Dylan Shiel

[wally]

I say do the deal with Gresh if it ends up pick 33 so be it.
If we want Shiel then maybe 33 or lower.
Why would we manipulate the deal to give an apposition team pick 13 ?
If the AFL allowed it I bet they wouldn’t if it was the other way around.

[D.B.Cooper]

IMO - Gresham is worth #25 - #32 in trade value.
Shiel is worth #55 - #75

If we get a first rounder for Gresham we certainly are getting overs, therefore something has to go back.

Maybe it is taking Shiels salary, maybe it’s pick 31, maybe there is another player involved or we swap #12 for #8 as part of the deal.

I don’t know, but I know what is being reported looks worse than the Hill/ Hannebery trades.

There is no way Ross is that dumb and halfwit Gallagher is gone so unless it ties in with other deals involving Henry, etc I’m sure these reports are inaccurate.

[Brunswicksainter]

IMO - Gresham is worth #25 - #32 in trade value.
Shiel is worth #55 - #75

If we get a first rounder for Gresham we certainly are getting overs, therefore something has to go back.

Maybe it is taking Shiels salary, maybe it’s pick 31, maybe there is another player involved or we swap #12 for #8 as part of the deal.

I don’t know, but I know what is being reported looks worse than the Hill/ Hannebery trades.

There is no way Ross is that dumb and halfwit Gallagher is gone so unless it ties in with other deals involving Henry, etc I’m sure these reports are inaccurate.

I don’t understand how this isn’t one of the greatest trade heists in the clubs history? 13 for Gresham is massively overs. 33 for Shiel is also a good deal given this will be close to the last pick used in the draft. 6-10 players difference between pick 33 and pick 80 this year. How is this dumb?

[damienc]

Essendon don’t have a cap issue tho

Perhaps Essendon take gresh as reported we get first round
But we get Shiel for 0 salary cap impact in 24 but have to give the pick back

Essentially Shiel for $0 impact allowing us to hit the FA elsewhere

Either that or we keep Shiel and his salary and give back a later pick but I don’t think Essendon need cap relief so why would they do that??

So a 26 year old on a reported 600k in exchange for a nearly 31 year old on 800k+..... we lose

but sounds like a mega deal for Essendon that gets to Salary dump on a surplus player get pick 13 and get the free agent for nothing that they want.
[/quote]

No in the scenario I proposed it is us salary dumping. Lose gresh gain Shiel but for $0.
Supposedly Essendon have more cap space than us so I don’t know why they would be interested in salary dumping

In any event I would still rather just keep the compo pick don’t get me wrong. But I reckon Essendon would prefer Shiel over pick 31 so something doesn’t stack up
[/quote]

If Essendon are recruiting McKay, Gresham and Goldstein if not others I think cap space may be an issue.

If Essendon think Shiel is worth more than #31 at 31YO next season playing what 11 or 12 games this season they are dreaming.

If Gresham compo pick is low, we match the offer and they don't get him this season.
If Gresham compo is 1st round it means Essendon have paid overs and require some compensation.

Taking Shiel and his salary is compensation as he is reportedly highly paid, is 31 next season and is probably not in their best 22 next year.

The first round compensation pick going back is surely a joke.
This would mean Essendon get Gresham & a first round pick and lose a 31YO who is borderline best 22 on a large contract.

Saints lose Gresham, hand back his compo pick to Essendon and take on an over priced 31 year old.

Not possible in any scenario.
[/quote]
If we are serious about drafting a 31 yr old whose best days were 4 + years ago then we are set for another year of mediocrity.
[/quote]

I’m sure you would have said the same when we recruited Paddy Ryder. To old. Way past his best. Blah blah. If we get Shiel. If. He is the type of player we need. A big bodied, inside mid. Even at 31, if he can stay fit he is a good get. All Australian in 2017. Yeah it was a while ago. But he is a class act. Of course I won’t change your mind. But happy I said it.

[saynta]

Essendon don’t have a cap issue tho

Perhaps Essendon take gresh as reported we get first round
But we get Shiel for 0 salary cap impact in 24 but have to give the pick back

Essentially Shiel for $0 impact allowing us to hit the FA elsewhere

Either that or we keep Shiel and his salary and give back a later pick but I don’t think Essendon need cap relief so why would they do that??

So a 26 year old on a reported 600k in exchange for a nearly 31 year old on 800k+..... we lose

but sounds like a mega deal for Essendon that gets to Salary dump on a surplus player get pick 13 and get the free agent for nothing that they want.

No in the scenario I proposed it is us salary dumping. Lose gresh gain Shiel but for $0.
Supposedly Essendon have more cap space than us so I don’t know why they would be interested in salary dumping

In any event I would still rather just keep the compo pick don’t get me wrong. But I reckon Essendon would prefer Shiel over pick 31 so something doesn’t stack up
[/quote]

If Essendon are recruiting McKay, Gresham and Goldstein if not others I think cap space may be an issue.

If Essendon think Shiel is worth more than #31 at 31YO next season playing what 11 or 12 games this season they are dreaming.

If Gresham compo pick is low, we match the offer and they don't get him this season.
If Gresham compo is 1st round it means Essendon have paid overs and require some compensation.

Taking Shiel and his salary is compensation as he is reportedly highly paid, is 31 next season and is probably not in their best 22 next year.

The first round compensation pick going back is surely a joke.
This would mean Essendon get Gresham & a first round pick and lose a 31YO who is borderline best 22 on a large contract.

Saints lose Gresham, hand back his compo pick to Essendon and take on an over priced 31 year old.

Not possible in any scenario.
[/quote]
If we are serious about drafting a 31 yr old whose best days were 4 + years ago then we are set for another year of mediocrity.
[/quote]

I’m sure you would have said the same when we recruited Paddy Ryder. To old. Way past his best. Blah blah. If we get Shiel. If. He is the type of player we need. A big bodied, inside mid. Even at 31, if he can stay fit he is a good get. All Australian in 2017. Yeah it was a while ago. But he is a class act. Of course I won’t change your mind. But happy I said it.
[/quote]

NOT HAPPENING.

[damienc]

Essendon don’t have a cap issue tho

Perhaps Essendon take gresh as reported we get first round
But we get Shiel for 0 salary cap impact in 24 but have to give the pick back

Essentially Shiel for $0 impact allowing us to hit the FA elsewhere

Either that or we keep Shiel and his salary and give back a later pick but I don’t think Essendon need cap relief so why would they do that??

So a 26 year old on a reported 600k in exchange for a nearly 31 year old on 800k+..... we lose

but sounds like a mega deal for Essendon that gets to Salary dump on a surplus player get pick 13 and get the free agent for nothing that they want.

No in the scenario I proposed it is us salary dumping. Lose gresh gain Shiel but for $0.
Supposedly Essendon have more cap space than us so I don’t know why they would be interested in salary dumping

In any event I would still rather just keep the compo pick don’t get me wrong. But I reckon Essendon would prefer Shiel over pick 31 so something doesn’t stack up

If Essendon are recruiting McKay, Gresham and Goldstein if not others I think cap space may be an issue.

If Essendon think Shiel is worth more than #31 at 31YO next season playing what 11 or 12 games this season they are dreaming.

If Gresham compo pick is low, we match the offer and they don't get him this season.
If Gresham compo is 1st round it means Essendon have paid overs and require some compensation.

Taking Shiel and his salary is compensation as he is reportedly highly paid, is 31 next season and is probably not in their best 22 next year.

The first round compensation pick going back is surely a joke.
This would mean Essendon get Gresham & a first round pick and lose a 31YO who is borderline best 22 on a large contract.

Saints lose Gresham, hand back his compo pick to Essendon and take on an over priced 31 year old.

Not possible in any scenario.
[/quote]
If we are serious about drafting a 31 yr old whose best days were 4 + years ago then we are set for another year of mediocrity.
[/quote]

I’m sure you would have said the same when we recruited Paddy Ryder. To old. Way past his best. Blah blah. If we get Shiel. If. He is the type of player we need. A big bodied, inside mid. Even at 31, if he can stay fit he is a good get. All Australian in 2017. Yeah it was a while ago. But he is a class act. Of course I won’t change your mind. But happy I said it.
[/quote]

NOT HAPPENING.
[/quote]

Really? Says who apart from you?

[CQ SAINT]

Gresh will need 4 x $850 minimum to get round 1 compo. That's overs.
We take 13 in compo.
Then we take Shiel's debt and offer 2 years on $650 and a trigger for a 3rd, for pick 31.

That's the only deal I'd entertain. Probably smarter to sniff around the kangas who have had interest in Clark and Gresham and possibly Paton.

[Sanctorum]

In today's Hun Jon Ralph elaborates on the Gresham/Sheil deal that throws more light on the possible trade:

"The AFL could approve a St Kilda-Essendon free agency-trade swap involving Jade Gresham and Dylan Shiel – but it would be rigorously checked before
being stamped.

Every trade and free agency move includes a recorded meeting with the clubs and a staff member from the AFL’s legal and integrity team to assess its bona
fides.

The clubs are asked about whether it is part of a bigger deal with secondary trades, but clubs can be involved in multiple deals.

Clubs cannot trade a selection in one deal then trade it back with another, but Gresham could move to the Dons as a free agent, which would create a draft
pick. Then St Kilda could trade a later pick back to Essendon for Shiel, who turns 31 in March.

St Kilda would not be allowed to top up Gresham’s salary to ensure they secured first-round compensation. But Essendon would be allowed to pay some of Shiel’s
deal while he played at St Kilda."

This obviuouly rules out a FRDP because I can't imagine Essendon paying Gresham anywhere near that level of salary, so at best it would attract a mid to late 2nd rounder.

In that event I can't see any problem in proceeding with this proposal as it retains St Kilda's (current) picks 12 and 31. Or have I got that wrong???

[ace]

I would much prefer to see St Kilda keep whatever compensation the league offers for Gresham
Then swap picks 12 and 31 for Essendons first round pick 8 and Shiel
Values Shiel around pick 35
Then see if St Kilda can grab Gold coast's pick 4 for by combining pick 8 with the Gresham compensation.

St Kilda does NOT need another also ran midfielder with pick 12 selection they need a top class midfielder at pick 4.
Ask Trout who to pick and take the guy he rejects.

[ace]

I would much prefer to see St Kilda keep whatever compensation the league offers for Gresham
Then swap picks 12 and 31 for Essendons first round pick 8 and Shiel
Values Shiel around pick 47 mid 3rd round.
He doesn't have many years left and he is beyond his best.
Then see if St Kilda can grab Gold Coast's pick 4 by combining pick 8 with the Gresham compensation.

St Kilda does NOT need another also ran midfielder with pick 12 selection they need a top class midfielder at pick 4.
Duursma, McKercher or Sanders.
Ask Trout who to pick and take a guy he rejects.

[Otiman]

That might work.

It's effectively trading 12, 13, for a single pick 4.

Another way of looking is trading 12 and Gresham for 4.

[Saints58]

That might work.

It's effectively trading 12, 13, for a single pick 4.

Another way of looking is trading 12 and Gresham for 4.

Could we trade Pick 13,Gresham compo pick and 31 for 4 and Hollands from GC we get a top mid plus we still pick up another one at pick 4.
Or trade pick 13 Gresham compo and Billings pick plus our pick 51 for 4 and Hollands if they don't like that we give pick 31 as well but get a 28 or 35 back

[Otiman]

If any of those scenarios don't involve dealing with Essendon they'd be better.

[saynta]

Keep Gresh FFS, Some people.......

[shanegrambeau]

Listen to Joey support Ben Rutten’s decision to drop Shiel last year..
https://www.triplem.com.au/story/joey-a ... iel-198672

Go to the audio bit obviously

Takeaway point

-good player
-gets dropped on the back of a 26 possession game
-poor kicking
-it was happening last year too, under the old coach


Brilliant Shane asks..

Would RTB ‘sort him out’ attitude wise?
Is Gresham that good anyway? (Never mind him at pick 13?)

[Otiman]

Because the deals are uncoupled - the FA offer can't be linked in a 'deal' between the clubs with the trades unless there's a third party contract outside of the AFL with club lawyers. It will be interesting to see what happens.

The scenarios are:
The Gresham bid is first, we then do the Shiel for late picks deal.
OR
The Shiel deal is first and we have to trust Essendon to submit the offer and have it accepted by the AFL.

I feel like unless Essendon puts the FA offer on the table first, we should walk away.

Whatever the case, we will know between October 9th and 13th. At least the trade and FA periods overlap.

Monday, October 9
• Continental Tyres AFL Trade Period Commences – Players & Selections (9am)

Friday, October 13
• Close of AFL Restricted Free Agency Offer and Unrestricted Free Agency Period (5pm).

[Scollop]

Listen to Joey support Ben Rutten’s decision to drop Shiel last year..
https://www.triplem.com.au/story/joey-a ... iel-198672

Go to the audio bit obviously

Takeaway point

-good player
-gets dropped on the back of a 26 possession game
-poor kicking
-it was happening last year too, under the old coach


Brilliant Shane asks..

Would RTB ‘sort him out’ attitude wise?
Is Gresham that good anyway? (Never mind him at pick 13?)

Dylan wasn't dropped this year. Got injured round 12 and played as sub rnd 17 and 18. He had injuries and couldn't play out the year.

Shiel was the ideal whipping boy in 2022 under Ben Rutten... he's on big money and his team mates expected more...as did the club.

Similar to Hill in 2021/2022 when we were losing....
except Ratts and the selection committee refused to drop him.

Same thing could be said of several players in various teams. Some are perceived by fans as mercenaries and it filters down to club level.

Some of them get blamed for team losses and I think that's what happened to Dylan Shiel under Ben Rutten, however Rutten still valued the role Shiel could play.

Shiel played some very good footy this year. He was never actually dropped although you could say he failed to break back into the line up after getting injured. I think Brad Scott had conceded that they weren't going to play finals and just used him as a sub.

I think Brad actually wasn't interested in playing finals, so therefore, Shiel was not seen as part of their future plans. Unlike Rutten, I don't think Scott wants him in the midfield mix going forward.

[Sanctorum]

Following article by Jon Ralph in today's Hun:

It gives a very clear insight into the AFL's rules regarding player trading.

It looks like Ralph had a gander at this thread I remain open-minded to Shiel coming to Moorabbin, provided that won't entail any of the first three 2023 draft picks and if Essendon are keen to off-load him that might just be a futre 3rd rounder. He will certainly add some genuine A grade quality to St Kilda's midfield.

"SHIEL OPEN TO SAINTS FUTURE

Dylan Shiel is open to finding a new home at Moorabbin as clubs seek clarity on the size of the contracts required to trigger first-round compensation this off-
season.

Essendon will offer Ben McKay a deal that is understood to have less than $800,000 of guaranteed salary each year, which puts North Melbourne at risk of
missing out on pick 3 as compensation.

It raises the possibility North Melbourne could match a free agency bid if they are only offered an end-of-first-round compensation pick.

The Herald Sun revealed last week Essendon was open to a complicated deal which would see them secure St Kilda’s Jade Gresham, which would hand the
Saints a free agency compensation pick.

Essendon would then be open to trading with St Kilda for Shiel, who has two more seasons on his deal.

St Kilda is believed to have engaged with Shiel to discuss his interest in a move to Moorabbin.

While there have been various reports about the length of his contract, it is understood he signed a seven-year deal worth over $800,000 with Essendon at
the end of 2018.

Shiel has been happy at Essendon and Keen to help them play finals but is aware the club is well stocked in its midfield and might consider moving him on.

St Kilda fans are sceptical about whether Shiel would improve their midfield but he was in exceptional form in the first seven weeks of the year until injuries hit.

He had kicked six goals and kicked the ball at a high efficiency rate in round 8 before injuries including a lingering foot issue.

Champion Data rated Shiel as Essendon’s best player to round 8 and the 19th ranked player in the competition.

Clubs are having meetings this week with the AFL about issues including how the new pay deal will influence free agency compensation.

Last year clubs believed the contract figure needed was $790,000 over at least three seasons for band-one compensation but the pay deal will increase wages 10per cent in 2023, 5.1 per cent in 2024 and 12.6 per cent in 2025.

So clubs are eager to know if contracts for players like McKay and Gresham would need to be more than $850,000 from 2024 onwards to secure first-round
compensation.

While Hawthorn offered up to $850,000 a year for Ben McKay, Essendon’s deal could reach that scope with incentives but is understood not to reach $800,000
of locked-in salary each year.

The AFL’s free agency compensation formula compares the new contract to every other deal across the competition for players over 25 years of age, with the contract needing to be in the top five per cent of those deals to trigger first-round compo.

The Roos will hope the league helps massage that compensation with his age at only 25 years of age helping them in their bid to secure the No.3 draft pick for
his loss."

[The G Train Legacy]

Free Agency happens first doesnt it?
Can't we just take pick 13 as the compo pick.
End of.

No, because we'd be getting pick 13 because Essendon would be paying Gresham more than he's worth. If Essendon offered Gresham a contract for his true value, we'd only get a second rounder at best as compensation.

So if we were getting 13 as compensation and giving it back, we're effectively trading Gresham for Shiel instead of a second round compo. That's the context you'd look at that deal in.

Having said that, I don't think that's the way it will happen. If we do get 13 as compo and trade it back, there would probably be something as well as Shiel coming back.

[SaintPav]

He’s too old.

[CQ SAINT]

Pick 8 has to come into play for this to appear legit.

Essendon offer Gresh 3 x $850 with triggers and we get 13.

Essendon dump Shiel, $1.6m deal and 8 for 13.

Deal done.

Essendon free up $1.6 to secure Gresh with a 1st round compo and receive change because he is worth $1.8 for 3 and they will only need $1m to fulfill his bonus if he lasts 4 years.

Essendon lose 287 draft points and we gain 287 draft points, meaning Gresh is valued at 574 draft point or pick 32. Lets be real.

Essendon gain another $600k turning McKay's offer from 3 x $650 to 3 x $850 and they dish some compo to North.

Essendon still have pick 13.

We lose Gresh and 13

We gain Shiel and pick 8.

If we want to balance our books and minimise our risks, delist Mackenzie for Shiel and invest the heart ache elsewhere and recruit a kid with pick 8.

This makes sense and looks perfectly fair.

[Otiman]

It's a real shame list management is now all about salary cap management, and renegging on dodgy deals done in the past.

[CQ SAINT]

It's just management. Emotions are priceless.

[saintbob]

There’s so much bulls*** being thrown around about this trade, the so called “Trade Experts” are as confused as the rest us.

[older saint]

Pick 8 has to come into play for this to appear legit.

Essendon offer Gresh 3 x $850 with triggers and we get 13.

Essendon dump Shiel, $1.6m deal and 8 for 13.

Deal done.

Essendon free up $1.6 to secure Gresh with a 1st round compo and receive change because he is worth $1.8 for 3 and they will only need $1m to fulfill his bonus if he lasts 4 years.

Essendon lose 287 draft points and we gain 287 draft points, meaning Gresh is valued at 574 draft point or pick 32. Lets be real.

Essendon gain another $600k turning McKay's offer from 3 x $650 to 3 x $850 and they dish some compo to North.

Essendon still have pick 13.

We lose Gresh and 13

We gain Shiel and pick 8.

If we want to balance our books and minimise our risks, delist Mackenzie for Shiel and invest the heart ache elsewhere and recruit a kid with pick 8.

This makes sense and looks perfectly fair.

That actually makes a lot of sense.
We get picks 8 and 12
Send future second rounder for Henry

Can the look to trade up in the draft if possible