Strategy Tom Langdon trade bait.

[Horaceg]

I would refer to late draft picks as low and early draft picks as high so I'd say he was a low draft pick. But you may be right that he doesn't have much development left. I still think he has plenty left and he's already shown more than any other recruiters thought he would otherwise he would have gone before his pick in the 60's

I didn't necessarily mean he won't get better and a massive breakout year could still be on the cards, it would be unexpected given his career to date was more my point. I can't see why he couldn't be a 200+ gamer.

 

[sirlothie]

Ok, I'll change my point to "I don't think Langdon has much development left", remove the "22" if it helps you sleep.

He might need to shave one day.

 

[Vankri]

I don't really see why we'd put players like Langdon on the trade table since he'd never give us good value, perhaps a third rounder for which I'd rather keep Langdon and try to develop him further. At worst he's good depth for Howe and can fill a role until Scharenberg comes onto the scene. At best he can put together all the good things he's shown (marking, decision making in his first year - finding the ball and playing further up in his second) into one very good player even though I'm not very confident he will.

 

[ThexderX]

Trade him for a 6th round pick we won't use. Sounds about the mark for me...

 

[THATSGOLD]

If we can't get a 2nd round pick for Langdon there's no point.

A 3rd round pick is virtually worth nothing

If we get Josh Daicos for Langdon it might be a risk worth taking.

 

[mike123]

I don't really see why we'd put players like Langdon on the trade table since he'd never give us good value, perhaps a third rounder for which I'd rather keep Langdon and try to develop him further. At worst he's good depth for Howe and can fill a role until Scharenberg comes onto the scene. At best he can put together all the good things he's shown (marking, decision making in his first year - finding the ball and playing further up in his second) into one very good player even though I'm not very confident he will.

I'd put him up as trade bait and see what we can catch. If the most we can get is a third rounder then I agree we should.

 

[Kappa]

If we get Josh Daicos for Langdon it might be a risk worth taking.

Why? Because of Josh's last name?

Langdon is a proven AFL talent, Josh could easily be out of the system in a few years.

 

[DRIZZT]

Also agree with you on this I fail to see how the hell hes meant to improve and which areas. He lacks pace or any sort of burst and doesn't have bounding leap. Many thought he could be like Maxwell who threw himself around but I've never seen Langdon do this once. He doesn't dive which is flaw for a defender.

You admit to being wrong about sinclair,maybe give tommy a chance,he was thrust into a side early in his AFL career and did extremely well,even being nominated as future captain material by pendles i believe(im sure pendles doesnt say these things for fun)Now injuries have taken a toll,he has the attributes,give the boy a chance.

 

[THATSGOLD]

You admit to being wrong about sinclair,maybe give tommy a chance,he was thrust into a side early in his AFL career and did extremely well,even being nominated as future captain material by pendles i believe(im sure pendles doesnt say these things for fun)Now injuries have taken a toll,he has the attributes,give the boy a chance.

The thing with Langdon is I struggle to find a spot for him in the side. We have Marsh and Maynard playing his position with Howe Brown Reid and Goldsack working well together. It's too similar types if you bring Langdon in. We have a lot of similar types and I think trading him could bring better variety to the list as we are in need of a small forward. Trade value is the key.

 

[THATSGOLD]

Why? Because of Josh's last name?

Langdon is a proven AFL talent, Josh could easily be out of the system in a few years.

Langdon might be proven but he isn't that much of a required player on our list. We wouldn't miss him if Marsh and Maynard cement a regular 22 spot.

 

[DRIZZT]

The thing with Langdon is I struggle to find a spot for him in the side. We have Marsh and Maynard playing his position with Howe Brown Reid and Goldsack working well together. It's too similar types if you bring Langdon in. We have a lot of similar types and I think trading him could bring better variety to the list as we are in need of a small forward. Trade value is the key.

Agree if we could get someone more valuable then langdon,but once you add fasolo and elliot back into the fwd mix,would we get someone better then them???Also langdon is still young,could still develop to be a winger/mid so wouldnt take those defenders spots you mentioned,plus id like to think with ramsay/scharenberg and marsh back into the side,howe(no matter how good he is in defence)will play the role we recruited him for-wing/forward.So many variables,and with all our injuries this year,i believe its too hard to judge from an outsiders point of view.IMO,unless we get a superior deal,perserve with langdon.

 

[nahnah]

What could he fetch? We have a few like him in the squad and he seems to have gone backwards. I'd be looking to grab a small forward at the end of the season to balance us out and be certain 22 starter.

Players fighting for a back 6 position.

Nathan Brown
Ben Reid
Jon Marsh
Jeremy Howe
Matthew Scharenberg
Jackson Ramsay
Marley Williams
Jack Frost
Lachlan Keefe
Tom Langdon
Ben Sinclair
Brayden Maynard

Seems like Langdon will play on at Collingwood and Marley will be the one moving on. We really need Ramsay to come back strong from his injury as we don't have another lock down defender on the list at the moment.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Langdon looks 200 + game player.
Why would we move on a really good interceptor?
He will be a main stay.
Here we build up talented young ones and people want to give them away for late picks???
Oh, so we can hope to get a value pick who may turn out to be a Langdon type.
Impeccable logic....

 

[fine and dandy]

What could he fetch? We have a few like him in the squad and he seems to have gone backwards. I'd be looking to grab a small forward at the end of the season to balance us out and be certain 22 starter.

Players fighting for a back 6 position.

Nathan Brown
Ben Reid
Jon Marsh
Jeremy Howe
Matthew Scharenberg
Jackson Ramsay
Marley Williams
Jack Frost
Lachlan Keefe
Tom Langdon
Ben Sinclair
Brayden Maynard

Well you can put a line through Marley Williams, Ben Sinclair, There is no way they should be at the club next year, C- Players

 

[Kilmo]

Well you can put a line through Marley Williams, Ben Sinclair, There is no way they should be at the club next year, C- Players

Ben Sinclair is highly rated internally

 

[Hekt]

Ben Sinclair is highly rated internally

Alas then, that his internals are no longer highly rated.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Wont and shouldnt be traded after one written off year due to injury.

Additionally his trade value aint that high, we can get sufficient trade value out of Cloke Witts and possibly also Williams if he is traded.

 

[RupetFan]

One bad year due to injuries and trade bait. Sounds great..... Dumb, not going anywhere.

 

[Apex36]

Well you can put a line through Marley Williams, Ben Sinclair, There is no way they should be at the club next year, C- Players

Rofl. Sinclair has been our best small defender this year, and the only player that's been able to provide meaningful run and carry on the rebound. Terrible post.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Sinclair is a keeper albeit with some risk that his concussion becomes career ending. All the more reason to retain Langdon.

 

[mike123]

Why would we move on a really good interceptor?

Because that attribute was on the decline and he has nothing else to make up for it.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Because that attribute was on the decline and he has nothing else to make up for it.

That settles it then

 

[Vicky Park]

Because that attribute was on the decline and he has nothing else to make up for it.

But it might come back Mike. I think Tommy needs at least a full pre-season and another year before we make the call on his attributes. His intercept marking in his first year in particular was outstanding.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

But it might come back Mike. I think Tommy needs at least a full pre-season and another year before we make the call on his attributes. His intercept marking in his first year in particular was outstanding.

He's very very good. On my view, if we trade him we'd hope we get another Langdon in his stead.
Seems flawed way to go.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

That settles it then

Yep he completly lost that attribute in the first 3-4 games of the year (when the rest of the side was playing SOOOOO well) before he got injured and was never seen again. Its a convincing sample set you have to admit.