List Mgmt. 2022 Trade Thread - Part II

[bird_man]

I disagree, I don't see that side of him, unfortunately. (And I've usually agreed with you on most points in the past)

I watched every game he's played in the midfield for Sandy this year and I've paid close attention to him in the seniors when he's on the ball.

He cannot win clearance or contested ball like a true inside mid. He doesn't get on the move around stoppages. He lets his opponent take the front spot and lead him to the ball and when he does win the ball he gets tackled. He often gets the kick or handball away because of his skill but he's never bursting through with any power from his legs. He's a nice mover in traffic, yes but he's rarely first hands-on or even first receiver.

His area for growth is around the stoppage and using his legs to break away into space.

Watch his VFL game against the Sharks he attended nearly every single center bounce and didn't win a single one. Watch his positioning and movement around the stoppages and tell me what you think?

Cannot win contested ball or clearances?

He's had very limited time on ball at the AFL bit when he has had opportunities he's proven that's exactly what he can do.

Round one last year he had 24 touches, 12 contested and 7 clearances with just 19 CB attendances

That was the only time he was given double figures for centre bounce attendances for the year.

Go back to the year prior when we were getting well beaten by the Eagles and we moved him into the middle at half time. He ended up with 24 touches, 12 contested and 5 clearances and was the major factor for getting us back into the game.

Clark has a few issues he needs to sort out but winning contested footy is not his issue.

 

[PoppedCorn]

So. Why has the club put Clark up for trade? I’m a bit confused.

Ffs we haven't

If someone offered a top ten we would LOOK at it

 

[Saints43]

Most players don't actually leave for more money for a longer period of time.

A few do but most will take less to stay at their club if things are going well.

I think if DeGoey were to walk out on the Pies it says a lot more about him than it does the club.

They are offering him 800k a year which is decent money for a player that has never got close to winning a best and fairest, never made AA and has had off field issues.

Most players don't run their contracts to the point where they're expiring in two weeks time and about to be able to move clubs as a free agent.
Perhaps St Kilda had already had discussions with JDG and made him feel supported prior to Collingwood withdrawing their contract offer and then having it reappear when he hit a spell of great form.

 

[bird_man]

Most players don't run their contracts to the point where they're expirinng in two weeks time and about to be able to move clubs as a free agent.
Perhaps St Kilda had already had discussions with JDG and made him feel supported prior to Collingwood withdrawing their contract offer and then having it reappear when he hit a spell of great form.

Most players don't go to Bali on a mid season trip when he's already got a history of shitty behaviour.

Let's wait and see then shall we. I'll be gobsmacked if he doesn't sign with the Pies

 

[Joffaboy]

So. Why has the club put Clark up for trade? I’m a bit confused.

Same reason that King and Steele are up for trade - at the right price of course

 

[Joffaboy]

Sounds like something we’d do…

Sign up a bloke on ridiculous money AFTER he’s won a flag, so he can just cruise around on easy street for $1m a yr & retire content with a flag (not ours) & a boosted super fund

We did do that.

 

[Rors]

We did do that.

Yep… twice in recent times

 

[Veer Right]

Cannot win contested ball or clearances?

He's had very limited time on ball at the AFL bit when he has had opportunities he's proven that's exactly what he can do.

Round one last year he had 24 touches, 12 contested and 7 clearances with just 19 CB attendances

Funny you mention that game as that's the only game i can remember Clark doing well in the guts. The same game where Steele absolutely dominated the first half then was DOUBLE tagged in the second half (he had a man on either side of him) while Clark had no man and ran amok. Yeah he played well but that is as poor an example i could think of for stating Clarks prowess in the middle.

 

[Dr Spaceman]

We are talking about selling off a guy to "clear space" that we paid a fortune for in dollars and trade capital and the club wants us to trust that the people who would make these decisions are on the ball. You are trying to sell this as some kind of positive. It's a diabolical * up, like cashing in your super to buy Crypto at the peak and telling everyone how clever you are getting 5 cents in the dollar back.

Clark is the guy we have invested 5 years of hope in and as our highest pick that year and one of the few first rounders, we hope he's one that might come good and carry us forward. Again, we picked him and now we're hoping we can cash him in, likely for less than we paid.

It looks a lot like stalling for time because they've fallen short again, They can sell missing finals next year on all the kids and not have to face any consequences for their failures. This footy department is racking up more * ups than wins at the moment and really needs a torch shined on them.

If you can't see how people would be upset by the club n this situation you don't really understand psychology.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CaptainRisky]

Where did you hear that?

I heard that Clark was open to being traded not that the club had put him up for trade.

My guess is the club doesn't want him to go.

Where did you hear Clark say he was open to be traded ? I think the only thing that was mentioned was on SEN

 

[g_TRAIN]

Cannot win contested ball or clearances?

He's had very limited time on ball at the AFL bit when he has had opportunities he's proven that's exactly what he can do.

Round one last year he had 24 touches, 12 contested and 7 clearances with just 19 CB attendances

That was the only time he was given double figures for centre bounce attendances for the year.

Go back to the year prior when we were getting well beaten by the Eagles and we moved him into the middle at half time. He ended up with 24 touches, 12 contested and 5 clearances and was the major factor for getting us back into the game.

Clark has a few issues he needs to sort out but winning contested footy is not his issue.

They're not the only times he's been tried in the middle though. You just may not have noticed the other times because he didn't win much ball.

It's exactly the view of the club as well, hence why Ratten and Steele have both said last year it was an area he needed to focus on.

Sorry completely disagree with you on this but it sounds like your mind is made up and I'm not going to argue

Edit: Not saying he can't make it and become a bloody good midfielder but for mine it's an area he needs to improve on first.

 

[g_TRAIN]

Where did you hear Clark say he was open to be traded ? I think the only thing that was mentioned was on SEN

I've only heard what everyone else has.

All of the reports I've seen suggest that he's open to a trade rather than we are shopping him around.

 

[bird_man]

Funny you mention that game as that's the only game i can remember Clark doing well in the guts. The same game where Steele absolutely dominated the first half then was DOUBLE tagged in the second half (he had a man on either side of him) while Clark had no man and ran amok. Yeah he played well but that is as poor an example i could think of for stating Clarks prowess in the middle.

So a 20 year old wasnt getting tagged?

Amazing.

As his stats show, he wasn't running around getting uncontested touches. Half of his possessions were contested.

What about the West Coast game I referred to?

Has he ever had another game where he's gone in to at least 10 centre clearances?

 

[bird_man]

They're not the only times he's been tried in the middle though. You just may not have noticed the other times because he didn't win much ball.

It's exactly the view of the club as well, hence why Ratten and Steele have both said last year it was an area he needed to focus on.

Sorry completely disagree with you on this but it sounds like your mind is made up and I'm not going to argue

Edit: Not saying he can't make it and become a bloody good midfielder but for mine it's an area he needs to improve on first.

Which other games has he been given a decent amount of midffield minutes?

Happy to admit if I'm wrong but I don't recall a time outside of those games where he's played at least half a game in the guts.

It's no surprise to see him challenged but his stats suggest it's clearly not a weakness. It was a strength in his draft year and he's shown he's capable of it at the top level with the limited opportunities he's had.

And I'm also of the view that Ratten hasn't always made the best judgement on players.

Playing Battle on the wing for the best part of 2 years proves that.

To me his biggest weakness that seems to be holding him back is when the opposition have the ball.

 

[Veer Right]

So a 20 year old wasnt getting tagged?

Amazing.

As his stats show, he wasn't running around getting uncontested touches. Half of his possessions were contested.

What about the West Coast game I referred to?

Has he ever had another game where he's gone in to at least 10 centre clearances?

I am saying he had no man at all. Free reign. West Coast game, no opinion as i cannot recall.

 

[Ads734]

I disagree, I don't see that side of him, unfortunately. (And I've usually agreed with you on most points in the past)

I watched every game he's played in the midfield for Sandy this year and I've paid close attention to him in the seniors when he's on the ball.

He cannot win clearance or contested ball like a true inside mid. He doesn't get on the move around stoppages. He lets his opponent take the front spot and lead him to the ball and when he does win the ball he gets tackled. He often gets the kick or handball away because of his skill but he's never bursting through with any power from his legs. He's a nice mover in traffic, yes but he's rarely first hands-on or even first receiver.

His area for growth is around the stoppage and using his legs to break away into space.

Watch his VFL game against the Sharks he attended nearly every single center bounce and didn't win a single one. Watch his positioning and movement around the stoppages and tell me what you think?

I’ve also watched all his games and I think this year. I’m willing to give him leeway for this year mainly after he came back. Prior to that and in the last praccy game ive seen enough from him to be a mid. The issue I think is he genuinely needs some more opportunity, (opportunity is not half a game it’s a block of games as a mid).

I agree about driving his legs as a big area for growth. I think in the best games he played for us in 2020 it’s been his ability to slip tackles in and out of traffic

 

[Verdun66]

I’m trying to ignore all these trade scenarios. Been saying it for a while. We need to draft, draft , draft. We have no surplus trade currency that I can see. So let’s build some. Takes time, but I don’t think we are succeeding with the methods of the last few years in terms of trade. Picking guys from State Leagues and Rookie drafts has been about our only plus.

We bottomed out and got Paddy M. Very unfortunate timing. Not going over very old ground. But our return for bottoming out was pretty poor. The only way we trade out a decent current player is if the pick we get back is deemed by the recruiters as one where we can get a very good long term player.

Cannot see Degoey coming to us. And as for others…..we are just not a destination club. So we have to make ourselves one. Sadly that takes time. I am quite happy to watch a developing young team rather than a mid rung team of cobbled together bits. It is just so frustrating.

 

[Yawkey way]

Overreaction no?

All this board seems to do is cry over every decision.

If they go to the draft load up on good/decent picks and have a ton of salary free for the next 12 months - with the list being in largely the same position with more youth on it. What’s wrong?

You can’t tell me it’s easy to beat hunter clarks talent with a top 10 pick, we hit with him now we have to do it again and loose all his development. Imo that’s not a win the same as loosing hills salary isn’t. We have to use just about all of it this year so how is that a win. The only win on hill is an upgrade Imo and that seems unlikely, the only win on clark is a high 1st plus another pick. I don’t think that it’s an over reaction to point out trades that make no sense.

Tell me there’s more to it, tell me we’ll do better than is being talked about and I’ll have a rethink but on face value at present we’re going backwards.

 

[bird_man]

I am saying he had no man at all. Free reign. West Coast game, no opinion as i cannot recall.

Yeah, ok mate...

Not sure I can remember a time in modern footy where a team has use two players at one time to run with an opposition midfielder, but if you insist.

If you can't give credit for a 20 year old mid playing a good game like that then I won't bother arguing

As for the West Coast, he was terrific and was named best on for us. Might be worth a watch.

 

[gringo2011]

No - we are talking about Brad Hil wanting to leave. Not same made up scenario you and others are creating.

The same Brad Hill with the same manager who walked out on 2 clubs prior to us mid contract.

So of course we just knocked it on the head and told them to **** off because he's contracted I guess. What do you expect to get back for him? Anything close to what we paid? Even close to the first rounder we gave up? If we turn something we bought as a premium asset and turn it into a future second rounder or something like that it's makes it a pretty terrible trade that we did to get him regardless.

Clark is the same. We either categorically ruled out trading him or we have said that we would trade him for a high pick. He's on the market if we can get what we want but otherwise we'll keep him seems to be what you've said. That's not having him off the table.

 

[bird_man]

So of course we just knocked it on the head and told them to * off because he's contracted I guess. What do you expect to get back for him? Anything close to what we paid? Even close to the first rounder we gave up? If we turn something we bought as a premium asset and turn it into a future second rounder or something like that it's makes it a pretty terrible trade that we did to get him regardless.

Clark is the same. We either categorically ruled out trading him or we have said that we would trade him for a high pick. He's on the market if we can get what we want but otherwise we'll keep him seems to be what you've said. That's not having him off the table.

Its a bad trade regardless.

If we can get a decent 2nd round pick for Hill we should trade it.

What we gave up for him is irrelevant now.

 

[Moral Decay]

Think the game has evolved. Outside wingers who can get up and back defensively allows backs to push up and block the turnover transition. McKenzie does that better than Hill. Wood can take a contested mark better than Hill. NWM is getting games and as such offers more than Hill.

Means mids do not have to be too quick to cover the turnover BUT need to stop it from happening halve the 50 50 contests is key. We have that covered Crouch Steele Windy etc. Always have one more.

Half backs have to be quick with good skills to link up through the centre to get the ball in quick to one on ones in fwd line. Sincs and why Hill was picked there but I do not think he was that effective. Paton did that effectively until injured last year and is trying but not back there yet.

Or kick that inside kick on the 45 to open up the centre and make it hit otherwise it is the worst place to turnover the ball. Clarke does that best in club and often on middle of a contest. Hill does not.

Otherwise it is the slow switch around the backline or chip up the wings or the long down the line. Sound familiar. Wilkie and Doogs do that to link it to Webster.

So the game has evolved past Hill on a wing and others better off half back. He is surplus to needs and maybe Norf have that requirement.

If I was looking to recruit Hill do I really want someone on 900k...no way. If he fits a need pick in the 20s and part salary paid. But it is StKildas problem to solve.

Long last game showed he could partner Sincs and POD take a contested mark....keep.
If he wants away then hard to make him stay but up the ante if you can get Hill off the books.

Clarke is worth more to us than I club would be willing to pay as he is an injury risk...doubt any club will give up pick 10 I know we wouldn't. So he stays.

Acres turns into the player we expected him too and Serong would have looked good in a Saints jumper....just saying.

The Hill trade made sense at the time and I thought a good idea as it definitely brought some sizzle to the club but now it is looking a bit sad and will only get worse unfortunately.

So
Want to see Hill gone but it must make sense. Pick on 20s.

If Long wants to go then go with our blessing as long as we get fair compensation...pick on 30s but rather he stays.

Clarke no unless it is similar to Taranto and that's not happening if it does do it.

Melbourne and Freo both had real problems with forward line entries....sound familiar. If Higgins can turn into a forward like Jamie Elliot get set Saints. He can mark like Elliot but the kicking at goal......enough said.

Still think we were a serious side when Coff Clarke Gres DMac and Billings playing in the same side. Reckon had them for less than 6 games in over 2 years (50 games)

That's 5 first round picks I think says it all. Get them on the park together with Sincs Steele Wilkie Higgins Doogs (good drafting and recruiting) and add last few drafts and we start looking pretty slick.

Game plan had to adapt as we had key injuries hence why we lost momentum in the back half of last two years.

All we need is a good slice of luck and good trading and a tweak to the game plan embracing more Collingwood and we will be okay despite what the doomsayers say here.

The Review will say broom to Football dept..few need to go start with Lade McGlynn for Lennie and ?? is a start. Would have Noble rather than the bloke who has been in there for over 10 years and cannot remember his name.

Keep recruiting good people we have a heap
Also reckon Clarko will prove to be fools gold. Rookie coaches seem to be winning flags....game keeps evolving...that's what makes it fun to watch and be part of.

Go Saints you bloody frustrating club

On SM-G977B using BigFooty.com mobile app

I agree with everything you've said and would add that we have a talent problem that affects these issues.

That problem is a lack of marking ability in the midfield, Steele is average to good, DMac is good, Long is good, (I would keep him and play him on the wing) Sinclair, Paton and Wood are ok, but the rest of the midfield group is poor to atrocious. Hill, Gresham, Jones, Billings, Kent, Butler, Crouch, Clark, Byrnes and Bytel. Both Windhager and Owens seem to have potential.

Now it seems that a lot of these blokes aren't midfielders but when we transition from defence, half forwards and running half backs become part of the midfield group.

My eye test would say that Hill, Jones, Gresham, Billings, Kent and Crouch are almost toxic when marking the ball, a 30m pass with no opponent within 10m can easily be spilled and turnover created, when we have players like Hill, Billings with lack of physicality, Jones and Gresham with poor disposal, we really have trouble implementing any system.

In my eyes this is why we persisted with Battle as a wingman, if Wood hadn't come on I think Highmore would be playing in the backline and Battle would still be on the wing.

Also, our drop in form coincides with injuries to Steele and DMac creating an even greater risk of moving the ball through the midfield, slower play than at season start, trying to play precise football with poor skills, no midfield marking option means the opposition all know we are looking for Marshall, King Membrey, Wood but going into next season we don't have too many options. Yes to Jack Hayes but there are still question marks over him the same with Sharman.

In this trade period I'd be happy to let go of Hill, Billings, Jones, not so keen but ok about letting go of Clark, Highmore, Gresham. Of course the better the footballer is the more we would want to get for them. I can see why we got Allison and have signed him on again, I have great hope for Windy, Owens, Heath and Hayes, who succeeds from that group and how well developed they are for next year really determines who we target in trades, I haven't looked to hard but certainly Degoey in football terms would be a no brainer, but we need a marking ruckman, a CHF or a medium marking forward I'd love us to get Zurhaar but he's off the table, maybe Rotugolea. If we can turn Hill into Goater I'd like that.

Take our first and second to the draft, trade for needs.

Much as I like Cam McKenzie maybe Bailey Humphrey is a better bet.

 

[stavro#4]

You can’t tell me it’s easy to beat hunter clarks talent with a top 10 pick, we hit with him now we have to do it again and loose all his development. Imo that’s not a win the same as loosing hills salary isn’t. We have to use just about all of it this year so how is that a win. The only win on hill is an upgrade Imo and that seems unlikely, the only win on clark is a high 1st plus another pick. I don’t think that it’s an over reaction to point out trades that make no sense.

Tell me there’s more to it, tell me we’ll do better than is being talked about and I’ll have a rethink but on face value at present we’re going backwards.

How do I answer a question 6 weeks before the club have to have decided what to do?

I would say just wait and see what happens.

De Goey was clearly plan A.

Who knows how it pans out from here. I think they’ll try and stock picks in the top 30 for Clark Hill and Long + try package up some picks for Brisbanes as an example.

(Currently we have 9+27 hypothetically speaking what if we got 7+16+19 (our 27 probably becomes 30) so we hypothetically have 7+9+16+19+30)

Can’t be going backwards if that’s what we do seeing as Clark and Long have barely played. Most supporters can’t stand Hill. So that would be a win, no?

Nothing else makes sense at the minute. But then I didn’t know the Clark news until you all did. So maybe there is something more. But I doubt it.

Cut our losses. Cash in the chips. Hope Coffield/Hayes, 5 top 30 picks and maybe some delisted players improve us - which it probably would.

 

[gringo2011]

How do I answer a question 6 weeks before the club have to have decided what to do?

I would say just wait and see what happens.

De Goey was clearly plan A.

Who knows how it pans out from here. I think they’ll try and stock picks in the top 30 for Clark Hill and Long + try package up some picks for Brisbanes as an example.

(Currently we have 9+27 hypothetically speaking what if we got 7+16+19 (our 27 probably becomes 30) so we hypothetically have 7+9+16+19+30)

Can’t be going backwards if that’s what we do seeing as Clark and Long have barely played. Most supporters can’t stand Hill. So that would be a win, no?

Nothing else makes sense at the minute. But then I didn’t know the Clark news until you all did. So maybe there is something more. But I doubt it.

Cut our losses. Cash in the chips. Hope Coffield/Hayes, 5 top 30 picks and maybe some delisted players improve us - which it probably would.

What's to say that these kids will be any better or any faster to come on than what we have. The sides with lots of kids playing finals, most are in their 2nd to 4th years, not drafted last draft.

Well I guess at least if we step backwards we get a new coach. There's always a positive I guess.

 

[stavro#4]

What's to say that these kids will be any better or any faster to come on than what we have. The sides with lots of kids playing finals, most are in their 2nd to 4th years, not drafted last draft.

Well I guess at least if we step backwards we get a new coach. There's always a positive I guess.

What’s the definition of insanity?



Doing something is better than doing nothing, No?