View Full Version : Keep Warnock!
Pretty self explanatory. Sandilands and Warnock are making an exceptional duo. Easily the best duo in the league at the moment.
chook2734
29 Jun 2008, 22:59
I think we all want to keep him, the issue is if Warnock chooses to stay, not if Freo choose to keep him.
He played well today - and about time too. If he continues to perform like that he will get what he wants, and that is a solid position in the team.
NiGHTFuRY
29 Jun 2008, 23:12
Exactly what chook states.
We horde want him to stay (mostly all anyways). If however he wants to pull a Jeff White then it's really out of our hands, and all we can do is get the best deal we can for him, which after todays effort, will improve. We may fetch good offers for him, but yeah I'd prefer he stay in purple. We have developed him after all.
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 23:20
What if someone offers up pick 10 for him though? Would be an interesting decision, keep a good/great ruck prospect or possibly get a great midfielder out of it. If it's not a great offer though we need to do our best to keep him.
chook2734
29 Jun 2008, 23:30
What if someone offers up pick 10 for him though? Would be an interesting decision, keep a good/great ruck prospect or possibly get a great midfielder out of it. If it's not a great offer though we need to do our best to keep him.
You'd keep Warnock every time. He's a quality player who's had 3 or so years of development and weights put into him. He's a 21 year old 206cm ruckman with exceptional ground skills and the ability to take a pretty good mark. His tap work is quality and his kicking is good. Pick 10 could net you another Palmer, or you could find the next Fiora/Sampi etc.
estibador
29 Jun 2008, 23:42
What if someone offers up pick 10 for him though?
Even pick 10 wouldn't be enough for me.
He's shown massive potential as a tap ruckman and some of those marks on the lead today showed he isn't out of place as a leading forward. And let's not forget how nimble he is around the ground (he was almost playing as a rover at times today). Combine all that with how scrawny he is (and therefore the amount of natural improvement left in him) and we'd be mad to trade him.
He really could be anything. Stuff trading someone like that for a draft pick that could turn out to be the next Ryley Dunn.
wehavethepassion
29 Jun 2008, 23:47
The only way i can see us keeping warnock or getting adequate compensation if he does want to jump ship is for us to finish lower than melb.
This way we have a high pick in the PSD. because warnock would have to put a price on his head and nominate for PSD if dockers & melb couldn't come to a suitable deal.
With both on the ground one forward and the other in the ruck it stretches the opposition no end.
A pick in the top 5 preferably top 3 would be adequate compensation for three ys devlopment and he being only 21.
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 23:48
I agree that he is a real good ruck prospect, could be one of the best. It's just we already have one of the best in Sandi. It's hard for me to make a call, it would have to be a real sweet offer.
If we keep him we need to find a way to make having 2 great rucks something we can take advantage of.
Even pick 10 wouldn't be enough for me.
He's shown massive potential as a tap ruckman and some of those marks on the lead today showed he isn't out of place as a leading forward. And let's not forget how nimble he is around the ground (he was almost playing as a rover at times today). Combine all that with how scrawny he is (and therefore the amount of natural improvement left in him) and we'd be mad to trade him.
He really could be anything. Stuff trading someone like that for a draft pick that could turn out to be the next Ryley Dunn.
Exactly , thats what these tanking draft pick junkies need to realise.
Warnock pick 42. :thumbsu:
Maybe pick 40 :thumbsu:
Anybody listen to Saturday morning sportstalk on the ABC?
Kim hughes was lamenting the fact that none of the WC youngsters (all low picks) were anywhere near "5 star" and none had achieved what our youngsters had. :eek:
Judgey actually agreed.
raffrox
29 Jun 2008, 23:52
I loved the combo of Warnock rucking and Sandi as the rover smashing through the packs for the clearance. Worked well in the last quarter.
chook2734
30 Jun 2008, 00:06
Exactly , thats what these tanking draft pick junkies need to realise.
Warnock pick 42. :thumbsu:
Maybe pick 40 :thumbsu:
Anybody listen to Saturday morning sportstalk on the ABC?
Kim hughes was lamenting the fact that none of the WC youngsters (all low picks) were anywhere near "5 star" and none had achieved what our youngsters had. :eek:
Judgey actually agreed.
I like to think we have quality over quantity Rip ;)
Chops_a_must
30 Jun 2008, 08:06
I like to think we have quality over quantity Rip ;)
That's really it.
Our best 3-4 youngsters are miles better than the Eagles best 3-4. Any objective observer could see that.
It's just that we are really thin after that.
Freo Shark
30 Jun 2008, 09:21
I thought he played well, and he has potential but what are we prepared to offer, a premium to keep him ?
Sandi is on $500k? Knockers the same ?
theGav56
30 Jun 2008, 14:15
I thought he played well, and he has potential but what are we prepared to offer a premium to keep him ?
Sandi is on $500k? Knockers the same ?
I think this is a really good point Shark. If we do, then I think we are investing way too much of our salary cap into our rucking division, and that we could be better off with a top-line ruckman, and a second stringer who can play another role. In addiion to that, we need a project ruckman in the WAFL (Connelly seems perfect), or even a hack ruckman (eg Peter Street)who can play a role in the event of injury, but not cost much.
But a million bucks on these two is way out of balance.
shiny_on_top
30 Jun 2008, 15:15
I think this is a really good point Shark. If we do, then I think we are investing way too much of our salary cap into our rucking division, and that we could be better off with a top-line ruckman, and a second stringer who can play another role. In addiion to that, we need a project ruckman in the WAFL (Connelly seems perfect), or even a hack ruckman (eg Peter Street)who can play a role in the event of injury, but not cost much.
But a million bucks on these two is way out of balance.
I tend to disagree. I believe Warnock isn't as much as Sandi. Plus i believe that two star ruckmen would be sensational. They worked a treat on the weekend:thumbsu:
Danlington
30 Jun 2008, 22:40
yeh definitely cant commit to 500k on warnock...look he is gonna be great bit still hasnt played many games what would be a reasonable offer?
When does sandi's current contract expire? If he keeps up this form he could definitely be in line for a payrise at the end of it...
chook2734
30 Jun 2008, 22:46
I think this is a really good point Shark. If we do, then I think we are investing way too much of our salary cap into our rucking division, and that we could be better off with a top-line ruckman, and a second stringer who can play another role. In addiion to that, we need a project ruckman in the WAFL (Connelly seems perfect), or even a hack ruckman (eg Peter Street)who can play a role in the event of injury, but not cost much.
But a million bucks on these two is way out of balance.
Agree that we can't be committing so much money to two players, particularly when you consider that both Pavlich and Tarrant are also on big money. Doesn't leave a lot for the rest of the squad.
It all comes down to what Warnock wants. If he wants a role as a second ruckman (which is all he is going to be capable of for at least another season) and stints up forward, then he is in the right place. If his reasons for leaving are that he's homesick, then there is very little that we can do to control that. If he wants to leave for big money (ie $350K+) and another club is willing to offer him that, then we will probably be best to let him go. Bradley is serviceable in the ruck and Connelly can be fast-tracked, if we get the ground level support right, we can manage.
theGav56
1 Jul 2008, 14:36
This is almost exactly the same issue we had with Snake Simmonds. The cost of having two frontline ruckmen becomes difficult to justify. They both need to be getting good game time every week, yet unfortunately even playing two ruckmen every week is not the best way to go. We tried to get Simmonds to develop a good second string to his bow, but he couldn't quite do it, and in the end we were outbid for his services. Now Richmond are overpaying an injury affected player over the odds for a long contract. And they are in the market for a replacement ruckman.
The critical thing to me for Warnock is that he looks like he has a fair bit of versatility. If he can play forward to good effect when not rucking, then I think a contract amping up to 350K at the end of 3 years is about the range.
The only negative in my opinion is the likelihood of Melbourne finishing below us. If they don't then Wartnock will get us some very good quality in a trade situation, or he will be playing for the club.
Freo Blood
1 Jul 2008, 15:08
I don't think there is space on our list for both Sandi and Warnock long term. With rotations and the like and the running game required at Subi we should be sitting our ruckman on the pine more often than resting forward or elsewhere. The result is not enough game time for one or both of them. I think Warnock knows in a few years he will be good enuff to be #1 ruck in an AFL team. He is unlikely to do that at Freo.
I think we should do all we can to sign him for 2 (or 3) years perhaps at a bit over his current market pay (he is not ready for #1 in a team yet) and guarantee him game time and development.
After first yr of the contract then trade him for good picks and his market pay will likely have caught up to his contract amt and we wouldn't lose any money.
Trick will be to sell it to him as: better pay now, and can move to another club as a more mature player ready for #1.
Win win!!
theGav56
1 Jul 2008, 15:22
Freo Blood, if that was the scenario then we may be better trading him now while we are cellar dwellars. It limits the PSD option a little, and in the end we may finish below any Melbourne clubs which takes it out of the equation entirely.
Freo Blood
2 Jul 2008, 03:33
If we sign him we take away his option of nominating into the PSD. We retain the power to trade (with his agreement) to another club but in exchange for picks or players.
RobbieGray17
2 Jul 2008, 18:56
Yeah trade Warnock....We'll take him! and you can have Pearce, he's a real goer, puts in 100% every game.