List Mgmt. Dan Gorringe requests trade to Port Adelaide

Status
Not open for further replies.
Arguably the best draft of all time in 2001 we essentially completely traded out of so missing out on the 'super draft' for talls this year doesnt worry me. We are at that stage of our list development where we can pick and choose specific players and player types to help our premiership chances.
 
Arguably the best draft of all time in 2001 we essentially completely traded out of so missing out on the 'super draft' for talls this year doesnt worry me. We are at that stage of our list development where we can pick and choose specific players and player types to help our premiership chances.

Wouldn't mind your thoughts as I've been fighting with this for a while, and note I really like the player I'm about to talk about.

But if we manage to bring in Ryder we end up next season with a fit Ryder (27), fit Lobbe (25), and a possibly recovering Redden (24) - with both Redden and Ryder able to do some stuff up forward.
We may also have at least Gorringe (22) on the list.

That gives us 4 rucks. Now I don't know salaries etc, but is having all three of Ryder/Lobbe/Redden on our list a good use of resources given we may struggle to play them all - and Redden has had injury concerns, or is there an argument to trade Redden (if he carries enouhg value) and effectively re[place him with another Ruck/Forward - (ie Lowden).

Ie - would you prefer:
1) Ryder/Lobbe/Redden/Gorringe + possible rookie ruck; or
2) Ryder/Lobbe/Gorringe/Lowden+ possible rookie ruck

Obviously on paper 1 is better option, but what if option 2 means we need to give up less other picks/players.
I know its extreme, but what if taking option 1 over 2 meant we had to give up a Young type over a Mitchell type. (citing a somewhat extreme case).

And of course the other mitigation is that some feel Redden could play as a pure forward.
 
So - those who watch the GCS a fair bit - what does Gorringe bring to Port other than potential and height. When the debate about him was on last year and he played us in Rd 21, the only thing he really did was kick a nice goal. Will he be anything more than a #4 ruckman in the squad.
 

AdsGoNads

Club Legend
Mar 21, 2014
1,972
1,861
SA Great
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Brøndby IF, Adelaide City FC
Wouldn't mind your thoughts as I've been fighting with this for a while, and note I really like the player I'm about to talk about.

But if we manage to bring in Ryder we end up next season with a fit Ryder (27), fit Lobbe (25), and a possibly recovering Redden (24) - with both Redden and Ryder able to do some stuff up forward.
We may also have at least Gorringe (22) on the list.

That gives us 4 rucks. Now I don't know salaries etc, but is having all three of Ryder/Lobbe/Redden on our list a good use of resources given we may struggle to play them all - and Redden has had injury concerns, or is there an argument to trade Redden (if he carries enouhg value) and effectively re[place him with another Ruck/Forward - (ie Lowden).

Ie - would you prefer:
1) Ryder/Lobbe/Redden/Gorringe + possible rookie ruck; or
2) Ryder/Lobbe/Gorringe/Lowden+ possible rookie ruck

Obviously on paper 1 is better option, but what if option 2 means we need to give up less other picks/players.
I know its extreme, but what if taking option 1 over 2 meant we had to give up a Young type over a Mitchell type. (citing a somewhat extreme case).

And of course the other mitigation is that some feel Redden could play as a pure forward.

Any room left for Cameron?
 
Feb 4, 2013
1,452
1,493
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
We can probably lose the rumour tag now that his manager has confirmed it.



If Gorringe and Lowden would come at the same price, then I'd rather have Gorringe. I don't think they would though. But it would be a hell of a trade period if we could somehow trade our first three picks to get Ryder and Gorringe.

I just don't get it from Gorringe's perspective. He'd be a clear second ruck at the Crows, he'd probably be fourth ruck here if we get Ryder.

Actually I have a slightly different view.
Ryder as primarily a Tall Forward with minimal ruck work e.g. forward 50 only. That leaves fwd 50 of Schultz, Westy and Ryder and leave grunt ruckwork to Lobbe, Gorringe and Lowden. Covers injury, form and rest!
Lobbes number 1 with Gorringe and /or Lowden as our 2nd back up ruckman
Redden to get his body ok in 2015 with a view to 2016 and if form permits or injuries he plays.
Our list could accommodate all.
 

Chachi

Premiership Player
Jan 10, 2013
3,344
5,627
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Fu** No
with all the injuries he has I am not sure...

in his first 2 years he has had Hamstrings, ankle and Achilles injuries which have destroyed his seasons and we don't want 2 ruckmen (the 2nd being Redden) taking time to get their bodies right

Lowden is slightly older, slightly taller .. but has a more healthier body
Sure fitness is important but there is a reason he's not getting a game at Hawthorn. They traded in experienced rucks because they probably weren't confident in his ability. Gorringe on the other hand generally plays when he's fit. With Burgess the club probably feels Gorringe has more upside.
 

jonasshirtfront

Club Legend
Sep 17, 2013
1,079
2,852
Cybertron
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
upload_2014-9-30_14-25-33.png


I am the king of photoshop!
 

Chachi

Premiership Player
Jan 10, 2013
3,344
5,627
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Fu** No
maybe some one should do a poll .. for the 3 ruck men (Lowden, Gorringe, Giles) listed so far
I think you can remove Giles. Crows are really into him and I think it's more important to Giles to play rather than being at a stronger performing club.
 

Traveling_Power

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 2, 2014
6,727
1,810
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Don't want Gorringe. Ryder as the marquee signing and Lowden as cheap depth is enough. Gorringe is in an awkward in between spot where he wouldn't step straight into our best 22 but he'd still cost us at the trade table due to being a high draft pick and under contract. He had his chance.
Could take a while. Crows are being very quiet on the coaching front since A. Jarmans comments.

some are talking up Bassett as their coach (and in regards to Gorringe then being wanted by Bassett at the Cows)... until someone posted (as a joke) that no...... Bassett is going to Port (as his team of choice)
 
gotta admit, i'm gonna miss seeing his insta pics of her in the gc sunshine. :p

just curious, where's aaron young at?

He is a fringe - best 22 player. Would be in best 25. Got injured late in the year - foot injury and missed out on playing finals. Has just had a shoulder operation and supposedly will require 4 weeks to get over it. He has popped it a couple of times this year. He is a good clearance player. At SANFL level he is a clearance machine.
 

Chachi

Premiership Player
Jan 10, 2013
3,344
5,627
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Fu** No
This ain't a super draft by any stretch. It's just that a lot of capable talls are all coming in this one. None seem to be an out and out star.
Correct. The regular comment is the is a good draft for talls but it's not as deep as other drafts.
 
Wouldn't mind your thoughts as I've been fighting with this for a while, and note I really like the player I'm about to talk about.

But if we manage to bring in Ryder we end up next season with a fit Ryder (27), fit Lobbe (25), and a possibly recovering Redden (24) - with both Redden and Ryder able to do some stuff up forward.
We may also have at least Gorringe (22) on the list.

That gives us 4 rucks. Now I don't know salaries etc, but is having all three of Ryder/Lobbe/Redden on our list a good use of resources given we may struggle to play them all - and Redden has had injury concerns, or is there an argument to trade Redden (if he carries enouhg value) and effectively re[place him with another Ruck/Forward - (ie Lowden).

Ie - would you prefer:
1) Ryder/Lobbe/Redden/Gorringe + possible rookie ruck; or
2) Ryder/Lobbe/Gorringe/Lowden+ possible rookie ruck

Obviously on paper 1 is better option, but what if option 2 means we need to give up less other picks/players.
I know its extreme, but what if taking option 1 over 2 meant we had to give up a Young type over a Mitchell type. (citing a somewhat extreme case).

And of course the other mitigation is that some feel Redden could play as a pure forward.

I like option 1 but we need to be mindful that Redden may never get over his injuries.
 
I like option 1 but we need to be mindful that Redden may never get over his injuries.

That's what I keep coming back to. The problem is, if next year is a write off, its almost career for him I would think.
I remember thinking in the early days Bowen Lockwood was going to be a star - he just had to get over his injuries.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back