View Full Version : Mark Johnson & Keplar Bradley
Osmodiar
15 Oct 2007, 20:30
Apparently both delisted. am not surprised but i am sad to see Mark Johnson go
not sure this has been posted, but it was straight from Knights mouth on 3AW.
TylerDurden
15 Oct 2007, 20:33
That's pretty big news. Would expect both to get picked up in the PSD. MJ to Port for mine...
Can't believe they asked for a 1st rd pick for Kepler - laughable now...
BABYBOMBERS2007
15 Oct 2007, 20:35
If only Bradley was played as forward. Nah but its better he's gone. Sad about Mark Johnson but it was the right call.
Yeap both de-listed
Bradley, Knights said he would go to Freo in psd
and noone wanted MJ so i cant see anyone going for him in the PSD.
Borgsta
16 Oct 2007, 07:48
Can anyone tell me now why Essendon didnt just accept a 4th rounder for Bradley? They could have then used that and their 3rd rounder to upgrade another pick.
Can anyone tell me now why Essendon didnt just accept a 4th rounder for Bradley? They could have then used that and their 3rd rounder to upgrade another pick.
As Essendon have promoted rookie Heath Hocking to the senior list and well as Adam Ramanauskas, the club probably has no intention of using its 4th round selection (ie. passing).
Can anyone tell me now why Essendon didnt just accept a 4th rounder for Bradley? They could have then used that and their 3rd rounder to upgrade another pick.
We won't use pick 56 and it was offered with about 3 minutes of trade period left so how are we going to use it to upgrade anotehr pick? It woudl've been ridiculous to roll over for Freo, and would've set a bad precedent.
Apparently Essendon were going to do the trade but Freo pulled out.
Kaiser Powser
16 Oct 2007, 12:32
Can anyone tell me now why Essendon didnt just accept a 4th rounder for Bradley? They could have then used that and their 3rd rounder to upgrade another pick.
I think they ran out of time. They came back to Freo and said alright we will accept pick 40 and Freo said, "well it's 56 now" and I don't think there was enough time to settle on that.
Hopefully the Doggies take him. He could be a servicable forward flanker.
Borgsta
16 Oct 2007, 15:47
Look this deal could have been done early in the week and Essendon could have worked out a Bulldogs / Eagles style trade with another club.
I think they have done poorly by themselves and also by Bradley. Even if you aren't using the pick allow the player to go where he wants to go in a sign of goodwill
can kepler play out of the goal square? is head a good lead, good below the knees, can he split open packs?
can kepler play out of the goal square? is head a good lead, good below the knees, can he split open packs?
can kepler play out of the goal square?is head a good lead
He doesn't have a huge burst of pace. So being an FF won't be his best position.
good below the knees
Yes, very good for his size
can he split open packs?
No, but he is still a reasonable pack mark.
Honestly, this seems a strange move given the comments Knights made to get the job. The word is that Hardwick missed out because he was blunt and suggested the list needed rebuilding, whilst Knights was more focused on immediate success. Cutting guys like Johnson and Bradley seems more like a move you would make if you shared Hardwick's view, not Knights'.
Honestly, this seems a strange move given the comments Knights made to get the job. The word is that Hardwick missed out because he was blunt and suggested the list needed rebuilding, whilst Knights was more focused on immediate success. Cutting guys like Johnson and Bradley seems more like a move you would make if you shared Hardwick's view, not Knights'.
Knights advocated a rebuilding with the aim of challenging in 2010. Hardwick wanted thought that 2012 was more realistic.
Knights advocated a rebuilding with the aim of challenging in 2010. Hardwick wanted thought that 2012 was more realistic.
Hardwick was right.
rooboy_88
17 Oct 2007, 11:58
can bradley be rookie listed if he doesnt get drafted.