The difference between insanity and genius is measured only in success.
Really? Poorly played?
OK lets just indulge Matt for a bit here and look at how ridiculous his supposed Dream trade is.
If Sydney are trading Mitchell, we would expect a 1st Rounder. On his own he is worth Pick 5. Clubs would take a proven classy midfielder that gets his own ball ahead of an untried raw boned 18 yo from the U18s competition. (look how many first rounders we have wasted on such players).
If Malceski is on his way out the door. Why throw him in as steak knives. We could get a 2nd round compensation pick for him, based on the free agency compensation rules in relation to the worth of a player.
Heeney will be elevated from the Rookie list in the next trade period. Why would we give him up. We are giving away part of our future.
But no Matt says bundle all 3 up together to give to Melbourne because Roosy is shrewd. If we were offering up such a deal in exchange for Pick 5, we'd have a multitude of clubs lining up to do the deal.
Unlike the Bulldogs, we don't need to take risks to get our list in good order so why throw out part of our future to get pick 5, when who's to say that pick 5 will be any better than the whatever our first pick in the first round of the draft will be. Oh, and "The Darcy deal" is hardly risk taking and will never get done. Why. Griffin may be the Dogs Skipper, but is currently in his 10th season, is under an injury cloud at the moment, and has probably got another 2, at best 3 seasons left in him. Any one of GWS's tall forwards have got probably 10 more seasons in them, and the Giants are attempting to do what we are doing, and that is have a multi pronged forward line. Why would they give up one of their tall forwards for Griffen and jeopardise the chance to have such a forward line. Makes no sense, and not really a risk for the Dogs. Typical of a so called media expert thinking that GWS is full of idiots who have no idea about trading, and would agree to such a deal.
Yeah probably poorly played as you say, but I find that stupidity is related to bigotry. If you don't call it out early it runs rampant over the internet.
I think the Swans have shown to be cleverer than any other club in the comp, and probably cleverer than most of us here on RWO. I have no doubt that the attempts to undermine us emanating from down south will be seen as just that, and that this silly talk of Tom M trades will be shown to be more rubbish spouted from so called 'journos' backed by jeoulous and insecure clubs down there...
Spot on:
1. Tom Mitchell was keenly sought by the Swans under F/S and exceeded expectations in his first season in the seniors. In his second season, he is not out of favour, just battling injuries. It would take a very attractive deal for Swans to let him out of his contract. The article citing this rumour also states Carlton were surprised to find he is on $400Kp.a. implying this is more than Carlton thinks he is worth. Hence, why would they be likely to offer the required very attractive deal?
2 Our salary cap is maxed out and most likely already factors in near future retirements such as Goodes, ROK, LRT
3. We will not have an immediate (i.e. next season) need for a Frawley-type backman ... the departure rumours are about Mal and Shaw, Frawley would not be a logical replacement for them. We have Rohan and (hopefully) AJ available plus Biggs and X progressing well
4. Lloyd Perris was the subject of a heated public argument between the Swans and Roos with the Swans winning out. He has not met expectations yet due to injury so would have low trade currency. No chance Swans mgt will consider trading him at this stage.
Conclusion: I expect Swans will use the next trade period to draft juniors only (Heeney 1st priority) and maybe one recycle player with a view to promoting the best of our current reserves to replace retirements and requested trades such as Mal (if this rumour is even true).
CIA Agent to Policeman: "Have you ever had anti-terrorist training?"
Policeman: "Yes, I was married once."
Luke Darcy really hasn't got a clue. The biggest suck in the game.
Bloods
"Lockett is the best of all time" - Robert Harvey, Darrel Baldock, Nathan Burke, Kevin Bartlett, Bob Skilton
LMHO. You are kidding me. Since you brought it up, the definition of a bigot is, ?a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief or opinion?. Seems you have an intolerance to someone else?s opinion. Make of that what you want. Labelling someone stupid is bordering on bullying and should not be tolerated in an RWO forum. So yes poorly played and getting worse.
actually we did a deal pretty similar to this - wayne schwass for shannon grant. i think the roos got the better deal but schwass was pretty good for us for the 3-4 seasons he played. i can see griffin also being very good.
in any case there is NO way Mitchell is worth 5 on his own. he could be a great player. but there is too many risks with him to make him that - I sincerely doubt he would have been pick 5 in his own draft. he may be rated 5 by us but i doubt any other club would see him as such.
I wouldn't go for matt's deal because perris and mitchell have a great deal of value for us and probably more for us than for others. but its far from a terrible decision. if mal was going anyway and mitchell likely to pick 5 for mal and mitchell is a lot better than 10-15 and 30
Come on guys. Sydney has always been the bogey team for the south. Don't you remember each time someone had a contract negotiation coming up their management released info that Sydney is interested (looking at you, Aker)? It is the same old same old. There are always rumours and rumours of rumours but 9 times out of 10 the player re-signs with his original club. Mitchell will be the same.
In addition, I think if we are forced to do any trading at all, it will be for players, not picks, as I think picks would impact our position with Heeney.
Last edited by Dosser; 22nd July 2014 at 05:15 PM.
Bookmarks