Opinion Brad Hartman

Remove this Banner Ad

Putting aside whatever ability Hartman has or hasn't, I still don't understand why they didn't just promote Walker last year.

Going to be a tough call on someone at the end of this year as a result. Be it a Cowan or McCarthy, or Walker or Burbury etc.
 
FredLeDeux said:
I think it also needs to be mentioned that when he was drafted, to the surprise of 100% of watchers, it was suggested that Wells was pulling another swifty, paying effectively zero for a youngster who would go much higher in the draft next year. If correct, this means a 3-4 year gestation period instead of the more common 2-3 years.
Click to expand...

Spot on Fred - for once. :p
 
winty said:
Maybe Wells was at the game where Hartman had about 40 touches and kicked 8 or 9 goals from the half forward flank.
Click to expand...

Maybe. Did you watch the George Burbs interview on CatTV. Insightful , he put down him be noiced to playing well in the right game when people were at the game for another two players. Not much has changed over the years

As I said , I have nothing to base my judgement on but what I see , where as our RD can use 1 minute , 1 game , 1 season of info. I will back them to get something out of him given he time but at the end of this year some choices have to be made. Sheringham for instance. Do we keep going with him. Probably as he has shown has has something , no world better but could be a role player. And we will have spots on the Rookie list. Walker & Burbs must go up, be insane to let them go
If you compare Sheringham to Hartman there is no doubt who's more ready to contribute, yet one is listed and one will have to wait another year. I hate the Rookie list.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Selective Retention said:
Putting aside whatever ability Hartman has or hasn't, I still don't understand why they didn't just promote Walker last year.
Click to expand...
They would have had to delist a senior player to promote him. So who do you think we should have delisted?
 
Jim Boy said:
They would have had to delist a senior player to promote him. So who do you think we should have delisted?
Click to expand...

I'm saying they should have used pick 70 whatever on promoting Walker and grabbed Hartman if he was still around in the rookie. I said the same before the draft. You are guaranteeing some guy at pick 70 a 2 year deal and it blocks your maneouvering of the list. Blicavs has come from nowhere but it wasn't a secret we had a group of above average rookies and a subsequent list squeeze approaching.
 
Selective Retention said:
I'm saying they should have used pick 70 whatever on promoting Walker and grabbed Hartman if he was still around in the rookie. I said the same before the draft. You are guaranteeing some guy at pick 70 a 2 year deal and it blocks your maneouvering of the list. Blicavs has come from nowhere but it wasn't a secret we had a group of above average rookies and a subsequent list squeeze approaching.
Click to expand...

If they liked the look of Hartman why risk him if Walker was happy to stay as a rookie? Hartman is a 3-4 year project so the 2 year deal is no issue, and if Walker is good enough his promotion will come about this year.
 
I just don't see the benefit of gambling on a hugely speculative player when you have a known commodity already on your list. It might not be Walker that it ultimately costs.
 
I'm really glad the people on this board aren't our list managers. Ready to delist an underage guy after a handful of reserves games. And comparing him to guys that have been in the system for at least 2-3 years. You can only start making judgement by mid next season. At the moment has no work rate and second efforts. They will give him 3 years. They don't expect instant results.

And on the positive side he doesn't seem injury prone (yet) ... unlike some of our other promising players. Its an unknown quantity when you draft whether the players have a body that can stand up to the rigors of AFL. Looks like a lot of the guys we drafted unfortunately do not.
 
Selective Retention said:
I'm saying they should have used pick 70 whatever on promoting Walker and grabbed Hartman if he was still around in the rookie.
Click to expand...
As I have said twice already, the cats were not allowed to do that. They are required by the rules to have three picks in the draft. One (and only one) can be replaced by a rookie upgrade, which is what Geelong did with Jesse Stringer. The cats were not allowed to use pick 70 on another rookie upgrade.

The only legal way in which Geelong could recruit Hartman without letting another player go was to select him in the national draft.
 
Selective Retention said:
At the time I'm sure someone proved otherwise and that you were in fact allowed two rookies counted in the minimum three changes.
Click to expand...
Is your full name selective memory retention? Somebody might have suggested that was the case, but it is simply not true.
 
Ok well I will take your word for it then. The AFL aren't exactly the greatest when it comes to disclosing their policies. I'm positive that was the talk at the time.
 
Fair enough, their was a bit of discussion about it at the time, especially as we didn't really want to lose any of the rookies whilst at the same time we had to reduce rookie numbers from six to four. This resulted in Simpkin getting the flick.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Jim Boy said:
As I have said twice already, the cats were not allowed to do that. They are required by the rules to have three picks in the draft. One (and only one) can be replaced by a rookie upgrade, which is what Geelong did with Jesse Stringer. The cats were not allowed to use pick 70 on another rookie upgrade.

The only legal way in which Geelong could recruit Hartman without letting another player go was to select him in the national draft.
Click to expand...
Perfectly explained Jim Boy...had this discussion over and over last year.
The only way to have promoted Walker was to delist him from the rookie list and hope he would have lasted till pick 70..most unlikely and why bother when he was on our list anyway.
 
got to laugh. The same people wanting to delist Hartman were probably saying the SAME thing about Motlop 12 months ago. Some people never change. Hartman will be an elite 60 goal a year forward who will eventually become an elite tall onballer. Bookmark it. He is just buildinghis tank an doing some growing up.
 
Catsmaninamerica said:
got to laugh. The same people wanting to delist Hartman were probably saying the SAME thing about Motlop 12 months ago. Some people never change. Hartman will be an elite 60 goal a year forward who will eventually become an elite tall onballer. Bookmark it. He is just buildinghis tank an doing some growing up.
Click to expand...

Ahh , can not remember that? Are you saying I said to delist Motlop after playing most of the season last year. Mmm I'd like to see that post.
And your bolded hopefully is correct. He'd have to hav a balistic improvement in his tank and his work rate but lets hope. And it may happen so slowly that it cost us more ready players in the mean time...there is no way we should have drafted him as a main list player. He is Rookie material if the likes of Burbs was.
 
fyi for some here: delist, hard decision etc for Hartman is next years discussion


  1. 4.6 Minimum Contract Term for Certain Players

    When a First Year Draft Choice Player is first listed by an AFL Club, that Player and the AFL Club shall enter into a playing contract for a minimum term of two AFL Seasons except in the case of a Player who has previously been listed as a Rookie at any AFL Club or the Player will be 23 years or over as at the 31st day of December immediately following the most recent National Draft Selection Meeting.


    good rule imo
 
krisholio14 said:
Walker is not a known commodity.
Click to expand...


Exactly.

He has a good athletic quality about him and a good engine but his football skills and nous leave a fair bit to be desired.
 
Catsmaninamerica said:
got to laugh. The same people wanting to delist Hartman were probably saying the SAME thing about Motlop 12 months ago. Some people never change. Hartman will be an elite 60 goal a year forward who will eventually become an elite tall onballer. Bookmark it. He is just buildinghis tank an doing some growing up.
Click to expand...


I think that talk of delisting Hartman is premature too, but I would also say that your predictions of him being a 60 goal forward and elite onballer cannot be based on anything that Hartman has shown in the Cats colours. He has been very ordinary and was again ordinary today. I will give him another season before making any judgments on what he may or may not become in the future.
 
The rabbi said:
I think that talk of delisting Hartman is premature too, but I would also say that your predictions of him being a 60 goal forward and elite onballer cannot be based on anything that Hartman has shown in the Cats colours. He has been very ordinary and was again ordinary today. I will give him another season before making any judgments on what he may or may not become in the future.
Click to expand...
We were saying the same thing about Burbury, Schroder last year and Motlop 2 years ago.
Agree, judgement should be deferred until the end of 2014 when his contract expires.
 
The rabbi said:
I think that talk of delisting Hartman is premature too, but I would also say that your predictions of him being a 60 goal forward and elite onballer cannot be based on anything that Hartman has shown in the Cats colours. He has been very ordinary and was again ordinary today. I will give him another season before making any judgments on what he may or may not become in the future.
Click to expand...
Was he? I heard he had a very good first quarter at least.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top