I think trading is the work of the devil, but just for the sake of it ...

[Sockeye Salmon]

Let's get one thing clear, right off the bat, I hate trading.

How do you plead with one guy to re-sign out of loyalty while at the same time you're trying to shaft his mate for the best deal you can?

You try to build a team environment and insist on every bloke bleeding for the cause, "oh, except you, we got offered pick 22 and we only thought you were worth pick 35 so bugger off."


There are some exceptions.

You trade a bloke out when:

* He is fringe and not getting much of a go and not likely to - Shane Birss
* The bloke wants out and you're not dealing with Hawthorn - Nathan Brown

You trade blokes in when:

* You can get hold of a gun dirt cheap - Aker
* You can fill a gaping hole dirt cheap - Ben Hudson
* You can give a lifeline to a kid with talent who isn't getting a go where he is - Tim Callan



Which brings me to my point (eventually).

If real life was a game of Supercoach, I would trade Daniel Cross.

This might surprise a few people, considering I named my son after him, but purely from an operational perspective he is superfluous. There's no point trading duds because you don't get anything for them (even if you package a few of them up together regardless of what they think on BF) and Cross would still have some very good value.

The media talk about how quick we are but I think it's a falacy, we have a number of plodders - like Cross and Gia - and a few of our better young mids aren't real quick either - Higgins and Ward.

We are pretty well off for inside players, Ward has come on and Reid will be best 22 next year as well, both are ball winners.

Cross is 26 (27 next March) so is the perfect age for it. I think he will drop off the perch pretty quickly as he gets older, one decent injury could stop him from training for a while and fitness is his major weapon.

I'd want a draft pick or two and they would need to be decent.

Most clubs are going to drop away over the next few years as players fall away because of injury, form or age and with the draft concession coming sides will not be as easily able to re-stock.

If we went into the draft loaded with a top 10 pick, a top 20 pick and a top 30-ish pick we could re-stock when others can't. With Wallis and Libba next year we could almost avoid the two years of missing out on the draft altogether.

[mighty_west]

It is an interesting debate SS, i guess at the end of the day, it's club first, player second, but i do agree with saying, how can you sweat on players being loyal when your trying to shaft others for whats seen as a best fit for the club.

In regards to Crossy, if you asked me this time last year, i'd say no way known should we trade a player who is so dedicated, so tough, has never shirked an issue in his life, in fact sometimes you wonder how he escapes such dangerous situations he outs himself into going back against the play.

However, right now, as you stated, we have younger players stepping up, Crossy also was my fave to take over the captaincy role one day, i reckon now both Boyd & Higgins have passed him, Crossy has also admitted himself that he was oh so close to leaving in 2003 due to a lack of opportunities, although you get the feeling he is well & truly happy with being a Bulldog, he might fit into the "let's not shaft our players" category.

The great thing Rocket has brought in regards to trading is common sense, and both ways as well, players like Birss, Ray, Power all requesting their choice of clubs, it's also used to free up cap space by dishing off dead wood that might get an opportunity elsewhere - Bowden, Rawlings.

We also no longer bend over and take it up the you know what like we did during the Rhode / Newport days...

We seem to go into the trade period with a friendly & no bullshit attitude, and clubs aren't scared to trade with us, Aker, Callan, even McDougall came to us for next to nothing, which as it ended up, was about what he was really worth, none of this Tim Boyle for Shaun Higgins crap!

[Mantis]

Agree with that call SS, if it wasn't Cross it could be Boyd.

Both are highly respected (and damn good) players at our club, but for the sound reasoning you gave I think one of these 2 is expendable.

Now in 3 weeks time when we are both still drunk from celebrating a famous GF victory we can look back and laugh, but if we were to fall over before then I think we have to look at improving the list, and trading is one way we can achieve that.

[comrade]

I love Crossy, but I’d do it in a heart beat.

[bulldogtragic]

What clubs would look at Crossy and what would they be willing to part with.

[comrade]

What clubs would look at Crossy and what would they be willing to part with.

I think Sydney might be interested - we know they hate bottoming out and love in and under types. Pick 6

Port Adelaide needs some backbone. Pick 8

2 picks in the first round of the last semi-uncompromised draft could have huge (positive) ramifications in the next few years, if we get it right.

[Rocket Science]

Not averse to the concept of trading Cross to address needs elsewhere, but I'm not necessarily sold on the prospect that "he will drop off the perch pretty quickly as he gets older". He's been a remarkably durable player in the Scott West mould, who clearly looks after himself, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he likewise ploughed on productively into his early 30's.

My only other issue is, while the ambition and timing of the proposal appeals, if Crossy's dealt, we'd really want to nail those draft picks.

[Desipura]

How does this sound TCD? Can we please wait until the end of the season before we consider trading our favourite sons?:D

[The Coon Dog]

How does this sound TCD? Can we please wait until the end of the season before we consider trading our favourite sons?:D
:rolleyes: You can do much better than that.

[Mofra]

I'm going to have to disagree. Strongly.

High draft picks are no guarantee of a gun.
Put simply, would you trade Crossy for:

a. Jordan McMahon?
b. Sam Power?
c. Tim Walsh?

and to make things interesting:
d. Farren Ray?
e. Jarryd Grant?
f. Tom Williams?

These are some of our high picks from the last few years. I place Cross' contribution to the team above every one of these players
With the exception of Cooney & Higgins, Cross is ahead of all of our early picks over the past 10-15 years.

This is before you talk about the loyalty to player issues - fair enough to trade a bloke out of necessity because there is something on offer, but to rip out a member of the leadership group because of our opinion of trading currency doesn't strike me as a particularly effective way to built group morale, remembering that one of the principles of leadership is that "morale is a focrce-multiplier".

[LostDoggy]

I would be more worried about the impact of trading a very popular player would have on the playing group!! It cannot be understated that a happy playing group is key to good results!!

[Bulldog Revolution]

If real life was a game of Supercoach, I would trade Daniel Cross.



This for me is the key lin Sockeyes post

If were to trade Cross what would we receive? - realistically a second or third rounder. Its pretty similar to Sydney looking at trading Jude Bolton a few years a go. Cross wont return a high enough pick to justify it, and given that he is the embodiment of everything a successful club wants in terms of professionalism, application and commitment it makes no sense.

[The Coon Dog]

I would be more worried about the impact of trading a very popular player would have on the playing group!! It cannot be understated that a happy playing group is key to good results!!

Too true WM, one only has too look back at Monty going to Port.

[bulldogtragic]

This for me is the key lin Sockeyes post

If were to trade Cross what would we receive? - realistically a second or third rounder. Its pretty similar to Sydney looking at trading Jude Bolton a few years a go. Cross wont return a high enough pick to justify it, and given that he is the embodiment of everything a successful club wants in terms of professionalism, application and commitment it makes no sense.
I'm towards you a little here.

I think we tend to overrate our players. Whilst Cross is a very good players, pick 6 or 8 seems exceptionally high. I wouldn't put money down on that happening.

[LostDoggy]

I'm going to have to disagree. Strongly.

High draft picks are no guarantee of a gun.
Put simply, would you trade Crossy for:

a. Jordan McMahon?
b. Sam Power?
c. Tim Walsh?

and to make things interesting:
d. Farren Ray?
e. Jarryd Grant?
f. Tom Williams?

These are some of our high picks from the last few years. I place Cross' contribution to the team above every one of these players
With the exception of Cooney & Higgins, Cross is ahead of all of our early picks over the past 10-15 years.

This is before you talk about the loyalty to player issues - fair enough to trade a bloke out of necessity because there is something on offer, but to rip out a member of the leadership group because of our opinion of trading currency doesn't strike me as a particularly effective way to built group morale, remembering that one of the principles of leadership is that "morale is a focrce-multiplier".

I agree with every word of this

Drafting is not an exact science. The risk in giving away an established player against the success/failure factor just doesn't weigh up

Sockeye has put forward the downside against Cross. What about the fact he is a club B&F and there is no reason to suggest he won't repeat that?

[LostDoggy]

Using Cross as an example is a bit emotive for most supporters who love the players and would hate to see them go. Nicky Winmar going to us would have been emotional for Saints fans for example. A lot of supporters loved Nathan Brown and are still not over it.

Putting emotions aside I think that player movement is bound to be more prevalent in the coming years and us as supporters need to get use to it.

If a trade can be done to secure the pick/picks of players in this years draft we wish to secure then I would go for it. We don't just trade for better picks we actually target a pick that we think we need to secure the player we want in the draft. This is exceptable for me as if we have holes to plug then we need to plug them.

As far as the playing group goes I doubt they will be to upset about a player leaving. Sure players like Cross are more popular with us fans but a player like Ray could be just as popular with the playing group as Cross is and I did not see a mass up rise from him leaving and nor would I expect anything to happen from professional footballers. The NRL trade players every year with top players moving and it does not stop the players performing week in week out for there clubs.

For me the success of the Club comes first. Could not care who we trade as long as we improve our Club.

Just as an aside. How would you rate the players on our list in terms of draft picks. For example I would rate the following on our list. Taking into account potential and age.

Higgins - Two first round picks.
Gia - Early third round pick.
Reid - Second round plus Third round.

[The Coon Dog]

For me the success of the Club comes first. Could not care who we trade as long as we improve our Club.

Don't disagree with you per se, just a bit cautious as if it isn't handled correctly it lingers, festers & ultimately destroys the fabric of the club.

I'm all for improving our list, but in a humane manner.

I understand players can be drafted & end up anywhere, but once you get them to your club you hope they will be loyal. As supporters we preach the value of loyalty to our players. Its a two way street.

[LostDoggy]

As far as the playing group goes I doubt they will be to upset about a player leaving. Sure players like Cross are more popular with us fans but a player like Ray could be just as popular with the playing group as Cross is and I did not see a mass up rise from him leaving and nor would I expect anything to happen from professional footballers. The NRL trade players every year with top players moving and it does not stop the players performing week in week out for there clubs.

.

There is a fundamental difference between Ray, who left of his own accord or his Manager's in order to better himself and Cross who we are talking about discarding in favour of a lottery to replace him with a draft pick.

This doesn't even satisfy the theory of trading for need.

[LostDoggy]

I'd want a draft pick or two and they would need to be decent.
I think thats where the argument breaks down a little. Unless we get another Richmond again, I doubt we will get good value for Cross in a trade.

Unless you have some examples (apart from Judd) of recent trades to prove otherwise I doubt we will get a good draft pick or two for a midfielder. Nobody in the football world doubts his tenacity and fitness but just about everyone knows his kicking isn't up to scratch.

[LostDoggy]

Don't disagree with you per se, just a bit cautious as if it isn't handled correctly it lingers, festers & ultimately destroys the fabric of the club.

I'm all for improving our list, but in a humane manner.

I understand players can be drafted & end up anywhere, but once you get them to your club you hope they will be loyal. As supporters we preach the value of loyalty to our players. Its a two way street.

I hear what you saying. I just cannot for the life of me remember any player leaving and the players be so upset it caused the very fabric of the club to fall apart.

Even when plugger went to the Swans I believe the Saints moved on fairly quickly as a club. Maybe not the supporters but the club seemed to cope quite well.

[comrade]

I'm going to have to disagree. Strongly.

High draft picks are no guarantee of a gun.
Put simply, would you trade Crossy for:

a. Jordan McMahon?
b. Sam Power?
c. Tim Walsh?

and to make things interesting:
d. Farren Ray?
e. Jarryd Grant?
f. Tom Williams?

These are some of our high picks from the last few years. I place Cross' contribution to the team above every one of these players
With the exception of Cooney & Higgins, Cross is ahead of all of our early picks over the past 10-15 years.

This is before you talk about the loyalty to player issues - fair enough to trade a bloke out of necessity because there is something on offer, but to rip out a member of the leadership group because of our opinion of trading currency doesn't strike me as a particularly effective way to built group morale, remembering that one of the principles of leadership is that "morale is a focrce-multiplier".

Mofra you make some good points, as always.

Champion Data statistics will tell you that there is a massive difference between first round picks and every other pick in the draft. This is probably stating the obvious but it also suggests that drafting is becoming more refined with each passing year.

The 2009 draft in particular is shallow – a large portion of 17 year olds are ineligible – to put that in perspective, about 30% of players drafted last year wouldn’t be eligible this year.

Like all drafts though, the value is at the top.

Mofra, you’re obviously not a fan of trading proven players for draft picks but we’ve never been in a position where the next 2/3/4 etc drafts are completely compromised, with access to most of the best kids essentially cut off.

Considering we only took 3 kids in a bumper draft last year (too light on IMO), we’re banking on our rookie recruiting manager to strike gold with a late first rounder and then with picks 30+, 45+, 60+. That’s a tough job in any year, but in 2009 there will be kids drafted who wouldn’t have got a look in, in previous years.

If our late first rounder doesn’t come on and the battlers we pick up with picks 45+ end up as uber-duds, we’re in trouble, with GC coming in.

By putting up a marquee name like Cross, and securing a top 10 draft pick, it gives the recruiting team an opportunity to get the absolute maximum value from this draft, help ride out the GC inclusion and flourish if we get it right.

And if drafting is too risky, we could also use the top 10 pick to snare a proven player to fill a deficiency on our list.

At the end of the day, we all love Crossy, but there are stormy times coming up for all clubs and fortune favours the brave.

Imagine if the kid we snare at pick 8 is the next Selwood or Rich (or we use the pick to snare a Pavlich or Roughead).

[LostDoggy]

putting up a marquee name like Cross, and securing a top 10 draft pick, it gives the recruiting team an opportunity to get the absolute maximum value from this draft, help ride out the GC inclusion and flourish if we get it right.

And if drafting is too risky, we could also use the top 10 pick to snare a proven player to fill a deficiency on our list.

At the end of the day, we all love Crossy, but there are stormy times coming up for all clubs and fortune favours the brave.

Imagine if the kid we snare at pick 8 is the next Selwood or Rich (or we use the pick to snare a Pavlich or Roughead).

I'm not sure I can believe it possible that trading Cross will get us a top 10 pick. He might be worth in it our eyes but I doubt that in the eyes of one of 15 other clubs.

[comrade]

I'm not sure I can believe it possible that trading Cross will get us a top 10 pick. He might be worth in it our eyes but I doubt that in the eyes of one of 15 other clubs.

You may be right, but without getting sucked into the BF habit of putting together far fetched trade packages, I’d suggest that adding our third rounder could get the job done.

What do you think?

[LostDoggy]

You may be right, but without getting sucked into the BF habit of putting together far fetched trade packages, I’d suggest that adding our third rounder could get the job done.

What do you think?
Probably not.
They tend hang on to those first rounders unless its a good KP.

[LostDoggy]

There is a fundamental difference between Ray, who left of his own accord or his Manager's in order to better himself and Cross who we are talking about discarding in favour of a lottery to replace him with a draft pick.

This doesn't even satisfy the theory of trading for need.

What your not taking into account is the fact that most clubs would not give us a high draft pick for probably 95% of our list. That is because they see the potential in those picks to be the next Buddy Franklin. While you point out its a lottery it works both ways. If a recruiter says to Eade this guy here is the next Franklin. Eade would then work out what we need to secure that guy. If the recruiter thinks he would go around 15 to 20 in the draft then we would need to get 14 or below to ensure we get this guy. What players we then have in surplus that could score this pick then would be put on the trade table. Then its all about how the other clubs value there picks V's whats on offer.

[LostDoggy]

I'm trying to look up some trade history. Just quickly, at pick 34 the aker trade was a steal. Did want to leave and Brisbane didn't want him but his credentials were better than Cross now.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I actually buggered up my OP because I left out one of the main reasons for writing it in first place.


We currently have Hargrave, Hahn & Gilbee born in '81 and Boyd, Morris, Lake, Gia and Murphy born in '82 (Cross was born in '83) so that's nearly half our best 22 that we will lose in quick succession. By trading out one now you are also reducing your vulnerability of a mass retirement by 1 player.

[comrade]

I'm trying to look up some trade history. Just quickly, at pick 34 the aker trade was a steal. Did want to leave and Brisbane didn't want him but his credentials were better than Cross now.

Completely different though, ES.

Aker was on the nose across the industry and had nominated us as his preferred destination. We had Brisbane by the short and curlies.

Cross is in his prime as an AFL footballer, is under contract and is a B&F winner in a prelim year. I think he holds considerable value, particularly to a club that is in dire need of midfield grunt (Port Adelaide for example).

[LostDoggy]

I'm trying to look up some trade history. Just quickly, at pick 34 the aker trade was a steal. Did want to leave and Brisbane didn't want him but his credentials were better than Cross now.

Age comes into the Aker trade. Also time out of football plus nagging hamstrings.

[comrade]

I actually buggered up my OP because I left out one of the main reasons for writing it in first place.


We currently have Hargrave, Hahn & Gilbee born in '81 and Boyd, Morris, Lake, Gia and Murphy born in '82 (Cross was born in '83) so that's nearly half our best 22 that we will lose in quick succession. By trading out one now you are also reducing your vulnerability of a mass retirement by 1 player.

If we’re going trade crazy, I’d chuck Hahn’s name up as well for the exact reason you posted.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I'm not sure I can believe it possible that trading Cross will get us a top 10 pick. He might be worth in it our eyes but I doubt that in the eyes of one of 15 other clubs.

It would all come down to what the recruiters believe the value of the draft is. WC (pick 5), Port (pick 8) and Hawthorn (pick 9) have all said their first rounders are on the table.

For every Joel Selwood there's 10 Sam Power's.

[comrade]

For every Joel Selwood there's 10 Sam Power's.

Or David Trotter's.

[LostDoggy]

It would all come down to what the recruiters believe the value of the draft is. WC (pick 5), Port (pick 8) and Hawthorn (pick 9) have all said their first rounders are on the table.

For every Joel Selwood there's 10 Sam Power's.

Do any of those clubs need a Cross type and do they value Cross pick 5 ,8 or 9?

[LostDoggy]

Completely different though, ES.

Aker was on the nose across the industry and had nominated us as his preferred destination. We had Brisbane by the short and curlies.

Cross is in his prime as an AFL footballer, is under contract and is a B&F winner in a prelim year. I think he holds considerable value, particularly to a club that is in dire need of midfield grunt (Port Adelaide for example).

I agree but I still can't find a comparable trade for where a Cross like player has gone for a top 10 pick. Maybe the Nathan Brown one? I still think its rare.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I agree but I still can't find a comparable trade for where a Cross like player has gone for a top 10 pick. Maybe the Nathan Brown one? I still think its rare.

It's rare because no-one has the goolies to actually get a trade done.

The only time anyone wants to trade is when they know they can rape someone else.

[LostDoggy]

It's rare because no-one has the goolies to actually get a trade done.

The only time anyone wants to trade is when they know they can rape someone else.
:)
So it won't happen then.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I agree but I still can't find a comparable trade for where a Cross like player has gone for a top 10 pick. Maybe the Nathan Brown one? I still think its rare.

North want pick 9 from Hawthorn for Gibson. Pelchen, of course, will offer pick 72 and the deal will fall over and Gibson will return to North, but I think pick 9 for Gibson is about right.

He's not as good as Cross and is only 1 year younger.

[bulldogtragic]

North want pick 9 from Hawthorn for Gibson. Pelchen, of course, will offer pick 72 and the deal will fall over and Gibson will return to North, but I think pick 9 for Gibson is about right.

He's not as good as Cross and is only 1 year younger.
My wife is a Hawthorn die hard. I told her just because there is an offer on the table to Gibson and he is out of contract means jack shite, and referred her to ROK. If that knob pulls the same stunt this year the AFLPA should run him out of the business and sanction the club either with legitimate or illegitimate industrial action.

But back to the thread, no way i see us getting a top 10 pick for Crossy.

I'd prefer to hand Hahn out there and see what nibbles (if any) we can get (re: moving on a player to avoid retirements).

[Rocket Science]

Musing over potential returns for someone of Cross' calibre...North's apparently firm (http://news.realfooty.com.au/breaking-news-sport/roos-stay-quiet-over-gibson-trade-report-20090909-fhje.html) on demanding pick #9 from the Hawks for Josh Gibson.

That's patently unrealistic for Gibson...and red, white and blue blinkers aside, Cross is surely worth a helluva lot more.

EDIT: jeez, you've gotta be quick 'round here.

[Topdog]

If we’re going trade crazy, I’d chuck Hahn’s name up as well for the exact reason you posted.

No one would want him.

Think Cross could get Port's pick at absolute best but being realistic I'd say Cross would go for pick 15.

[LostDoggy]

North want pick 9 from Hawthorn for Gibson. Pelchen, of course, will offer pick 72 and the deal will fall over and Gibson will return to North, but I think pick 9 for Gibson is about right.

He's not as good as Cross and is only 1 year younger.

I agree cos Gibson can play FB and the Hawks need a FB badly.
I have little understanding of the trade market but not sure what club would offer us a top 10 for Cross.

[bulldogtragic]

No one would want him (Hahn) .


So why will we persist with him if 15 other clubs wouldn't?

[Topdog]

Musing over potential returns for someone of Cross' calibre...North's apparently firm (http://news.realfooty.com.au/breaking-news-sport/roos-stay-quiet-over-gibson-trade-report-20090909-fhje.html) on demanding pick #9 from the Hawks for Josh Gibson.

That's patently unrealistic for Gibson...

I think it is spot on for someone like Gibson. A tough backman who can punch above his height. Able to hold Buddy.

If Morris left I'd be demanding top 10. You have to remember here North don't want to lose him.

[Mantis]

If Jordan McMahon was worth pick #19 a few years back, surely we could get a top 5 pick for Crossy. ;)

[bornadog]

What's wrong with trying to develop your own players and forget about trading altogether.

There has to be a balance of players in groupings as follows:

18 to 21
22 to 25
26 to 30

Looking at our list we need to build up more youth so that we have a balanced list in coming years. As mentioned previousley by SS, we have a number of players approaching 30 in the next few years so we need to ensure that the 22 to 25 year old players are developing to be the future 26 to 30 year olds. On the other end, we need to keep bringing in 18 to 21 years olds and giving them game time. This means in the midfield, the Woods, Reids, Stacks, GOk's, Lynches have to either get game time or turned over.

Our midfield needs the likes of Cross, Boyd as we can't rely on Ward and Reid yet, who are only 19 years old. Cooney and Griffen are filling the middle group (the 22 to 25), but we don't have enough in this group, whether midfield or other.

Maybe a trade for an earlier pick will help our cause, but its a risk to trade a good player for an unknown. A Cross will give you another say 5 years of playing, but a low draft pick may not even give you more than a few games. If the draft pick is for a tall, then you need at least 4 years of development to see whether they are going to be any good, and you may have wasted your time (Wight should be at his peak by now as he is still young)

Personally, I prefer to stay out of the trade period, have all your investment in top recruiting scouts and pick the best young kids at the time.

[Rocket Science]

What's Gibson honestly done to realistically net a top-ten pick despite doing a job on Buddy a couple of times? He's a versatile, middle of the road defender who's athletic but not particularly good at anything.

I understand North wanting full value for a player they'd rather not lose altogether, and the whole bluff and counter-bluff nature of AFL trade negotiations, but I'd have thought anything higher than perhaps pick #20 would be gravy for someone like Gibson, even from a club in dire need of defenders.

If Gibson's worth #9...Cross is a top-fiver.

[The Underdog]

If Jordan McMahon was worth pick #19 a few years back, surely we could get a top 5 pick for Crossy. ;)

Richmond have a top 5 pick:D

Can't wait to see North try to exact revenge on Hawthorn for playing hardball on the Thompson and Hay deals.

[Topdog]

So why will we persist with him if 15 other clubs wouldn't?

He has value to us but not for other teams.

[bulldogtragic]

He has value to us but not for other teams.
I know now is probably not the best time for Mitch to ask, but what is he currently adding in value with?

[bulldog]

It wont happen and if it did it would tear the heart out of the place

[Mofra]

Good points comrade, I have to reply

Champion Data statistics will tell you that there is a massive difference between first round picks and every other pick in the draft. This is probably stating the obvious but it also suggests that drafting is becoming more refined with each passing year.

The 2009 draft in particular is shallow – a large portion of 17 year olds are ineligible – to put that in perspective, about 30% of players drafted last year wouldn’t be eligible this year.
Basically, that tells me that this draft is already slightly compromised, considering Ward would have fallen into the 17 year olds who are poached by GC17. Therefore the first rounder that some clubs are keen to hold onto is less valuable than last year.


Mofra, you’re obviously not a fan of trading proven players for draft picks but we’ve never been in a position where the next 2/3/4 etc drafts are completely compromised, with access to most of the best kids essentially cut off.

Considering we only took 3 kids in a bumper draft last year (too light on IMO), we’re banking on our rookie recruiting manager to strike gold with a late first rounder and then with picks 30+, 45+, 60+. That’s a tough job in any year, but in 2009 there will be kids drafted who wouldn’t have got a look in, in previous years.
It would be remiss of any argument against trading out Crossy to ignore the potential for father/son drafting after this year - Liberatore & Wallis in 2010 will look good in a compromised draft, whilst Lachlan Hunter in 2011 is a real possibility considering he just took out his league B&F award.




If our late first rounder doesn’t come on and the battlers we pick up with picks 45+ end up as uber-duds, we’re in trouble, with GC coming in.

By putting up a marquee name like Cross, and securing a top 10 draft pick, it gives the recruiting team an opportunity to get the absolute maximum value from this draft, help ride out the GC inclusion and flourish if we get it right.

And if drafting is too risky, we could also use the top 10 pick to snare a proven player to fill a deficiency on our list.

At the end of the day, we all love Crossy, but there are stormy times coming up for all clubs and fortune favours the brave.

Imagine if the kid we snare at pick 8 is the next Selwood or Rich (or we use the pick to snare a Pavlich or Roughead).
That's the salient point right there - it's a maybe.

We can only use past performance as a guide to future potential, and I'd argue our first round drafting in recent history has been as woeful as any other club in the competition - perhaps worse than even Freo & Richmond!

I simply don't believe on balance, even from a team list point of view, that the risk vs reward stands up to tarding out Cross.
That is before the devastating effect this would have on the playing group, which I believe would hurt mroale considerably.

[Mofra]

It would all come down to what the recruiters believe the value of the draft is. WC (pick 5), Port (pick 8) and Hawthorn (pick 9) have all said their first rounders are on the table.

For every Joel Selwood there's 10 Sam Power's.
Exactly, and our drafting record isn't flash.

[Mofra]

We currently have Hargrave, Hahn & Gilbee born in '81 and Boyd, Morris, Lake, Gia and Murphy born in '82 (Cross was born in '83) so that's nearly half our best 22 that we will lose in quick succession. By trading out one now you are also reducing your vulnerability of a mass retirement by 1 player.
It's a valid point to raise, however Gia & Hahn by all accounts wont have the durability of the remainder of the group (Murphy's run with injuries leads me to believe he could also suffer a rapid decline).
The durability differences of these players will help stagger the retirements.

[comrade]

Basically, that tells me that this draft is already slightly compromised, considering Ward would have fallen into the 17 year olds who are poached by GC17. Therefore the first rounder that some clubs are keen to hold onto is less valuable than last year.

Last year’s top 10 were largely made up of top agers (with Jack Watts being a noticeable exception).

This year’s top 10 is meant to be every bit as good as last years – it’s the depth further down the list that pales in comparison.

[anfo27]

Musing over potential returns for someone of Cross' calibre...North's apparently firm (http://news.realfooty.com.au/breaking-news-sport/roos-stay-quiet-over-gibson-trade-report-20090909-fhje.html) on demanding pick #9 from the Hawks for Josh Gibson.

That's patently unrealistic for Gibson...and red, white and blue blinkers aside, Cross is surely worth a helluva lot more.

EDIT: jeez, you've gotta be quick 'round here.

Have to agree Rocket, Gibson is solid but no way is he worth pick 9 & a 3 year $850,000-$1mill contract. I know the hawks are desperate but can't see that happening.

[Jasper]

Cross to Port for Pearce and an exchange of draft picks, if we decided to trade Cross.

Frankly I disagree with the premise of this thread. I don't consider it a great idea to trade Cross, I believe and also get the strong impression that our senior people at WB believe they are in a 'window' and won't trade seasoned good players.
However, the key area where we have excess players is the Cross type, hence Addison. I would look to shift him to the Swans or Essendon for an exchange of 2nd round picks and lock in Hall or Lloyd (whoever is available).

Also agree Hahn should be shopped. Carlton may be interested, but frankly I doubt many teams would be overly excited about Mitch.

[Mantis]

Exactly, and our drafting record isn't flash.

We have a 100% strike rate with with our new recruiting team....

[Mofra]

We have a 100% strike rate with with our new recruiting team....
Wasn't Clayton still basically running the show last year?

[azabob]

We have a 100% strike rate with with our new recruiting team....


Wasn't Clayton still basically running the show last year?

Yes, thats why they are at 100%. ;)

[Mofra]

Yes, thats why they are at 100%. ;)
No, that'd be 0% ;)

[Remi Moses]

Gibson for a second round pick is the obvious conclusion. Waste of time talking about trading Cross cos' it aint happening

[Happy Days]

Waste of time talking about trading Cross cos' it aint happening

Neither did the Y2K Bug but that got some press.

[azabob]

No, that'd be 0% ;)

Yep glass half full, half empty. lol

[macca]

There is a fundamental difference between Ray, who left of his own accord or his Manager's in order to better himself and Cross who we are talking about discarding in favour of a lottery to replace him with a draft pick.

This doesn't even satisfy the theory of trading for need.
Ray is a spud who has a big engine. On the weekend seeing him Saint colours and doing turnonvers, 3 I remembers so glaring: 1 handpass backwards to the oppostion fwd line, missing the target, a kick across the ground when in centre square missing target by 20 meters, and handballing to player who got crunched. His clangers are not so damaging in a hard running and big bodied team. Ray is a dud, and I am glad we let him go. He will be overtaken next year by guys like mcqualter, geary( when he plays in midfield) and clinton jones. So I wonder if he will play 50 more games ?

[macca]

its not a question if crossy drops of his perch, but how many quality games can we get out of him ? If we get another 100 games off him, where he contributes, he is worth more than 1 first round pick. Drafting is not an exact science, and we have had terrible, terrible luck with our first round picks apart from cooney in the last couple of years.

[The Coon Dog]

terrible luck with our first round picks apart from cooney in the last couple of years.

That number 7 fellow goes allright too. ;)

[LostDoggy]

Ray is a spud who has a big engine. On the weekend seeing him Saint colours and doing turnonvers, 3 I remembers so glaring: 1 handpass backwards to the oppostion fwd line, missing the target, a kick across the ground when in centre square missing target by 20 meters, and handballing to player who got crunched. His clangers are not so damaging in a hard running and big bodied team. Ray is a dud, and I am glad we let him go. He will be overtaken next year by guys like mcqualter, geary( when he plays in midfield) and clinton jones. So I wonder if he will play 50 more games ?

At year ending, Ray might have the last laugh. Stkilda excellent chance for the flag.

[LostDoggy]

How would everyone feel, if the we traded Cross for Gibson, straight swap?

[comrade]

How would everyone feel, if the we traded Cross for Gibson, straight swap?

Cold and alone.

[Mantis]

How would everyone feel, if the we traded Cross for Gibson, straight swap?

I would throw up.

Why would we chase/ want a mid 20's mid-sized defender who ain't that good?

If (big if) were to trade someone of Crossy's calibre I would want atleast a top 10 pick or a developing player under the age of 20 who would add something different to our side (pace, good kick, etc..) and would be a 200 game player.

[LostDoggy]

I would hate to see Crossy go. So stop throwing his name around for trade.
He is not going anywhere.

[Desipura]

If we’re going trade crazy, I’d chuck Hahn’s name up as well for the exact reason you posted.

Hahn would generate very little interest if we offered him up for trade.

[Topdog]

No, that'd be 0% ;)

Actually it would be undefined.:cool:

[comrade]

Hahn would generate very little interest if we offered him up for trade.

You never know unless you try - another club might think he's just what they need.

Personally, I think he's run his race at the Dogs.

[The Coon Dog]

Good thread Jim with plenty of thought provoking responses. Well done & I have to admit, it shocked me, given you man love for Crossy.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Good thread Jim with plenty of thought provoking responses. Well done & I have to admit, it shocked me, given you man love for Crossy.

I would never trade Crossy, you know that.

I would hardly ever trade at all.


The point of my OP is that if we were ever to trade, and I never think we should, but if we were to, all the stars align right now and Crossy would be the one.

[Desipura]

You never know unless you try - another club might think he's just what they need.
Personally, I think he's run his race at the Dogs.
I believe Hahn's lack of pace combined with how quick the game is now, has caught him out. Lets face it, he has no real position on the ground, he plays as a defensive forward who crushes packs. If we had a dare I say it, strong kpp, Hahn's position in our team would not be as important.
If we got a 3rd round pick for him, I would be doing cartwheels!

[LostDoggy]

Been thinking about your premise, SS -- and given that I agree that 'trading is the work of the devil' -- I think the only trade of Crossy that the club, players and supporters would tolerate is a trade up to another marque player, not down to a speculative draft pick (however high).

This might mean packaging Crossy with a first or second round draft pick, and maybe a gun kid, to go after a Sandilands or a Pavlich (I know, I know), but there are a select handful of KPF players (Pav, Brown, Roughhead) we would give our eyeteeth for, and Crossy + Wood (or the like) + premium draft picks may represent a high enough enticement to certain clubs.

[G-Mo77]

The point of my OP is that if we were ever to trade, and I never think we should, but if we were to, all the stars align right now and Crossy would be the one.

I was talking about trading to another Bulldog's supporter at work. We have a LOT of players around the 27 - 29 year age mark and they are all Senior footballers. As much as it pains me to say I really think we need to make some movement over the next few years to balance our list. It could get pretty ugly when all those players retire. The players stocks are reasonably high right now so it should be at least talked about.

[LostDoggy]

I was talking about trading to another Bulldog's supporter at work. We have a LOT of players around the 27 - 29 year age mark and they are all Senior footballers. As much as it pains me to say I really think we need to make some movement over the next few years to balance our list. It could get pretty ugly when all those players retire. The players stocks are reasonably high right now so it should be at least talked about.


The list isn't going to stand still. The players you mention will retire over the next five years or so and in that time we will bring in another 15 players minimum. Add to this the "coming of age of the existing reserves eg Roughead, Cordy, Boumann, Reid, Jones, Grant etc and there is a whole new team.

We have balanced our list well since the mess that Wallet left us in.

[Topdog]

Plus those guys will finish at different times aswell. I can see Mitch finishing in the next season, not sure Gia has more than 2-3 years left. Cross looks like the kind of player that will stop before he reaches 30. On the flip side Gilbee and Shaggy look like they would play on for a while.

[Sedat]

I believe Hahn's lack of pace combined with how quick the game is now, has caught him out. Lets face it, he has no real position on the ground, he plays as a defensive forward who crushes packs. If we had a dare I say it, strong kpp, Hahn's position in our team would not be as important.
If we got a 3rd round pick for him, I would be doing cartwheels!
You'd be surprised. Hahn has quite a good rep out there with quite a few opposition clubs. His assets (or perceived assets) are quite visible and sought after by most clubs, and his deficiencies are not as noticable if you aren't watching him intently every week like we do.

[LostDoggy]

Given I have limited comprehension of how much players get paid, how much $$ would be available with the following retirements / delisting / trade (albeit unlikely) at the end of the season?
Eagleton (350k)
Welsh (250k)
Skipper (150k)
Wight (150k)
Hahn (250k)


Would anyone consider trading Josh Hill back to WA for a Spangher or Staker plus a draft pick combination?

[Desipura]

You'd be surprised. Hahn has quite a good rep out there with quite a few opposition clubs. His assets (or perceived assets) are quite visible and sought after by most clubs, and his deficiencies are not as noticable if you aren't watching him intently every week like we do.
Well then I would look at trading him if we can get anything inside the 3rd round. If we get Hall next season, Hahn's loss wont be that great. This is no disrespect to the guy who playes the game hard and will always put his body on the line.

[Desipura]

Would anyone consider trading Josh Hill back to WA for a Spangher or Staker plus a draft pick combination?[/QUOTE]
I would not think you would be that far off the mark with the players salaries, Eagle may be closer to about $300k.
On Josh Hill, I would consider a trade for Spangher but not Saker as he would be a lower priority for mine as he does not address our kpp issue down back.

[LostDoggy]

Griffen for Tippett?

[Desipura]

Griffen for Tippett?
Why would the Crows trade a future gun KPP for a future gun onballer? Anyway if Tippett goes anywhere, it mist likely will be to GC.
Walker for Griffen, who would look at that????????

[Mantis]

Would anyone consider trading Josh Hill back to WA for a Spangher or Staker plus a draft pick combination?

No way.

I wouldn't be trading Hill for anyone.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Griffen for Tippett?

You don't trade away 23yos who still have massive upside, that was the point of the thread.

You trade away 27yos who play in a style that you have an abundance of.


Does anyone remember us trading Darren Baxter to Hawthorn? Baxter had just come off a career best season but Wheels thought that Cameron kid would be OK in Baxter's role. Baxter was finished within a season or two and from memory Cameron played a few reasonable games for us.

[Desipura]

No way.

I wouldn't be trading Hill for anyone.
Anyone?

[LostDoggy]

[QUOTE=Sockeye Salmon;113102]You don't trade away 23yos who still have massive upside, that was the point of the thread.

You trade away 27yos who play in a style that you have an abundance of.


We'd be trading away a 23yo with massive upside for a 22yo KP Forwad/Ruck with a massive upside.

[Mantis]

Anyone?

Yep.

You are not going to get Matthew Pavlich for Hill so it isn't worth thinking about. For anyone who is in his own age group I wouldn't trade Hill for anyone.

Josh has unbridled potential and I want to see it fulfilled while he is wearing Bulldog colours.

[Desipura]

Yep.

You are not going to get Matthew Pavlich for Hill so it isn't worth thinking about. For anyone who is in his own age group I wouldn't trade Hill for anyone.

Josh has unbridled potential and I want to see it fulfilled while he is wearing Bulldog colours.

Going by your theory I would definately look at getting a Taylor Walker for Josh Hill who are only 1 year apart, then there is Joel Selwood, Matthew Leunberger, Mitchell Brown of WCE & Nathan Brown of Collingwood, Bryce Gibbs etc etc. I do not know how you can say you would not trade Hill for anyone in the same age group unless you believe he will become as good as or better than the abovementioned.

[mighty_west]

[QUOTE=Sockeye Salmon;113102]You don't trade away 23yos who still have massive upside, that was the point of the thread.

You trade away 27yos who play in a style that you have an abundance of.


We'd be trading away a 23yo with massive upside for a 22yo KP Forwad/Ruck with a massive upside.

The only, and i stress the ONLY reason we'd trade off a player like Griffen, would be that he wanted to go home, even then you'd try as much as possible to change his mind, but if we couldn't persude him, i'd look at Dangerfield, a gun mid for gun mid, they won't trade Tippet as stated, but then you'd always worry about him going up North one day.

[Mofra]

Given I have limited comprehension of how much players get paid, how much $$ would be available with the following retirements / delisting / trade (albeit unlikely) at the end of the season?
Eagleton (350k)
Welsh (250k)
Skipper (150k)
Wight (150k)
Hahn (250k)
Those figures are miles off.

[Rocket Science]

Those figures are miles off.

The corollary being...do tell.

[LostDoggy]

Those figures are miles off.

Can you provide what ball park they are in?

[Mantis]

Going by your theory I would definately look at getting a Taylor Walker for Josh Hill who are only 1 year apart, then there is Joel Selwood, Matthew Leunberger, Mitchell Brown of WCE & Nathan Brown of Collingwood, Bryce Gibbs etc etc. I do not know how you can say you would not trade Hill for anyone in the same age group unless you believe he will become as good as or better than the abovementioned.

Try and be a little realistic Desi.... It isn't that hard.

Oh, I better edit all my posts too to reflect 'anyone... within reason'. Perhaps you can edit my posts for me as I have noticed you are pretty good at it.

[The Pie Man]

Why would the Crows trade a future gun KPP for a future gun onballer? Anyway if Tippett goes anywhere, it mist likely will be to GC.
Walker for Griffen, who would look at that????????

I said I wouldn't post on this issue anymore (in another thread) but in light of hearing a KB insitigated rumour (which given it's source would likely be baseless, though bear with me) if Griff wants to go home, then I doubt we'd say it's via the PSD like Hutchy suggested will be our approach with Lake should he walk.

Walker and a draft for Griffen I'd consider.

Only if he's adamant he wants to go home.

I've also tipped Griff for BOG tonight

Was interesting to read an interview with Mark Williams on thr AFL website today, his comments on injured players getting nervous for their spot on return...as a fan, I look at how we travel without certain players for a period when they are out - i.e we really missed Higgins and Murphy during parts of this year.

[Desipura]

Try and be a little realistic Desi.... It isn't that hard.
Im only replying based on your theory that you "wont trade Hill for anyone" aside from a Pavlich who will not become available. You need to be more open minded when player trades are mentioned.
There are only a few players at each club that are untouchable and Hill is not one of them.

[Mantis]

Im only replying based on your theory that you "wont trade Hill for anyone" aside from a Pavlich who will not become available. You need to be more open minded when player trades are mentioned.
There are only a few players at each club that are untouchable and Hill is not one of them.

You missed the part that I added to my post... as per most of your posts I have responded to over the past few days.

[mighty_west]

I'm not too sure why we would have to get a forward IF Griffen wanted home, i'm not too sure about this Walker kid just yet, and with Eagleton in his twilight, say we lost Griff, we would be losing alot of run in our midfield, esepcially run with the class of Griffen, which is why i suggested Dangerfield, he's a Vic kid, and a very polished young performer.

Plus say we get Barry Hall as a stop gap before our young developing talls coming through, we should be covered in that area going forward, the young mids coming through aren't overally quick - Reid, Wood etc, Daniels has the pace but a query on his skills, Lynch might be struggling to hold his spot on the list at seasons end.

[Desipura]

Try and be a little realistic Desi.... It isn't that hard.

Oh, I better edit all my posts too to reflect 'anyone... within reason'. Perhaps you can edit my posts for me as I have noticed you are pretty good at it.

I do not need to edit your posts, you have done that yourself. I only quote what you have said. You are quick to correct others though. Pot calling the kettle black

[Mofra]

Can you provide what ball park they are in?
No, due to the Privacy Act. Can't say anymore than I have.

[Topdog]

No, due to the Privacy Act. Can't say anymore than I have.

I thought you were guessing completely didn't realise you had more info. Fair enough reasoning.

[Jasper]

Would anyone consider trading Josh Hill back to WA for a Spangher or Staker plus a draft pick combination?

These are our mid sized forwards and their ages

Hahn, Mitchell 28
Hill, Josh 20
Johnson, Brad 33
Murphy, Robert 27
Welsh, Scott 31

I would suggest Hill is one of the last people we would trade. Hahn yes definitely (still doubt if there would be much interest). The only other player with trade currency on this list is Murphy...?

[hujsh]

If we were to trade an inside mid like Cross and wanted another outside mid would we consider Shaun Burgoyne?

He's not too old and if he really want's to go he want be too expensive (though it sounds like his injuries might drop his value a bit). Port may be interested as they can add some proper hardness to their midfield (not Josh Carr hardness)

[Dry Rot]

Surely some of this comes down to where you see where the team is at?

The vast majority view is that our window will still be open next season, therefore get Hall and maybe trade say Cross for an extra late first round draft pick. Fair enough.

Minority view:

With stars like Aker and Johnson ageing and slowing down and our young talls taking till 2011 or 2012 to begin to fire, this season is it for our window. You will probably disagree with that premise, but if you can look at that hypothetically then that opens up more trade possibilities. By 2012 wear and tear will probably see the end of Murphy, Hahn and Gia or they will be in decline. Under this scenario, I'd consider a worthwhile trade for any of them. I'd even consider a top 6 trade for Gilbee who would be getting on by the time of this new 2012 window.

Another factor which might force scenario 2 is if we lose Lake. I love Lake, but if he doesn't re-sign then I'd argue that our window will definitely close.

In effect, we'd be trying to do a mini-rebuild with first and second round draft picks this year.

I understand the immediate cost of doing this: we'd be lucky to make the finals in 2010 but so many of our slack non-renewing members don't seem to care anyway. But it makes sense if you think our window closes this year.

[chef]

Surely some of this comes down to where you see where the team is at?

The vast majority view is that our window will still be open next season, therefore get Hall and maybe trade say Cross for an extra late first round draft pick. Fair enough.

Minority view:

With stars like Aker and Johnson ageing and slowing down and our young talls taking till 2011 or 2012 to begin to fire, this season is it for our window. You will probably disagree with that premise, but if you can look at that hypothetically then that opens up more trade possibilities. By 2012 wear and tear will probably see the end of Murphy, Hahn and Gia or they will be in decline. Under this scenario, I'd consider a worthwhile trade for any of them. I'd even consider a top 6 trade for Gilbee who would be getting on by the time of this new 2012 window.

Another factor which might force scenario 2 is if we lose Lake. I love Lake, but if he doesn't re-sign then I'd argue that our window will definitely close.

In effect, we'd be trying to do a mini-rebuild with first and second round draft picks this year.

I understand the immediate cost of doing this: we'd be lucky to make the finals in 2010 but so many of our slack non-renewing members don't seem to care anyway. But it makes sense if you think our window closes this year.

Do you really think that we are that reliant on Lake?

If he goes at the end of this year(god forbid), we are still going to be a very good side and IMO still a top 4 side.

[AndrewP6]

Do you really think that we are that reliant on Lake?

If he goes at the end of this year(god forbid), we are still going to be a very good side and IMO still a top 4 side.

I know it's not my question to answer, but I think we're in big strife if Bryza goes... without him, I reckon top 4 is out... finals will be extremely tough.

[Happy Days]

Do you really think that we are that reliant on Lake?

If he goes at the end of this year(god forbid), we are still going to be a very good side and IMO still a top 4 side.

Lake should be valued alongside Brown, Riewoldt and Scarlett in the sense that without them, their sides would be significantly worse. We should be moving heaven and earth to keep him aboard, as he is our most important player by some distance.

[LostDoggy]

Lake should be valued alongside Brown, Riewoldt and Scarlett in the sense that without them, their sides would be significantly worse. We should be moving heaven and earth to keep him aboard, as he is our most important player by some distance.

Maybe Scarlett but not Brown or Riewoldt. Much easier to replace FB run up the ground roll than a CHF.
If we had Brown or Riewoldt we'd be premeirship favourites.

[Dry Rot]

Lake should be valued alongside Brown, Riewoldt and Scarlett in the sense that without them, their sides would be significantly worse. We should be moving heaven and earth to keep him aboard, as he is our most important player by some distance.


Agreed.

And in the context of my post, if he goes then I cannot see how we would be a premiership contender. Shit team? No. Contender, no also.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Maybe Scarlett but not Brown or Riewoldt. Much easier to replace FB run up the ground roll than a CHF.
If we had Brown or Riewoldt we'd be premeirship favourites.

And if Hawthorn had Lake they would be playing this weekend.

[LostDoggy]

And if Hawthorn had Lake they would be playing this weekend.

I think they need more than Lake.

[Happy Days]

I think they need more than Lake.

Not really..Hawthorn need a backline, Lake is a backline in himself.

[Mofra]

I think they need more than Lake.
They need a functioning ruck division too - Bailey gone next year is already a huge loss.

[Hot_Doggies]

According to the Herald Sun Brisbane are chasing Richard Hadley (again), Voss believes they need someone to help Black.

Maybe Cross could fill this role.