Opinion Player list management and game plan 2019

[Ford Fairlane]

This would be a whole lot simpler if it was:

a) they want to trade pick 2 (they want Lukosius)
b) they want to trade pick 1 (they're passing on Lukosius)

I'm not dumbing it down just for you.

 

[Powertron]

Kingy reckons we are obligated to offer up Wingard at trade'time

Kingy can go EAD.

 

[Willsy10]

Ebert's drop off this year was quite concerning. Loved him as a player because like Boak and Westhoff he is one you know genuinely cares and is a competitor who will always give it everything he has despite some flaws he may have. But for whatever reason he dropped off this year, even with the fundamentals, after having such a good 2017.

 

[JimmyBeerCans]

You guys talk about a culture of winning, perennial failures and this and that but aren't willing to make a genuinely tough call like moving a now long term disinterested Wingard on? He makes a shitload of mistakes, doesn't care all that much about footy and his currency would be worth more than his current output. It's not that outlandish if you were brave and a little bit crazy. We cant wait forever for him to rediscover himself.

Say what you like but we would/have/are considering it. That said, my money is on nothing eventuating from this for now.

Personally I would like to see how he goes with fresh coaches and gameplans but that boy is never going to be the dedicated superstar we all know he could be.

You know what defeats that stance most of our players stagnate it's our system don't kid yourself.

 

[KenOath]

You guys talk about a culture of winning, perennial failures and this and that but aren't willing to make a genuinely tough call like moving a now long term disinterested Wingard on? He makes a shitload of mistakes, doesn't care all that much about footy and his currency would be worth more than his current output. It's not that outlandish if you were brave and a little bit crazy. We cant wait forever for him to rediscover himself.

Say what you like but we would/have/are considering it. That said, my money is on nothing eventuating from this for now.

Personally I would like to see how he goes with fresh coaches and gameplans but that boy is never going to be the dedicated superstar we all know he could be.

Because despite all that his output is still better than 90% of our list!

We also have very little talent in his age bracket...losing Wingard and Polec leaves us with a massively unbalanced list in age terms.

If we're wanting to make a statement, we should be looking to move on some of our over 28's, you know the actual leaders who have let us down for 4 years, not the younger guys who are rightfully jaded with the club!

 

[Willsy10]

Ebert actually has a nice kick for goal, and is good overhead. Half forward would be a good role for him and probably much more suited to that role than Boak.

Low and behold Boak has played better footy the last couple weeks playing in the midfield.

Not sure why we would trade SPP or Wingard. It would have to be some offer to get us to entertain trading our two most promising players 25 and under.

 

[Adam Marrett23]

You guys talk about a culture of winning, perennial failures and this and that but aren't willing to make a genuinely tough call like moving a now long term disinterested Wingard on? He makes a shitload of mistakes, doesn't care all that much about footy and his currency would be worth more than his current output. It's not that outlandish if you were brave and a little bit crazy. We cant wait forever for him to rediscover himself. We do everything for him in an effort to get him right, we aren't getting the return for it.

Say what you like but we would/have/are considering it. That said, my money is on nothing eventuating from this for now.

Personally I would like to see how he goes with fresh coaches and gameplans but that boy is never going to be the dedicated superstar we all know he could be.

Couldn't you have said the same thing about Dustin Martin until last year? It's a utterly ridiculous notion to trade him, and for what? A pick that won't equate anywhere near what Chad is worth, Dusty didn't explode until he'd played around 150 games, the same mark Chad is around now. Put Chad on the ball for the whole of next season.

Personally I'd give him some responsibility, put him in the leadership group or make him vice captain cause of the 22 players who walked off that field on Friday night, Chad was only one visibly upset with it all.

There are others we can move on if needed, but not one of our biggest weapons, cause Robbie doesn't have much time left, and I'd be filthy to see him slowly drop off and Chad is thriving elsewhere.

 

[Willsy10]

i think we are going to make enough obvious list changes as it is, so much deadwood it's not funny. We aren't trading Wingard and SPP on top of that. We've already seen this year that a huge turnover in players is not the answer.

 

[raptalia]

Not quite that simple.

It was 14 and 34 for Polec, 21 and 45.

Polec still cost us our #14 pick. We used the #21 on Jarman Impey and #45 on Mitchell Harvey both of who are no longer with us.

 

[Tibbs]

You’re kidding right? .... I can literally see no possible occurrence that would cause this - and it’s just casting dispersions where they don’t need to be.

SPP had a rough year, but in the grand scheme of things - he was the least of our worries.

I agree with you ... But I did laugh at the above! And I too certainly dont wish to cast any aspersions!

Talking about malapropisms, my mother-in-law is a killer at it!! Some years back she says to my wife "Can we go back to the fruit & veg, I want to get some more of those lesbian cucumbers for lunch" ... I peed my pants! But then gain, the words, lesbian and cucumbers, might not be mutually exclusive!

 

[scottjr]

Just a hypothetical, say Carlton get a priority pick and it is pick 2. They are willing to trade pick 2 to us.

Who is untouchable if

a) Carlton don't guarantee they won't take Lukosius with their first pick
b) Carlton do guarantee they won't take Lukosius with their first pick

Robbie.

 

[Magus]

You guys talk about a culture of winning, perennial failures and this and that but aren't willing to make a genuinely tough call like moving a now long term disinterested Wingard on? He makes a shitload of mistakes, doesn't care all that much about footy and his currency would be worth more than his current output. It's not that outlandish if you were brave and a little bit crazy. We cant wait forever for him to rediscover himself. We do everything for him in an effort to get him right, we aren't getting the return for it.

Say what you like but we would/have/are considering it. That said, my money is on nothing eventuating from this for now.

Personally I would like to see how he goes with fresh coaches and gameplans but that boy is never going to be the dedicated superstar we all know he could be.

Why are you talking like he hasnt been any good in his role this year? He was our highest possession getter on Friday which means he's far from disinterested.
If he was rotting away in the forward line like he was early in the year then maybe your comments could be entertained but the timing is completely off.

 

[MrMeaner]

Is Chad being disinterested something that is beyond speculation or is it speculation echoed into ‘fact’ through repetition here?

Just for clarity, I don’t mean the idea that he does not live and breathe football but that his alleged disinterest is something that would see him play elsewhere.

 

[RossFC]

Imagine if we traded Polec and Wingard and then listened to PowerRaid for some reason and traded Motlop.

Might as well re-name us to Plod Power.

 

[Dalfino]

I’d just make Ebert a defender that can also go forward and nab a goal. Obviously his kicking out of defence is an issue (just bomb it down the line to a tall far-ken) but is a good tackler and a good mark so that might help when our backline is under the pump.

He'd almost work well in a swing-man role like Westhoff - whenever Hoff is going forward Ebert can sit across half-back to look for intercept marks, and whenever Hoff is down back we can send Ebert forward. Both of them have good endurance so they will be able to get up and down the wing nicely. I do like Ebert and Wines marking off of kick-ins as well, so a wing role for Ebert might work well. With Hammer back in the team next year, there might not be a permanent place for Ebert in the defence unless he can own it ahead of Houston, DBJ, Bonner or Hammer if we use Clurey, Jonas and Doogs as our talls.

 

[Tibbs]

Is Chad being disinterested something that is beyond speculation or is it speculation echoed into ‘fact’ through repetition here?

Just for clarity, I don’t mean the idea that he does not live and breathe football but that his alleged disinterest is something that would see him play elsewhere.

Well the review announced today says we are not the "ruthless" club we need to be to compete against the top echelon. And that is patently true ... we dont make the ruthless decisions when we should ... Ala, Ken is still here coaching us in 2018!

With Wingard, the fact is to achieve the elite status that he has the potential to achieve, he needs to commit to footy 100% - mentally, emotionally, as well as physically. He openly admits he doesnt! As mentioned by a previous poster, his current trade value exceeds his current output! The questions are: Can Port get the best out of him? Or, would we be better off making the hard call, and trading him for a top-2 pick?

So Port, how ruthless do you want to get?

 

[philthy05]

Enough with trying to shoehorn players into other positions

If Ebert isn’t good enough as a mid he goes to sanfl

We recruit develop and play forwards forward and backs for the backlines

 

[Dalfino]

You guys talk about a culture of winning, perennial failures and this and that but aren't willing to make a genuinely tough call like moving a now long term disinterested Wingard on? He makes a shitload of mistakes, doesn't care all that much about footy and his currency would be worth more than his current output. It's not that outlandish if you were brave and a little bit crazy. We cant wait forever for him to rediscover himself. We do everything for him in an effort to get him right, we aren't getting the return for it.

Say what you like but we would/have/are considering it. That said, my money is on nothing eventuating from this for now.

Personally I would like to see how he goes with fresh coaches and gameplans but that boy is never going to be the dedicated superstar we all know he could be.

Agree with this - the only thing that makes me want to hang onto Wingard is the potential for him to be a star under the right coaching. Obviously he starred in 2013-15, and has lost his way a bit since with not being able to lock down his position in either the midfield nor forward-line, but has shown glimpses of greatness in both roles and he is definitely not alone in being a player who hasn't played to his full potential since 2015 - see Boak, Hartlett (except for earlier this year), Wines, etc. I imagine if we had a functioning midfield and forward-line he would be one of the players to benefit most.

His weaknesses and doubts should be seriously considered, but I'd just be incredibly pissed off if he went to go star at another club, meaning we weren't able to coach the best out of him - would be a monumental failure.

 

[JimmyBeerCans]

A guy that doesn't watch footy classified or the odd game on telly = lack of commitment to football guys

 

[MrMeaner]

Well the review announced today says we are not the "ruthless" club we need to be to compete against the top echelon. And that is patently true ... we dont make the ruthless decisions when we should ... Ala, Ken is still here coaching us in 2018!

With Wingard, the fact is to achieve the elite status that he has the potential to achieve, he needs to commit to footy 100% - mentally, emotionally, as well as physically. He openly admits he doesnt! As mentioned by a previous poster, his current trade value exceeds his current output! The questions are: Can Port get the best out of him? Or, would we be better off making the hard call, and trading him for a top-2 pick?

So Port, how ruthless do you want to get?

So, it’s not beyond speculation? Cool.

 

[Powerade 08]

If Clarkson rang trying to sell Wingard on the Hawks I reckon he would hang up within 5 seconds thinking it was a telemarketer. and yet there is this constant paranoia about his future.

 

[Magus]

His weaknesses and doubts should be seriously considered, but I'd just be incredibly pissed off if he went to go star at another club, meaning we weren't able to coach the best out of him - would be a monumental failure.

Not only that but he's hugely popular amongst the supporter base, especially the kids. Players like Chad have the potential to get people through the gate and make people watch on TV.

 

[dav3]

Well the review announced today says we are not the "ruthless" club we need to be to compete against the top echelon. And that is patently true ... we dont make the ruthless decisions when we should ... Ala, Ken is still here coaching us in 2018!

With Wingard, the fact is to achieve the elite status that he has the potential to achieve, he needs to commit to footy 100% - mentally, emotionally, as well as physically. He openly admits he doesnt! As mentioned by a previous poster, his current trade value exceeds his current output! The questions are: Can Port get the best out of him? Or, would we be better off making the hard call, and trading him for a top-2 pick?

So Port, how ruthless do you want to get?

Perhaps his current output is stunted by the fact we moved him out of the position where he became a 2x AA, and to a part of the ground that's unnatural to him. The guy is one of those rare, naturally talented freaks, perhaps we should just let him do his thing in the forward line.

And since when is David f**king King a reliable source for any sort of review? He's the guy who said Gold Coast should trade a pick in the 2017 draft for Ken Hinkley

 

[Coobk001]

Ebert actually has a nice kick for goal, and is good overhead. Half forward would be a good role for him and probably much more suited to that role than Boak.

Low and behold Boak has played better footy the last couple weeks playing in the midfield.

Yes I posted this a couple weeks back. I'd switch their roles. Boak instead of Ebert gives us a little more speed in the midfield, while it also gives us a hard runner on the outside that can provide a marking option, unlike Boak.

 

[ctpower]

You guys talk about a culture of winning, perennial failures and this and that but aren't willing to make a genuinely tough call like moving a now long term disinterested Wingard on? He makes a shitload of mistakes, doesn't care all that much about footy and his currency would be worth more than his current output. It's not that outlandish if you were brave and a little bit crazy. We cant wait forever for him to rediscover himself. We do everything for him in an effort to get him right, we aren't getting the return for it.

Say what you like but we would/have/are considering it. That said, my money is on nothing eventuating from this for now.

Personally I would like to see how he goes with fresh coaches and gameplans but that boy is never going to be the dedicated superstar we all know he could be.

Deep down I know this is right.
But I’m not ready to face up to it.