Remove this Banner Ad

Buckley's Trading

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

September Action

September Action

Premiership Player
Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2008
Posts
3,460
Reaction score
3,751
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
So I'm thinking about the major decisions Buckley seems to have "created". The BIG movements which really could have haunted us - I'm not seeing much fail...

On EXPOSED form:

Dawes to Broomhead (and half of Ramsay) - Even. (Dawes would probably have held his place and given at least as much as White. Expect this to shortly swing to tick.)

Wellingham to Grundy - TICK.

Thomas (essentially) to Scharenberg - Fail (though obviously the exposed form is not telling the full story. Potential for tick - high.)

Shaw to Adams - Even

Beams to De Goey, Crisp, Greenwood - Tick.

I think they are the main ones...anyone I've forgotten?

Thus far, it's looking like astute list building. We've been well and skilfully compensated. Beams could yet hurt, but hasn't yet. In the wash up, I'd expect "Even" at worst on that trade, given what we've seen.

Edit: (I guess there's also Butters to Davoren.)
 
September Action said:
So I'm thinking about the major decisions Buckley seems to have "created". The BIG movements which really could have haunted us - I'm not seeing much fail...

On EXPOSED form:

Dawes to Broomhead (and half of Ramsay) - Even. (Dawes would probably have held his place and given at least as much as White. Expect this to shortly swing to tick.)

Wellingham to Grundy - TICK.

Thomas (essentially) to Scharenberg - Fail (though obviously the exposed form is not telling the full story. Potential for tick - high.)

Shaw to Adams - Even

Beams to De Goey, Crisp, Greenwood - Tick.

I think they are the main ones...anyone I've forgotten?

Thus far, it's looking like astute list building. We've been well and skilfully compensated. Beams could yet hurt, but hasn't yet. In the wash up, I'd expect "Even" at worst on that trade, given what we've seen.

Edit: (I guess there's also Butters to Davoren.)
Click to expand...

Buckley/Hines trading for picks has been good. Their bringing in experienced players for cheap or free has been hopeless. But those failures at least haven't really cost us much apart from list space and a bit of cash.
 
We've been heavily criticised for not bringing in big name free agents, but it was clear from about the start of 2012 that we intended to rebuild on the run, and trade for high draft picks rather then experienced players.

The Beams deal changed that a bit, because we had to take what we could get, although getting pick 5 (De Goey) was still part of the plan.

We won last night with most of our recent first round picks not playing (Grundy the only one).

Once Freeman, Scharenberg, Moore, De Goey, Kennedy and Broomhead (and others like Marsh and Oxley) get games under their belt we will be scary.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

mattys123 said:
We've been heavily criticised for not bringing in big name free agents, but it was clear from about the start of 2012 that we intended to rebuild on the run, and trade for high draft picks rather then experienced players.

The Beams deal changed that a bit, because we had to take what we could get, although getting pick 5 (De Goey) was still part of the plan.

We won last night with most of our recent first round picks not playing (Grundy the only one).

Once Freeman, Scharenberg, Moore, De Goey, Kennedy and Broomhead (and others like Marsh and Oxley) get games under their belt we will be scary.
Click to expand...
While we have been criticized for not bringing in free agents, in many sports the teams that spend in free agency are usually the teams watching the finals from home.
So I'm all for going through the draft.
 
mattys123 said:
We've been heavily criticised for not bringing in big name free agents, but it was clear from about the start of 2012 that we intended to rebuild on the run, and trade for high draft picks rather then experienced players.
Click to expand...

I've never understood the argument that you can't rebuild while getting a great free agent in. Its one spot of the list and you don't need to give up draft picks for them. I understand not trading for them though.
 
ace andy said:
I've never understood the argument that you can't rebuild while getting a great free agent in. Its one spot of the list and you don't need to give up draft picks for them. I understand not trading for them though.
Click to expand...
It's hard to attract the big name free agents unless you are at least a top 6 side though, and let's face it we didn't look like a top 6 side for the last few seasons.

If we play finals this year though, with the young list we have, we all of a sudden become attractive to those players who are free agents or out of contract.
 
September Action said:
So I'm thinking about the major decisions Buckley seems to have "created". The BIG movements which really could have haunted us - I'm not seeing much fail...

On EXPOSED form:

Dawes to Broomhead (and half of Ramsay) - Even. (Dawes would probably have held his place and given at least as much as White. Expect this to shortly swing to tick.)

Wellingham to Grundy - TICK.

Thomas (essentially) to Scharenberg - Fail (though obviously the exposed form is not telling the full story. Potential for tick - high.)

Shaw to Adams - Even

Beams to De Goey, Crisp, Greenwood - Tick.

I think they are the main ones...anyone I've forgotten?

Thus far, it's looking like astute list building. We've been well and skilfully compensated. Beams could yet hurt, but hasn't yet. In the wash up, I'd expect "Even" at worst on that trade, given what we've seen.

Edit: (I guess there's also Butters to Davoren.)
Click to expand...

Harry for Varcoe, think same as Heath Shaw we offloaded some off field baggage.

In time Varcoe will hopefully be a better player than Harry as he is more damaging and could be cream on top for us.
 
mattys123 said:
It's hard to attract the big name free agents unless you are at least a top 6 side though, and let's face it we didn't look like a top 6 side for the last few seasons.

If we play finals this year though, with the young list we have, we all of a sudden become attractive to those players who are free agents or out of contract.
Click to expand...

True. But I was more angling at some people say we shouldn't go for one because we are rebuilding. If they don't want to come its another thing entirely.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

paul buhagiar said:
What about ceglar
Click to expand...

wasn't a trade.We let him go I think. I don't really get the pain some people have for that decision. Ceglar isn't a star. He is a ok player. He didn't perform well at Collingwood for whatever and we had two young players we thought would be much better than him. I can understand why we let him go. These things happen in footy.
 
Tbone McGraw said:
I believe Shaw for Adams is a win (for both clubs).

Yes Shaw is a decent player but the brainfades. Adams is exactly what we needed. Add in the age difference and it is a no brainer.
Click to expand...
I'm happy with the trade, but I still think in terms of pure output, it's "even", as Shaw would still have given a lot if not traded.
 
dmoore30 said:
Lumumba is better than Varcoe in my opinion...
Click to expand...

Yes he is, but his play for us towards the end wasn't as good as what he's done for Melbourne (in an admittedly small sample).

Another aspect is would you really want Harry still keeping out kids like the Ox and Seeds? Sometimes a trade is just as much about addition by subtraction as it is about the player you get back in return.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

partypie said:
Yes he is, but his play for us towards the end wasn't as good as what he's done for Melbourne (in an admittedly small sample).

Another aspect is would you really want Harry still keeping out kids like the Ox and Seeds? Sometimes a trade is just as much about addition by subtraction as it is about the player you get back in return.
Click to expand...

What? Varcoe does the same thing? How is Varcoe not keeping out a young player but Harry would have?
 
ace andy said:
wasn't a trade.We let him go I think. I don't really get the pain some people have for that decision. Ceglar isn't a star. He is a ok player. He didn't perform well at Collingwood for whatever and we had two young players we thought would be much better than him. I can understand why we let him go. These things happen in footy.
Click to expand...
Ceglar's ruck work has surprised me, but he never really had a chance to show that at Collingwood, where depth meant he played almost exclusively as a forward. At the vfl last year I overheard someone with connections to the side saying that Ceglar was a bit of a big head and that the players didn't really like him. Not sure if there's any truth to it. Thankfully Buckley also likes big blokes to be aggressive, which isn't really Ceglar's go. I see his upside as being more like Hale.
 
HospitalBalls said:
Lumumba for varcoe? I would say the jury is still out but looking like a possible tick
Click to expand...
Yep - forgot! I'm saying "even", with potential either way.
paul buhagiar said:
What about ceglar
Click to expand...
He's been good hasn't he? But not relevant here, as was a "minor" move at the time, and prolly not related specifically to Bucks.
(Inb4 Beams wasn't either...I think Beams would still be with us if Mick was still coach. Could be wrong, but that's my opinion.)
 
September Action said:
Dawes to Broomhead (and half of Ramsay) - Even. (Dawes would probably have held his place and given at least as much as White. Expect this to shortly swing to tick.)
Click to expand...

Would he have though? He was pretty bad in 2012 and he probably took a year and a half to get himself going at Melbourne after the trade. Could we have afforded to keep him on the list in that situation, especially given him reportedly being on $500k / year?

Thomas (essentially) to Scharenberg - Fail (though obviously the exposed form is not telling the full story. Potential for tick - high.)
Click to expand...

This is a firm push even with Shaz not having stepped out in an AFL match yet - our fears with Daisy were pretty much realised wrt his injury issues (and he was terrible for the blues last year - only reason they were trying to play him was probably the contract because form certainly didn't warrant a spot in any AFL side for most of the season).

Dwelling on Daisy's excellent past form is pointless in a trade (although that's what Carlton paid for) - you have to judge the player he is now and unfortunately for him he's not what he was and his shocking run with the injury imp is ongoing. He's certainly not worth the reported $700k they offered him to come over.

Shaw to Adams - Even
Click to expand...

Another case of addition by subtraction really - but in time Adams will probably come out as a clear winner in that comparison as a long serving inside mid to replace Ball / Swan.
 
Last edited:
ace andy said:
What? Varcoe does the same thing? How is Varcoe not keeping out a young player but Harry would have?
Click to expand...

Is Varcoe somehow keeping out Ox and Seeds (rebounding half back flankers / wingmen) out? That's what I was talking about - giving kids who'd fill the same role as the departing player a crack at it to see what they've got.

I agree the jury is definitely out on Varcoe (more consistent games like he produced a couple of weeks ago wouldn't hurt in that regard), but if Harry was still on board then we probably wouldn't be seeing one of the Ox or Seeds stepping out.

I suspect that if Varcoe's form dips enough then Bucks wont have any hesitation in dropping him back to the VFL side, but that was harder to do with Harry as he was somewhat of a fixture in the team for a variety of reasons.
 
partypie said:
Is Varcoe somehow keeping out Ox and Seeds (rebounding half back flankers / wingmen) out? That's what I was talking about - giving kids who'd fill the same role as the departing player a crack at it to see what they've got.

I agree the jury is definitely out on Varcoe (more consistent games like he produced a couple of weeks ago wouldn't hurt in that regard), but if Harry was still on board then we probably wouldn't be seeing one of the Ox or Seeds stepping out.

I suspect that if Varcoe's form dips enough then Bucks wont have any hesitation in dropping him back to the VFL side, but that was harder to do with Harry as he was somewhat of a fixture in the team for a variety of reasons.
Click to expand...

Still don't get it. Varcoe is still keeping a young player out just like Harry. Who cares if they play different positions. You can just as easily argue Varcoe keeps potential mid/forwards in BenKen and De Goey out. Even Freeman who is supposed to be a line breaker and link man like Varcoe.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom