View Full Version : Would you class trade week a fail if...
The only trade we did was Tim Callan for the Dogs last pick? We have a great chance to trade the likes of Tenace, Gardiner and Playfair, however from what i have read the club really hasn't been that active.
What do you think? Success or Fail?
cat in sydney
11 Oct 2007, 11:58
Yeha, I think we really need to try and offload at least one of those three, if not two.
I'd be over the moon if we offloaded all three.
The only trade we did was Tim Callan for the Dogs last pick? We have a great chance to trade the likes of Tenace, Gardiner and Playfair, however from what i have read the club really hasn't been that active.
What do you think? Success or Fail?
Unfortunately it's a fail. We traded "fresh" for a trade we wont even use. We shuld have promoted the names mentioned a bit more. It surprising that the players have been overlooked, especially a KPP like Henry.
CatmanForever
11 Oct 2007, 12:03
I am surprised Tenace hasn't got much interest. I think Gardiner and Playfairs best chance is probably the PSD if they get delisted. The vibe I get from comments made in the press by Balme and Co. is that they are happy to keep what they have and are not expecting much trading this week.
catempire
11 Oct 2007, 12:08
No.
As the premiership team, our goals are:
1. Keep list intact.
2. Plan for succession for older players (1. Blake and West for King; 2. Versatile defenders for Milburn, Scarlett and Harley; 3. the rest)
3. Cut dead wood.
If all we do is trade Fresh, then all of the above will still be achieved with list submission and the draft.
I am surprised Tenace hasn't got much interest. I think Gardiner and Playfairs best chance is probably the PSD if they get delisted. The vibe I get from comments made in the press by Balme and Co. is that they are happy to keep what they have and are not expecting much trading this week.
Yeah that is what i have noticed to. I really hope geelong start pushing our players who are expenable. I mean with Sydney wanting to Ditch Bolton and Buchannan, we have a great chance to get one of them. You would think tenace would be on some decent money, considering 2 years ago he was rated very highly still.
Would love ot see geelong push Tenace and Second Rounder for Buchannan.
WE Are Geelong
11 Oct 2007, 12:43
I'll wait till friday 2pm before I get definitive.
I think Geelong has handled Prismall well this week and did what they had to with Blake. As for promoting guys to trade who can say without actually being there?
I think Geelong were always mainly interested in the draft this season and upgrading pick/s is still something they might achieve so lets wait and see.
The continual uncertainty surrounding Grima is my main concern at the moment. I would have thought he was a formality to step onto the senior list and I doubt many Geelong fans disagree with that thinking. This is where Geelong dont want to get too complacent with the list and keep a 'mate' around ahead of someone who has some real potential to do something in a couple more seasons.
Mr Sensitive
11 Oct 2007, 12:44
i wouldn't class trade week a failure if the Callan trade is the only deal we make. Even though we're only getting a pick we don't intend to use, it probably means we're planning to promote either Grima or Lonergan, so I'm not complaining.
I'm open to trading Tenace, but if we can't get a second round pick for him, than there isn't much point.
And we were never going to get much for Playfair or Gardiner. No team is gonna trade for Gardiner when it appears a certainty that he will be delisted, thus allowing them to pick him up in the PSD for nothing.
thejester
11 Oct 2007, 12:46
The only trade we did was Tim Callan for the Dogs last pick? We have a great chance to trade the likes of Tenace, Gardiner and Playfair, however from what i have read the club really hasn't been that active.
What do you think? Success or Fail?
I'm not a big believer in trading...but yeah, pretty much. Certainly if we fail to offload Tenace to Sydney I'll be disappointed.
Ling Sting
11 Oct 2007, 13:31
I thought Byrnes and Tenace would be offered
BlueOyster
11 Oct 2007, 13:34
i have to agree with mr sensitive. the other clubs just need to look at our list and realise we have guys we want to promote from the rookie list, then we have to draft minumum 3 and most in the twos we want to keep. so it only leaves an unlucky few we need to delist. callan, playfair, gardiner and spencer are obvious choices so why trade when they will most probably will be delisted. to delist tenace would be wrong as i think he has some currency as does king. our main aim in this period is to keep our 1st draft pick, maintain the list and do all this inside the salary cap.
there is no way we could fit more players in our salary cap so all we can do during this trade period is watch. probably safe to say our first pick in the draft might be the only useful one anyway. keep tenace, give him some mid year games, increase his currency and offload next year when the draft is most probably going to be stronger.
cat_fanatic_21
11 Oct 2007, 13:39
The fact that we won both the VFL and AFL flags means we should be trying to offload any expendables who have played or at least contributed to said premiership teams:
Byrnes - is worth a second round up grade
Tenace - as above
Gardiner - Third round upgrade
Callan - gone for a late rounder
If we can't do deals on at least one more player (than Callan) then this week will be a fail as the above players will be de-listed at some stage in the next two years IMO. It would be much better to trade them now while they still have some value.
catempire
11 Oct 2007, 13:55
This is where people misunderstand trade week.
The reason not many trades occur is because when a player is expendable to one club (e.g. Playfair, Gardiner, Tenace, etc.) they are usually not much use to another club.
It's not like these players haven't been offered. I think it's pretty clear they have been. It's that no club is willing to part with what we're asking for (not much, you'd think) or has any interest at all.
This shouldn't be surprising and is no indictment on our approach or "success" or otherwise this week.
Cheshire Cat
11 Oct 2007, 14:00
The continual uncertainty surrounding Grima is my main concern at the moment. I would have thought he was a formality to step onto the senior list and I doubt many Geelong fans disagree with that thinking. This is where Geelong dont want to get too complacent with the list and keep a 'mate' around ahead of someone who has some real potential to do something in a couple more seasons.
Agree with that WAG. Watching Grima this season I thought he was a cert to be promoted, kicked 50 goals etc. However, I watched the VFL GF and he didn't have a big one then, looked to have been hampered by injury. But regardless, he is still very raw and has massive potential I think, I would promote him before Lonergan (I think this is one example of a 'mate' ahead of someone with real potential). Although Lonergan did play well in the GF, I'm not sure what role he could play in our team. Byrnes is another, premiership player yes but will not improve and will certainly struggle for a spot, with the plethora of midfield type we have knocking on the door.
I really hope we retain Grima.
Cheshire Cat
11 Oct 2007, 14:03
This is where people misunderstand trade week.
The reason not many trades occur is because when a player is expendable to one club (e.g. Playfair, Gardiner, Tenace, etc.) they are usually not much use to another club.
It's not like these players haven't been offered. I think it's pretty clear they have been. It's that no club is willing to part with what we're asking for (not much, you'd think) or has any interest at all.
This shouldn't be surprising and is no indictment on our approach or "success" or otherwise this week.
Exactly, you've got to put yourself in other clubs shoes for a second. Would you take Gardiner, Playfair, Tenace? I wouldn't. The only reason I would think they might is if they haven't seen as much of these players as we have. Because Gardiner and Playfair haven't cut it on our list for years, we know that. Tenace has terrible disposal, that's not very enticing to opposition clubs
thejester
11 Oct 2007, 14:24
This is where people misunderstand trade week.
The reason not many trades occur is because when a player is expendable to one club (e.g. Playfair, Gardiner, Tenace, etc.) they are usually not much use to another club.
It's not like these players haven't been offered. I think it's pretty clear they have been. It's that no club is willing to part with what we're asking for (not much, you'd think) or has any interest at all.
This shouldn't be surprising and is no indictment on our approach or "success" or otherwise this week.
Yeah, but you'd think we'd be something of an exception to that rule given that we won both the AFL and VFL flags. Tenace, Playfair and to a lesser extent Gardiner might be surplus to our requirements but it doesn't mean they don't have the skills for AFL level.
catempire
11 Oct 2007, 15:03
Yeah, but you'd think we'd be something of an exception to that rule given that we won both the AFL and VFL flags. Tenace, Playfair and to a lesser extent Gardiner might be surplus to our requirements but it doesn't mean they don't have the skills for AFL level.
I realise this. I just think it's unrealistic to expect that there will be clubs waiting with open arms and picks in hand to take them off us.
Reality is, players of their calibre (perhaps Tenace excepted) generally get delisted eventually and only get second chances through drafts.
nananana catman
11 Oct 2007, 16:00
Yeah that is what i have noticed to. I really hope geelong start pushing our players who are expenable. I mean with Sydney wanting to Ditch Bolton and Buchannan, we have a great chance to get one of them. You would think tenace would be on some decent money, considering 2 years ago he was rated very highly still.
Would love ot see geelong push Tenace and Second Rounder for Buchannan.
If Prismall cannot get a game how will Buchannan? we dont need any more midfielders.
As for the likes of Playfair and Gardiner, no-one may be offering anything decent for them. If no-one offers anything decent then we aren't going to trade as we dont want a swag of late draft picks we are commited to use.
We just won the AFL and VFL flag, the need for changes is minimal. Our list is still relatively young.
If Prismall cannot get a game how will Buchannan? we dont need any more midfielders.
As for the likes of Playfair and Gardiner, no-one may be offering anything decent for them. If no-one offers anything decent then we aren't going to trade as we dont want a swag of late draft picks we are commited to use.
We just won the AFL and VFL flag, the need for changes is minimal. Our list is still relatively young.
i've always seen Amon as a small forward. Would be a handy play coming in for Byrnes.
Why cant we just do them for pick upgrades. Playffair + Late third rounder for early third rounder. I'm pretty sure teams would snap at that!
Agreed, however we do have some dead wood. We just can't sit around with it on our list.
LifeSpan-Void
11 Oct 2007, 16:10
I'm more interested in watching the current experienced core group help integrate our younger players (Davenport, Djerrkura, Gamble et al) than us trading away deadwood for more potential deadwood. I would say based on the success of the VFL team this year that we'll see a few more rookie list promotions than extensive drafting. Doesn't really matter to me where the talent is coming from, as long as we've got it available to us. I would like to see them draft or rookie Thompson however. Probably won't need a high pick for that anyway.
If Steven King has been offered a very minimal contract for 1 year (or retire) I think it shows that we're up to our eyeballs in the salary cap. This year we will be trying to create some breathing room in the cap so blokes like Buchannan and Johnstone will push us over, not get us under. A pity really coz a guy like Brennan, in the right envirnmoent, could be anything (plus from the reports if we offered our 1st rounder we'd get him. But no cash means no go.)
As for Charlie & Hank, yes they have had good seasons in the VFL but in AFL terms when you're mid 20's that aint that appealing. Both have been offered previously and will either be delisted or traded in a simular way to Callan.
As long as we retain our 22 premiership players, I'll be happy. Still have the likes of Hawkins, Djerrkura, Prismall, Gamble, Blake, Varcoe, Davenport ect knocking the door down trying to get a gig. Add that to this years crop and anything's possible.
My5t3r10u5
11 Oct 2007, 16:45
Exactly, you've got to put yourself in other clubs shoes for a second. Would you take Gardiner, Playfair, Tenace? I wouldn't. The only reason I would think they might is if they haven't seen as much of these players as we have. Because Gardiner and Playfair haven't cut it on our list for years, we know that. Tenace has terrible disposal, that's not very enticing to opposition clubs
You and Catempire are on the money there! I think it's funny that people constantly bag the likes of Byrnes, Playfair and Gardiner during the year and then are surprised that other clubs aren't willing to offer anything for them. Plus it's then the clubs fault for not being able to trade them.
As for classing trade week a fail, here's some info for you - there's still a day to go and that day is the day when most of the action happens (not that doing trades is a guage of success - we could do nothing and I'd be happy). Callan's trade isn't even official yet so we don't know what we are getting for him but someone still manages to complain that we get a late pick for him (this may prove to be true but we don't KNOW anything yet!!!!).
nananana catman
11 Oct 2007, 16:53
Why cant we just do them for pick upgrades. Playffair + Late third rounder for early third rounder. I'm pretty sure teams would snap at that!
Agreed, however we do have some dead wood. We just can't sit around with it on our list.
They might and they might not. Playfair is never going to be a regular at any AFL club, so in the case of Richmond why drop back 15 places in the draft to get a player who you know wont cut it?
Deadwood gets delisted. There are probably only 3 players on the list who you would say have bugger all chance of being regular AFL players. Playfair, Spencer, Sam Hunt.
Budda 230
11 Oct 2007, 16:55
Agree with that WAG. Watching Grima this season I thought he was a cert to be promoted, kicked 50 goals etc. However, I watched the VFL GF and he didn't have a big one then, looked to have been hampered by injury. But regardless, he is still very raw and has massive potential I think, I would promote him before Lonergan (I think this is one example of a 'mate' ahead of someone with real potential). Although Lonergan did play well in the GF, I'm not sure what role he could play in our team. Byrnes is another, premiership player yes but will not improve and will certainly struggle for a spot, with the plethora of midfield type we have knocking on the door.
I really hope we retain Grima.
I completely agree.
I can't believe that Grima isn't considered a certain rookie promotion. He would be the first on the rookie list that I would be looking to keep. He adds depth and in my opinion will eventually settle into the best 22 (2-3 years).
I feel the same as you about Lonergan too CC. Before his injury, his place on the list would have been under threat. It was a terrible thing to happen to him, but since his injury his stocks have all of a sudden risen. It sounds harsh, but I really can't see a spot on the list for him. Yeah, he played great in the GF, who didn't?
Am I the only one who has this opinion?
Exactly, you've got to put yourself in other clubs shoes for a second. Would you take Gardiner, Playfair, Tenace? I wouldn't. The only reason I would think they might is if they haven't seen as much of these players as we have. Because Gardiner and Playfair haven't cut it on our list for years, we know that. Tenace has terrible disposal, that's not very enticing to opposition clubs
Seriously Dude SHUTUP!!! Richmond scouts do their homework by reading bigfooty posts... and u have just informed them that Henry, Charles, and Turbo are shite... all of a sudden they have decided to keep their first round pick...
I completely agree.
I can't believe that Grima isn't considered a certain rookie promotion. He would be the first on the rookie list that I would be looking to keep. He adds depth and in my opinion will eventually settle into the best 22 (2-3 years).
I feel the same as you about Lonergan too CC. Before his injury, his place on the list would have been under threat. It was a terrible thing to happen to him, but since his injury his stocks have all of a sudden risen. It sounds harsh, but I really can't see a spot on the list for him. Yeah, he played great in the GF, who didn't?
Am I the only one who has this opinion?
I can... we have Nath, T-Hawk and Moons as KP fwds... added to Otto who can rotate through. Our KP fwd stocks are decent, I'd much prefer to add Davenport to the senior list as I can realistically see him playing senior football next season... Grima will still be playing VFL.
we can leave Davenport on the rookie list for another year.
we can leave Davenport on the rookie list for another year.
Pfffffffffft........
The scenario...
We promote Grima and retain Davenport... Grima and Davenport plays VFL
OR
We promote Davenport and lose Grima... Davenport potentially replaces Byrnes in the senior 22.
I know which one id prefer.
BlueOyster
11 Oct 2007, 17:25
worst thing for us is the sacjing of sheedy, he loves his hack defenders, playfair would have been traded for their first round no doubt.
MmkMrMackie
11 Oct 2007, 19:32
They might and they might not. Playfair is never going to be a regular at any AFL club, so in the case of Richmond why drop back 15 places in the draft to get a player who you know wont cut it?
Deadwood gets delisted. There are probably only 3 players on the list who you would say have bugger all chance of being regular AFL players. Playfair, Spencer, Sam Hunt.
I see...
The rabbi
11 Oct 2007, 19:52
I can... we have Nath, T-Hawk and Moons as KP fwds... added to Otto who can rotate through. Our KP fwd stocks are decent, I'd much prefer to add Davenport to the senior list as I can realistically see him playing senior football next season... Grima will still be playing VFL.
Who says that Grima has to compete for as spot in the forward line against Hawkins, Mooney, Nablett et.al. Why not pick the best players available. If Grima can play in a KPP forward position in the VFL why can he not play in defense if he is promoted? Defense seems to be the place the we may be lacking in the future.
The rabbi
11 Oct 2007, 20:03
I completely agree.
I can't believe that Grima isn't considered a certain rookie promotion. He would be the first on the rookie list that I would be looking to keep. He adds depth and in my opinion will eventually settle into the best 22 (2-3 years).
I feel the same as you about Lonergan too CC. Before his injury, his place on the list would have been under threat. It was a terrible thing to happen to him, but since his injury his stocks have all of a sudden risen. It sounds harsh, but I really can't see a spot on the list for him. Yeah, he played great in the GF, who didn't?
Am I the only one who has this opinion?
I have some problems with this and I don't believe that it is a case of sentimentality. We had a problem in the forward line in 05 and Geelong looked to Lonergan as he was performing well in the VFL at full forward. He failed at AFL level but when he returned to the VFL he was still regularly in the best players if not BOG. Albeit in the back line. When Lonergan returned to the senior side it was as a defender and it was then that he was injured. I don't think that Lonergan had really been tried and found wanting in defense. The problem for him is that when he was tried it cost him a kidney. He is 197cm and quite mobile. I think that he needs to do some work on his body, but I think he could be very handy in defense.
OldStyle2007
11 Oct 2007, 21:11
I have some problems with this and I don't believe that it is a case of sentimentality. We had a problem in the forward line in 05 and Geelong looked to Lonergan as he was performing well in the VFL at full forward. He failed at AFL level but when he returned to the VFL he was still regularly in the best players if not BOG. Albeit in the back line. When Lonergan returned to the senior side it was as a defender and it was then that he was injured. I don't think that Lonergan had really been tried and found wanting in defense. The problem for him is that when he was tried it cost him a kidney. He is 197cm and quite mobile. I think that he needs to do some work on his body, but I think he could be very handy in defense.
yeah but lonergan was not given the same development time that Nablett got
I am a Nablett fan, but I also recognise he has been given a good go by coaching staff and selection committee
I reckon lonergan was looking really good in the game he got injured. He would definitely be required down back at some stage in 2008 and maybe even pinch hitting at forward in case of injuries
My5t3r10u5
11 Oct 2007, 21:25
I see...
To quote a line from The Princess Bride - "I don't think that means what you think it means"!
MmkMrMackie
12 Oct 2007, 01:22
Playfair is a swan now for pick 44
http://realfooty.com.au/news/news/playfair-joins-schoolmate-at-swans/2007/10/11/1191696085298.html
Cleared up a bit of salary cap room there. Hopefully we can find a deal to somehow upgrade our plethora of late draft picks which we will probably not use.
Wow, trading Playfair for 44, amazing. I'd say that'll help make room for our rookie promotions.
kriso182
12 Oct 2007, 09:31
Trade week is pass after the Playfair trade.
Theres also talk that we could trade Gardiner to Carlton today!!
-Kris
Furious_G
12 Oct 2007, 09:51
If we could get Charlie to Carlton, would we then look at keeping King for another year? Or should we still trade him while he has currency? The man said he would play on a performance based salary, that's gotta count for something...
As trade week has gone on, I've gotten more gutted if we lose King. Fingers crossed something can happen.
All we need is to trade charlie and its a massive pass :thumbsu:
cat_fanatic_21
12 Oct 2007, 10:35
This is where people misunderstand trade week.
The reason not many trades occur is because when a player is expendable to one club (e.g. Playfair, Gardiner, Tenace, etc.) they are usually not much use to another club.
It's not like these players haven't been offered. I think it's pretty clear they have been. It's that no club is willing to part with what we're asking for (not much, you'd think) or has any interest at all.
This shouldn't be surprising and is no indictment on our approach or "success" or otherwise this week.
Exactly, you've got to put yourself in other clubs shoes for a second. Would you take Gardiner, Playfair, Tenace? I wouldn't. The only reason I would think they might is if they haven't seen as much of these players as we have. Because Gardiner and Playfair haven't cut it on our list for years, we know that. Tenace has terrible disposal, that's not very enticing to opposition clubs
Ha.:D
Just because we think Playfair is a dud doesn't mean he's not tradeable. To tell you the truth, Playfair was the last person i thought we'd get something for...
Thanks Sydney!
I think Sam Hunt has a chance of playing senior football... has been good in the VFL and if Scarlett / Harley got injured if he was playing good in the magoos hed have to come under consideration.
Gogeelong
12 Oct 2007, 18:05
We traded King and Charlie for pick 60?
nananana catman
12 Oct 2007, 18:06
We traded King and Charlie for pick 60?
90 mate