Remove this Banner Ad

Will the Tim Kelly trade go down as one of the worst ever ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cadillac
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Was the right call at the time and is the right call now. List managers recognised we were in the premiership window and swung for a home run. Didnt work out.

Now the Eagles bottom right out and very quickly, getting high draft picks asap and not being stuck in no-mans land in the middle of the ladder.

Id rather have wild fluctuations in our performance then drift around the way St Kilda has.
 
I'm sure Geelong would rather have had Kelly lining up on GF day for them instead of the swag of picks they ended up with, but seeings as they were never keeping him they did as well or better than could be expected out of the trade.

We rolled the dice as we figured we were in with a chance for another flag and it would have been silly to ignore that and start the rebuild then. I don't think the covid years did us any favours, but we could hardly have predicted that.

Hardly one of the worst trades ever, a bit risky maybe but at the end of the day I think it's more dangerous to play safe.
 
Was the right call at the time and is the right call now. List managers recognised we were in the premiership window and swung for a home run. Didnt work out.

Now the Eagles bottom right out and very quickly, getting high draft picks asap and not being stuck in no-mans land in the middle of the ladder.

Id rather have wild fluctuations in our performance then drift around the way St Kilda has.
Who ever pays that much for a mid, which are so common in every draft, is an idiot.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Who ever pays that much for a mid, which are so common in every draft, is an idiot.

Kelly level mids are not that common. Say between Duncan/Guthrie in 9/10 and whenever we drafted Kelly (19?), we didn't find one via the draft. If you have top 10 picks or a whole state academy then maybe but not for the rest of us. They were just a heap of junk picks at the end of the day. We basically flipped them for Cameron so someone will probably make the same thread about him in 2 years time if we don't jag a flag.
 
It's a bit of a paradox that one. Had we had Kelly we wouldn't have had Menegola and Guthrie forced to play higher midfield minutes in his absence.

Guthrie went on to be AA and the winner of the B&F, while Menegola was considered unlucky by many to not make the side.

These guys were just solid defensive midfielders before 2020. They joined the elite bracket in Kelly's absence. Guthrie has stayed there, Menegola has dropped off with injury and form.

I personally don't think it changed anything. I think we make the GF and lose to Richmond regardless of the trade.
Could that not have been simply a case of those players developing and getting better? I find it hard to see how losing Kelly would have made no difference to the team (especially after watching him against us in that semi final in 2019), but then I don't watch Geelong every week so I can't say it's impossible.
 
You can literally taste the desperation from the Freo supporters in this thread.
Don't really care to be honest.

But seriously.... How old do you think Tim Kelly will retire? I say 34 years old. I won't be surprised if he does a David Mundy and plays until he is 36 or 37 years old.

Sort of a blessing in disguise he didn't get taken by an AFL club until he was 21 or 22 years old.

Peter Matera debut at 20 years old and retired at 33.

Chris Mainwaring debut for west coast at 21 or 22 years old and was 34 when he retired.
 
I think, for what it is worth, we have still to see the best of Kelly. He was a late developer anyway and will get better. He has only played four seasons at AFL level has he not?
Last year he had to learn how to deal with a heavy tag, as most talented mids have to, but he has lots of improvement to come.
My opinion FWIW.
 
I think, for what it is worth, we have still to see the best of Kelly. He was a late developer anyway and will get better. He has only played four seasons at AFL level has he not?
Last year he had to learn how to deal with a heavy tag, as most talented mids have to, but he has lots of improvement to come.
My opinion FWIW.
And that is part of the reason I think he will play solid footy until he is 34 or 35 years old.

We are usually talking about youth etc.

Oh we got a talented 18 or 19 year old. Let's pump games into him for the sake of it. Some teenagers are fresh out of high-school.

Some players start early at 18 or 19 and have their bodies broken down at 26 or 27 years old.

Some mature and start late at 21 or 22 or 23 years old and still play 12 years of solid footy.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

I really liked the Leigh Colbert trade for Geelong.
Geelong got Enright and Mooney. 530-odd games.
North got Colbert for about 100.

Enright won two B&Fs and 3 premierships, while Mooney snagged two.

One of the worst was probably Richmond trading away Teasdale, Roberts and Francis Jackson for John Pitura.
Teasdale won a Brownlow, Roberts had a great season, and Pitura stank at Richmond.
 
Last edited:

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Tim Kelly would have been a big free agency player last year if he were 18 when he was drafted back in 2017, like Oscar Allen who was taken three picks before him - but he's five years older.

Still has managed 164 games. Five extra years earlier in his career and he could have played 250 to 300 games before retirement - if he were on 264 games heading into turning 32 years old nobody would have expected much else out of him these next two years.

Michael Barlow was two years younger than Tim Kelly when he was drafted and only managed 141 career games, arguably missing 20 games as a result of that leg break in the debut season.

It's the nature of the beast. Time catches up to you, and it catches you faster when you're not quick to begin with.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom