Ashley Hansen

[Monocle]

In today's Herald Sun there was a Trade Teaser suggesting that Melbourne send Steven Armstrong and pick #29 to West Coast for Ashley Hansen.

IMO this is a pretty good deal although changing pick #29 to pick#45 would probably make it more even as Armstrong is a bit more proven than Hansen and is also a year younger.

Hasen has just signed a two year contract.

Why would we need another frindge player who is a midfielder. Thats like you getting another ruckman when you have White, Jolly and Jamar.

 

[dees_best]

Hasen has just signed a two year contract.

Why would we need another frindge player who is a midfielder. Thats like you getting another ruckman when you have White, Jolly and Jamar.

Why would you require Hansen when you have McDougall, Staker, Lynch, Gaspar, Johnson, Seaby and Gardiner (who I've heard will be playing at CHF next season).

West Coast were strongly considering selecting Armstrong with their first selection in the 2001 draft but opted for Sampi. Arma would certainly add some spark to your side whether that being an impact player coming off the bench as your midfield is awesome, or as a spark up forward as he has shown himself to be more than capable of that role when given the opportunity.

 

[jod23]

Why would you require Hansen when you have McDougall, Staker, Lynch, Gaspar, Johnson, Seaby and Gardiner (who I've heard will be playing at CHF next season).

West Coast were strongly considering selecting Armstrong with their first selection in the 2001 draft but opted for Sampi. Arma would certainly add some spark to your side whether that being an impact player coming off the bench as your midfield is awesome, or as a spark up forward as he has shown himself to be more than capable of that role when given the opportunity.

Why do we need Hansen? Maybe because Gaspar and Gardiner are both injury prone, Staker is a flanker and not really a KPP and Lynch plays more CHB than CHF. Johnson has shown nothing and Seaby is a part time forward, due to his rucking ability.

Why would we want Armstrong when the kid would find it extremely difficult to even get a game in our midfield?

 

[Monocle]

Jod23 .If you had seen Armstrong playing for Sandringham this last month you would understand why Melbourne want to get rid of him. You would hardly recognise him as the same player who showed some promise a few years ago.

The way he is playing at the moment he would only get a game in the WAFL with Perth if we were to trade for him.

 

[theorangeapple]

geez we were super keen on armstrong last year, but melbourne resisted. they will be rueing that now. i think that trade for hansen is about fair in terms of value, but we wont do it.

 

[crazzzy_grrl]

He has to be one of the most injury prone (behind gaspar). First game back after doing his hammy and then does his ankle during the game. Was not happy to hear he had done that

 

[underthebridge]

doing your ankle isnt reall a injury prone thing. that is more bad luck if anything..... but soft tissue injuries such as hammys(as he has done a couple times), calfs and also the knee, once its screwed, thers always a chance it will screw up again.

 

[crazzzy_grrl]

doing your ankle isnt reall a injury prone thing. that is more bad luck if anything..... but soft tissue injuries such as hammys(as he has done a couple times), calfs and also the knee, once its screwed, thers always a chance it will screw up again.

Yeah, but once you've done an ankle it does become weaker than the other. I've hurt the same ankle so many times its not funny. But he does have bad luck with injuries that i hope over the pre-season he takes it easy and doesnt put too much pressure on his body. I wanna see him in the eagles colours next year alot