Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Neil Appleby wrote:

CarringbushCigar wrote:

Defender wrote: We won't take pick 4 only, I'm thinking we'll want their second rounder 'or' a decent player as well, forget about pick 4 and one of their young guns, won't happen.

Brisbane hold all the cards.

We are likely to get bent over here, because Collingwood don't want Beams to talk.

What are you talking about? Collingwood holds the aces in this game. Please take your tiresome conspiracy theories to some other forum where they'll appreciate your acute insights. Oh wait, maybe I'm not allowed to comment in this thread; don't wanna receive a warning from you.

+1

He can't "Luke Ball" us. There's no way a player of his quality and age would be overlooked by enough of the bottom clubs. Brisbane get him that way only if they tank. Think Stevens announcing he wanted to go to Collingwood.

The Boy Who Cried Wolf wrote:

Defender wrote:

Neil Appleby wrote: What are you talking about? Collingwood holds the aces in this game. Please take your tiresome conspiracy theories to some other forum where they'll appreciate your acute insights. Oh wait, maybe I'm not allowed to comment in this thread; don't wanna receive a warning from you.

I don't think we "hold all the aces", sure he's contracted and we don't have to deal, but if we don't he could very easily Luke Ball us next year, and if he feels we treated him unfairly he may very well do that.

And in the mean time he could also say 'stuff yah! I'm going north for a surf... enjoy your footy!!' frankly, we're not in a good spot, but anything less then pick 4 and a player and we've been robbed.

Yep, I doubt it will come to that though, but frankly if the Bears only offer up pick 4 I'd prefer us to send a message to those who think they can screw us, and that message should have been sent during the Nick Davis trade, we should have sent him to the draft, look at the favourable trade deals Port have managed to manufacture since they sent a message to other clubs not to **** with them. (Nick Stevens)

Difference being that Stevens to a Melbourne club or another Melbourne club. Not so much difference.

Beams has just left Victoria because he wants to play in Queensland. Would be tough for a Melbourne club or GWS to take him at $800k a year. Might need the Suns to finish below Brisbane.

We're holding QQ and they're holding AK. How things pan out from here is more to do with how each side plays their cards and a little bit of luck than either of us having an unbeatable hand.

All we can do is wait and see, but it appears each side is starting from their expected positions (Just Pick 4 vs Star Player). I'd expect something between these two positions (Pick 4 + Good player).

Defender wrote:

The Boy Who Cried Wolf wrote:

Defender wrote: I don't think we "hold all the aces", sure he's contracted and we don't have to deal, but if we don't he could very easily Luke Ball us next year, and if he feels we treated him unfairly he may very well do that.

And in the mean time he could also say 'stuff yah! I'm going north for a surf... enjoy your footy!!' frankly, we're not in a good spot, but anything less then pick 4 and a player and we've been robbed.

Yep, I doubt it will come to that though, but frankly if the Bears only offer up pick 4 I'd prefer us to send a message to those who think they can screw us, and that message should have been sent during the Nick Davis trade, we should have sent him to the draft, look at the favourable trade deals Port have managed to manufacture since they sent a message to other clubs not to **** with them. (Nick Stevens)

True but Beams is a dam sight better player then Nick (look mom I have one trick) Davis ever was...

The Boy Who Cried Wolf wrote:

Defender wrote:

The Boy Who Cried Wolf wrote: And in the mean time he could also say 'stuff yah! I'm going north for a surf... enjoy your footy!!' frankly, we're not in a good spot, but anything less then pick 4 and a player and we've been robbed.

Yep, I doubt it will come to that though, but frankly if the Bears only offer up pick 4 I'd prefer us to send a message to those who think they can screw us, and that message should have been sent during the Nick Davis trade, we should have sent him to the draft, look at the favourable trade deals Port have managed to manufacture since they sent a message to other clubs not to **** with them. (Nick Stevens)

True but Beams is a dam sight better player then Nick (look mom I have one trick) Davis ever was...

It was a bloody handy trick though.

AN_Inkling wrote:Difference being that Stevens to a Melbourne club or another Melbourne club. Not so much difference.

Beams has just left Victoria because he wants to play in Queensland. Would be tough for a Melbourne club or GWS to take him at $800k a year. Might need the Suns to finish below Brisbane.

That's when the Luke Ball scenario comes in, Lions offer him a one year deal at 1.5 million, no one else will touch him.

I am so sad that Beams is leaving us. I had looked forward to many years of seeing him plying his craft for us. Swan is my man now and I was sure he would pass the mantle to Beams when he retired. No matter what happens I wish him all the best. He has certainly given us his best. In a miracle scenario we manage to convince him to stay. If not I hope we get fairly compensated.

Thanks Beams. Please think about staying here with those who think the world of you. If not good luck.

The crows list manager has said flat out that Danger is not up for grabs this year, so that pours cold water on any deal that we could have possibly served up to snare him.

Az wrote:The crows list manager has said flat out that Danger is not up for grabs this year, so that pours cold water on any deal that we could have possibly served up to snare him.

Do they even have a coach yet? If they haven't that stance could change rather quickly.

IMO the Crows aren't in the running for the 2015 premiership, if Danger wants out now they'll deal IMO, but do we really want to pay for a franchise player now considering the age profile of our list? Probably not.

Defender wrote:

Az wrote:The crows list manager has said flat out that Danger is not up for grabs this year, so that pours cold water on any deal that we could have possibly served up to snare him.

Do they even have a coach yet? If they haven't that stance could change rather quickly.

IMO the Crows aren't in the running for the 2015 premiership, if Danger wants out now they'll deal IMO, but do we really want to pay for a franchise player now considering the age profile of our list? Probably not.

The Crows don't think that, that's one of the main reasons why they sacked their coach.

Though he'd be great for us, but I think our chances are Buckley's chance (pun intended).

The Boy Who Cried Wolf wrote:

Defender wrote:

Az wrote:The crows list manager has said flat out that Danger is not up for grabs this year, so that pours cold water on any deal that we could have possibly served up to snare him.

Do they even have a coach yet? If they haven't that stance could change rather quickly.

IMO the Crows aren't in the running for the 2015 premiership, if Danger wants out now they'll deal IMO, but do we really want to pay for a franchise player now considering the age profile of our list? Probably not.

The Crows don't think that, that's one of the main reasons why they sacked their coach.

Though he'd be great for us, but I think our chances are Buckley's chance (pun intended).

He's overkill for us IMO, what we need now are prime DPs.

Defender wrote:

AN_Inkling wrote:Difference being that Stevens to a Melbourne club or another Melbourne club. Not so much difference.

Beams has just left Victoria because he wants to play in Queensland. Would be tough for a Melbourne club or GWS to take him at $800k a year. Might need the Suns to finish below Brisbane.

That's when the Luke Ball scenario comes in, Lions offer him a one year deal at 1.5 million, no one else will touch him.

Why are we even talking about the Luke Ball scenario? We would be in a potential Luke Ball scenario next year. Not this year. This year we hold the cards and negotiate from a position of power. We shouldn't weaken our whole bargaining power by negotiating based on where will be next year. We have all of next year to accept unders for Beams.

Even if we do end up losing Beams for nothing, in this era of free agency salary cap space is just as valuable. Use the free cap space from Beams to sign Dangerfield as a free agent next year = same best case outcome as this year.

If the Luke Ball scenario is as simple as you make it out to be, we could even use Beams + Thomas + Shaw + Lumumba's free cap space or backload all our player contracts and lure Jeremy Cameron next year when he comes out of contract next year on a $2m one year deal. If it's that simple, why not just do it for all the uncontracted players we want rather than trade for them? I think what you'll find with Ball is that one of the major reasons we got him was because of his injury issues and clubs not being able to perform detailed medicals on him whilst we could.

Harvey wrote:

Defender wrote:

AN_Inkling wrote:Difference being that Stevens to a Melbourne club or another Melbourne club. Not so much difference.

Beams has just left Victoria because he wants to play in Queensland. Would be tough for a Melbourne club or GWS to take him at $800k a year. Might need the Suns to finish below Brisbane.

That's when the Luke Ball scenario comes in, Lions offer him a one year deal at 1.5 million, no one else will touch him.

Why are we even talking about the Luke Ball scenario? We would be in a potential Luke Ball scenario next year. Not this year. This year we hold the cards and negotiate from a position of power. We shouldn't weaken our whole bargaining power by negotiating based on where will be next year. We have all of next year to accept unders for Beams.

Even if we do end up losing Beams for nothing, in this era of free agency salary cap space is just as valuable. Use the free cap space from Beams to sign Dangerfield as a free agent next year = same best case outcome as this year.

If the Luke Ball scenario is as simple as you make it out to be, we could even use Beams + Thomas + Shaw + Lumumba's free cap space or backload all our player contracts and lure Jeremy Cameron next year when he comes out of contract next year on a $2m one year deal. If it's that simple, why not just do it for all the uncontracted players we want rather than trade for them? I think what you'll find with Ball is that one of the major reasons we got him was because of his injury issues and clubs not being able to perform detailed medicals on him whilst we could.

Not disagreeing with your post but clubs don't like to be assholes, It's a last resort move, and remember the Ball deal almost failed because Mark Williams was willing to take him but was knocked back by the Port board, Crazy Vossy was sniffing around as well.