- Nov 14, 2010
- 41,698
- 45,837
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Not phased if we lose a 32 year old ruckman
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Brisbane Lions v Collingwood - 7:30PM Thu
Squiggle tips Lions at 64% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
Not phased if we lose a 32 year old ruckman
Had to loan it to Bards a few months ago. Never got it back.
The fact he hasn’t signed speaks volumes I think
I'm not quite sure why you would want potentially our best forward playing more time in the rucktime to move past them, they are not going to sign anytime soon then we start planning for the future. We have campbell who is a physically superior ruckman. While he is not as mobile, he will be more suited to our blue collar midfield. Also this will make Larkey to play more secondary ruck duty and Daw if he ever gets back into fitness.
The fact he hasn’t signed speaks volumes I think
This is different.Same words precisely being said about Gaff this time a year ago.
This is different.
Gaff felt an obligation to stay because he let them down and they supported him through the aftermath. Plus he was part of a bloody strong premiership winning list which showed no signs of regressing.
If Goldy's is getting a better offer at the Cats then I can see why he'd walk, and I think he will, which is going to hurt us for next year, because we don't have anyone on the list currently that is near his level.
Who said he was 32?
I agree with all of your points RS.This is different.
Gaff felt an obligation to stay because he let them down and they supported him through the aftermath. Plus he was part of a bloody strong premiership winning list which showed no signs of regressing.
If Goldy's is getting a better offer at the Cats then I can see why he'd walk, and I think he will, which is going to hurt us for next year, because we don't have anyone on the list currently that is near his level.
Someone did... oh, Ziebull.He is 31, turns 32 on the 1st of July next year.
Would be great. With luck we could nab another Dan Nielsen or Josh Williams.Not keen on getting into a bidding war and overpaying to keep him around.
Goldy is great, and has enjoyed a pretty stellar career with us. Ending up with a second round pick would be a pretty handy outcome.
Someone did... oh, Ziebull.
In most contexts, "one year, big deal." But if he were to get a 3 year, or the factor behind getting a 3 year deal, is that he's 31 going on 34, rather than 32 going on 35. Dunno if AFL ruckman get that old.
Good explanation to answer what was essentially a pedantic rant by someone with not enough fiber in his breakfast this morning.That is the tricky question. Unlike the best midfielders in particular, who when they start to slow down a little and can be used more sparingly in the midfield/on ball or moved forward/back into different roles where their superior abilities still allow them to play valuable roles, there are not a lot of options for a slowing down big man.
My view is that because he has had an injury free career and is still very mobile, he probably has another 3 years in him. But a list manager has to consider very carefully, not so much the next 2 years but rather that third year of a new contract.
For the Cats, giving him 3 years is not so much of a risk, because they see their next flag in this small window of this year, next year and maybe in 2022.
The Cats have an ageing list of stars. Ablett is 35 and may well retire this year, Harry Taylor is 33 and looks certain to retire, Joel Selwood and Tom Hawkins - the All Australian Full Forward on the basis of goal assists rather than goals - no goals and no goal assists in the recent Qualifying Final - but I digress - both 31 and born in the same couple of months as Todd, while Patrick Dangerfield turns 30 next year.
So they may figure that if Goldy gives them a really good year next year and they snare a flag, if he quickly falls of the cliff afterwards, the risk of a third year is well warranted. Likewise they may see the same risk/reward in recruiting Higgo.
We are not in the same list situation as the Cats so maybe a third year for us is harder to justify.
Absolutely correct. I just have an awful feeling if we let him go over one extra year, we'd be like Carlton watching Waite for years yet - and Waite had a much more chequered injury history than Goldy does.That is the tricky question. Unlike the best midfielders in particular, who when they start to slow down a little and can be used more sparingly in the midfield/on ball or moved forward/back into different roles where their superior abilities still allow them to play valuable roles, there are not a lot of options for a slowing down big man.
My view is that because he has had an injury free career and is still very mobile, he probably has another 3 years in him. But a list manager has to consider very carefully, not so much the next 2 years but rather that third year of a new contract.
For the Cats, giving him 3 years is not so much of a risk, because they see their next flag in this small window of this year, next year and maybe in 2022.
The Cats have an ageing list of stars. Ablett is 35 and may well retire this year, Harry Taylor is 33 and looks certain to retire, Joel Selwood and Tom Hawkins - the All Australian Full Forward on the basis of goal assists rather than goals - no goals and no goal assists in the recent Qualifying Final - but I digress - both 31 and born in the same couple of months as Todd, while Patrick Dangerfield turns 30 next year.
So they may figure that if Goldy gives them a really good year next year and they snare a flag, if he quickly falls of the cliff afterwards, the risk of a third year is well warranted. Likewise they may see the same risk/reward in recruiting Higgo.
We are not in the same list situation as the Cats so maybe a third year for us is harder to justify.
Would be great. With luck we could nab another Dan Nielsen or Josh Williams.
Absolutely correct. I just have an awful feeling if we let him go over one extra year, we'd be like Carlton watching Waite for years yet - and Waite had a much more chequered injury history than Goldy does.
Geelong might have ageing names, but notwithstanding that debacle at their home ground this year, I don't think they are much closer to a flag than we are. Transferring Goldy across would make them closer and us further away. Both poor outcomes, and for not much in return. The only way I'd come to terms with it if we needed that spot or cap space for another very exciting change to our list, but to be honest I'd think North without him is suddenly a less attractive place to be traded to (like we need to add disincentive).
Way to miss the point. I just don't think losing a guy who is a very good to excellent player for the low chances of success that would come with a second round draft pick could be seen in any way as a good result.You're right. We should skip the draft entirely just in case we pick up someone who doesn't work out.