Broughton

[theGav56]

Yes exactly. and precisely why Spurr replaced him in the side and Ibbo is slowly moving to the bench. Broughton/ Duffield is a more solid combo than Duffield/ Ibbo.

Might be more solid, but in reality it is marginal. And those players are only some of the current options.

Even though I think it is a fair way off being a great trade or anything, we have traded from an area of depth, and that is what we should be doing.

 

[Dockernut]

Mitch Brown is rubbish

This times a bzillion.

 

[prattsta]

So we got rid of Broughton so we could make a speculative choice on a small we don't even really need?

No, I think we got rid of Broughton for the money.

You said it was unlikely we would take a tall, given our recent history. I was simply saying that you wouldn't want to be taking a tall that late anyway. Certainly not in a year when you need to make every pick count.

 

[salim malik]

Spurr isn't half the player Broughton is. Get real.

Broughton couldnt adapt to the Lyon game plan,was subbed out for not following team rules
As Lyon said get with it or get out ,Broughton decided to move on
Broughton is a small,dime a dozen 27 year old defender with a heavy back loaded contract that most clubs couldnt afford,we were never going to get a first round pick for him.A thirty to forty pick was always going to be his currency.

 

[hoss]

Blind Freddy can see there's more to this than meets the eye. It's not about whether Broughton is, or was a better player than Ibbo, Spurr, Duffield etc. He obviously does not fit into Lyon's plans for him ie. forward role or he will not buy into the team plan or the hardline regime that Ross wants to instill in all players. Or he's happy to look around, wants out and therefore has questionable committment.

It's a bit like an investment. "Past performance is no guarantee of future returns". I have no doubt Greg has been best 22 in the last 4 years, but this wasn't going to be the case next year, especially in Lyon's mind. And why pay so much for someone who is going to be playing WAFL. On the face of it, looks like we've been bent over badly, but I can see where the club is coming from.

 

[yakka man]

Broughton couldnt adapt to the Lyon game plan,was subbed out for not following team rules
As Lyon said get with it or get out ,Broughton decided to move on
Broughton is a small,dime a dozen 27 year old defender with a heavy back loaded contract that most clubs couldnt afford,we were never going to get a first round pick for him.A thirty to forty pick was always going to be his currency.

In an uncompromised draft we technically received a third round pick, that is way under his value. Just because he no longer suits our game plan it doesn't mean he can't thrive under a different one. Calling him a dime a dozen player is a tad harsh, he served us very well and would be in every/most clubs best 22.

 

[Nothing]

That's a pretty marginal argument at age 25-26. So much can happen in 4 years that the possibility of one extra year makes no difference.

Conversely, 4 years in the AFL system to 1 year makes a massive difference.

 

[pavsbootlace]

Broughton couldnt adapt to the Lyon game plan,was subbed out for not following team rules
As Lyon said get with it or get out ,Broughton decided to move on
Broughton is a small,dime a dozen 27 year old defender with a heavy back loaded contract that most clubs couldnt afford,we were never going to get a first round pick for him.A thirty to forty pick was always going to be his currency.

Good post. (But he only just turned 26.)

 

[valkorum]

In an uncompromised draft we technically received a third round pick, that is way under his value. Just because he no longer suits our game plan it doesn't mean he can't thrive under a different one. Calling him a dime a dozen player is a tad harsh, he served us very well and would be in every/most clubs best 22.

I beg to differ - in an uncompromised draft pick #37 actually becomes lower. By my calculations this pick is 9 places lower to #28

 

[salim malik]

In an uncompromised draft we technically received a third round pick, that is way under his value. Just because he no longer suits our game plan it doesn't mean he can't thrive under a different one. Calling him a dime a dozen player is a tad harsh, he served us very well and would be in every/most clubs best 22.

I didnt mean to diminish Broughtons ability but he falls into that HBF small defender that all clubs seem to have a surplus of including us.It would have been hard to place him with his age ,position played and heavy contract
Unfortunate his leaving fell in this heavily compromised draft

 

[Jentleman Geff]

Conversely, 4 years in the AFL system to 1 year makes a massive difference.

Positive in the favour of Broughton I would imagine.

I don't see anything special in Spurr at all.

 

[prattsta]

I don't see anything special in Spurr at all.

Average player, cheap contract, fills a role. How many games do you think he will play in 2013? I'd set the over/under at 12.5 and take the under.

 

[Nothing]

Positive in the favour of Broughton I would imagine.

The longer chance you have in the AFL system the more likely you can improve to an AFL standard or improve your standard as an AFL player. Broughton was not improving further from his output, Spurr may improve his output with time in the system (he may not too).

I don't see anything special in Spurr at all.

Not arguing that fact.

 

[apuchar]

No, I think we got rid of Broughton for the money.

You said it was unlikely we would take a tall, given our recent history. I was simply saying that you wouldn't want to be taking a tall that late anyway. Certainly not in a year when you need to make every pick count.

This is all fine but they got rid of a good player for embarrassingly below value and still haven't addressed our problem with future tall options. Speculation (and hopefully it is only that) is that we are going to take an inside mid with our first pick, so that will be another year of not recruiting talls and picking up players that add to the depth in area's we are not needy in.
It seems we are going to stick with our fruitless approach of getting a key forward through trade.Bit like if you throw enough darts eventually one will stick. It is only a vague possibility and if it is unsuccessful again next year then we are stuffed. Added to that, throwing ridiculous amounts of money at players to play at your club is not a successful approach. Surely, if nothing else we have leaned that from the past. But as I said a week ago, i will reserve my judgement until after Nov 22. But at this point I reasonably unimpressed.

 

[Leslie_Chow]

Average player, cheap contract, fills a role. How many games do you think he will play in 2013? I'd set the over/under at 12.5 and take the under.

25 games

 

[apuchar]

So we should trade McPharlin and keep Faulks?

Ross obviously rates Spurr as the better defender, personally I doubt he would have traded him otherwise.

Think the gap between McPharlin and Faulks is a little larger. That really is just a clever comment Chris25 without any real comparative substance to it.

 

[Purpellian Anchor]

This is all fine but they got rid of a good player for embarrassingly below value and still haven't addressed our problem with future tall options. Speculation (and hopefully it is only that) is that we are going to take an inside mid with our first pick, so that will be another year of not recruiting talls and picking up players that add to the depth in area's we are not needy in.
It seems we are going to stick with our fruitless approach of getting a key forward through trade.Bit like if you throw enough darts eventually one will stick. It is only a vague possibility and if it is unsuccessful again next year then we are stuffed. Added to that, throwing ridiculous amounts of money at players to play at your club is not a successful approach. Surely, if nothing else we have leaned that from the past. But as I said a week ago, i will reserve my judgement until after Nov 22. But at this point I reasonably unimpressed.

I am pretty confident the decision has been influenced by Greg's previous back injury - can he still play? Yes can he have sustained fitness and give maybe 15-20 games for 2013 and again 2014 ? probably not. Is a bit of a replay of Haselby dilemma before. Maybe we will never know.

 

[prattsta]

This is all fine but they got rid of a good player for embarrassingly below value and still haven't addressed our problem with future tall options. Speculation (and hopefully it is only that) is that we are going to take an inside mid with our first pick, so that will be another year of not recruiting talls and picking up players that add to the depth in area's we are not needy in.
It seems we are going to stick with our fruitless approach of getting a key forward through trade.Bit like if you throw enough darts eventually one will stick. It is only a vague possibility and if it is unsuccessful again next year then we are stuffed. Added to that, throwing ridiculous amounts of money at players to play at your club is not a successful approach. Surely, if nothing else we have leaned that from the past. But as I said a week ago, i will reserve my judgement until after Nov 22. But at this point I reasonably unimpressed.

All I'm saying is, the likelihood of a KP taken at pick #37 working out is very low. It's better to have a good short player on your list than a shit tall player.

I agree with all the other stuff. The Broughton trade was in GC's favour and everything else that has occurred - outside of signing Pearce - has been unimpressive. Bond has missed on almost every single shot he's fired through the FA/Trade period.

I'm happy to wait and see how it all plays out in the ND though.

25 games

I can't see it happening myself, but if we were to play in 25 games, I'd take it.

 

[apuchar]

I am pretty confident the decision has been influenced by Greg's previous back injury - can he still play? Yes can he have sustained fitness and give maybe 15-20 games for 2013 and again 2014 ? probably not. Is a bit of a replay of Haselby dilemma before. Maybe we will never know.

Yes first to admit we are not privvy. Anyway, let's see what they do with our brand spanking new pick 37.

 

[apuchar]

All I'm saying is, the likelihood of a KP taken at pick #37 working out is very low. It's better to have a good short player on your list than a shit tall player.

I agree with all the other stuff. The Broughton trade was in GC's favour and everything else that has occurred - outside of signing Pearce - has been unimpressive. Bond has missed on almost every single shot he's fired through the FA/Trade period.

I'm happy to wait and see how it all plays out in the ND though.



Don't want to harp, but unless we bottom out we are unlikely to get a Pav quality KPP and it appears we are not going to get one in the trade any time soon. This draft we must take a chance at 17 with a good tall if one is available. Stuff a small, slow inside mid. We can get one of those any time and any year at any place in the draft.

 

[Bender571]

Surely salary cap is the main motivator here.

Port were interested, then baulked because of his contract.
We reportedly have plenty of cap space and could have offered to pay for part of his contract (I believe North were doing this with Hale)
Port have better picks, 30 and 31
Broughton is a player with a back ended contract (I find this intriguing considering we missed out on Clark and Cloke/Goddard. I would've thought this would lead to most contracts being front ended)

I think if we wanted a better deal we could've got it at the expense of salary cap.

 

[FreoRicci]

Thought the club weren't going to be bent over during the trade window? Only activity we ve done and it's getting rid of a valuable small backman. Hope the club knows what they are doing.. Still don't have a KPF.

 

[prattsta]

Don't want to harp, but unless we bottom out we are unlikely to get a Pav quality KPP and it appears we are not going to get one in the trade any time soon. This draft we must take a chance at 17 with a good tall if one is available. Stuff a small, slow inside mid. We can get one of those any time and any year at any place in the draft.

I agree with that. If anything having pick #37 increases the likelihood of us taking a tall with #17.

 

[prattsta]

Bollocks.

A potter can only work with the clay at hand.

So, in trying to recruit through the FA/trade period...
How many people are thrilled to go west?
How many people are in a price range that is fair?
Just what positions were to be recruited through FA/Trade that the club had decided on (it's not just bonds decision alone)?

We can all speculate here, but Bond doesn't have open slather, he works under instruction there is a finite budget and there are many other things that tie the hands behind the back.

To disagree with the decisions is one thing, bagging people when you don't know all the details is a different thing.

We didn't get a mini-draft selection.
We haven't recruited a KP player.
We haven'y improved/lowered our draft position enough to take a KP player of note (based on what the club has said previously).
We have given away a 'best 22' player for a marginal pick upgrade and some salary cap space.

The Pearce FA signing was good.

What impressive work am I missing here? Also, where did I 'bag' anyone?

 

[TheLastCall]

If we don't get a big name for next year, I'd expect us to quickly secure some of our young guns with front ended deals early next year. I'd give Fyfe a five years deal and throw a mil into the first year. (but that's just me).