In: Welsh Out: Kingsley??? [Archive]

Jack-Packenham

5 Oct 2006, 15:57

Have heard Scott Welsh to Geelong for Kent Kingsley in a straight swap?

What are your thoughts?

Would be great but doubt the crows will agree. Maybe we could throw in McCarthy, Playfair and Gardiner as well.

rossfunke

5 Oct 2006, 16:02

Would be great but doubt the crows will agree. Maybe we could throw in McCarthy, Playfair and Gardiner as well.

I think Adelaide would probably interested more in Gardiner. He played in rounds 1,2,5,6 and 7 and collected double figures in stats. Could be the sweetner.

Rosso

5 Oct 2006, 16:03

Have heard Scott Welsh to Geelong for Kent Kingsley in a straight swap?

What are your thoughts?

Would consider it but I think we could get more for Kent.

Kent has quit so we need something for him coz apart from 06 he's been our best forward for a long long time.

I think Welsh is older than Kent so as I've previously stated if we are going for a mature forward Bradshaw is our man. Might be one of those 1.59pm deals on Friday week though if all others fall through.

DBAH0

5 Oct 2006, 16:16

rossfunke

5 Oct 2006, 16:16

Would consider it but I think we could get more for Kent.

Kent has quit so we need something for him coz apart from 06 he's been our best forward for a long long time.

I think Welsh is older than Kent so as I've previously stated if we are going for a mature forward Bradshaw is our man. Might be one of those 1.59pm deals on Friday week though if all others fall through.

Welsh is 27 at the moment, turns 28 in December. Similar player to Kingsley, very quick off the mark, however can take a good grab overhead.

I wouldn't mind him at Geelong, but the only thing that would stop us from getting him is that I think he is settled in Adelaide, so if he was to be traded I think he would request to be traded to Port Adelaide.

But I agree with you that I think the Cats should chase Bradshaw.

To land Bradshaw I think we need to trade someone for a pick in the Top 20. Then on trade that pick along with our #25 pick for Bradshaw.

rossfunke

5 Oct 2006, 16:18

Wasn't there an article somewhere yesterday saying that Welsh was the next Crow likely to be delisted?

Either way I have him as an upgrade over Kingsley for the simple fact that he can kick straight.

Welsh came back from injury in Round 19 and played the remainder of the season. In those 6 games he kicked 12 goals, one of those games included a bag of 5.

Rosella

5 Oct 2006, 16:46

Welsh is 27 at the moment, turns 28 in December. Similar player to Kingsley, very quick off the mark, however can take a good grab overhead.

I wouldn't mind him at Geelong, but the only thing that would stop us from getting him is that I think he is settled in Adelaide, so if he was to be traded I think he would request to be traded to Port Adelaide.

But I agree with you that I think the Cats should chase Bradshaw.

To land Bradshaw I think we need to trade someone for a pick in the Top 20. Then on trade that pick along with our #25 pick for Bradshaw.

may be easier to go for Welsh - cheaper anyway. Bradshaw would cost a fair bit in terms of trade and salary. I still think he will stay at Brisbane.

year of the cat

5 Oct 2006, 17:08

Don't know whether Welsh would add that much in the medium to long term. He probably is the closest player in the competition to Kingsley. Would prefer a third round draft pick if possible.

crows98

5 Oct 2006, 17:09

rossfunke

5 Oct 2006, 17:14

may be easier to go for Welsh - cheaper anyway. Bradshaw would cost a fair bit in terms of trade and salary. I still think he will stay at Brisbane.

Now Mal has retired, Brisbane may just give the coin Bradshaw is asking for, especially after some big names retire/delisted/traded.

rossfunke

5 Oct 2006, 17:16

I am not going to come on hear and crap on about how Scott Welsh isn’t leaving the AFC because I don’t know what is going to happen next year.

The only think I know is that we would not trade Scott Welsh for Kent Kingsley, if Welsh was to be traded (and it’s still very debatable) we would be trying to lower our average age of the list and acquiring a 28 year old would not be fitting that requirement.

We would be after a draft pick or a young KPP if a trade was deemed necessary.

Kent Kingsley – NO
Charlie Gardner – maybe but I doubt it

Andrew Mackie and a 3rd or 4th round pick may be acceptable I but don’t know.

Just like any trades, all clubs involved would want a win/win situation.

year of the cat

5 Oct 2006, 17:16

Andrew Mackie and a 3rd or 4th round pick may be acceptable I but don’t know.

I assume you mean WE would get the third round pick? Mackie has resigned anyway for a further two years.

Seb

5 Oct 2006, 17:24

Can't really see the point in this trade.

Budda 230

5 Oct 2006, 17:36

I am not going to come on hear and crap on about how Scott Welsh isn’t leaving the AFC because I don’t know what is going to happen next year.

The only think I know is that we would not trade Scott Welsh for Kent Kingsley, if Welsh was to be traded (and it’s still very debatable) we would be trying to lower our average age of the list and acquiring a 28 year old would not be fitting that requirement.

We would be after a draft pick or a young KPP if a trade was deemed necessary.

Kent Kingsley – NO
Charlie Gardner – maybe but I doubt it

Andrew Mackie and a 3rd or 4th round pick may be acceptable I but don’t know.

Mackie and a pick for a 28 year old injury prone Kent Kingsley clone? Get stuffed!

crows98

5 Oct 2006, 17:55

Mackie and a pick for a 28 year old injury prone Kent Kingsley clone? Get stuffed!

And the same would be said if you asked to trade Kent Kingsley for Scott Welsh. so get stuffed yourself. :mad:

Rosella

5 Oct 2006, 18:05

And the same would be said if you asked to trade Kent Kingsley for Scott Welsh. so get stuffed yourself. :mad:
Mate, seeing as the Adelaide teams were just about wetting themselves over the idea of getting Mackie, why should we give you him and a draft pick for a player it appears you don't want? It would be Welsh and your second round pick for Mackie.

Academic now anyway, seeing as he has re-signed.

jo172

5 Oct 2006, 18:12

Mate, seeing as the Adelaide teams were just about wetting themselves over the idea of getting Mackie

Do a quick search on the Adelaide board and i'll think you'll see a bit differently;)

Also I cannot see the point in a Welsh for Kingsley trade as they are pretty much the same player at the same age with the same skills. Also for you're guys general information if Michaelangelo Rucci wrote the article it's generally not true.

Rosella

5 Oct 2006, 18:15

Do a quick search on the Adelaide board and i'll think you'll see a bit differently;)

Also I cannot see the point in a Welsh for Kingsley trade as they are pretty much the same player at the same age with the same skills. Also for you're guys general information if Michaelangelo Rucci wrote the article it's generally not true.

I meant the clubs, not the forums. I don't understand why they were that interested, as we've only just worked out what to do with him ourselves.

Gazzajr is god

5 Oct 2006, 18:44

Id prefer a draft pick or someone like Mattner.

Maybe Kingsly and Gardiner for Mattner + 4th round pick ?????

Welsh is made better than what he is because he plays in a very good team. In an average team, he'd be crap.

thegerman

5 Oct 2006, 19:04

Mackie and a pick for a 28 year old injury prone Kent Kingsley clone? Get stuffed!

Love it Budda.

A guy who is up and coming, great height (needs to bulk up though), and a pick for a dud forward who can't get it going even with the supposed quality Crows midfield passing him rockets all game.

Someone tell him he's dreamin.

Inferno

5 Oct 2006, 19:13

And the same would be said if you asked to trade Kent Kingsley for Scott Welsh. so get stuffed yourself. :mad:Our trade idea was realistic, yours wasn't. Why would we trade our arguably most improved player AND a draft pick for a KK clone?

nananana catman

5 Oct 2006, 19:17

people whinge every time Kent Kingsley plays a game for Geelong, yet are now saying we should recruit Scott Welsh? :confused:

Bunch of idiots.

crows98

5 Oct 2006, 19:18

Our trade idea was realistic, yours wasn't. Why would we trade our arguably most improved player AND a draft pick for a KK clone?

Exactly, so why would we?

nananana catman

5 Oct 2006, 19:19

Exactly, so why would we?
I know you are

crows98

5 Oct 2006, 19:29

I know you are

Fab – ab - ulous

Turbocat

5 Oct 2006, 21:26

While not every trade has to provide us with a 100 game player Id have to wonder what we are thinking if we went down this path.Yes he may be a seasoned professional but Id much rather get greener talent considering that I realy do believe our forwardline potential is not really that bad.

Lets focus on quality not on any percieved short term advantage. A space taken by him will be a kid we cant pick. Id hate to think Prismall's brother if he's available at P73 and we miss on him because we have some guy who is a temp fixeruper

If we think Welch is the answer then we are sleeping next to the glue factory. Invest in the kids.

Inferno

5 Oct 2006, 23:00

Exactly, so why would we?Do you even remember your post at the top of the page?

Unwritten_Law

6 Oct 2006, 04:51

Kent Kingsley at Geelong (2001-2006) - Games 110 Goals 227

Scott Welsh at Adelaide (2000-2006) - Games 108 Goals 221

Why the hell would we bother?

d_henderson1810

6 Oct 2006, 20:45

I am not going to come on hear and crap on about how Scott Welsh isn’t leaving the AFC because I don’t know what is going to happen next year.

The only think I know is that we would not trade Scott Welsh for Kent Kingsley, if Welsh was to be traded (and it’s still very debatable) we would be trying to lower our average age of the list and acquiring a 28 year old would not be fitting that requirement.

We would be after a draft pick or a young KPP if a trade was deemed necessary.

Kent Kingsley – NO
Charlie Gardner – maybe but I doubt it

Andrew Mackie and a 3rd or 4th round pick may be acceptable I but don’t know.

Andrew Mackie and a 3rd or 4th round draft pick for Scott Welsh. You've got a deal. We get a good kicking experienced forward and Adelaide would get an inconsisten, lazy kid, who has only played well in the last six months, and is inaccurate. Tell you what, we'll throw in Playfair too, just so that if Adelaide need a behind or two kicked. Ha Ha :rolleyes: