View Full Version : Trade Dean Cox
If we can get a reasonable player or good draft choice for him I think we should definitely let him go.
He hasn't pushed on as well as everyone thought he would. Clarke killed him on Saturday.
The fact is, Gardiner will be our number one ruckman for the next 5-8 years and with Seaby and Beeck doing really well in the WAFL plus pinch hitters like McDougall, Johnson etc, it's worth it to try and get a solid defender which we need or perhaps a key forward for Cox.
We need to repair our weaknesses for next season.
Your thoughts:
Black Thunder
10 Aug 2003, 23:21
possibly, but we NEED to know that Seaby and/or Beeck are capable of being second ruckman before trading Gardiner away.
Whenever McDougall has gone into the ruck he has really struggled, but that may change in years to come.
Only if we have another adequate rotation ruckman (preferably one which can play in another position as well) can we afford to get rid of Cox.
Unfortunately for Cox, he doesn't really play anywhere apart form the ruck as well, which means he plays 1-1.5 quarters in the ruck, maybe a half to a full quarter floating round the forward line and probably half a game or so on the bench, which is to much bench time for a guy like him, who is a quality player.
RzrBlade
10 Aug 2003, 23:22
Cox is a worthy and loyal clubman that deserves to stay.
But as the old saying goes, if the right offer comes up no one is indespenisble (obviously not entirely true, but in regards to Coxy it would be).
You need a full forward and Nth Melb need a ruckman. How does a Digby Morrell for Cox swap sound?
RzrBlade
10 Aug 2003, 23:25
Originally posted by Lidge
You need a full forward and Nth Melb need a ruckman. How does a Digby Morrell for Cox swap sound?
Nah, Digby hasn't got enough hair on his head. :p
Petrie is a winner though.
Voice of Reason
10 Aug 2003, 23:28
Could well happen.
He hasn't pushed on and if the right deal came up, we should take it. On the other hand, I'd be happy to keep him. We win either way.
mouldy_bread
10 Aug 2003, 23:32
Originally posted by Black Thunder
possibly, but we NEED to know that Seaby and/or Beeck are capable of being second ruckman before trading Gardiner away.
:eek: !!
Plus the porn star (Morrell) is from WA.
Black Thunder
10 Aug 2003, 23:49
Originally posted by mouldy_bread
:eek: !!
oops got me there - posted without thinking. Obviousbly meant Coxy :p
BTW, I don't think we need a FF - at the moment, we have the highest scoring set up in the league so no need to change that. If we traded Cox it would have to be for a KP defender.
mouldy_bread
11 Aug 2003, 00:11
Originally posted by Black Thunder
BTW, I don't think we need a FF - at the moment, we have the highest scoring set up in the league so no need to change that. If we traded Cox it would have to be for a KP defender.
I agree, plenty of guys who could take a forward role, but there seems to be no one who can play down back.
[QUOTE]I agree, plenty of guys who could take a forward role, but there seems to be no one who can play down back.
Agreed there needs to be a shake up down back...stopping the scoring when we arent scoring is our biggest weakness.
daddy_4_eyes
11 Aug 2003, 00:19
Originally posted by Black Thunder
BTW, I don't think we need a FF - at the moment, we have the highest scoring set up in the league so no need to change that. If we traded Cox it would have to be for a KP defender.
Its been a bit exposed in the last 4 weeks though. I have no doubt McDougall, Gaspar and Staker will be good/great players for us in the future, and Seaby, Johnson, Beeck and Hansen all have good wraps on them, but at the moment we lack marking power up forward. Basically, we're a bit predictable.
Black Thunder
11 Aug 2003, 00:34
Originally posted by daddy_4_eyes
Its been a bit exposed in the last 4 weeks though. I have no doubt McDougall, Gaspar and Staker will be good/great players for us in the future, and Seaby, Johnson, Beeck and Hansen all have good wraps on them, but at the moment we lack marking power up forward. Basically, we're a bit predictable.
yea we are a tad predicatable at the moment, but this is yet another reason to get excited about our future.
I honestly believe of all the teams in the top 8, we still have the most improvement to be made, and when we have our best guys on the park, we are in the best 3-4 teams in the competition.
We have the potential to be a great team in the future, and if guys like McDougall, Gaspar and Staker and other KPP really come on in the future years, that will certainly happen.
We're already a gun team, and basically the only area where we have completed our planning for the future is the midfield. This area has been set, and will only get better as the play more with each other (:eek: - sorry, being a bit dirty tonight :p)...but seriously I don't think we'll see too many changes from the midfield of Gardiner, Cox, Cousins, Judd, Kerr, Braun, Fletcher, Embley and Jones over the next 5 or so years.
Down forward we are still definetaly planning, and the future isn't quite set there, and we probably could do with another tall player up there. Down back we are a LONG way from hitting our peak, but Gaspar will most likely hold down a spot down there, and Staker is likely to be a half back flanker. The concern is whether Glass can hold down the FB position.......
Cox was beaten by the best ruck duo in the league on the weekend so he shouldnt really be down on himself. Well at least even with our duo but we were a man down.
Trading Cox would be stupid if Seaby or Beeck cant prove themselves in the AFL. Gardiner is injury prone, we were without him for a stretch last season and again this season. If we trade Cox and Gardy goes down next season, you will all be crying as we start a game with McDougall or Seira in the ruck....
Black Thunder
11 Aug 2003, 01:44
Originally posted by jod23
Trading Cox would be stupid if Seaby or Beeck cant prove themselves in the AFL. Gardiner is injury prone, we were without him for a stretch last season and again this season. If we trade Cox and Gardy goes down next season, you will all be crying as we start a game with McDougall or Seira in the ruck....
agree 100% there - until we have someone else who can prove themsleves to ruck at least competently to give Gardy a break, we can't trade Cox.
And although Siera played very well on the weekend, we can't have him in the ruck. he could barely get of the ground - vertical leap of a sausage dog :p
larrikin
11 Aug 2003, 02:04
Originally posted by jod23
Cox was beaten by the best ruck duo in the league on the weekend so he shouldnt really be down on himself. Well at least even with our duo but we were a man down.
Trading Cox would be stupid if Seaby or Beeck cant prove themselves in the AFL. Gardiner is injury prone, we were without him for a stretch last season and again this season. If we trade Cox and Gardy goes down next season, you will all be crying as we start a game with McDougall or Seira in the ruck....
It's nice to have insurance, but Cox is good enough to be the number 1 ruckman at at least 6 AFL clubs. He is worth more to other clubs than he is to us. I think we can afford to make that trade (as long as we get a quality kpp player in return) and gamble a bit on Seaby or Beeck making it. Most people agree Seaby has shown enough that he will be an AFL quality ruckman, and Beeck is starting to be a force in the WAFL
Black Thunder
11 Aug 2003, 02:12
Originally posted by larrikin
It's nice to have insurance, but Cox is good enough to be the number 1 ruckman at at least 6 AFL clubs. He is worth more to other clubs than he is to us. I think we can afford to make that trade (as long as we get a quality kpp player in return) and gamble a bit on Seaby or Beeck making it. Most people agree Seaby has shown enough that he will be an AFL quality ruckman, and Beeck is starting to be a force in the WAFL
When it comes to the position of ruck, it's just too important a position to take a gamble on.
It's the most important position on the field - very rarely to teams get done in the ruck but when games. It happens, but not often.
The four games Gardiner has missed this year have been Sydney, Hawthorn, St Kilda and Adelaide. We have lost 3 of them.....
larrikin
11 Aug 2003, 02:19
Originally posted by Black Thunder
The four games Gardiner has missed this year have been Sydney, Hawthorn, St Kilda and Adelaide. We have lost 3 of them.....
Exactly my point, Cox hs played first ruck in all of those - didn't seem to help much.
Originally posted by larrikin
Exactly my point, Cox hs played first ruck in all of those - didn't seem to help much.
Good call
Originally posted by larrikin
Exactly my point, Cox hs played first ruck in all of those - didn't seem to help much.
That's more of an indication of how reliant our game-plan is on Gardiners freakish ability. Cox is a decent/solid ruckman - it's our game-plan and coaching that suck ATM.
Originally posted by Jabber
That's more of an indication of how reliant our game-plan is on Gardiners freakish ability. Cox is a decent/solid ruckman - it's our game-plan and coaching that suck ATM.
What's wrong with our gameplan? Just because we over-achieved earlier in the year doesn't mean our coaching now sucks.
I would be willing to trade Cox for the right deal... either a mid-early first round pick or a decent KPP.
The Gardy/Cox combo has worked well. We'd need to be sure Bek or Seaby could cover for Cox before trading. Perhaps that's another reason Beek was elevated, to see how he'd perform. Probably in the Dees game.
Originally posted by Sera
What's wrong with our gameplan? Just because we over-achieved earlier in the year doesn't mean our coaching now sucks...
We have the best Ruck/midfield combination in the league when fit. The only problem is we live and die off that alone, and when we have 1, 2 or in this case 3 of that combination injured - it's the latter option that prevails.
Our key position solutions up forward continually fail because the midfielders don't know how to kick to a marking forward. Rather than address the issue of forward line disposal and structure, we keep ending up re-cycling people like Wilson in the vain hope he may be able to suck balls 1 metre over his head down onto his chest like a giant vacuum cleaner, or that Phil Matera will suddenly develop a 2 metre leap.
Our game plane is predictable and one-dimensional and there are no signs from the coaching staff of changing that philosophy.
carneagles
11 Aug 2003, 15:41
We would be insane to trade Cox.
I'll say it again for emphasis - insane.
Originally posted by carneagles
We would be insane to trade Cox.
I'll say it again for emphasis - insane.
so you wouldn't trade cox if it could be worked into a trade for Hay?
daddy_4_eyes
11 Aug 2003, 16:09
Originally posted by Black Thunder
agree 100% there - until we have someone else who can prove themsleves to ruck at least competently to give Gardy a break, we can't trade Cox.
We also have to assess Cox's worth in the future. Maybe the coaching staff know something about his abilities that we don't, and may want to trade him before he gets found out? Maybe his worth is as high as its gonna be due to the demand for ruckmen this year. Probably also depends on what would be offered for him. Would he want to leave if we traded him, or does he want WC to trade him?
So many factors to consider, its silly how early in the season the trade talks amongst supporters (and media) begins.
carneagles
11 Aug 2003, 16:53
Originally posted by noodle
so you wouldn't trade cox if it could be worked into a trade for Hay? Actually, I wouldn't, but maybe that's just me.
Cox may have been beaten last week, but he's well worth persevering with. And if he goes, all it takes is an injury to Gardiner and we're down to Doogs as first ruck until Seaby is ready.
If Cox goes, we're two years behind the 8-ball in developing a second-string AFL calibre ruckman.
I agree with Carneagles (also like your posts on Dockerland).
We need Cox for another 2 years or so while Seaby has a chance to mature - reckon he'll be a very good player. I'd trade Beeck.
The real problem though remains the backline or what passes for one at the moment. At present our midfield is our first and last line of defence and that can't continue.
Originally posted by carneagles
Cox may have been beaten last week, but he's well worth persevering with. And if he goes, all it takes is an injury to Gardiner and we're down to Doogs as first ruck until Seaby is ready.
Gardiner, whether we like it or not, is going to miss at least 3 or 4 games a year. That's going on his history. I don't know if it's really been mentioned much - but Gardy is not durable.
Because of that we NEED Cox. Until such time as we can work out where Beeck and Seaby fit we have no choice, unless you think throwing one or both of them in the deep end is the answer.
Hay would be a certain upgrade down back, but let's be realistic. We aint getting him for Cox, even with another team thrown into the mix it is unlikely.
In my opinion we are at least one poss two year away from realising the true value (trade or playing) of our ruck division. Until then we wait. And forget about trading for a FF and find a KP backman!!
If Cox was a worthy player I'd say keep him, but i don't think he is.
In the last few weeks he's been beaten in every game.
He also can't play well around the ground which means if he's not rucking he's on the bench which is a waste.
At least with Doogs, Johnson, Beeck and Seaby we can put them back or forward to utlise another bigman.
We need to get defenders so trade Cox while his value is high and while other clubs like Collingwood, St.Kilda and the Bulldogs need ruckman!
Originally posted by Jumper
If Cox was a worthy player I'd say keep him, but i don't think he is.
In the last few weeks he's been beaten in every game.
He also can't play well around the ground which means if he's not rucking he's on the bench which is a waste.
At least with Doogs, Johnson, Beeck and Seaby we can put them back or forward to utlise another bigman.
We need to get defenders so trade Cox while his value is high and while other clubs like Collingwood, St.Kilda and the Bulldogs need ruckman!
What?? :confused:
He was beaten Saturday but by the leading ruck pair in the comp. I thought vs St Kilda and particularly Hawthorn he did well. Don't know what you are expecting.
Generally Cox's around the ground play is good. He actually has pretty good skills. Not such a great option up forward as lacks ability to tie the ball in the forward 50 but as a ruck option is proven.
Clubs will always need ruckmen, so I wouldn't worry about that. Better off them than us though.