Past 26. Harrison Macreadie

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

No1Suspect said:
I do know this was just saying i think it will be Harrison for reason stated:thumbsu:
Click to expand...
I think they'll play around with both he and Weitering at times, but in a first choice team they won't be up forward.

We've now got Pickett, Buckley, Smedts, Polson, Fisher, Cripps, Murphy, Gibbs and more who will rotate through there, and a need to deploy Levi as a ruck/forward until McKay can help out.

In time it's a possibility, but Ben will be on the list in 2018, and we've just drafted Kerr.
 
Jimmae said:
I think they'll play around with both he and Weitering at times, but in a first choice team they won't be up forward.

We've now got Pickett, Buckley, Smedts, Polson, Fisher, Cripps, Murphy, Gibbs and more who will rotate through there, and a need to deploy Levi as a ruck/forward until McKay can help out.

In time it's a possibility, but Ben will be on the list in 2018, and we've just drafted Kerr.
Click to expand...

True! also doggies have shown you dont gotta be tall to score these days!! high pressure fwd line is where the parties at!!
 
Azul said:
Handshake agreement. we'll let you have macreadie if you stop trying to poach Tomlinson.

Or structurally they preferred Tiziani and had precommitted to de boer.
Click to expand...

DeBoer being a free agent is what completely bamboozles me, why didn't they just pick him up a couple of weeks ago?
 
teagueyubeauty said:
DeBoer being a free agent is what completely bamboozles me, why didn't they just pick him up a couple of weeks ago?
Click to expand...
I think they were conscious of points.

Inevitably they did pass on a couple of bids but they needed to keep as many 'live' picks. Picking de Boer up DFA would have meant they'd have one less list spot to count towards the total.
 
I'm really intrigued by how/why he dropped so low. A possible top-5 pick in May? Also I heard at one point he was the most highly rated of the GWS academy players. You don't get from there to nobody bidding on you before pick 47 (and GWS passing) unless something pretty major has happened this year? Is it just the form dropoff? If so he must have been exposed pretty badly in games that left recruiters of little doubt about certain weaknesses.

Not trying to be negative, but it just seems like a pretty big fall for a talented player. Sure GWS may have not had the room for all academy players in the end so someone got squeezed out, but that doesn't changed the fact that 16 other clubs weren't interested in him before pick 47 either.
 
ODNBlue said:
Does the fact that GWS are likely to lose their first two picks next year explain in any way why GWS didn't match the bid?

i.e. was there a chance they would have to go into deficit this year thus impacting their picks next year?

(I don't understand this stuff...)
Click to expand...
They had enough points to match without going into deficit. In fact, I believe they could have matched every bid for their players without going into deficit.

If there was any deficit, it would likely have only eaten away at their 4th round pick next year, so draft penalties weren't a factor here.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The thing I like with this pickup (and Kerr to a degree as well) is that it increases the chances of seeing Charlie Curnow spend time in the middle.

If that's the pencilled-in plan, it could be why we didn't take an outright clearance midfielder with a big body to support Cripps. That, and I'm sure we will have a go at Fyfe.
 
Dramoth said:
I think that we mugged GWS with the Setterfield bid. And then when Adelaide bid on Perryman, we knew that we had the chance of getting either Mutch or Macreadie. I think that it was planned that we bid on Setterfield or Perryman to ensure that we got one of GWS's other highly rated academy players.
Click to expand...

But we did not ensure anything.
GWS could have taken this guy if they wanted to match the bid. They had plenty of draft picks points they could use they tipped down the drain for nothing. It is a mystery why.
 
I'm wondering if GWS are so close to the salary cap and committed to taking deBoer already that they simply had no more room in salary cap to fit another draftee. They are going with only 38 on primary list by only using 6 of their 10 picks in the national draft. Maybe that is why they did not bid on this guy. About the only thing at moment that would make some sense of not taking him when they could have.
 
Reading between the lines GWS asked a 17 year old to prematurely leave home. They set him up at a boarding school in Sydney away from his family and friends and his game suffered as a result.

The AFL should clamp down on this sort of thing. A 16/17 year old kid shouldn't be put in a position where they have to choose between their family and their potential future employer.
 
Last edited:
He wanted to go to a Melbourne club. He's from Henty (An hour from me and I think one other member here) and they had managed to get to print an interview (brief) about being drafted.

Wanted to come to Melbourne
Avid Carlton man.

GWS may have seen that he would have likely left anyway and agreed to let him go.
 
No1Suspect said:
True! also doggies have shown you dont gotta be tall to score these days!! high pressure fwd line is where the parties at!!
Click to expand...
Not really relevant, but no they haven't. They've demonstrated that, in an incredibly even year, you can pinch a flag with a dominant midfield and an emerging key forward; hardly groundbreaking.

Getting a bit sick of all the things the Bulldogs have seemingly proven with their premiership.

Welcome Harrison.
 
Personal theory on GWS letting some academy kids go through to other clubs - if they keep raking in 5-6 talented kids for less than market value, at some point the bubble will burst and their academy system will be overhauled. From this point on, I think they'll be very selective with which ones they take, and how many - they're better off getting 2 or 3 guns each year than dominating a couple of drafts and consequently having the rug pulled out from under them.
 
Blue__Balls said:
Personal theory on GWS letting some academy kids go through to other clubs - if they keep raking in 5-6 talented kids for less than market value, at some point the bubble will burst and their academy system will be overhauled. From this point on, I think they'll be very selective with which ones they take, and how many - they're better off getting 2 or 3 guns each year than dominating a couple of drafts and consequently having the rug pulled out from under them.
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly, it's to cultivate the appearance that their academy zone is not giving them the unfair advantage that everyone says that it is. They have arguably an even better crop next year, at least at the top end of the draft and they don't what to lose access to them. Then again, that does not explain why other clubs did not bid earlier, perhaps they just had different priorities at that stage and we thought his potential was too good to pass up.

The strange thing is, I think more clubs would have been interested if he didn't have the year he had last year because he wouldn't have been perceived to have lowered his standard.
 
Last edited:
Dominator_7 said:
'We'll take Palmer off your hands, if you let us get Harry Mac in the Draft'
SOS to GWS during Trade Week '16
Click to expand...

Doubt it - relies on every club with a pick between 27 and 47 letting him go - there's no way we'd do a deal that could net us absolutely nothing just because someone else bid on him a few picks ahead of us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top