List Mgmt. Collingwood Trade Talk 2015

[spartan-magpie]

They're going to let him 'go' only if they can get a guaranteed band 1 compensation pick from the AFL. If not he'll remain at Carlton. It's simple draft tampering.

They won't get pick 2. The AFLs qld baby will make sure of that. I'm hoping that anyway if the unfortunate happens and Kreuzer leaves.

 

[Bard]

They won't get pick 2. The AFLs qld baby will make sure of that. I'm hoping that anyway if the unfortunate happens and Kreuzer leaves.

It'd be ridiculous if they did get pick 2, but that's what they'll be holding out for. If not I fully expect them to hold onto Kreuzer unless he gets a monstrous offer that they'd be crazy to match (ie. 600K+ over 4+ years).

Either way, Carlton are not trading/holding him based on his ability, just the value they can get out of him.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Come on...get off the fence & make the hard call...indecisive behaviour breeds non action, which in turn is the key to failure.

Ive made the hard call to fail miserably in indecision

 

[doodles98]

They have no future. They're goneeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Yep gone like Geelong were after 2010.

 

[Apex36]

I don't normally post speculation or rumours but the same source who gave me the cold hard facts on Karnezis' issue which has proven accurate has notified me that Kreuzer did a medical with us on Wed/Thurs and he apparently failed the medical, despite what is being reported.

Make of it what you will.

Funny, BEEG said his source reckons he passed. Hope he did fail tbh, do not want.

 

[Pedro]

Funny, BEEG said his source reckons he passed. Hope he did fail tbh, do not want.

I don't mind the idea of Kreuer if Witts is to go. But not at the price thats being floated around. $600K is way too much imo. $450-$500 if he is fit I could live with

 

[Anzacday]

I actually like the way Kruze plays, (hasn't justified the no. 1 pick for mine though) he's similar to Grundy.
This has a bad feel to it though.
Quentin Lynch & Clinton Young type bad.
If there's a doubt over their fitness we don't want them.
I'd rather a Currie from North or Jamar from Dees and keep the $$

 

[doodles98]

I have done a massive backflip on this. Tony Abbot style!. I was really all for getting Kruz because he's a freebie and will allow us to trade out Witts without depleting our ruck situation. But I am wondering about the wisdom now. Given injury doubts and that Kruez won't add a lot to our list in terms of playing ability,; but he will come at a hefty price to the cap; maybe we should pass and use the cap space to try and land someone like Dangerfield/ Motlop/ Aish etc who could add more to the teams overall playing ability. This would mean that we'd take the punt of just having Grundy, Cox and White as our ruckmen for next year. Think I could live with that short term.

 

[tommyv49]

Haven't posted in a while, but wanted to throw my 2c in about kruezer.

I honestly believe picking him up will be a big mistake for the club.
We are talking about a player that has played more than 20 games only twice in 8 seasons. He is injury prone and that's the last type of player we need at the pies. For those thinking he can play forward stop kidding yourselves highest tally of 13 goals for a season, he is a player that can sneak forward and kick a goal here or there, but he will never be a 30 goal a year fwd. He's played fwd before at Carlton and struggled.

We saw this year that Grundy is a much better player taking the ruck load by himself. Playing 2 big slow ruckman is a liability these days, 2 rucks will work only if one of them is the real athletic type (nic nat, blicavs etc.)
Statistically speaking his numbers are no better than Grundy or Witts (both of them average more hitouts), so in terms of value for money 500k+ is way too expensive.

Assuming Witts is traded (which i also think would be a big mistake) it does leave a hole in the rucking division. Mason Cox whilst he has showed a lot of promise this year, but is not the answer for right now. So we do need another ruckman, but we would get much better value for money out of a mature age VFL player (ala currie) or even someone like Giles (out of favour at essendon).

This is just my opinion, but i just can't see what Kruezer would actually add to our squad.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

I have done a massive backflip on this. Tony Abbot style!. I was really all for getting Kruz because he's a freebie and will allow us to trade out Witts without depleting our ruck situation. But I am wondering about the wisdom now. Given injury doubts and that Kruez won't add a lot to our list in terms of playing ability,; but he will come at a hefty price to the cap; maybe we should pass and use the cap space to try and land someone like Dangerfield/ Motlop/ Aish etc who could add more to the teams overall playing ability. This would mean that we'd take the punt of just having Grundy, Cox and White as our ruckmen for next year. Think I could live with that short term.

I don't mind the idea of Kreuer if Witts is to go. But not at the price thats being floated around. $600K is way too much imo. $450-$500 if he is fit I could live with

Agreed - im all for Kreuzer, but only at the right price.

When hes healthy and in form, i think he is a clear improvement for our 22... And when he's not its really no difference that what we have done most of this year (with Witts in the VFL).

Problem is you cant be spending that sort of money on someone who is injury prone. (For the same reasons i wouldnt spend that sort of money on Bennell - you have no garauntee what you are getting).
For me he's worth 400k, but can see we will need to stretch that a bit to attract him.

600k is far too much and would be a big mistake. Could get someone much cheaper to be a backup, and just contine to use Moore and White in the role, and use the extra money to try and get some of the others we are after. (or even add a little to Scharenburg or Freeman if it makes sense)

 

[legendstatus]

The only way Kruezer would be a risk is if he continues to get injuries. If ( yes a big if) he plays 20+ games a year he will be our best player. Have a look at Reid, will eventually come through all his injuries. MK end up playing 12-14 in a row to finish off the year?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[tommyv49]

The only way Kruezer would be a risk is if he continues to get injuries. If ( yes a big if) he plays 20+ games a year he will be our best player. Have a look at Reid, will eventually come through all his injuries. MK end up playing 12-14 in a row to finish off the year?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Based on what? His highest placing in Carlton bnf is 5th.

 

[Apex36]

The only way Kruezer would be a risk is if he continues to get injuries. If ( yes a big if) he plays 20+ games a year he will be our best player. Have a look at Reid, will eventually come through all his injuries. MK end up playing 12-14 in a row to finish off the year?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Lol, he won't even be close to being our best player.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Yep gone like Geelong were after 2010.

Ha ha hawthorn not quite out yet, but geelong were treading water after 2012 as they until now havnt made the list changes required.
Hawthorn win three in a row if they now win games in a row.
BUT they almost, didnt, but almost got punted by port Last year, so they not invincible.
Maybe they too have to start thinking Bout their ageing players
Just a thought but obviously could still win this year even next year but thinking aloud that might be theor shelf life.

In other news, swans million per year for lance f is going so so

 

[mattys123]

I'm in the Kreuzer camp, I hope we get him at 500k a year or less, because quite simply at that amount it's worth the risk.

We've had a massive problem with our second ruck ever since Leigh Brown retired on Grand FInal day 2011, let's be honest. No one has gone close to filling the role in any AFL class way.

Kreuzer, if he stays fit (and that's the obvious catch to this one) walks in as our number 2 ruck, improves the forward line as he takes a good defender away from Cloke or Moore (or gets the third tall defender, who is usually no good) and helps Grundy out to no end.

And if it blows up and he rarely plays a game, we have Jessica and Coxy in as backup anyway.

It's worth the risk, we are only throwing cash at him, not costing us picks or players, ignore the compensation for Carlton, that's not coming from us so I don't care what they get.

 

[Roverjg]

Kruezer is a model citizen and loyal. He will not be found trying to hit a cigarette out of a bouncers hand or cutting coke at a festival. He has been on record all of his career and as late as 5 weeks ago stating he wanted to be a one club player. This is all Carltons doing in that they are trying to tamper the draft by off loading him via FA whilst crying crocodile tears saying they want him and that they should be rewarded for him leaving. Until such time he has a medical no club will be making ANY offer. So called claims of $550k are rubbish and are being fuelled by media and Carlton to enhance their chances of a PP. I would be hesitant paying that amount. Instead of solely looking at the amounts he has kicked whilst playing fwd for 15% of game time. Look at his tackles per game, wins his own stoppage, R50's and I50's and taps to advantage.

 

[Anzacday]

Surely we don't want another player with potential foot problems.
Not sure if this has been posted anywhere...
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...val-clubs-circle/story-fni5f5nx-1227523295178
THE precarious state of Matthew Kreuzer’s surgically repaired right foot has emerged as the key sticking point for rivals circling the free agent.

The Pies are confident Kreuzer’s foot can withstand the AFL’s rigours, but it has Carlton wondering if it could match a massive bid for the star ruckman.

The Blues are warm favourites for Kreuzer, but those with close knowledge of his injury know his foot is far from fully functional.

 

[well left]

I'm 50/50 on Kreuzer.

I get that Witts is the best bargaining chip player wise we have to get us Treloar, and I do think Grundy and Witts struggle together as they both play better when playing 70-80% ruck time, so we do need to do something.

And Kreuzer is a good option, and an easy option, as a Free Agent. I'm just not sure he is the right piece of the puzzle for what we need and that is purely down to him not playing that second ruck role all that often.

The other options are thin on the ground. The two you'd throw a lot at are Peter Wright, but think he'll stay with Dixon going, and Josh Jenkins. He'd be the first thing I ask for from the crows if Scharenberg wanted back to SA. The other one I'd think about is Lycett from WC, who is now behind Sinclair as that second ruck.

All require trades to be done hence Kreuzer the easier option and I am probably OK with that if we exhausted the above options.

The other option is to top up with a stop gap like Dan Currie, and hope Cox comes on quickly with another season of footy under his belt.

 

[JOELY]

It's interesting how contracts lengths and prices and the salary cap has become so significant in the discussion with fans about list management in recent years. Only recently every discussion about Kruezer would have been framed by "yeah, but we get him for nothing" but now nobody is really saying that because the financial cost is so much part of the discourse now. I do think it could go back the other way a bit because even though we pay the price not having to trade for this guy is pretty handy.

 

[Babylove]

It's a risk reward type scenario with Kreuzer. The risk is that Kreuzer's body can't stand up to AFL and that his ankle is stuffed. The reward is he is a first draft pick quality ruckman who has serious talent if he can get his body right.

And let's not forget the Stevie J principle who was in a similar situation when we were looking to recruit him prior to 2007. He was going to be a Pie if not for concerns over the state of his ankle. At the end of the day I'm happy to trust e club on this one. They are better placed to assess if the reward is worth the risk.

 

[Mkcaptain]

The Pies are confident Kreuzer’s foot can withstand the AFL’s rigours, but it has Carlton wondering if it could match a massive bid for the star ruckman.

I'd be wanting a bit more assurance than just confident. If you got that call wrong it would be a hell of a mistake.

Surely if we're making such a large play for Kreuzer we're giving him a heavily front-ended contract. That way it won't entirely screw us over if he can't get on the park after two years.

 

[FAIRANDBALANCED]

If we get rid of Witts to bring in Kreuzer it will be a monumental mistake. Think Mal Michael to the Lions mistake.

Witts will be a very good player, just needs more time. Next year with no sub we will likely have two rucks playing around 50% game time in the ruck each. It suits Witts and Grundy. They can still work. Just because it doesn't work when they are sub 50 game players doesn't mean it will never work.

I would give our first rounder this year and next for Treloar and a Hampton or a Kennedy or a Bugg type. That should be our move.

At worst couldn't we trade Witts out at the end of next year for a second rounder if it really is that bad? I think a lot of people forget Witts went past Grundy at the end of last year and then had shoulder surgery in the off season. Back the kid in, we've put enough time into him.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

If we get rid of Witts to bring in Kreuzer it will be a monumental mistake. Think Mal Michael to the Lions mistake.

We wouldn't be getting rid of Witts to bring Kreuzer in, we would be getting rid of Witts to being Treloar in

 

[FAIRANDBALANCED]

We wouldn't be getting rid of Witts to bring Kreuzer in, we would be getting rid of Witts to being Treloar in

But we don't need to, we can trade out our next two first round picks. That will do.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

But we don't need to, we can trade out our next two first round picks. That will do.

I don't know what GWS want, but the "talk" is that they want our first round pick and Witts.
If that is the case, we would be nuts not to do it.

The discussion then becomes "now we need to replace Witts" ...... enter Kreuzer