Mega Thread Delist/Trade/Draft Supermegaultrathread - Now Starts A Long Offseason

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
It was a factual comment.

There's currently roughly 22 Claremont players and 25 East Freo players in the league. Next best is Swans with 18.

You provided no facts - and what % of those are at WCE? But you just don't get it - this isn't even about WAFL clubs. How many players have we recruited from QLD, NSW and Tasmania? There are over 50 NSW players currently in the AFL, many of them very good. There is absolutely no reason why we take so many chances on Claremont players other than human bias.
 
I'd be keen to see a breakdown of our last 10 years of WA draft picks, per WAFL club, with a binary assessment (i.e. Boom or Bust) attributed to each.
 
You provided no facts - and what % of those are at WCE? But you just don't get it - this isn't even about WAFL clubs. How many players have we recruited from QLD, NSW and Tasmania? There are over 50 NSW players currently in the AFL, many of them very good. There is absolutely no reason why we take so many chances on Claremont players other than human bias.

It's been documented elsewhere that we take more WA-based players than we would be expected to, even allowing for home-state bias. I don't argue with that. What I'm saying is that within that, we don't take any more players from Claremont (or East Freo) than would be expected given the number of players from those clubs across the league.

The majority of the NSW players would be at GWS and Sydney I assume.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

If he nominated us our first would be enough.

He's contracted at the moment, so if he nominated us GWS can still refuse to trade him to us if we didn't give them what they want. From what was speculated, it sounded like we were given a very fair offer for Brown when he requested to go to the Saints, yet we still refused the trade because he was contracted, and we valued him highly.

Based on output pick 11 (or whatever we have) would be fair. However my guess is GWS would ask for more based on his inherent value as a former pick 2 (which should have no affect, but it does) and the fact he still has a lot of upside given GWS have been s**t his entire career and he's been slowed by injuries.

As for next year when he's out of contract, there's too many factors at play to decide whether our first pick would be enough. We could have pick 18 (unlikely), or Coniglio could have a break out year (much more likely than us having pick 18).
 
He's contracted at the moment, so if he nominated us GWS can still refuse to trade him to us if we didn't give them what they want. From what was speculated, it sounded like we were given a very fair offer for Brown when he requested to go to the Saints, yet we still refused the trade because he was contracted, and we valued him highly.

Based on output pick 11 (or whatever we have) would be fair. However my guess is GWS would ask for more based on his inherent value as a former pick 2 (which should have no affect, but it does) and the fact he still has a lot of upside given GWS have been s**t his entire career and he's been slowed by injuries.

As for next year when he's out of contract, there's too many factors at play to decide whether our first pick would be enough. We could have pick 18 (unlikely), or Coniglio could have a break out year (much more likely than us having pick 18).

If Coniglio claimed homesickness or something along those lines, depression etc our first pick would do it. The new clubs are asking ridiculous things for some of their players and if we chased coniglio this year rather than him coming out and saying he wanted to go home then it would cost more than that.
 
If Coniglio claimed homesickness or something along those lines, depression etc our first pick would do it. The new clubs are asking ridiculous things for some of their players and if we chased coniglio this year rather than him coming out and saying he wanted to go home then it would cost more than that.

Not sure I'd want him claiming depression unless it was true, in which case I wouldn't trade pick 11 for him.

I still think they'd want more than pick 11 for him, even if he says he wants to leave. GC held onto Caddy an extra year despite him saying he wanted to leave, as did GWS with Tyson. They ended up with reasonable compensation for both those players in the end. They've got so much talent and high picks that they can afford to be stubborn at the trade table.
 
If Coniglio claimed homesickness or something along those lines, depression etc our first pick would do it. The new clubs are asking ridiculous things for some of their players and if we chased coniglio this year rather than him coming out and saying he wanted to go home then it would cost more than that.

We aren't that evil, are we?
 
No offence taken, I'm not too familiar with the trading process. It just struck me as odd that everyone was bringing up the Western Australian midfielders at Gold Coast, but no one was even mentioning Conigilio.

Would it be better to wait until next year until his contract expires or try and secure him this year, before he becomes more valuable with a good season in 2015?

Ah fair enough. I agree, Coniglio is probably the more realistic/gettable target. I reckon waiting until he comes out of contract is the way to go. Would still cost an arm and a leg though.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

No, I just think your suggestion was ridiculous.

We draft more players from Claremont and East Fremantle because in general they produce more AFL-listed players than the other WA clubs. Our recruiting in the past few years has been poor, hence there's more busts from those clubs.
Not sure whose right or wrong, but the only thing about this statement is that it doesn't really prove anything. If west coast did have a bias towards claremont players it is likely claremont will have more afl listed players playing, because we will be recruiting them. If there is a trend of more claremont listed afl players than other wafl clubs, excluding those listed at west coast, than your argument is strengthened!!
 
Not sure whose right or wrong, but the only thing about this statement is that it doesn't really prove anything. If west coast did have a bias towards claremont players it is likely claremont will have more afl listed players playing, because we will be recruiting them. If there is a trend of more claremont listed afl players than other wafl clubs, excluding those listed at west coast, than your argument is strengthened!!

That's a fair point.

6 of the 22 Claremont players are at West Coast (MacKenzie, McGovern, McGinnity, Hill, Barrass and Powell), so 16 at other clubs.

6 of the 30 East Freo players are at West Coast (Masten, Sheppard, Yeo, Cripps, Kennedy and Brennan), so 24 at other clubs

3 of 18 Swans players (Naitanui, Newman, Bennell), so 15 at other clubs.

2 of 16 Souths players (Carter and Main) so 14 at other clubs

The other WAFL clubs have less than 15 players floating around. So bottom line is Claremont do seem to produce more than everyone else bar the Sharks, but maybe not by as much as I initially thought.
 
I can't see anything freo have that we would want other than fyfe. I wouldn't take their first pick for mcgovern tbh.

Maybe crozier and their first for mcgovern and our second.
 
That thread is stupid, and that comment of McGovern not being enough for Tom Mitchell, get off it Freo flogs, Gov is a star playing AFL while Mitchell is playing reserves and can't crack a game, Gov> Mitchell.

And no Gov isn't going anywhere. No deal. No team would rate Gov as much as we do therefore we get bent over.
 
I've been tipped off to some interesting rumour talk on the freo board.

See here - http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/ross-lyon-on-6pr-15-9-discussing-frawley.1077040/

In short, Mitchell to Fremantle, McGovern to Sydney, someone to West Coast.

Probably BS but interesting none the less.

My BS detector is off the charts with this stuff.

McGovern just signed a two year deal, he loves it at West Coast and all his family and friends are in Western Australia (South West) and owes the club for the faith they had in his ability. Not to mention Simpson has a man crush on him and forwarded him quickly into the senior side.
 
Why on earth would Sydney want the Gov? Is Longmire jealous of his old teammate's 100 ruck policy?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top