View Full Version : Bradley for Pick 40
wizard_9
11 Oct 2007, 09:03
Being suggested in the age today. If this is a possibility i hope Harvs jumps at it. In this draft thats nothing.
Bombers_Forever
11 Oct 2007, 09:21
We would want much more than 40........
****....bradley is a crab :mad:
Kepler Bradley, from what I have seen, is a fumbling, bumbling waste of space. :eek:
We have had better from pick 40 in the draft before. I don't care if it's a weak draft. There are always surprises.
While Harvey was spot on in getting Solomon across, I think we need to be careful of becoming a home for Essendon's rejects.:thumbsd:
TheLoris
11 Oct 2007, 10:54
Kepler Bradley, from what I have seen, is a fumbling, bumbling waste of space. :eek:
We have had better from pick 40 in the draft before. I don't care if it's a weak draft. There are always surprises.
While Harvey was spot on in getting Solomon across, I think we need to be careful of becoming a home for Essendon's rejects.:thumbsd:
Agree, even if we only have to use pick 40 I'd rather we passed on Bradley. Can't even see where we'd use him, can't play in defence and he would be behind murph/campbell to get a game up forward.
Also, aren't Hadrill, Browne, Webster possibly in line for delisting as we don't have room for them all. Would rather we gave one of them a lifeline before bringing in Bradley.
ImperialPurple
11 Oct 2007, 11:03
I'm sure the Cardies will be happy if we pick him up. Get a good WAFL player for a couple of seasons and won't have to pay him a cent. :rolleyes:
Warnock came to us as pick 42. I believe he will be a champion.
Bradley most certainly will not.
Bradley is more like a Campbell without the mongrel.
Pick a young kid who wants to play.
freocuz
11 Oct 2007, 11:09
We may well not use pick 40 anyway. Currently we have 7, 24 & 40 as our first 3 I think. If we trade out a player for a pick in the 20's or 30's, chances are we won't use 40 as it looks like we will only use 3 picks.
While KP might struggle to get a game, he might be a handy backup, particularly if he is effectively free.
inferno66
11 Oct 2007, 11:12
Lets not crucify the guy. Bradley has been played out of position in Essendon. Kind of like Solmon playing FF for the the Bombers. In the VFL Bradley was playing great footy and won the best and fairest award there. At pick 40 Bradley is a bargain in a weak draft.
pistol17
11 Oct 2007, 11:33
If Harvey wants him here then Bradley must have something to offer Fremantle. I couldnt see Mark Harvey recruiting anyone that didnt fit into 'his plans'.
Pick 40 is cheap anyway.
Jiblett
11 Oct 2007, 11:44
I know I've said this before, but... youth, pace, mid-fielders, youth, pace mid-fielders, youth, pace, midfielders.
Do I sound like a broken record??
ImperialPurple
11 Oct 2007, 11:46
Pick 40 isn't cheap for a bloke who can't play. We have picks 7, 24, 40 and 56. I'd rather keep pick 40 than have to use pick 56 as one of our compulsory picks.
wehavethepassion
11 Oct 2007, 11:52
I know I've said this before, but... youth, pace, mid-fielders, youth, pace mid-fielders, youth, pace, midfielders.
Do I sound like a broken record??
No but obviously the message to the FFC ain't getting thru if the footy dept are considering bradley, M.Jonson etc
ImperialPurple
11 Oct 2007, 11:55
Lets not crucify the guy. Bradley has been played out of position in Essendon. Kind of like Solmon playing FF for the the Bombers. In the VFL Bradley was playing great footy and won the best and fairest award there. At pick 40 Bradley is a bargain in a weak draft.
What is best position?
Winger, HFF, CHF...?
I would rather use pick 40 on Harry Taylor. :thumbsu:
nurries
11 Oct 2007, 12:22
I would rather use pick 40 on Harry Taylor. :thumbsu:
I agree. Would be a good pick up in this draft. Hope the club is looking at him for a late pick.
Freo Big Fella
11 Oct 2007, 12:33
I would rather we use pick 40 on GentlemanJeff. It'll take years to turn Bradley back into the running CHF/Ruckman that made him appealing in the first place.
Bradesmaen
11 Oct 2007, 12:42
Hmm I don't get it with this hatred of Bradley. Sure he can't play defence, but you dont win a Larke medal by not being able to play.
ImperialPurple
11 Oct 2007, 12:43
I would rather use pick 40 on Harry Taylor. :thumbsu:
I'm with you Rip.
pistol17
11 Oct 2007, 12:45
Pick 40 isn't cheap for a bloke who can't play. We have picks 7, 24, 40 and 56. I'd rather keep pick 40 than have to use pick 56 as one of our compulsory picks.
Whether he can play or not is debatable as he did win the Best and Fairest at the Bendigo Bombers. He played 15 games for them this season and was their leading goal kicker. I dont think he is a backman but more of a half forward flanker leading up to the wing. He has something to offer at 199cm and 100kg, even as a backup ruckman if Warnock or Sandilands go down. and he is only 22.
Cheap might not have been the right word but pick 40 is about right.
peppy la pew
11 Oct 2007, 12:59
I would rather use pick 40 on Harry Taylor. :thumbsu:
Quick, buy this man a cigar :thumbsu:
wizard_9
11 Oct 2007, 13:00
Whether he can play or not is debatable as he did win the Best and Fairest at the Bendigo Bombers. He played 15 games for them this season and was their leading goal kicker. I dont think he is a backman but more of a half forward flanker leading up to the wing. He has something to offer at 199cm and 100kg, even as a backup ruckman if Warnock or Sandilands go down. and he is only 22.
And we have a winner. Pick him up if we can get him for #40. If nothing else he is another back up ruckman. Send Murph down back and play him forward.
Bradesmaen
11 Oct 2007, 13:04
Just look at previous shallow drafts and 3rd round picks... you'll barely find any gems there. Our last one in a shallow draft was Greg Edgcumbe in 2002 (2003 was Peake due to F/s, 2004 no pick, 2005 wasn't shallow and it was Warnock)
inferno66
11 Oct 2007, 13:05
And we have a winner. Pick him up if we can get him for #40. If nothing else he is another back up ruckman. Send Murph down back and play him forward.
Yep totally agree :thumbsu:.
Cant we just get Harry Taylor with our next available pick after 40?
Yep totally agree :thumbsu:.
Cant we just get Harry Taylor with our next available pick after 40?
Harry has been talked to by WCE, Brisbane and Port...he won't last much longer than that
dockertor
11 Oct 2007, 13:11
I would rather use pick 40 on Harry Taylor. :thumbsu:
The question I have is (and I'm an EF supporter), If EF had Palmer, Masten and Harry Taylor who everyone seems to be saying are guns, Why were they such carp this year?
The question I have is (and I'm an EF supporter), If EF had Palmer, Masten and Harry Taylor who everyone seems to be saying are guns, Why were they such carp this year?
kids with a shit team
The question I have is (and I'm an EF supporter), If EF had Palmer, Masten and Harry Taylor who everyone seems to be saying are guns, Why were they such carp this year?
Didn't win a game for a while when Ryley Dunn did his knee 1st Quarter in round 4.
Previous to that were 3-0.
2007 was a huge improvement , winning 2 out of 3 derbies (after a long, long drought), nearly making the finals despite losing a heap of games by small margins.
Masten & Palmer were out of the senior team a lot as well , the thing most people have ignored though is that when in the team , Foster (particularly ) & Ibbo where generally better than them.
Harry was fairly constant all year , approching 30 possesions some games which is quite an effort for a 194cm 90+ kg player.
He may still have a bit of ganglyness , but shows determination and desperation.
Will be a good'un.
Being suggested in the age today. If this is a possibility i hope Harvs jumps at it. In this draft thats nothing.
not sure if they teach english in fremantle but is has clearly been written that essendon want a late 1st or early 2nd round pick for bradley. pick 40 doesn't cut the mustard.
Bradesmaen
11 Oct 2007, 13:25
not sure if they teach english in fremantle but is has clearly been written that essendon want a late 1st or early 2nd round pick for bradley. pick 40 doesn't cut the mustard.
Obviously they do not teach it at Windy Hill either because he said from "The Age" today. Now, how is that a Freo persons fault for what The Age wrote?
The question I have is (and I'm an EF supporter), If EF had Palmer, Masten and Harry Taylor who everyone seems to be saying are guns, Why were they such carp this year?
they same could be said for fremantle - with pavlich, bell etc how did they miss the 8! i'm talking thru my pocket as i lost money on them but gee they were disappointing.
Belnakor
11 Oct 2007, 13:27
Masten & Palmer were out of the senior team a lot as well , the thing most people have ignored though is that when in the team , Foster (particularly ) & Ibbo where generally better than them.
Yeah thats the thing, these idiots are harping on about a really good draft, players who will be stars, and we've got a couple of "duds" on our list according to opposition supporters who are 1-2 years older and playing better.
wizard_9
11 Oct 2007, 13:27
not sure if they teach english in fremantle but is has clearly been written that essendon want a late 1st or early 2nd round pick for bradley. pick 40 doesn't cut the mustard.
They will deal Bradley in exchange for the Kangaroos' second-round selection, No. 32, or Fremantle's second-round selection, No. 24. A third-round selection is more likely.
The Dockers will sit on Bradley talks until Friday's deadline, preferring to go after midfielders if they are available.
"Essendon just threw him up as to say they would be looking to give him an opportunity elsewhere," Dockers football manager Robert Shaw said yesterday.
"We're going to consider it, that's all, but it won't be with our (top picks)."
Sorry but from i think your having trouble with the reading thing.
Belnakor
11 Oct 2007, 13:29
not sure if they teach english in fremantle but is has clearly been written that essendon want a late 1st or early 2nd round pick for bradley. pick 40 doesn't cut the mustard.
You should be a carlton supporter, then you could also harp on about Carlton getting Judd for nothing through the PSD.
Bradley isn't getting a game in a team that finished 14th. He ain't worth that.
Bradesmaen
11 Oct 2007, 13:34
You should be a carlton supporter, then you could also harp on about Carlton getting Judd for nothing through the PSD.
Bradley isn't getting a game in a team that finished 14th. He ain't worth that.
Of course he's not getting a game for Melbourne.
Belnakor
11 Oct 2007, 13:35
Of course he's not getting a game for Melbourne.
Whatever, Essendon sucked this year and Kelper wasn't getting a game.
Obviously they do not teach it at Windy Hill either because he said from "The Age" today. Now, how is that a Freo persons fault for what The Age wrote?
fair enough - i'll let it pass. the age are useless - with caroline wilson in charge who knows what garbage they'll produce. i don't read it and only get the herald-sun for the formguides but have a look and laugh at mike sheehans bs.
They will deal Bradley in exchange for the Kangaroos' second-round selection, No. 32, or Fremantle's second-round selection, No. 24. A third-round selection is more likely.
The Dockers will sit on Bradley talks until Friday's deadline, preferring to go after midfielders if they are available.
"Essendon just threw him up as to say they would be looking to give him an opportunity elsewhere," Dockers football manager Robert Shaw said yesterday.
"We're going to consider it, that's all, but it won't be with our (top picks)."
Sorry but from i think your having trouble with the reading thing.
can you explain your last sentence to me? it doesn't make any sense in the english language...
Whatever, Essendon sucked this year and Kelper wasn't getting a game.
fremantle were just as bad - at least essendon were not expected to win the flag so you'd have to say the dockers were a lot more disappointing in the end.
IMO Bradley won't be a Docker next year...can't see the trade going thru.
Still betting on "0" trades for Freo this year....most clubs think we are fairly active during trade week, but every 2nd year (recently), we have done nothing...past is strewn with trades though (see below)
Past trading weeks..past years, player wise;
2006
IN: Tarrant, Solomon
OUT: Medhurst, Polak
2005
Nil...Schofield via PSD
2004
IN: Black, J.Carr
OUT: Simmonds
2003
Nil
2002
IN: Headland
OUT: L.Brown, McPhee
2001
IN: Croad, Farmer, McPharlin, Simmonds
OUT: Schell, Bandy
Eastaugh in PSD
2000
IN: Bell, M.Carr, Metropolis, Simpson
OUT: Harding, Callaghan, Sinclair, Clement, Holland
1999
IN: Cook, Fewster, T.Longmuir
OUT: O'Reilly
1998
IN: Modra, Wira
OUT: nil
Picks we've lost or gained in trades;
2006
GAINED; #52 (Brock O'Brien)
LOST; #8 (Ben Reid), #42 (Bachar Houli), #47 (Kyle Reimers)
2005
Nil
2004
GAINED; #67 (Toby Stribling)
LOST; #11 (Adam Thomson), #27 (Pat Garner), #45 (Justin Sherman)
2003
GAINED; #10 (Ryley Dunn), #19 (David Mundy)
LOST; nil
2002
GAINED; #13 (Byron Schammer), #55 (Ryan Crowley)
LOST; #3 (Jared Brennan), #19 (Troy Selwood)
2001
GAINED; #56 (Paul Medhurst)
LOST; #1 (Luke Hodge), #17 James Kelly, #20 (Daniel Elstone), #36 (Sam Mitchell)
2000
GAINED; #39 (Adam McPhee), #51 (Dion Woods)
LOST; #6 (Dylan Smith), #37 (Guy Richards), #52 (Amon Buchanan)
1999
GAINED; #46 (Adam Butler)
LOST; #34 (Leon Davis), #16 (David Haynes), #19 (Brad Green), #63 (Shannon O'Brien)
1998
GAINED; nil
LOST; #29 (Tyson Stenglein), #34 (Byran Beinke)
If Murphy ends up being traded (and that's a big IF,) then I'd be happy to see us recruit Bradley (with pick 40) as a replacement tall forward.
Scotland
11 Oct 2007, 15:15
If Murphy ends up being traded (and that's a big IF,) then I'd be happy to see us recruit Bradley (with pick 40) as a replacement tall forward.
Murphy is a better footballer than Bradley.
None of Webster, Dunn, Longmuir (perennially injured), Campbell, Drum, O'Brien, Collard, Ibbotson, Browne, Mourish, Duffield hold regular spots in the Freo side.
How many from that list are a worse option to put in the Freo forward line than Bradley?
Murphy is a better footballer than Bradley.
None of Webster, Dunn, Longmuir (perennially injured), Campbell, Drum, O'Brien, Collard, Ibbotson, Browne, Mourish, Duffield hold regular spots in the Freo side.
How many from that list are a worse option to put in the Freo forward line than Bradley?
Apart from Campbell & JLo and maybe Webster & Mourish, Bradley would beat all of them with height.
I'm not saying Bradley's gonna be the difference, just that he would be adequate back-up - which, let's face it, is all that Murphy is.
You know what - I think Harves would know his value better than any of us.
If he decides the price is worth pulling the trigger - I will be happy.
In fact I am just happy we are keeping 7.
Bender571
11 Oct 2007, 16:21
IMO Bradley won't be a Docker next year...can't see the trade going thru.
Still betting on "0" trades for Freo this year....most clubs think we are fairly active during trade week, but every 2nd year (recently), we have done nothing...past is strewn with trades though (see below)
Past trading weeks..past years, player wise;
2006
IN: Tarrant, Solomon
OUT: Medhurst, Polak
2005
Nil...Schofield via PSD
2004
IN: Black, J.Carr
OUT: Simmonds
2003
IN:Nil
OUT:Croad(for #10), S.Koops(for #19)
2002
IN: Headland
OUT: L.Brown, McPhee
2001
IN: Croad, Farmer, McPharlin, Simmonds
OUT: Schell, Bandy
Eastaugh in PSD
2000
IN: Bell, M.Carr, Metropolis, Simpson
OUT: Harding, Callaghan, Sinclair, Clement, Holland
1999
IN: Cook, Fewster, T.Longmuir
OUT: O'Reilly
1998
IN: Modra, Wira
OUT: nil
Picks we've lost or gained in trades;
2006
GAINED; #52 (Brock O'Brien)
LOST; #8 (Ben Reid), #42 (Bachar Houli), #47 (Kyle Reimers)
2005
Nil
2004
GAINED; #67 (Toby Stribling)
LOST; #11 (Adam Thomson), #27 (Pat Garner), #45 (Justin Sherman)
2003
GAINED; #10 (Ryley Dunn), #19 (David Mundy)
LOST; nil
2002
GAINED; #13 (Byron Schammer), #55 (Ryan Crowley)
LOST; #3 (Jared Brennan), #19 (Troy Selwood)
2001
GAINED; #56 (Paul Medhurst)
LOST; #1 (Luke Hodge), #17 James Kelly, #20 (Daniel Elstone), #36 (Sam Mitchell)
2000
GAINED; #39 (Adam McPhee), #51 (Dion Woods)
LOST; #6 (Dylan Smith), #37 (Guy Richards), #52 (Amon Buchanan)
1999
GAINED; #46 (Adam Butler)
LOST; #34 (Leon Davis), #16 (David Haynes), #19 (Brad Green), #63 (Shannon O'Brien)
1998
GAINED; nil
LOST; #29 (Tyson Stenglein), #34 (Byran Beinke)
Edited for accuracy
But I agree I don't think we'll do anything this year
ImperialPurple
11 Oct 2007, 16:38
IMO Bradley won't be a Docker next year...can't see the trade going thru.
Picks we've lost or gained in trades;
2006
GAINED; #52 (Brock O'Brien)
LOST; #8 (Ben Reid), #42 (Bachar Houli), #47 (Kyle Reimers)
2002
GAINED; #13 (Byron Schammer), #55 (Ryan Crowley)
LOST; #3 (Jared Brennan), #19 (Troy Selwood)
Appreciate your effort plugga - but I just need to correct these...
Our picks were 13, 31, 47. We ontraded 8 (from Richmond for Tarrant which we got in the Polak deal) and 42 (from Richmond for Solly which we got in the Polak deal). We actually lost only #13 and #47, while gaining #52.
We traded #5 and #21 - which became #3 and #19 when Carlton got busted for salary cap cheating.
pistol17
11 Oct 2007, 16:50
You know what - I think Harves would know his value better than any of us.
If he decides the price is worth pulling the trigger - I will be happy.
In fact I am just happy we are keeping 7.
Totally agree there moo... I mentioned earlier if Harvey wants him at Fremantle i'm going to trust his judgement as im sure he knows more about Kepler Bradley than most. And for pick 40 we could do a lot worse than get a VFL Club best and fairest/leading goal kicker.
wehavethepassion
11 Oct 2007, 16:51
in 2003 we also picked up murphy and peaker(Father/son)
and Johnno in PSD
Birds of Prey
11 Oct 2007, 17:27
I hope you blokes do pick up KB, we need him back at the Falcons!:thumbsu:
Warrior 89
11 Oct 2007, 17:27
Bradley is a mobile tall forward who was played out of position by Sheedy which has hurt his trade value. As Robert Shaw mentioned Essendon want to get something for him as they already have Lloyd, Lucas and Gumbleton as tall forwards and I think Bradley as a versatile forward might be a better fit alongside Pav and Taz than Murphy who seems to be a bit one-dimensional. If we could get a 1st round pick for Murphy and replace him with Bradley for a 2nd round pick it would be a great result for us. A possible trade could be Murphy and Thornton to Melbourne for Pick 14 (which they look like getting for Johnstone) and then trading our Pick 24 to Essendon for Bradley. Then we can trade Pick 40 to Brisbane for Moody. We would replace a rebounding defender Thornton for a running midfielder Moody which means Mundy and Johnson can stay in defence, Murphy for Bradley and most importantly we would have two 1st round draft picks 7 and 14.
kp junior
11 Oct 2007, 17:40
Bradley is a mobile tall forward who was played out of position by Sheedy which has hurt his trade value. As Robert Shaw mentioned Essendon want to get something for him as they already have Lloyd, Lucas and Gumbleton as tall forwards and I think Bradley as a versatile forward might be a better fit alongside Pav and Taz than Murphy who seems to be a bit one-dimensional. If we could get a 1st round pick for Murphy and replace him with Bradley for a 2nd round pick it would be a great result for us. A possible trade could be Murphy and Thornton to Melbourne for Pick 14 (which they look like getting for Johnstone) and then trading our Pick 24 to Essendon for Bradley. Then we can trade Pick 40 to Brisbane for Moody. We would replace a rebounding defender Thornton for a running midfielder Moody which means Mundy and Johnson can stay in defence, Murphy for Bradley and most importantly we would have two 1st round draft picks 7 and 14.
nice.. can we keep scotty, give em webster
wizard_9
11 Oct 2007, 18:07
Bradley is a mobile tall forward who was played out of position by Sheedy which has hurt his trade value. As Robert Shaw mentioned Essendon want to get something for him as they already have Lloyd, Lucas and Gumbleton as tall forwards and I think Bradley as a versatile forward might be a better fit alongside Pav and Taz than Murphy who seems to be a bit one-dimensional. If we could get a 1st round pick for Murphy and replace him with Bradley for a 2nd round pick it would be a great result for us. A possible trade could be Murphy and Thornton to Melbourne for Pick 14 (which they look like getting for Johnstone) and then trading our Pick 24 to Essendon for Bradley. Then we can trade Pick 40 to Brisbane for Moody. We would replace a rebounding defender Thornton for a running midfielder Moody which means Mundy and Johnson can stay in defence, Murphy for Bradley and most importantly we would have two 1st round draft picks 7 and 14.
I dont think we will even use a PSD pick on Moody anymore. I'd trade nothing more than a 4th rounder for him. He might even get delisted so we could get him late in the National Draft.
Bradley is a mobile tall forward who was played out of position by Sheedy which has hurt his trade value. As Robert Shaw mentioned Essendon want to get something for him as they already have Lloyd, Lucas and Gumbleton as tall forwards and I think Bradley as a versatile forward might be a better fit alongside Pav and Taz than Murphy who seems to be a bit one-dimensional. If we could get a 1st round pick for Murphy and replace him with Bradley for a 2nd round pick it would be a great result for us. A possible trade could be Murphy and Thornton to Melbourne for Pick 14 (which they look like getting for Johnstone) and then trading our Pick 24 to Essendon for Bradley. Then we can trade Pick 40 to Brisbane for Moody. We would replace a rebounding defender Thornton for a running midfielder Moody which means Mundy and Johnson can stay in defence, Murphy for Bradley and most importantly we would have two 1st round draft picks 7 and 14.
I'd rather keep Thornton all the same. In fact I'd like to keep Murph too - I think melb are building anyway from the draft by the looks.
NiGHTFuRY
11 Oct 2007, 19:01
For once... why can't we just try to develop a new player.... I know it sounds crazy but let's try.
Why oh why must we have another club's failure.....
pinkus maximus
11 Oct 2007, 19:53
im not totally against getting him but id rather give pick 40 for richard hadley
paul conners on radio said he is looking for a new home for him
ImperialPurple
11 Oct 2007, 20:01
im not totally against getting him but id rather give pick 40 for richard hadley
paul conners on radio said he is looking for a new home for him
Agree.
I just can't see the point of picking up Bradley. Unless we try tomorrow to off-load Murph to Sydney (pick 11) or Melbourne (pick 14), then he would be a decent guy to replace Murphy as a back-up forward... otherwise he's superfluous, surely. :confused:
We have to take 3 picks in the ND. Foster replaces Cook on the senior list; then there's Walker, Webster, Browne, Haddrill still uncontracted. There's not much room to move in terms of taking extra players at this stage. Unless we let someone else go for a pick in exchange.
inferno66
11 Oct 2007, 20:21
I think Hadley would suit our needs better then Bradley. But would Brissy accept Pick 40 for Hadley?
ImperialPurple
11 Oct 2007, 20:25
I think Hadley would suit our needs better then Bradley. But would Brissy accept Pick 40 for Hadley?
Ash McGrath wants to come home too (he did last year as well, and apparently we would have taken him if the Taz thing didn't come off).
A few former Freo fellas from Brissie wanting new homes - Hadley, McGrath, Moody. All can play a midfield role... Food for thought, but not much time left now.
inferno66
11 Oct 2007, 20:35
We can get Moody throught the PSD. McGrath will stay at Brissie I reckon.
Warrior 89
11 Oct 2007, 20:42
Murphy is a great kick and a good leading forward but I don't think he is suited to playing in our forward line. When he does play he is the 4th option behind Pav, Tarrant and Farmer and never looked comfortable until he moved to defence in RD22. Bradley however can still play forward but can also push up the ground and play in the ruck(we need another backup ruckmen). In hindsight Polak should of been traded at the end of 05 as he wasn't holding down a position and in the end we didn't get much for him. I don't want the same thing happening to Murphy and if we can get a cheap versatile replacement in Bradley whilst getting a 1st round pick between 10-16 for Murphy packaged with one of our other backup players let's do it.
Roundhouse
11 Oct 2007, 21:05
Murphy is a great kick and a good leading forward but I don't think he is suited to playing in our forward line. When he does play he is the 4th option behind Pav, Tarrant and Farmer and never looked comfortable until he moved to defence in RD22. Bradley however can still play forward but can also push up the ground and play in the ruck(we need another backup ruckmen). In hindsight Polak should of been traded at the end of 05 as he wasn't holding down a position and in the end we didn't get much for him. I don't want the same thing happening to Murphy and if we can get a cheap versatile replacement in Bradley whilst getting a 1st round pick between 10-16 for Murphy packaged with one of our other backup players let's do it.
Versatile is not the correct adjective for someone who is able to play crappily in a number of positions.
Bradley would need to improve to cement a spot in our 22. Murphy would too, going by 2007 form, so the question becomes "who is most likely to improve in 08". I'd have my money on Murphy at this stage.
I think Hadley would suit our needs better then Bradley. But would Brissy accept Pick 40 for Hadley?
its all good trying to get Hadley, but if im not mistaken is Hadley a bit injury prone. i think he has been sideline for the last couple of seasons with knee reco's and hamstring injuries, can anyone give me a update.
Also pick 40 for Bradley not worth it would rather get him via PSD or trade for pick 56.
ImperialPurple
15 Oct 2007, 20:51
There's a thread on the main board that says that Matthew Knights was just on 3AW and both Bradley and Mark Johnson have been delisted.
Looks like we're probably going to get ourselves a Kepler...
Poor Lach, his worst nightmare is booking his tickets as we speak :p
ImperialPurple
15 Oct 2007, 21:01
Poor Lach, his worst nightmare is booking his tickets as we speak :p
"Purple Kepler" is the name of the nasty stress-related skin infliction Lachie will no doubt develop upon reading that Bradley is most likely to end up at Freo. ;)
"Purple Kepler" is the name of the nasty stress-related skin infliction Lachie will no doubt develop upon reading that Bradley is most likely to end up at Freo. ;)
hahahaha, i was telling him that once he gets there he will fall in love with him.
So much so he will have him as his avatar next year....lol
Poor bugger
Faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrkkkkkkkkkkkk kkkkkk!
Bugger me, we're going to have someone to rival Scotty Chisolm in the "I have got no idea what I am doing on this field" stakes. :o
ImperialPurple
15 Oct 2007, 21:34
Faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrkkkkkkkkkkkk kkkkkk!
Is it really itchy Lach? Wait till it starts blistering and weeping.... ;)
He's not that bad, is he Lach? :confused:
I mean, my impression of him is that he's a bumbling, fumbling hack, but surely not enough to make anyone break out in a sweat unnecessarily?
He will be a great WAFL player. Send him to the Sharks. :thumbsu:
Ryder Is God
16 Oct 2007, 04:15
You will experience some of these type of brain farts:
Dq8vE4S3kV4
I think he can still be a good player, he just wasn't used right at Essendon. He played great at Bendigo as a CHF, and it showed with him winning the B&F.
If you use him right, he could be good.
estibador
16 Oct 2007, 05:25
You will experience some of these type of brain farts:
Gutsy mark running back with the ball though.
We'll just tell him to handball off to Hayden in that situation.
inferno66
16 Oct 2007, 11:48
I mean, my impression of him is that he's a bumbling, fumbling hack, but surely not enough to make anyone break out in a sweat unnecessarily?
I reckon Bradley lost confidence in his ability when he was played out of posistion in defence. Kind of like when Schammer was playing in the backline. Schammer was also fumbling and turning the ball over when played in defence. But when Schammer was moved back into his more natrual posistion of HFF/Midfielder he was making less turnovers and fumbles.
I reckon Freo will be playing Bradley as a forwardor a Gilmore type ruckman. A ruckman who is better around the ground and plays like an extra midfeilder.
Gutsy mark running back with the ball though.
We'll just tell him to handball off to Hayden in that situation.
I rated that mark too. Pity about the rest. Not that we havent seen plenty of those from our boys.
I reckon Bradley lost confidence in his ability when he was played out of posistion in defence....
I reckon Freo will be playing Bradley as a forwardor a Gilmore type ruckman. A ruckman who is better around the ground and plays like an extra midfeilder.
Honestly, where in the forward line?
By my reckoning:
HF: DJ Pav Tarrant
FF: Farmer Campbell Bell
With Murphy, resting ruckman, and Drum all better next tall options than Kepler Bradley.
And in terms of a Gilmore-type rucking role, that is a stop gap emergency measure at best. Which we already have Gilmore for. Its like when Richmond fans were all excited about getting Polak because he could ruck (which he can't) and hold down a KP spot in the backline (which he won't).
When Warnock gets on the park next year with Gilly roving him, you won't be worrying about having a ruckman like Bradley around the ground.
astro_toby
16 Oct 2007, 12:55
how poor is that from essendon?!?! wouldn't trade him home - and then delist him anyway? think that with the Harv's relationship with the club - something could have been arranged:confused:
inferno66
16 Oct 2007, 12:55
Bradley will be here for depth. If someone goes down Bradley will be a handy replacement.
astro_toby
16 Oct 2007, 12:58
. Its like when Richmond fans were all excited about getting Polak because he could ruck (which he can't) and hold down a KP spot in the backline (which he won't).
that rucking comment is rubbish - never been discussed as a ruckman - we saw him as being capable of being a CHB - which defensively i doubt he will - but the way wallace played him this year definitely played him to his strengths - and got the most out of him
i see polak as our future CHF - his hands are brilliant - kicking wayward - but if you have him as a target at CHF taking the marks and handballing it off to our plethora of running players we are building - with foot skills - such as deledio, tambling, edwards and now McMahon and Morton - he will be excellent IMO - a genuine cog in our team structure for the next 8 years.
ATM he plays more down back as we lack genuine body mass in our KP defenders - but once thursty and McGuane bulk up - he will move forward
but that rucking comment is just plain wrong mate - i never heard anyone mention him as being a future ruckman for RFC - he just had to play there when simmo went down - as we lacked depth
Roundhouse
16 Oct 2007, 13:01
how poor is that from essendon?!?! wouldn't trade him home - and then delist him anyway? think that with the Harv's relationship with the club - something could have been arranged:confused:
Essendon did nothing wrong in my opinion. They already had a pick around 52 so it was pretty pointless in them accepting another one.
You could say that they should have acted in Keplers best interests and sent him home, but he is coming home anyway albeit a little later. They made a stand and tried to get the best deal they could for themselves, it didn't work but I don't think they could be blamed for putting the clubs best interests over Keplers.
GentlemanJeff
16 Oct 2007, 13:02
Bradley will be here for depth. If someone goes down Bradley will be a handy replacement.
My sources at the club indicate that Kepler is a certainty to be picked up by Freo.
The club has genuine concerns about Robbie Warnocks loyalty to FFC beyond 2008. Whilst it is not a certainty that Warnock will return to Victoria, his refusal to "enter into negotiations" until the end of the 2008 season is triggering alarm bells.
FFC sees Kepler as a potential cover for Warnock. He will be thrown a life line by Freo.
that rucking comment is rubbish - never been discussed as a ruckman - we saw him as being capable of being a CHB - which defensively i doubt he will - but the way wallace played him this year definitely played him to his strengths - and got the most out of him
i see polak as our future CHF - his hands are brilliant - kicking wayward - but if you have him as a target at CHF taking the marks and handballing it off to our plethora of running players we are building - he will be excellent IMO
but that rucking comment is just plain wrong mate - i never heard anyone mention him as being a future ruckman for RFC - he just had to play there when simmo went down - as we lacked depth
Not wrong, you just didnt read what I was talking about. I read many a post and had many a conversation where his potential to be a stopgap ruckman was raised. Read the context. I was talking about stopgap emergency rucking, not being number 1 ruckman.
Also, good luck with a CHF who handballs instead of kicks. Good plan.
My sources at the club indicate that Kepler is a certainty to be picked up by Freo.
The club has genuine concerns about Robbie Warnocks loyalty to FFC beyond 2008. Whilst it is not a certainty that Warnock will return to Victoria, his refusal to "enter into negotiations" until the end of the 2008 season is triggering alarm bells.
FFC sees Kepler as a potential cover for Warnock. He will be thrown a life line by Freo.
If that is the case, which I doubt, then we are rooted. If we want cover for Warnock why wouldn't we look at a ruckman?
So far that is the worst case, out of a lot of poor cases, for getting Bradley.
I have no problem with the guy as a player, I just don't see where his value is to us other than depth in case we need a CHF/HFF which is where we appear to have pretty good depth already.
GentlemanJeff
16 Oct 2007, 13:09
If that is the case, which I doubt, then we are rooted. If we want cover for Warnock why wouldn't we look at a ruckman?
So far that is the worst case, out of a lot of poor cases, for getting Bradley.
I have no problem with the guy as a player, I just don't see where his value is to us other than depth in case we need a CHF/HFF which is where we appear to have pretty good depth already.
If the club goes after a ruckman (to cover a risk of Warnock going home) and then Warnock stays we will be left with a spare ruckman.
The benefit of Kepler is that he is versatile.
If Warnock goes home, then Kepler can play as a back up ruckman, but he can also slot into other positions.
If the club goes after a ruckman (to cover a risk of Warnock going home) and then Warnock stays we will be left with a spare ruckman.
The benefit of Kepler is that he is versatile.
If Warnock goes home, then Kepler can play as a back up ruckman, but he can also slot into other positions.
Are you advocating that should Warnock "pull a Judd" then we are ok to have Sandilands as the only genuine (and fit) ruckman on the list, followed by a series of stopgaps in Gilmore and Kepler?
Given we only have two fit ruckman, we are certain to go after a genuine ruckman with either a National draft pick or a rookie pick.
GentlemanJeff
16 Oct 2007, 13:17
Are you advocating that should Warnock "pull a Judd" then we are ok to have Sandilands as the only genuine (and fit) ruckman on the list, followed by a series of stopgaps in Gilmore and Kepler?
Given we only have two fit ruckman, we are certain to go after a genuine ruckman with either a National draft pick or a rookie pick.
I am saying Kepler and Gilmore could be used as a stop gap for 1 season until a more suitable replacement could be located.
I am saying Kepler and Gilmore could be used as a stop gap for 1 season until a more suitable replacement could be located.
So you are happy to play 2009, which has the potential to be our best shot at a premiership, with 1 genuine ruckman fit to play? What happens if Sandilands gets injured? What then?
GentlemanJeff
16 Oct 2007, 13:28
So you are happy to play 2009, which has the potential to be our best shot at a premiership, with 1 genuine ruckman fit to play? What happens if Sandilands gets injured? What then?
I dont rate Sandilands.
If Sandilands got injured and we were playing Gilmore and Kepler the team would improve exponentially.
The days of having a lumbering collosus in the ruck are gone. You need versatile players who are capable of playing as a ruckman at stoppages, but also capable fo making an impact around the ground. Gilmore and Kelper can both fill this role.
You rumour mongering wanker. Honestly. Why must you keep bringing this up? No one else has, Robbie Warnock has never even seemed like leaving and the refusal to enter into negotiations is just pure bull. Pav refused to enter.. where is he right now? Oh thats right, he's our Captain and stayed at this wonderful club. This wonderful club that has an idiot in you following it.
hear hear. This GentlemanJeff bloke is a twit. His persistence in perpetrating this RUMOUR about Warnock is nothing but trouble.
Not on ly is it trouble, it is horsec rap. Pure and utter. Warnock loves it here. We picked him up late, showed faith in a gangly kid and signed him up for more even before he had shown anything. He would be nowhere without us and he knows it.
Even if this were true - and it is not - no-one at the club would be talking about it.
Roundhouse
16 Oct 2007, 13:34
Are you advocating that should Warnock "pull a Judd" then we are ok to have Sandilands as the only genuine (and fit) ruckman on the list, followed by a series of stopgaps in Gilmore and Kepler?
Given we only have two fit ruckman, we are certain to go after a genuine ruckman with either a National draft pick or a rookie pick.
Exactly.
The idea that we are picking up Kepler out of a fear that Warnock hasn't renegotiated seems to overlook this.
I dont rate Sandilands.
If Sandilands got injured and we were playing Gilmore and Kepler the team would improve exponentially.
Sorry, but that is laughable. We will improve exponentially when Sandi is rucking and Gilmore is roving.
The days of having a lumbering collosus in the ruck are gone. You need versatile players who are capable of playing as a ruckman at stoppages, but also capable fo making an impact around the ground. Gilmore and Kelper can both fill this role.
Grant Thomas thought that too. How many GF's did he win, or make? That theory has been well and truly put to bed by everyone except you and Grant.
As I think someone on another thread said, being versatile doesn't mean being poor at everything.
Freo Big Fella
16 Oct 2007, 13:35
My sources at the club indicate that Kepler is a certainty to be picked up by Freo.
The club has genuine concerns about Robbie Warnocks loyalty to FFC beyond 2008. Whilst it is not a certainty that Warnock will return to Victoria, his refusal to "enter into negotiations" until the end of the 2008 season is triggering alarm bells.
FFC sees Kepler as a potential cover for Warnock. He will be thrown a life line by Freo.
BZZZT. Embers alert! Embers alert!
inferno66
16 Oct 2007, 13:36
Sorry, but that is laughable. We will improve exponentially when Sandi is rucking and Gilmore is roving.
I agree. Gilmore will be a clearance machine :D
astro_toby
16 Oct 2007, 13:41
Not wrong, you just didnt read what I was talking about. I read many a post and had many a conversation where his potential to be a stopgap ruckman was raised. Read the context. I was talking about stopgap emergency rucking, not being number 1 ruckman.
Also, good luck with a CHF who handballs instead of kicks. Good plan.
he can still kick it mate - lol - just with the way our gameplan is set up - it is made for several small, quick - highly skilled players to be running past to recieve and deliver - so i think polak's ability to hold a mark will definitely mean he can be a important cog in the side.
To be honest, is it much different to yours with Tarrant? pretty similar really - could mark , crap kick. tarrant moves better, but as far as a CHF goes - kicks like a pigeon
his kicking i reckon isn't so bad when he is delivering a ball somewhere - it's more when he has to take the set shot he can look a bit ordinary - but the wallace gameplan relies on several receivers running the line and doing just that - receiving - not saying its how i would structure a team - but thats how wallace does
with Kep - i think the bombers really did a shit thing to him - the geelong method is much more appropriate. it sends a message to your team that we respect you career - even if its not here. surely in the last 5 minutes essendon could have given in and let it happen - knowing he was getting cut.
I dont rate Sandilands.
If Sandilands got injured and we were playing Gilmore and Kepler the team would improve exponentially.
The days of having a lumbering collosus in the ruck are gone. You need versatile players who are capable of playing as a ruckman at stoppages, but also capable fo making an impact around the ground. Gilmore and Kelper can both fill this role.
I'm going to jump in here. I'm not sure if you've paid attention to what Gilmore did. He was fantastic around the ground etc., but he was definitely a stop gap at best. Against quality ruck combinations he got slaughtered (in the ruck contest that is). I'm with many people who thought he was a revelation this season and a consistent top player in the later half of the season, but he can easily be found out because he simply can't ruck. If we end up relying on him Kepler (especially Kepler at this stage) then it ain't going to work in the long run. As an option in the mix so to speak, then great, but if we don't have proper ruckman to go to when the middle needs to be controlled from the tap, then we are going to be found out.
A fit & healthy Sandilands is still more than capable of being a presence around the ground used the right way.
pistol17
16 Oct 2007, 13:56
I dont rate Sandilands.
If Sandilands got injured and we were playing Gilmore and Kepler the team would improve exponentially.
The days of having a lumbering collosus in the ruck are gone. You need versatile players who are capable of playing as a ruckman at stoppages, but also capable fo making an impact around the ground. Gilmore and Kelper can both fill this role.
Its very rare i agree with you GJ. I dont rate Sandilands that highly, ive seen him just hit the ball anywhere he doesnt try to send it down our midfielders throats just hits the ball and hopes he hits a purple jumper. Ruckmen in other clubs talk to their midfielders before the bounce, telling them where they are going to hit the ball. I dont see that with Sandilands. He wont kick the ball, lacks confidence to kick it so on the rare occasion he takes a mark its a handball off where a team mate 40 - 50m down the ground is free yet he cant kick to him.
With Warnock I cant see him going anywhere. Everytime someone is out of contract the rumours start about them leaving. By all reports Warnie loves the place, not so sure about him being single either.
Ive defended Kepler for the past 2 weeks or there abouts. At the end of the day we have 3 ruckman and 1 probably wont play for Fremantle again so we pretty much have 2 ruckman and Gilmore. Kepler is 199cm and 100kg, we will get him for nothing, he can play in the ruck if one of Sandilands/Warnock goes down which means Gilmore wont be needed to play a fill in role in the ruck. The guy won a VFL clubs Best and Fairest and Leading Goal Kicker I think he deserves a spot on an AFL list, whether that is with Fremantle well hopefully we roll the dice and give him a go, what do we really have to lose from picking the guy up in the PSD for nothing.
Roundhouse
16 Oct 2007, 14:04
Ruckmen in other clubs talk to their midfielders before the bounce, telling them where they are going to hit the ball. I dont see that with Sandilands.
This is just BS. Try watching the games. If you have any on tape, you can check. :thumbsu:
Scotland
16 Oct 2007, 14:07
BZZZT. Embers alert! Embers alert!
:D
Applying the Embers principle it's safe to say Bradley is a certainly not to be picked up by Freo.
GentlemanJeff
16 Oct 2007, 14:08
This is just BS. Try watching the games. If you have any on tape, you can check. :thumbsu:
I disagree Roundi.
I am very critical of Sandi, so I watch him very closely at every home game.
The thing with Sandi is that he taps the ball to where our midfielders were standing before the bounce, not to where they are running to. This makes it very easy for opposition teams to "feed off" a Sandi tap down. There seems to be absolutely no system or strategy in place.
pistol17
16 Oct 2007, 14:10
This is just BS. Try watching the games. If you have any on tape, you can check. :thumbsu:
Watch the game at the ground not on tv you will get a better look. Ruckman always talk to their mids... well i watch for it anyway.
Not everything gets shown on tv..... ;)
Roundhouse
16 Oct 2007, 14:14
Watch the game at the ground not on tv you will get a better look. Ruckman always talk to their mids... well i watch for it anyway.
Not everything gets shown on tv..... ;)
I do watch the games at the ground.
To say that the Sandi doesn't talk to those in the square before the bounce is BS.
Like I said, if you have any games on tape, you can check.
Its very rare i agree with you GJ. I dont rate Sandilands that highly, ive seen him just hit the ball anywhere he doesnt try to send it down our midfielders throats just hits the ball and hopes he hits a purple jumper. Ruckmen in other clubs talk to their midfielders before the bounce, telling them where they are going to hit the ball. I dont see that with Sandilands. He wont kick the ball, lacks confidence to kick it so on the rare occasion he takes a mark its a handball off where a team mate 40 - 50m down the ground is free yet he cant kick to him.
You should watch closer. 4 times out of 5 sandi taps it straight to one of ours who coughs it up.
I actually think him being injured this year is going to help heaps when He come back as the midfielders have by neccessity had to become more proactive themselves at stoppages instead of relying on the big fella to give them an armchair ride.
If you don't think it is a midfielder problem check out the Pies vs WC final when Cox & Seaby hit it "straight to the pies midfielders".
The reason 211 hasn't been kicking was because of his hernia. In 2006 his field kicking was as good as anyone on the teams.
Watch the game at the ground not on tv you will get a better look. Ruckman always talk to their mids... well i watch for it anyway.
Not everything gets shown on tv..... ;)
You are wrong , they have a pow wow before just about every ball up.