2017 Trade and FA thread

[POBT]

I really hope not. Why bring in someone in their late 20's when you are trying to build towards a premiership in a number of years time. Wrong age demographic for us.

I'd agree with you if this were a trade. Free agent though. Adding a decent midfielder to the list is a good outcome, particularly if it costs us nothing in a trade.

 

[trikster]

I'd agree with you if this were a trade. Free agent though. Adding a decent midfielder to the list is a good outcome, particularly if it costs us nothing in a trade.

but if the midfield is beams/rockliff/zaharakis how do berry,clugga, mathieson, this years pick(s) get to develop enough. That would be my concern still.

 

[POBT]

but if the midfield is beams/rockliff/zaharakis how do berry,clugga, mathieson, this years pick(s) get to develop enough. That would be my concern still.

I think some of our young midfielders have been thrown into the deep end too often in terms of midfield reliance. We've got no real midfield depth and, as excited as we rightfully are about our young blokes, they do get exposed in midfield roles. Instead of being mids 4, 5, 6 in the rotations, they get to be #7 or 8.

I also think we tend to overlook the value of competition for spots. I've got no problem if one of the young blokes spends time in the reserves because someone is playing better.

It is also clear that the club would like to give Rocky, Beams and Zorko more forward time. Adding mature depth to the midfield allows that to occur.

FWIW, I don't think this will eventuate. However, I can definitely see us looking around for someone like Zakarahis, particularly if Rocky departs.

 

[Bucking Beads]

but if the midfield is beams/rockliff/zaharakis how do berry,clugga, mathieson, this years pick(s) get to develop enough. That would be my concern still.

The more players you have that can rotate through the midfield the better. You can really never have enough midifielders.

 

[Dom PC]

He's the wrong age IMO. I know easier said then done, but if we were to get another mid, I think they should be in that 23-25 age bracket (or younger). Not the same age bracket as Zorko, Beams, Rockliff,, Rich Bastinac, Robinson and Christensen. It just creates issues in 2 years time when we have potentially 8 of our starting 18, 29 or older.

If Rocky were to leave, then I'd be happy to get Zakarahis though (would prefer to keep Rocky).

 

[POBT]

Most free agents are 26 and up. Having hard and fast age restrictions for new recruits effectively rules free agency out of the list management plans.

Besides, we haven't exactly got an old side. It would be different if we were in our position with a list full of 33yos.

 

[CarterS]

Besides, we haven't exactly got an old side. It would be different if we were in our position with a list full of 33yos.

Worth remembering we are the youngest in the comp by far, still.
Players like that become available as free agents and you go for it.

 

[jackess]

He's the wrong age IMO. I know easier said then done, but if we were to get another mid, I think they should be in that 23-25 age bracket (or younger). Not the same age bracket as Zorko, Beams, Rockliff,, Rich Bastinac, Robinson and Christensen. It just creates issues in 2 years time when we have potentially 8 of our starting 18, 29 or older.

If Rocky were to leave, then I'd be happy to get Zakarahis though (would prefer to keep Rocky).

Who's to say we're not targeting players in that age bracket?

I like it. Probably pushes someone like Barrett, Lester or NRobbo out of the best 22. Giving us a bit more depth.

 

[Dom PC]

Who's to say we're not targeting players in that age bracket?

I like it. Probably pushes someone like Barrett, Lester or NRobbo out of the best 22. Giving us a bit more depth.

For me, i just feel like we've got enough 27-30 year olds. So adding another B grade midfielder at the age of 28 just doesn't really make a lot of sense to me.

Next year we get back Robinson and Christensen. Both should be first 22 players. So that will already add to our experience on field.

I wouldn't be outraged if we got him, but where our list is at, I am not sure we (the club) are sticking by the guidelines outlined by Faggs and Noble of only adding players that would play in our next premiership.

 

[jackess]

For me, i just feel like we've got enough 27-30 year olds. So adding another B grade midfielder at the age of 28 just doesn't really make a lot of sense to me.

Next year we get back Robinson and Christensen. Both should be first 22 players. So that will already add to our experience on field.

I wouldn't be outraged if we got him, but where our list is at, I am not sure we (the club) are sticking by the guidelines outlined by Faggs and Noble of only adding players that would play in our next premiership.

But it then pushes Robinson into the forward line and Beams and Rocky can spend more time down there. Then perhaps Bundy can spend more time down back and add some experience to the back line. We've seen this year people like Clugg, Barrett, Cox and others get games when their form didn't merit selection.

We've also had the problem this year with Rocky and Beams playing injured and Robbo and Bundy missing most of the season or all of it.

We're still in a phase with quite a few players under 50 games who need guidance. Look at the Melbourne team we're up against today climbing the ladder with more experience after bringing in Lewis and Hibberd.

Plus he would add a bit of speed which would be handy.

 

[POBT]

For me, i just feel like we've got enough 27-30 year olds. So adding another B grade midfielder at the age of 28 just doesn't really make a lot of sense to me.

Next year we get back Robinson and Christensen. Both should be first 22 players. So that will already add to our experience on field.

I wouldn't be outraged if we got him, but where our list is at, I am not sure we (the club) are sticking by the guidelines outlined by Faggs and Noble of only adding players that would play in our next premiership.

There is the question of assessing the alternatives though. Let's assume salary cap space is not an issue for the next year or two. That means the cost is a list spot. The alternatives to fill that list spot are:

1. Keep one of our fringe players for another year
2. Draft a young player with a late(r) draft pick
3. Trade for a good player who fits our preferred age profile (noting that it comes at the cost of a player or draft picks)
4. Sign a player in the right age profile who doesn't have a trade cost (ie a delisted player or one that a club is preprared to trade out for peanuts)

Perhaps option 3 is preferable but it does rely upon identifying the right player, convincing them to come to Brisbane and then getting agreement on a trade that two clubs are happy with.

Other than that though, my feel is I'd rather a Zaharakis (despite being older than our preferred age profile) than a pick 60 or a fringe player.

 

[briztoon]

There is the question of assessing the alternatives though. Let's assume salary cap space is not an issue for the next year or two. That means the cost is a list spot. The alternatives to fill that list spot are:

1. Keep one of our fringe players for another year
2. Draft a young player with a late(r) draft pick
3. Trade for a good player who fits our preferred age profile (noting that it comes at the cost of a player or draft picks)
4. Sign a player in the right age profile who doesn't have a trade cost (ie a delisted player or one that a club is preprared to trade out for peanuts)

Perhaps option 3 is preferable but it does rely upon identifying the right player, convincing them to come to Brisbane and then getting agreement on a trade that two clubs are happy with.

Other than that though, my feel is I'd rather a Zaharakis (despite being older than our preferred age profile) than a pick 60 or a fringe player.

Sums up what I was going to post.

If Zaharakis is a best 22 or fringe best 22 player, you'd be silly not to add him at the cost of delisting a fringe squad player.

Doesn't hurt to make the kids earn their spots in the best 22. And also means Rocky and Beams don't have play injured, but can take time off to recover properly.

 

[winged1]

Zaharakis had a good year in a struggling side last year. He would be easily best 22 here. We still need to add depth in the midfield and he can use it. If he doesn't cost a lot it is a no brainer.

 

[Dom PC]

But it then pushes Robinson into the forward line and Beams and Rocky can spend more time down there. Then perhaps Bundy can spend more time down back and add some experience to the back line. We've seen this year people like Clugg, Barrett, Cox and others get games when their form didn't merit selection.

We've also had the problem this year with Rocky and Beams playing injured and Robbo and Bundy missing most of the season or all of it.

We're still in a phase with quite a few players under 50 games who need guidance. Look at the Melbourne team we're up against today climbing the ladder with more experience after bringing in Lewis and Hibberd.

Plus he would add a bit of speed which would be handy.

There is the question of assessing the alternatives though. Let's assume salary cap space is not an issue for the next year or two. That means the cost is a list spot. The alternatives to fill that list spot are:

1. Keep one of our fringe players for another year
2. Draft a young player with a late(r) draft pick
3. Trade for a good player who fits our preferred age profile (noting that it comes at the cost of a player or draft picks)
4. Sign a player in the right age profile who doesn't have a trade cost (ie a delisted player or one that a club is preprared to trade out for peanuts)

Perhaps option 3 is preferable but it does rely upon identifying the right player, convincing them to come to Brisbane and then getting agreement on a trade that two clubs are happy with.

Other than that though, my feel is I'd rather a Zaharakis (despite being older than our preferred age profile) than a pick 60 or a fringe player.

All these are fair points. I understand you arguing that getting Zaharakis would aid in the younger players developing and avoids drafting using late pick or keeping a current fringe player, but I'd argue having all your experienced players in the one position (midfield) could potentially hinder our young midfield brigades development. We'd essentially have seven 28-29 year olds playing in the same position on the field. I understand they would rotate from other positions; but their best positions are rotating through the midfield and the NEAFL is not exactly the greatest development league.

I just think our midfield already has enough senior midfield players, if we were to be getting older players, it should be in defense (e.g. McVeigh or Hodge etc.) or in the forward line (Puopolo or Cameron). If it was an A grader wanting to come I would be in agreement, but he is a B grader (and at times a C grader). We can build our depth when our younger players have developed more in a year or two and we are starting our climb up the ladder.

I am not saying your opinions are wrong and mine is right as there is many ways to skin a cat. So either way, I'd say none of us will be too fussed with which ever way it turns out.

 

[winged1]

All these are fair points. I understand you arguing that getting Zaharakis would aid in the younger players developing and avoids drafting using late pick or keeping a current fringe player, but I'd argue having all your experienced players in the one position (midfield) could potentially hinder our young midfield brigades development. We'd essentially have seven 28-29 year olds playing in the same position on the field. I understand they would rotate from other positions; but their best positions are rotating through the midfield and the NEAFL is not exactly the greatest development league.

I just think our midfield already has enough senior midfield players, if we were to be getting older players, it should be in defense (e.g. McVeigh or Hodge etc.) or in the forward line (Puopolo or Cameron). If it was an A grader wanting to come I would be in agreement, but he is a B grader (and at times a C grader). We can build our depth when our younger players have developed more in a year or two and we are starting our climb up the ladder.

I am not saying your opinions are wrong and mine is right as there is many ways to skin a cat. So either way, I'd say none of us will be too fussed with which ever way it turns out.

The thing with Zaharakis is when he had a bigger role he played better. With the return of the drugged up 12 he got pushed out of the big midfield minutes and been playing a lot of hff.
We still need this kind of player.

Rocky, if he stays, will push forward more. We can't expect 18 and 19 year olds to be playing big mid minutes. (Though berry has made a fair fist of it).

 

[Tassie4ever]

Look, who the hell needs these A grade imports.

Not the Lions surely. I mean- look where we are on the ladder.

Get a grip.

 

[Milux]

but if the midfield is beams/rockliff/zaharakis how do berry,clugga, mathieson, this years pick(s) get to develop enough. That would be my concern still.

Not to mention Robbo and Christo to come back in.

 

[Leuy LongerCombo]

Pardon my intrusion, but just a quick question to you guys. Out of these two Cameron deals, which do you reckon you'd prefer? Both value him at a pick at around 25-30, which at this stage (considering contract status, current output etc) is probably fair.

13 for Cameron and 35
18 for Cameron and 53

Where Ballenden is rated will be a big factor in our trade plans, ideally as a club we still get to use the Port pick in the draft and move our second rounder on.

Another factor will be list spots, we can't simply hoard later picks for matching either. We have been fairly flexible in previous years so no doubt will be able to make something happen

 

[Comeback Lions]

but their best positions are rotating through the midfield and the NEAFL is not exactly the greatest development league.

Sydney plays in the NEAFL and you can't fault their development. Mitchell (Hawthorn) developed in the NEAFL, for example. We're not dominating in the midfield in the NEAFL at the moment, even though we're second on the ladder and have only lost three games. Last couple of weeks our NEAFL midfield have been well beaten. It's not doing Ben Keays any harm to be playing NEAFL and Matho and Cluggage would benefit from going back there. Cox didn't exactly tear it up yesterday. The NEAFL is a much better development league than people think and all we have at the moment. It's not a disadvantage for young guys to fight for their spots.

 

[captainrich]

Will genuinely laugh if that happens, both at my club for getting a shit deal and at the fact that one of the trade ideas in that article actually came true

I'm sorry you would say getting lewis taylor for Cameron is a shit deal for Adelaide?...

 

[jackess]

All these are fair points. I understand you arguing that getting Zaharakis would aid in the younger players developing and avoids drafting using late pick or keeping a current fringe player, but I'd argue having all your experienced players in the one position (midfield) could potentially hinder our young midfield brigades development. We'd essentially have seven 28-29 year olds playing in the same position on the field. I understand they would rotate from other positions; but their best positions are rotating through the midfield and the NEAFL is not exactly the greatest development league.

I just think our midfield already has enough senior midfield players, if we were to be getting older players, it should be in defense (e.g. McVeigh or Hodge etc.) or in the forward line (Puopolo or Cameron). If it was an A grader wanting to come I would be in agreement, but he is a B grader (and at times a C grader). We can build our depth when our younger players have developed more in a year or two and we are starting our climb up the ladder.

I am not saying your opinions are wrong and mine is right as there is many ways to skin a cat. So either way, I'd say none of us will be too fussed with which ever way it turns out.

I think you're doing something a lot of people do and thinking just because you don't hear a rumour of the Lions doing something that we're not doing it.

Zaharakis might be our 10th target but also the most likely to come to us. We might have offered Kelly $1.5mil, we might have offered McVeigh and Hodge a playing/coaching deal.

We might also he resigned to losing Rocky and looking for a replacement of which Zaharakis could be an upgrade given he's a quicker midfield so suits our midfield mix better.

As I said Robinson and Bundy might not play midfield and Beams and Rocky might spend more time forward. There are still spots there for Berry, Clugg, etc. and it will stop players like McCluggage getting games when their form doesn't merit selection.

Maybe we'll even reinvent Zaka as a back flank in the McVeigh mound.

 

[bungalow_bill]

I'm sorry you would say getting lewis taylor for Cameron is a shit deal for Adelaide?...

Lewis Taylor for Cameron and the Crows first pick is a bad deal for us. Taylor is developing into a gun goal kicking midfielder

 

[captainrich]

I think you're doing something a lot of people do and thinking just because you don't hear a rumour of the Lions doing something that we're not doing it.

Zaharakis might be our 10th target but also the most likely to come to us. We might have offered Kelly $1.5mil, we might have offered McVeigh and Hodge a playing/coaching deal.

We might also he resigned to losing Rocky and looking for a replacement of which Zaharakis could be an upgrade given he's a quicker midfield so suits our midfield mix better.

As I said Robinson and Bundy might not play midfield and Beams and Rocky might spend more time forward. There are still spots there for Berry, Clugg, etc. and it will stop players like McCluggage getting games when their form doesn't merit selection.

Maybe we'll even reinvent Zaka as a back flank in the McVeigh mound.

if rocky was leaving we would not try and get zaka as a free agent as we would want his compensation pick

 

[captainrich]

Lewis Taylor for Cameron and the Crows first pick is a bad deal for us. Taylor is developing into a gun goal kicking midfielder

lol you should try read what I said and the context too if you can try. I was calling out the crows supporter for thinking harwood, taylor and a third rounder for Cameron was a bad deal for Adelaide. its a cracking deal for Adelaide and a terrible deal for us as lewis is becoming a good contributor (gun goal kickingmidfielder is a bit far-fetched yet)

also don't know where the crows first pick came into this

 

[jackess]

if rocky was leaving we would not try and get zaka as a free agent as we would want his compensation pick

I'd be happy to in effect trade pick 18 for Zaharakis.