot worse than look at it as a starting point.

[bornadog]

Yeah, I usually pay not attention to anything he says. But whoever did this for him has argued a solid foundation for such a trade. It needs work as my above post, but all clubs could do a lot worse than look at it as a starting point.

So in effect we lose Dunkley and the two first rounders we wanted are replaced with 1 x F1, and Lobb, plus Deven (or a player)

[bulldogtragic]

So in effect we lose Dunkley and the two first rounders we wanted are replaced with 1 x F1, and Lobb, plus Deven (or a player)

Yep, that trade suggestion is, for Dunkley:

First Round Pick
Player of First Round Pick Value
Rory Lobb


We probably need to do some points work to offset the Pick 21 going out from Brisbane. But that shouldn’t be too bad overall.

[Bulldog4life]

Who’d have thought, Cooney is close:

1148

Just not Robertson as player. Melbourne probably wants a bite more.

I like Robertson.

[1eyedog]

It's Monday and not one player has been even hinted at being put up for trade. Can't see a player being offered and I'm now subject to the very real proposition of getting bent over by this Dunkley trade.

It's pretty poor from a Premiership player, a B&F and a player who for all intents and purposes has a strong relationship with the coach.

Dunkley really is giving zero f**%$.

[Mantis]

It's Monday and not one player has been even hinted at being put up for trade. Can't see a player being offered and I'm now subject to the very real proposition of getting bent over by this Dunkley trade.

It's pretty poor from a Premiership player, a B&F and a player who for all intents and purposes has a strong relationship with the coach.

Dunkley really is giving zero f**%$.

Why is it Dunkley’s fault?

In the current landscape he has every right to nominate the club he wants to move to and then it’s up to the 2 clubs to sort through the trade.

The fault should sit with the following 3 parties:

Player manager
Brisbane
Western Bulldogs

It seems our asking price isn’t aligned with what Brisbane wants to pay or what the player manager deems fair.

[hujsh]

It's Monday and not one player has been even hinted at being put up for trade. Can't see a player being offered and I'm now subject to the very real proposition of getting bent over by this Dunkley trade.

It's pretty poor from a Premiership player, a B&F and a player who for all intents and purposes has a strong relationship with the coach.

Dunkley really is giving zero f**%$.


Why is it Dunkley’s fault?

In the current landscape he has every right to nominate the club he wants to move to and then it’s up to the 2 clubs to sort through the trade.

The fault should sit with the following 3 parties:

Player manager
Brisbane
Western Bulldogs

It seems our asking price isn’t aligned with what Brisbane wants to pay or what the player manager deems fair.

Very rarely a player will look after the club they come from. It' a show of loyalty because in some ways it's harming the success of your new home but Jackson has shown it still can happen.

Dunkley is not such a character. He's a character that nominates Essendon for their 'professionalism'. He shields a bloke, who on the balance of evidence performed some heinous acts, because it's in his interests to do so. Doesn't really think about the people who made the claims. Best you can say for him is that as a person he's very average and uninteresting. Thinking about himself and his immediate family but having no real perspective beyond that. All he seems to have to offer is his sporting prowess, so it's best he get what he can now while he still can.

That said I expect to hear him on Channel 7 in 10 years time. He'd fit right in.

[azabob]

I can't see any scenario where they offer him as part of a deal.

If Mofra said and BT said; never say never.

[kruder]

Dev Roberston is exactly the type of player they should be willing to give up if Dunkley comes in. Obviously Dev doesn't necessarily have to come to us but he does need to want to play for another club I guess that's the challenge.

[1eyedog]

Why is it Dunkley’s fault?

In the current landscape he has every right to nominate the club he wants to move to and then it’s up to the 2 clubs to sort through the trade.

The fault should sit with the following 3 parties:

Player manager
Brisbane
Western Bulldogs

It seems our asking price isn’t aligned with what Brisbane wants to pay or what the player manager deems fair.

Cause it makes me feel better to blame him.