Past #1: Hamish McIntosh - drafted at pick 9 in '02 ND - traded to Geelong for #36 in '12 trade period

[Hard_to_Beat]

Id agree , you are even slimmer than us although there is no doubt your three are better (include petrie) and perhaps McIntosh is wasted if not your #1 ruck. For you to trade him when there are only so few talls on your list would be almost negligent. Again , it makes not sense.
Q. Have you been linked to GC rucks like Hickey or Nicholls?

Nope. We haven't been linked to any ruckmen. I expect we will keep our full compliment and add another ruckman in this years draft.

We have Goldstein and McIntosh that are ready to go, Petrie who is only a change ruckman, Daw who is only a burst ruckman and Ben Mabon who I doubt will ever fill out enough to make it as an AFL ruckman.

Thats it. 2 x ready to go, 2 x part timer/never will be full timers & 1 x surprised if he ever makes it.

 

[Turbocat]

Nope. We haven't been linked to any ruckmen. I expect we will keep our full compliment and add another ruckman in this years draft.

We have Goldstein and McIntosh that are ready to go, Petrie who is only a change ruckman, Daw who is only a burst ruckman and Ben Mabon who I doubt will ever sill out enough to make it as an AFL ruckman.

Thats it. 2 x ready to go, 2 x part timer/never will be full timers

Then I can't see how he would even be linked to a trade.
Thanks for the info

 

[SnowRoo]

Then I can't see how he would even be linked to a trade.
Thanks for the info

Mostly because hes too good to play VFL and to pay a backup ruck option 400K a year is too much.

 

[Joey7]

I don't understand two things here..

1. Why Geelong given their ruck depth

2. What could they possibly give us to even consider the trade. It's not like we are desperate to trade him

 

[Tas]

I have doubts we are going to be pushing anyone out the door, however, we may end up trading some players who we rate at the club simply because they request to be traded for greater opportunity. That can happen even if someone is contracted. We traded Hale when he still had another 2 years to go.

As Teffy says, we only have one established ruckman other than monster and he didn't set the world on fire this year. I just don't know how we can better utilise him, we have a lot of guys we are going to struggle to hold on to if they don't get games, be it this season or next season.

 

[Daz]

The only explanation is that they believe they can win the flag in 2013. I believe that's very optimistic but I'm all for them chasing Hamish.

 

[Higgins2Waite]

You are starting to rustle some feathers mate, think were going to have to trade you for Joffa

Collingwood wouldn't take that trade. Even he is more tolerable.

Don't worry Hard to Beat will have everyone ignored soon enough, then threads will be filled with only his comments, and I'm sure he'll love it too!

 

[Mailman]

I don't understand two things here..

1. Why Geelong given their ruck depth

2. What could they possibly give us to even consider the trade. It's not like we are desperate to trade him

Does seem strange that geelong are targeting Hamish. Could it be that GC have demanded a top ruckman in a Caddy trade and Geelong are trying to arrange a 3-way?

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

I have doubts we are going to be pushing anyone out the door, however, we may end up trading some players who we rate at the club simply because they request to be traded for greater opportunity. That can happen even if someone is contracted. We traded Hale when he still had another 2 years to go.

As Teffy says, we only have one established ruckman other than monster and he didn't set the world on fire this year. I just don't know how we can better utilise him, we have a lot of guys we are going to struggle to hold on to if they don't get games, be it this season or next season.

Clubs are starting to look at us as a nursery of sorts and have come to plunder.

We have excellent depth and clubs in the flag window (Hawthorn, Collingwood), or wishing to maintain a flag window (Geelong), have come calling.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

Does seem strange that geelong are targeting Hamish. Could it be that GC have demanded a top ruckman in a Caddy trade and Geelong are trying to arrange a 3-way?

Why would we supply Geelong a player to get a player that we ourselves are trying to acquire?

 

[Tas]

Clubs are starting to look at us as a nursery of sorts and have come to plunder.

We have excellent depth and clubs in the flag window (Hawthorn, Collingwood), or wishing to maintain a flag window (Geelong), have come calling.

We were back when Gibson did the dirty on us but from my understanding Hale moved because we suggested it would be the best thing for his career if he did. Which turns out to be true. It just shits me when guys like Hale and Brown play like fairies with us and they go to a different club and they put in, if we are seen to have a soft underbelly then perhaps that perception is justified, we have so few players that go in hard physically.

 

[Mailman]

Why would we supply Geelong a player to get a player that we ourselves are trying to acquire?

Yeah, i agree it doesn't make much sense. Maybe Hickey is a target?

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

We were back when Gibson did the dirty on us but from my understanding Hale moved because we suggested it would be the best thing for his career if he did. Which turns out to be true. It just shits me when guys like Hale and Brown play like fairies with us and they go to a different club and they put in, if we are seen to have a soft underbelly then perhaps that perception is justified, we have so few players that go in hard physically.

This all served it purpose at the time, but we are now entering the contender phase and need to stop tossing aside quality depth for speculation picks, which in the same process is strengthening our main contenders.

We want to be trading with GC, GWS, Port and Melbourne now, not top 4-6 sides.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

Yeah, i agree it doesn't make much sense. Maybe Hickey is a target?

IF there is another ready to go ruckman stitched up then I could see the point in trading Hamish, should he want to go.

BUT

This is only worthwhile if we are gaining something of substance out of the deal.

 

[Mailman]

IF there is another ready to go ruckman stitched up then I could see the point in trading Hamish, should he want to go.

BUT

This is only worthwhile if we are gaining something of substance out of the deal.

Has caddy gone through the North HQ yet? Has he picked Geelong?

 

[SnowRoo]

We were back when Gibson did the dirty on us but from my understanding Hale moved because we suggested it would be the best thing for his career if he did. Which turns out to be true. It just shits me when guys like Hale and Brown play like fairies with us and they go to a different club and they put in, if we are seen to have a soft underbelly then perhaps that perception is justified, we have so few players that go in hard physically.

Dont mind us being a feeder club of sorts with some of our 27+ guys. The Laids era was one of survival, we traded to keep costs down not for on field benefit. We are clearly entering a new era as contenders. Having a little less depth over the next 2 years could extend our possible premiership window by 4 years. No longer are we a team of a few good picks, rookie upgrades and freebie trades.

 

[Kimbo]

This is only worthwhile if we are gaining something of substance out of the deal.

...we are now entering the contender phase... We want to be trading with GC, GWS, Port and Melbourne now, not top 4-6 sides.

Why would we supply Geelong a player to get a player that we ourselves are trying to acquire?

Meaning we'd be using a H trade, if under consideration, to trade for something (e.g. compo pick) to on-trade to GC for Caddy, for example?!

And, somewhere along the line, or in the mix, picking up some replacement ruck depth.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

Meaning we'd be using a H trade, if under consideration, to trade for something (e.g. compo pick) to on-trade to GC for Caddy, for example?!

And, somewhere along the line, or in the mix, picking up some replacement ruck depth.

Are you suggesting we would trade picks 14 and 15 to get Caddy?

 

[chrissy]

I wouldn't be doing a trade to maybe help Geelong secure Caddy , Melbourne want Pedo and where they sit as a club they are desperate . We should be juggling things to get Caddy to us .
I can help but feel that the ship has sailed on the value on Hamish , that needed to be done a year ago.
Having said all that Hamish's price tag is a lot for a #2 ruckman who isn't going to have a role that is worthy of him , and he would be crazy think he would have a major role .

IMO with the interchange being 3 and 1 we can't go with rucks like Goldy and Hamish because they offer nothing else but their ruck ability .

 

[Bigeasy]

I wouldn't be surprise if Hamish's management has sent out feelers to fish out interest which is fair enough but I would prefer we kept H unless the offer is too good to refuse which I doubt.

I'm in HTB's corner here, we are in no position to give away a quality ruckman considering our ruck stocks.

I still can't see why we can't play both as the issue is not fitting in H but getting Goldy to play at his best in tandem with H. I see the issue is more with Goldy at this stage but at 24 he has time to adapt .

 

[Shagga is all Class]

We want to be trading with GC, GWS, Port and Melbourne now, not top 4-6 sides.

Tend to agree with you. However, no point in having a Pedo or Hamish in the 2s and then have Hamish move into FA territory.

1 needs to play 1s for us and the other traded.

In the event of ruck injury I would rather see a ruck reshuffle and a Black, C Delaney, Kennedy, Daw play.

 

[chrissy]

I still can't see why we can't play both as the issue is not fitting in H but getting Goldy to play at his best in tandem with H. I see the issue is more with Goldy at this stage but at 24 he has time to adapt .[/quote]

Where is Hamish while Goldy is in the ruck? On the bench ?

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

Pederson isn't a ruckman.

Hamish has publicly stated that he wants to play his career out at North.

The ruck situation is as much a problem of the immature midfield as anything else.

 

[chrissy]

Pederson isn't a ruckman.

Hamish has publicly stated that he wants to play his career out at North.

The ruck situation is as much a problem of the immature midfield as anything else.

Yeah and I want to shack up with Josh Kennedy's hot European Mrs .
To ruck for 20% of the game Pedo is passable , at least he can fill a role around the ground .

 

[chrissy]

I do agree that the fact that our midfield got smashed a few times needs to be looked at