View Full Version : Wonder who he has in mind
Ford Fairlane
16 Aug 2006, 13:12
Choco in his latest Uncut (http://portadelaidefc.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=289551)seems to be hinting there's a grab bag full of players he'd like to add to the squad.
2007 team predictions might have to keep a couple of places clear ... ;)
What will Port be looking for in the trade and draft to add to this magnificent bunch of kids that are coming through?
Roy
MARK WILLIAMS: There’s a variety of players we need. You can never do without enough tall players who can run. Certainly midfielders, we’ve lost a lot of those since the grand final and you can’t have enough goalkickers either. So it’s a wide variety, we’d love to have any good players here and that doesn’t limit us to young players. There could be some older players as well.
wharfie_1870
16 Aug 2006, 13:41
I assume you are referring to the "There could be some older players as well" part Ford as the rest of it is pretty much stating the bleeding obvious.
I wonder what Choco considers as older? Over 25 but under 28?
Aker?
Porthos
16 Aug 2006, 13:47
OK, I don't really see how anyone could draw a conclusion from that statement, and I think that was the intent.
Ford Fairlane
16 Aug 2006, 13:52
There was a time when Choco would almost name the players he was after, but he's too media savvy for that now. He's now more than suitably vague.
Medhurst?
I'm not trolling, the guy has got the kicking yips at the moment. He's as fit as ever. He came second in the beep test at the club behind Headland. Its purely a confidence thing with him, Though he'd probably be competing with Motlop for a spot.
If he got his kicking back on track, was never really a problem in previous years, he would become a very valuable player.
Porthos
16 Aug 2006, 14:03
If you don't want Medhurst, why would we want Medhurst?
If you don't want Medhurst, why would we want Medhurst?
We want Medhurst, but i think he wants to move to a team where his position in the 22 would be more secure. Not sure if thats the case at Port. Just asking.
Its a little bit presumptious to assume that if he can't get a game for us he isn't worth looking at. He's out of form, if he returns to being a 40 goal a year forward, any team would have him.
Porthos
16 Aug 2006, 14:11
We already traded for one of those guys last year.
Choco in his latest Uncut (http://portadelaidefc.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=289551)seems to be hinting there's a grab bag full of players he'd like to add to the squad.
2007 team predictions might have to keep a couple of places clear ... ;)
Gardiner? Should have had him in the first place instead of Downsborough
Medhurst?
Can be a class midfielder. Has got a very solid body so should be able to throw it around a bit, break tackles etc. Long kick, good pace and endurance, chases hard when his mind is right.
If choco can harness his mindset (a change of clubs would certainly help), he can be a very very very good player
Did i mention he's a good mark? :P
Porthos
16 Aug 2006, 14:42
OK deeps, who do you want to drop from our side to fit Medhurst in?
RussellEbertHandball
16 Aug 2006, 14:43
Last week I wrote about the game up at the Gabba in 2003 and listed the players that are missing from that side. As a bit of an exercise in seeing who we need to one day get back to those heights, I will list the names and you can judge who has successfully been replaced them.
Premiership players gone
Hardwick
Carr
Schofield
James
Pickett
Montgomery
Wanganeen
Others gone
Guerra
Stevens
Cockatoo-Collins
Paxman
Primus
Cochrane
Poulton.
Likely to be cut
Bishop
Kingsley
Francou
To be replaced end of 2007??
Wilson
Wakelin
Trade bait
Dew
Thurstans
Trades
2003
None
2004
Walsh poor mans Hardwick, good player but not as good as Canckles
Shattock poor mans Guerra
2005
Motlop straight swap for Che
Lonie softer, less skifull version of Schofield
Some of our 2003 younger players have stepped up, Shaun and Kane, Chad improved over 2003 then redefined himself late last year into a midfielder. Dom improved in '04 but hasn't made great improvements since. Throw into that mix the long absences of Shaun, Pickett, James, Wilson, Brogan and Chad last year, and Tredders, Peter, Wangers, Brogan, Dom etc this year and it's easy to see why we have fallen so quickly.
Pearce is about the only kid who you can say right now has replaced one of the players listed above that is better than Poulton and Cochrane. Salopek's best, I don't think beats Kingsley at his best, not yet. Surjan is a match for Poults the way he has played this year. We have 2 or 3 great kids and a lot of very good ones but unfortunately we have to have some patience for them to replace the list above.:(
If we trade, I'd like for us to get someone as good as some of the players in the list, not spare parts players who will fill in here and there when we have lots of injuries.
pafc4life
16 Aug 2006, 14:48
Cassisi -> Medhurst
Dew, Thurstans & 3rd rounder -> Griffen
Porthos
16 Aug 2006, 14:49
Cassisi -> MedhurstThat would be utterly retarded.
Dew, Thurstans & 3rd rounder -> GriffenWhy would the Bulldogs want any of that?
pafc4life
16 Aug 2006, 14:52
That would be utterly retarded.
Not really, Dom's a champ but Medhurst has more ability and could be developed in the midfield as well as a gun forward
Why would the Bulldogs want any of that?
You reckon they wouldn't bite at that?
Porthos
16 Aug 2006, 15:02
Not really, Dom's a champ but Medhurst has more abilityNo he doesn't.
and could be developed in the midfield as well as a gun forwardWe already have AFL standard midfielders and forwards. Medhurst would be one of the shortest guys on our list, and is noted for being a marking forward in lots of space, not a crumbing forward in not so much.
Why do you think that Freo have a real forward line this year?
You reckon they wouldn't bite at that?The Bulldogs would treat that with the sort of disdain we offered to Collingwood for Heath Scotland.
OK deeps, who do you want to drop from our side to fit Medhurst in?
Are you saying our worst player > medhurst?
His flexibility of being a forward would be good too.
I'm sure we could fit him in the side.
Enough with the 'medium' marking talls. One in the forward lines is more then enough. And I'd rather see all and any of Burgoynes x 2, Cornes x 2, Salopek, Pearce, Thomson, Ebert, Ezard, Cassisi and Surjan doing various jobs through our midfield then Medhurst.
As for the bulldogs, yes, they still would probably pay a good price for Thurstans, but not that. A more realistic one would be Thurstans + our third round pick for their second round pick (a likely improvement of 6 - 8 places).
Ford Fairlane
16 Aug 2006, 15:09
Medhurst concerns me insofar as Choco has been linked to trying to trade for him for the past 2 years, and Freo seem to have tired of him now. Hopefully Motlop has cured him of that infatuation.
I reckon Dew would have zero trade value now with NFL rumours, his Hollywood bound girlfriend publicly saying "they" could be moving for her career, and the not inconsiderable observation that he is the size of a small mountain range.
Porthos
16 Aug 2006, 15:12
His flexibility of being a forward would be good too. Yeah, we only have about a million forwards options.
I'm sure we could fit him in the side.OK, so who are you dropping to fit Medhurst in the side?
RussellEbertHandball
16 Aug 2006, 15:16
I reckon Dew would have zero trade value now with NFL rumours, his Hollywood bound girlfriend publicly saying "they" could be moving for her career, and the not inconsiderable observation that he is the size of a small mountain range.
:D
And how big would he get if he went to the USA. They don't serve small meals over there. Last time I was in the States, I ordered a salad as I wasn't that hungry. Ended up with enough grass to feed a cow for a week.
wharfie_1870
16 Aug 2006, 15:21
.........I reckon Dew would have zero trade value now with NFL rumours, his Hollywood bound girlfriend publicly saying "they" could be moving for her career, and the not inconsiderable observation that he is the size of a small mountain range.Did him come back from Darwin or is he still in the Territory?
http://nla.gov.au/nla.pic-an2854600-v.jpg
Lightning_Rod
16 Aug 2006, 15:22
I believe we don't need Medhurst as we have Pearce running from the midfield doing cameos on the forward line, Mahoney and Ebert crumbing, but also having strong leads and over head marks, Lade, Tredrea and Damon in the forward line for height, thats enough for the forward to work for a few years We need to be looking at a possible replacement for Tredrea, also the back line needs to be assessed pretty quickly, i hope they have faith in the like of Bob AKA Carlile, Willits etc. if not we need to be looking else where, our midfield is set, we don't really need to look for any new midfielders, but maybe just maybe Deluca won't be up to our lofty ruck standards which we have held since our inception, then what?
wharfie_1870
16 Aug 2006, 15:28
:D
And how big would he get if he went to the USA. They don't serve small meals over there. Last time I was in the States, I ordered a salad as I wasn't that hungry. Ended up with enough grass to feed a cow for a week.You should of had the soup ;)
When I lived there we would eat at this Italian restaurant once a week. After eating as much as we could we'd get the remainder in a box (doggy bag in Oz). That would give us another couple of meals. I still put on 10kg while I was there :o
No hope for Stewy but at least NFL punters don't really need to be fit.
wharfie_1870
16 Aug 2006, 15:29
I believe we don't need Medhurst as we have Pearce running from the midfield doing cameos on the forward line, Mahoney and Ebert crumbing, but also having strong leads and over head marks, Lade, Tredrea and Damon in the forward line for height, thats enough for the forward to work for a few years...........Agree, we have no use for Medhurst at this time.
I'm not saying play him as a forward much, mainly a midfielder. He can IF REQUIRED play forward. A good marking midfielder with pace and strength. It's what we've been crying out for, for quite a long time.
His skills and attributes are brilliant, it's only the mindset that is the problem. And i don't see it as a huge problem, many players have struggled at Fremantle, and then become very good away.
I know, that if he is drafted by most other clubs and played in the midfield, he will become very very good.
He's better than Dew and Cassisi to start with. If Dew can play almost 22 rounds with us, so can Medhurst. Medhurst has a very long kick as well, though not the class of Dew on the kick, but that's very rare.
If we can get him for a decent price, i'd do the deal.
RussellEbertHandball
16 Aug 2006, 15:36
I used to be a fan of Medhurst as he was a bit flashy and could win the game. However, he is a one trick pony at the moment. Freo have worked out they play better footy with only Farmer up forward, not with both of them.
Go back to my list at post#13, who does Medhurst replace, who he is the equal to, or greater than that player? Appart from Che I don't see anyone else. We have replaced Che with Motlop. We have him, Ebert and Mahoney as our 3 smalls and that's enough give the other rotations through the forward line.
wharfie_1870
16 Aug 2006, 15:46
......He's better than Dew and Cassisi to start with. If Dew can play almost 22 rounds with us, so can Medhurst. Medhurst has a very long kick as well, though not the class of Dew on the kick, but that's very rare.....Saying he is better than Dew is no recommendation at the moment. Dew is certainly under performing and the fact that he continues to get a game when on form he doesn't deserve it certainly wouldn't justify playing Medhurst.
Cassisi is a different type of player to Medhurst and given the players we have on our list I would be very happy to stick with Dom.
wharfie_1870
16 Aug 2006, 15:48
.....Go back to my list at post#13, who does Medhurst replace, who he is the equal to, or greater than that player? Appart from Che I don't see anyone else. We have replaced Che with Motlop. We have him, Ebert and Mahoney as our 3 smalls and that's enough give the other rotations through the forward line.Agree, we have no use for Medhurst at this time.
Lightning_Rod
16 Aug 2006, 16:01
deeps you may be refering to him playing as a midfielder, but do you consider him to be better than pearce, both burgers, kane, or even thomo?? i dont think midfielders are what we should be focussing on, its not our midfield that isn't performing its our tall forwards or lack there of, and our backline which is well below par.
Supertiger
16 Aug 2006, 17:23
I mentioned this before on here maybe in the last 2 weeks, but alot of people around the place reckon Jay Schulz is in the top 2 or 3 Port targets if not the number 1 target for your club. The issue is as it was 2 weeks ago, does Jay Schulz wanna play for you or does he want to play for us, and can you do a proper deal that satisfies Richmond. I believe Richmond will want picks for Schulz and not players.
medhurst can hardly play as a small forward (roundhouse kicks) let alone as a midfielder (doesnt handpass, tackle or do 1%ers)
Does not know how to play any other position than as a small forward and even then, doesnt dominate at afl.
Move on, we have given this guy too much time....
Ford Fairlane
16 Aug 2006, 17:38
I mentioned this before on here maybe in the last 2 weeks, but alot of people around the place reckon Jay Schulz is in the top 2 or 3 Port targets if not the number 1 target for your club. The issue is as it was 2 weeks ago, does Jay Schulz wanna play for you or does he want to play for us, and can you do a proper deal that satisfies Richmond. I believe Richmond will want picks for Schulz and not players.
Four years on the Tigers list and he's probably had one game ever that would make you sit up and take notice (6 goals on Mal Michael in 2004). 34 games and in 4 of those he reached double figures in possessions. Not to mention a well documented off field issue that cost you a significant sponsorship. I'm not saying you're wrong, but seriously what would you think he's worth? He's done less in his career than either Toby Thurstans or Damon White right now.
Supertiger
16 Aug 2006, 17:56
For mine, Id hate to see Richmond let Schulz go. Hes 6'4, a good grab, a good size, a good kick and has good speed of the mark. Hes had injuries for the past 2 years as well as spending time at CHB which he did really well as well. Hes actually a good player, but if you dont want him, ring up Williams and tell him to lay off coz Id love for us to keep him. And hes only 22 years old.
Macca19
16 Aug 2006, 18:24
I dont understand all the love for Medhurst here. I certainly wouldnt do a straight swap with Cassisi for him. Dom at least has a few strings to his bow. Medhurst is, and has always been a marking small forward. He isnt a crumber and I have never seen anything to suggest he would be a useful midfielder.
Bulldogs certainly wouldnt bite at that Griffen trade. If we want Griffen, we have to be prepared to give up our first pick and probably a bit more as well.
If we are to trade this year, it should be after a player of quality and preferably under 25 as well. I wouldnt call Medhurst quality.
Count Zero
16 Aug 2006, 18:32
So we want a tall, pacy midfielder who can kick goals from anywhere. No problem. :)
Total Power
16 Aug 2006, 18:36
Stay clear of Jay Schulz.He is not the kind of player we want.He is a complete dud in the making.I just hope its not some washed up old hack.But please Choco, dont trade your first round pick :(
Tarrant is up for grabs going by a number of radio reports I have heard.
Tredders66
16 Aug 2006, 19:10
Tarrant is up for grabs going by a number of radio reports I have heard.
dont want him.
Total Power
16 Aug 2006, 19:17
We already have a HFF who cant kick, we dont need another.We have to pay heaps for him anyway.Not worth it.
Porthos
16 Aug 2006, 19:52
Tarrant is the archetype of the forward that needs a ridiculous amount of space to be effective. Unless we are going to revert to the floodmaniacs, there wouldn't be much point.
PJ Power
17 Aug 2006, 00:05
I would stay well clear of all of those suggested trade options.
Cassisi is being under-estimated here. He was pivotal to us winning hard balls against the Dogs and can do this on a more frequent basis (as he did in 2005) provided he is given tagging responsibilities.
Small forwards should definitely not be on our radar.
Surely our experiences with tall forwards over the years have taught us that quality not quantity pays - adding Schulz to the Thurstans, White queue would be a huge waste of effort. Keep our picks and go all out to recruit a tall forward.
Mr Magoo
17 Aug 2006, 08:22
Purely guess work & i would suggest that chocco has his eyes on the following types of players....
A Tall, quick running backmen ala like how Bishop used to play for us a few years ago.
Midfielders who go hard at the man & ball. Another 'Predator' like Thomson wouldn't go astray either. :thumbsu:
Forwards : Small elusive forward & a mobile tall forward who can take contested marks.
ctpower
17 Aug 2006, 13:49
not at all interested in medhurst or jay schultz.
i just hope choco doesn't trade away our 1st pick as i'm sure we can pick up a real gun with this pick.
Lets hope a key position foward is still around.
ps what about surjan for sam butler.
Toots Hibbert
17 Aug 2006, 16:00
Purely guess work & i would suggest that chocco has his eyes on the following types of players....
A Tall, quick running backmen ala like how Bishop used to play for us a few years ago.
Midfielders who go hard at the man & ball. Another 'Predator' like Thomson wouldn't go astray either. :thumbsu:
Forwards : Small elusive forward & a mobile tall forward who can take contested marks.
I hope Choco's number one priority is an excellent key forward prospect. Another Lance Franklin would be nice.
Daniel Bell - young SA born midfielder struggling to get a game in a decent team with a solid midfield group.
I'd look at Gardiner as well, finally get rid of Thrust or White and gives us another Lade type option up forward as well as being considerably younger than Ladey will give time for another young ruckman to come through (Giles, Deluca or Minson - hopefully).
A forward line with Gardiner and Tredrea with Lade cameo's would be a very hard match up. Brogan could spend more time in a floating defender, ruckman playing a kick behind play role and thus free up Chad for a midfield role at times.
I can't say any player bandied around as trade bait has me desperately wanting to get him at Port. There's a couple (Gardiner and Tarrant) for a bargain pick up I'd take, but given they won't be bargain pickups, I'm happy to pass.
Another 50 odd game fringe player from another club who just keeps a youngster out and I'll scream (which with Choco is a 90% certainy I'll be screaming at the end of draft week :( ). I just hope we don't trade our first and second round picks this year.
Toots Hibbert
17 Aug 2006, 17:34
I can't say any player bandied around as trade bait has me desperately wanting to get him at Port. There's a couple (Gardiner and Tarrant) for a bargain pick up I'd take, but given they won't be bargain pickups, I'm happy to pass.
Another 50 odd game fringe player from another club who just keeps a youngster out and I'll scream (which with Choco is a 90% certainy I'll be screaming at the end of draft week :( ). I just hope we don't trade our first and second round picks this year.
A week or two back Peter Rohde indicated that Port would not be giving up draft picks to get Ackermanis so hopefully that is an indication of intent not to give up draft picks.
Ford Fairlane
17 Aug 2006, 17:46
Choco seems to have a keen eye on our draft pick this year, he's mentioned it a few times since the win on Saturday, so hopefully it's for using not abusing.
RussellEbertHandball
17 Aug 2006, 18:12
In the 2000 draft we swapped pick 4 for Wakelin and Stk used it to trade for Hamil, Carlton then drafted Livingston. We won, Stk won but Clt have lost.
I reckon that was a good trade. A KPP who has played 100+ games for the club and probably the 2nd toughest postion in the field to play. Why wouldn't we consider a similiar trade for someone who is 25ish played 100 games and is likely to play 100+ for the club and is a KPP. Wakelin now is a mentor for our developing KPP backmen, another advantage of trading for Wakelin.
Midfielders are easy to find and I wouldn't use pick 4 for one unless they are top shelf eg Judd, Ball, Carr, Wells etc (yes I know 4 + plenty more).
Given the Wakelin experience is anyone 100% opposed to trading our first round for an equivalent type KPP player. If so why?
crazy_big_al
17 Aug 2006, 18:43
Given the Wakelin experience is anyone 100% opposed to trading our first round for an equivalent type KPP player. If so why?
Because this year is a very deep draft and the players are VERY very good at the top end
PJ Power
17 Aug 2006, 19:14
Let me preface this post by pointing out that my preference is for us to keep our top pick (which would be no.6 on current ladder position).
However, there has been a little bit of talk over the year (not much here mind you) that Port have had their eye on Daniel Wells and that the move to get Motlop was partly with Wells in mind.
Clearly it would take alot for the Kangas to let go of such a player.
But if he was keen and we were, what do people think of:
1. The principle of us handing over our top pick in a trade for Wells?
2. The likelihood of the Roos accepting a combination of pick 6 and a player who we considered expendable (eg Dew). Would they consider a guy like Willits as being of interest as part of a trade? Note I'm not trying to insult them by throwing up Toby.
Once again, I don't necessarily think this is something we should pursue, but I'm wondering about how fellow Port supporters consider Wells' value to our side if he was interested in joining us.
Ford Fairlane
17 Aug 2006, 19:24
I remember the lynching party the Roos sent over here when we chased Motlop - pitchforks, burning torches, slack-jawed droolers ... I can't imagine the horrors they'd visit upon us if we chased Wells. They'd be dragging gimps out of the basement.
FWIW I'd say we're looking at pick 6 at this stage. As a rough rule of thumb, going by others assessments on the Draft and Trading Board you'd think Gibbs, Gumbleton and Hansen would go top 3, Selwood, Thorp and Sellar would be in the next group of 3, with Proud and Reiwoldt maybe peeking in.
So we'd likely be looking at one of Sellar, Selwood and Thorp. I know people here have doubts on Sellar's hunger, and I've not seen Thorp or Selwood. Are any outside that top group going to give us what we want? I guess if the right deal was on the table you'd consider trading the pick. Especially if we slipped a bit (very unlikely admittedly that we could drift to #7).
Crow-mo on the Adelaide Board did an interesting assessment of the so-called superdraft of 2001 that showed these assessments are far from iron-clad guarantees.
PJ Power
17 Aug 2006, 19:30
The reason I raised Wells' name is because he is a young player (Salopek's age from memory) who clearly is going to be very good, if not a champion. His best position is a little unclear to me, but he probably could be very useful at HB or in the middle, although not as that in-and-under midfielder our current squad craves.
I just wonder how beneficial such a player would be for our current side.
As a direct swap for pick 6, I would consider him, as the key forward options left for us to draft by that pick are starting to look a little less impressive.
I wouldn't take him for much more than pick 6 though, purely as I don't think his type of player is at the top of our list of priorities.
pafc4life
17 Aug 2006, 19:33
Let me preface this post by pointing out that my preference is for us to keep our top pick (which would be no.6 on current ladder position).
However, there has been a little bit of talk over the year (not much here mind you) that Port have had their eye on Daniel Wells and that the move to get Motlop was partly with Wells in mind.
Clearly it would take alot for the Kangas to let go of such a player.
But if he was keen and we were, what do people think of:
1. The principle of us handing over our top pick in a trade for Wells?
2. The likelihood of the Roos accepting a combination of pick 6 and a player who we considered expendable (eg Dew). Would they consider a guy like Willits as being of interest as part of a trade? Note I'm not trying to insult them by throwing up Toby.
Once again, I don't necessarily think this is something we should pursue, but I'm wondering about how fellow Port supporters consider Wells' value to our side if he was interested in joining us.
i'd say that Wells is what 22 maybe 23...and has potential to be a genuine champion of the game. If the Kangaroos were to say Yep we will take Pick 6 for Wells it would have to be taken into serious consideration...what's to say the player we pick with Pick 6 is gonna offer better service to the club than Wells could? S and P Burgoyne, Motlop, Pearce and Wells...that would have to be a scary thought for opposition sides
RussellEbertHandball
17 Aug 2006, 19:40
Because this year is a very deep draft and the players are VERY very good at the top end
It is very good in theory, we will not know the answer until somewhere between the end of 2009 and 2011. The player managers are the one spruiking it up. Crow-Mo on the Adelaide board had an interesting thread on the top 20 picks of the 2001 draft, the last so called super draft. The general concensus was that 5 years down the track, somewhere between 6 to 8 of those players have made it and can be considered very good players. None were KPPs!!
There are no guarantees. The kid or traded player could get a knee injury, have an accident etc etc and not prove their worth. The only criteria you have to make a judgement call is potential vs a track record. Wakelin has given us 6 good years and we may get a 7th. A young KPP could be on the list for 10 to 15 years and you might not getting much out of them for the first 3 years.
Would I trade a top pick away for a Gumbelton, probably not as I've seen him play. Anyone else I don't know, but I would at least think about it.
Porthos
17 Aug 2006, 19:52
OK, my thoughts
Of all the supposed trade rumours put forward this year, Wells is the only one that doesn't make me want to hit someone. Of course Roos fans would bitch and moan about it, blah blah, is worth pick 6++ and whatever other crap that usually spews forth. Wells has potential, but do we really need him? Is he definitely better than a player we can draft? While it would be good to get him, I reckon we would need to give up too much.
On the Wakelin idea, well, who else out there has Wakelin's pedigree that another club would even consider trading? The only reason we got Wakes is because St Kilda were a shambles...at the time they didn't even officially have a coach! Anyway, back on the pedigree. Ex-Port, vice captain of his side, experienced, Jack Oatey medallist...and due to hit a career peak. Anyone see that guy available out there?
As for who would be available at pick #6...Riewoldt has probably jumped up the rankings, Albert Proud reads like a new Josh Carr with skills, Selwood has been the Next Big Thing for years...there are plenty of options.
If we trade pick #6, I never want to hear Choco comment that we don't get a chance to pick the good kids, ever ever ever ever ever again.
Macca19
17 Aug 2006, 20:07
I wouldnt mind Andrew Welsh from Essendon. Probably not a current high demand spot in our side but hes a good tough player. Essendon probably wouldnt give him up though.
I really would like us to keep pick 6. Thorp is one that could drop to pick 6. Selwood would give us another class midfielder. I havent seen much of Proud, but from what I saw I dont think hes worth pick 6. Riewoldt would be good.
I do think that if hes available at 6, Sellar will be our pick.
Theres only 3-4 players that I wouldnt mind seeing in a Port guernsey next year that I would consider gettable in terms of trades.
RussellEbertHandball
17 Aug 2006, 20:08
OK, my thoughts
On the Wakelin idea, well, who else out there has Wakelin's pedigree that another club would even consider trading? The only reason we got Wakes is because St Kilda were a shambles...at the time they didn't even officially have a coach! Anyway, back on the pedigree. Ex-Port, vice captain of his side, experienced, Jack Oatey medallist...and due to hit a career peak. Anyone see that guy available out there?
Stk weren't in that much of a shambles. They basically gave up Wakelin for Hamil. That's a smart trade from their position. I'm not saying those events will occur again and that there is an equivalent to Wakelin readily available but if a similar situation occurs you would have to look at it seriously, even something like 6 + Thurstans. If there are disgruntled players who want to leave their club then we aren't going to know about them until their seasons end.
Porthos
17 Aug 2006, 20:53
Stk weren't in that much of a shambles. They basically gave up Wakelin for Hamil. That's a smart trade from their position.You mean the position of having #1 pick in the preseason draft?
As for it being a good trade for them, in hindsight I'm not sure it was. Hamill has been excellent, but seriously, how ****ful is St Kilda's defence? Here they've been peaking for years, and can't take the next step because they can't stop good forwards with their defenders...best they can do is defeat midfield supply. They even ended up trading a first round pick for Luke Penny to plug the hole, and that blew up in their faces.
Structurally, St Kilda ditching the Wakelins was just dumb. They'd already lost Jamie Shanahan two years earlier.
I'm not saying those events will occur again and that there is an equivalent to Wakelin readily available but if a similar situation occurs you would have to look at it seriously, even something like 6 + Thurstans. If there are disgruntled players who want to leave their club then we aren't going to know about them until their seasons end.Two problems.
1. Disgruntled player would have to want to very specifically come to Port.
2. We would have to meet the club's demands, as we now pick too late in the PSD.
This is where the ex-Port part of Wakelin's credentials comes in.
RussellEbertHandball
17 Aug 2006, 21:54
Got to admit that I don't understand why they traded Darryl and delisted Shane at the same time. Both have played good footy at their respective clubs.
The ex-Port part of Wakelin was huge. I think that Byron was probably the last player we will be able to use the "going back home to Port" factor in the trade game. Players who go thru the Magpies are not likely to have the same attachment to Port like those who played at Alberton prior to 1997 did. Thomson, Didak both weren't drive to get back home at all costs.
I don't think a Wakelin type situation has much hope of occuring but I would seriously look at it, if it did.
Porthos
19 Aug 2006, 16:47
Cameron Mooney - any thoughts?
Ford Fairlane
19 Aug 2006, 17:19
Cameron Mooney - any thoughts?
No I don't think he has any. ;)
I used to be a fan when he was with the Roos. Never quite lived up to what I expected he might and seems to be out of control these days. Still don't mind him, big, tough, provides a contest.
Think he's worth a shot?
Porthos
19 Aug 2006, 17:25
Well, I'm just wondering if he's ****ed up enough this year that he'd be tradeable. He's in the category of players that I wouldn't bitch about eternally if we traded for him...it'd be fair to say that he'd bring something to the side that no-one else on our list right now can.
As for would Port/Choco do it, well, he's a tall player that can run, and would fit the same sort of thinking as us going after Pickett and Hardwick.
At the moment its just an interesting thought and I'd like to see what other people reckon.
No I don't think he has any. ;)
I used to be a fan when he was with the Roos. Never quite lived up to what I expected he might and seems to be out of control these days. Still don't mind him, big, tough, provides a contest.
Think he's worth a shot?
It's a fair possibility that the cats may want to trade him, i'd imagine a reasonable sized clean could occur down there. He's big and angry which would be a positive for us. He doesn't have a big media pressence in melbourne. Also the cats are going to pick up a gun tall forward (father-son) so he may be expendable. He's 26 (almost 27), what would it take to get him?
Ford Fairlane
20 Aug 2006, 13:27
Well, I'm just wondering if he's ****ed up enough this year that he'd be tradeable. He's in the category of players that I wouldn't bitch about eternally if we traded for him...it'd be fair to say that he'd bring something to the side that no-one else on our list right now can.
As for would Port/Choco do it, well, he's a tall player that can run, and would fit the same sort of thinking as us going after Pickett and Hardwick.
At the moment its just an interesting thought and I'd like to see what other people reckon.
Yeah I reckon I would do a trade (at the right price). My only concern would be a little about his age - 28 next year - but you'd get a few years out of him. And he's the type of big forward who could work well with Tredrea as I'd expect Tredrea to mostly play close to goals next year. Mooney seems to be handy at that pushing upfield role. And yes, he'd bring some of that intimidation factor with him.
I remember the lynching party the Roos sent over here when we chased Motlop - pitchforks, burning torches, slack-jawed droolers ...
That wasn't their lynching party, that was their cheersquad.
RussellEbertHandball
20 Aug 2006, 14:44
Mooney is racking up suspensions and is like Pickett, getting closing to becoming a liability for his side and maybe unemployable. Could Choco have changed Pickett's game like Dahiher has?
From his last report;
Cameron Mooney, Geelong, has been charged with a Level Two charging offence for harging Daniel Pratt, the Kangaroos, during the first quarter of the Round 17 match etween Geelong and the Kangaroos, played at Manuka Oval on Sunday July 30, 2006. In summary, his previous poor record means his penalty cannot be reduced from a onegame sanction.
The incident was assessed .........a Level Two offence, drawing 125 points and a one-match sanction. He has a total of three matches suspended within the last three years, increasing his penalty by 20 per cent to 150 points and he also has a further 50 residual points from within the last 12 months, increasing the penalty to 200 points and a two game sanction. An early plea reduces the penalty by 25 per cent to 150 points and a one-game sanction.
He got one game so he now carries a 30% loading and 50 points into this weeks likely report for that hit yesterday on Buchanan . If he ends up with two games he will be on a 50% loading and any carry forward points. That's a lot like Pickett ended up with after his hit on Begley and then on Wiggins.
Cam Mooney is not someone that I would like to see in the Power colours. He is a lose cannon and would only be continually suspended.
From watching parts of the game yesterday, I wouldnt be surprised to see him facing the tribunal again this week for striking. Do we really want someone like that playing for us?????????
Toots Hibbert
20 Aug 2006, 16:05
Well, I'm just wondering if he's ****ed up enough this year that he'd be tradeable. He's in the category of players that I wouldn't bitch about eternally if we traded for him...it'd be fair to say that he'd bring something to the side that no-one else on our list right now can.
As for would Port/Choco do it, well, he's a tall player that can run, and would fit the same sort of thinking as us going after Pickett and Hardwick.
At the moment its just an interesting thought and I'd like to see what other people reckon.
As a player I really like him. He would need to clean up the cheap shots though. The few times Choppy got into strife was due to mistiming a bump. He was always in control of his emotions it seemed to me. Mooney is a different kettle of fish. Maybe some sort of performance based contract where any suspensions are heavily penalised financially?
Macca19
20 Aug 2006, 18:19
Hes half decent, but I think Geelong would want too much for him. Theyd probably expect our first round draft pick for him. For too much for him.
pafc4life
21 Aug 2006, 18:22
Cam Mooney is not someone that I would like to see in the Power colours. He is a lose cannon and would only be continually suspended.
From watching parts of the game yesterday, I wouldnt be surprised to see him facing the tribunal again this week for striking. Do we really want someone like that playing for us?????????
Well for mine it all depends on what you have to give up. If we could get Cameron Mooney for something that was genuinly reasonable, i'd consider him.
crazy_big_al
21 Aug 2006, 19:32
Well for mine it all depends on what you have to give up. If we could get Cameron Mooney for something that was genuinly reasonable, i'd consider him.
toby
Toots Hibbert
21 Aug 2006, 21:29
toby
Yin for Yang
Cameron Mooney has been offered two weeks for his latest striking charge. Is he really what people want at the club??
We went through all this with Choppy, surely we cant afford to go down this path again.
blackdiamond
21 Aug 2006, 21:55
If we could get a reformed, tribunal free Mooney that would be fantastic, would sure free up Chad Cornes much more and would be a hard match up.
However there is a fair bit of risk taking him on probably wouldn't be a priority, it may be better to continue with the development of the youngsters and hopefully come across a gem that can give us 10-15 yeards rather than 3-4.
Sandola
22 Aug 2006, 11:01
If we could get a reformed, tribunal free Mooney that would be fantastic
Well, Mooney reformed after his first tribunal visit this year. Then he reformed after his r 15 charge. And he reformed again after r 17. He is no doubt reforming again as we discuss this.
Pity, too, because he can really play, and I love his passion, but unfortunately that's his undoing, and he's basically useless.
Eddie Woloschek
22 Aug 2006, 11:39
Well, Mooney reformed after his first tribunal visit this year. Then he reformed after his r 15 charge. And he reformed again after r 17. He is no doubt reforming again as we discuss this.
Pity, too, because he can really play, and I love his passion, but unfortunately that's his undoing, and he's basically useless.
Elise Mooney would be a better bet!
MrMeaner
22 Aug 2006, 11:50
In discussing Mooney, we should remember the reputation Barry Hall had before he went to Sydney (even for some time afterwards). Could Mooney be similar?*
*My first thought was actually similarities with Dave Granger. If Granger was up for trade today, would anyone want him? But then I realised that it was an unanswerable question.
*PAFC*13
22 Aug 2006, 15:34
I'll throw up some names....
Brent Staker and Nathan Foley.. any intrest?
Foley reminds me alot of Roger James.
RussellEbertHandball
22 Aug 2006, 16:25
Elise Mooney would be a better bet!
I'd take her...even to the footy :p
PJ Power
22 Aug 2006, 19:12
I'll throw up some names....
Brent Staker and Nathan Foley.. any intrest?
Foley reminds me alot of Roger James.
Both would be welcomed to our side but acquiring them would be challenging wouldn't it?
Can't see either WCE or Richmond parting with either of those two players at the end of this year.
After speaking to a Geelong supporter in regards to Cam Mooney. If he was to modify his game then he isnt worth thinking about. He is a hard tough player and that is what he does best.
Mooney has been listed as Geelongs next captain so even thinking that they would consider trading him is ridiculous. He will remain at Geelong for a long time.
Macca19
22 Aug 2006, 22:05
Staker is the only forward the Eagles have that can take a contested grab. Id say we'd have to pay over the odds for him.
Foley is decent but reminds me too much of Sziller.
Id still go after Butler. See what the Eagles would want for him.
After speaking to a Geelong supporter in regards to Cam Mooney. If he was to modify his game then he isnt worth thinking about. He is a hard tough player and that is what he does best.
Mooney has been listed as Geelongs next captain so even thinking that they would consider trading him is ridiculous. He will remain at Geelong for a long time.
Leigh Colbert was Geelong captain and he departed.
Grave Danger
23 Aug 2006, 01:12
Darryl Poole was a more politically correct version of David Granger...
Ford Fairlane
23 Aug 2006, 09:03
Jason Johnson and Dean Solomon have been offered 1 year contracts by Essendon. I'm sure Choco will be monitoring their situations closely.
Rooch is his Roast suggested an Adelaide player frustrated by his drawn out contract negotiations was considering calling JJ to discuss a trade. Andrew McLeod I'd suppose. It's good to know that even today, the threat of wanting a trade to Port can speed up contract negotiations ... ;)
Toots Hibbert
23 Aug 2006, 09:25
We should look to sign him. It would be "wedge recruiting". :thumbsu:
Ford Fairlane
23 Aug 2006, 09:42
Too late for Andy - he got his new 2 yr deal when the crows broke their policy that doesn't exist about >1 yr deals for guys over 30.
MR also suggested Kent Kingsley would be at a new club next year. No link to Port - just a reference to him being a former SANFL player - but if he were to come back, you'd think he'd be too similar to Scott Welsh for the crows to be interested.
Eddie Woloschek
23 Aug 2006, 09:57
Kent Kingsley would be at a new club next year.
I hereby invoke my Loserville veto.
Ford Fairlane
23 Aug 2006, 10:10
I hereby invoke my Loserville veto.
Duly noted :thumbsu:
Porthos
23 Aug 2006, 10:54
We already traded Kent Kingsley away once, why would we want him now?
arrowman
23 Aug 2006, 11:14
Too late for Andy - he got his new 2 yr deal when the crows broke their policy that doesn't exist about >1 yr deals for guys over 30.He was 29 when the deal was signed ;)
MR also suggested Kent Kingsley would be at a new club next year. No link to Port - just a reference to him being a former SANFL player - but if he were to come back, you'd think he'd be too similar to Scott Welsh for the crows to be interested.Similar to Welsh, or Hentschel, or - whatever, I actually like Kingsley but I don't think he's what's missing from our forward line.
Back to Port - I think the most interesting part of Choco's comment was about "older players". Without knowing your list in detail, I suspect that you are at risk of becoming "too young" and that perhaps one or two 25-27 year olds would be a good idea?
Ford Fairlane
23 Aug 2006, 11:33
Back to Port - I think the most interesting part of Choco's comment was about "older players". Without knowing your list in detail, I suspect that you are at risk of becoming "too young" and that perhaps one or two 25-27 year olds would be a good idea?
It'd be fairly certain he'll go down that path. Choco's never been afraid to dip his toes in trade waters.
Of course the flipside is he may well offload a couple of players in that age range anyway ...
Porthos
23 Aug 2006, 11:41
I don't reckon we are in danger in having too young a side. By trading for a couple of OKish 25-27 year olds, we are in danger of going back to the previous state of clogging the senior side so we can deprive the young guys of opportunities.
If we can trade for a player that genuinely fills a hole we can't currently fill, its all good. If its for Generic Halfback Flanker, Small Marking Forward or Tall Back Who Can Only Win When The Midfield Does, then we definitely shouldn't.
Malibu#27
23 Aug 2006, 11:41
We already traded Kent Kingsley away once, why would we want him now?
Apart from that point - hes too busy trying to be an entrepreneur (doing well at it) but I get the feeling talking to a few Geelong people that they actually are wondering where his priorities really lie.
Malibu#27
23 Aug 2006, 11:43
I don't reckon we are in danger in having too young a side. By trading for a couple of OKish 25-27 year olds, we are in danger of going back to the previous state of clogging the senior side so we can deprive the young guys of opportunities.
If we can trade for a player that genuinely fills a hole we can't currently fill, its all good. If its for Generic Halfback Flanker, Small Marking Forward or Tall Back Who Can Only Win When The Midfield Does, then we definitely shouldn't.
A coupe of our "young players" probably play with more leadership than there age anyway.
Take Shaun and Kane for example. Lets not forget they (and players like Cassisi) are really ony 1 year away from becoming 25- 27 year olds.
*PAFC*13
23 Aug 2006, 12:42
Couple more names for discusion...
Callum Urch and Ryley Dunn... Both have done close to nothing this year tho...
Porthos
23 Aug 2006, 12:54
OK, I think I can safely say that we're not in the market for guys who have played bugger all games even though they've been on a list for years. If we want to put time into young guys, the only sensible thing is to use our young guys.
If we do make a play, it'll be for a player with real AFL experience, or a recent draftee that we really like.