List Mgmt. COLLINGWOOD Trade and F/A Discussion

[Gone Critical]

Agree - unless our sales pitch to him included playing him forward - in which case we'd need to honour that agreement for an appropriate length of time, before switching him back if he isn't cutting it as a forward.

Yeah but if his forward position is in the VFL but there is a spot on the backline in the AFL surely he doesn’t say no to that or worry

He isn’t a best 22 player currently, hopefully he becomes that on our forward line but it can’t be cut and dried. He couldn’t get games at Geelong forward or back, that is why he is a t Collingwood. Geelong didn’t ask much for him.

 

[manicpie]

Not losing any sleep.
A 22 year old KPP discarded by West Coast, when two of their KPF are wrong side of 30 next year (Darling 30, Kennedy 35).
Why didn’t they keep him…?

Their salary cap is maxed, they are having one more big tilt at a flag next year, which they won't get. It probably came down to extending a couple of veterans for one more year or start the rebuild next year

 

[soreplums]

Would have been happy to see him come out of the goal square.

 

[mike123]

Howe only went back because after our usual backline injury curse there was nobody left but him

as you said he might've enjoyed the new environment so said he'll stay put

Howe went back because he was rubbish up forward

 

[TradeDraft]

Howe went back because he was rubbish up forward

Pretty sure was because of Injury

 

[sr36]

Their salary cap is maxed, they are having one more big tilt at a flag next year, which they won't get. It probably came down to extending a couple of veterans for one more year or start the rebuild next year

No one taking him during trade week doesn't exactly give him a stamp of confidence though.

 

[stormskye]

Im with you, I'm trading next years first for pick 4 this year. We could fast track our rebuild with Daicos, pick 4, Dib and an indiginous small forward. Add Lapinski and Kruegar and hopefully oine of Keene or Kelly can come good. Holding on to next years pick is just delaying the inevitable and that is that we would take a midfielder with our first pick next year anyway, and Callahan, ward, Erasmas, Raschelle and so on are equal to any midfielder next year. If people really believe we are going to take a Key Forward with next years first is just hoping

Why would adel trade pick 4 for our future first? Where’s the benefit for them? If daicos gets bid on at 2 or 3, we then have to trade out pick 4 anyway.. but adel are not trading it for just our future first

 

[Gone Critical]

The words of both Wright and Kreuger about the trade strongly suggest to me that that was the gist of what was shared between them.

We also need to remember that we had a crack at him last year and then this year the Cats gave him two games as a defender, and now he is ours.

He'll be the full-forward in any preferred 22 I name until Round 9, barring injury, with DC at CHF and Mihocek as the third tall, a role he should relish

Can’t agree. I would hope the first thing Kreuger is told is he needs to earn his spot in the 22. No promises. He left Geelong because he knows he is outside their best 22 and is aiming to be in our best 22.

We have a number of younger players looking for the same best 22 forward slot he is. Kelly, McMahon, Johnson even Begg would have aspirations. If one of them clearly outperforms Kreuger in the pre season no way should Kreuger expect a run of games ahead of them in the 1sts.

He has 0 games of experience as an AFL forward. He has to earn a spot like everyone on the list.

 

[manicmagpie]

Why would adel trade pick 4 for our future first? Where’s the benefit for them?

I don’t think they’ll do it but if they’re backing themselves to rise a bit and us to stay bad next year they could take a gamble.

If there’s someone they’re keen on projected to go early next year or they rate the top end highly they give themselves two shots at it.

 

[Pleasedontfail11]

Why would adel trade pick 4 for our future first? Where’s the benefit for them? If daicos gets bid on at 2 or 3, we then have to trade out pick 4 anyway.. but adel are not trading it for just our future first

We would trade for it after the Daicos bid. It would be pick 6 by then. Perhaps Adelaide have identified that they prefer a pick in the 1-8 range next year and there is really no player they want to take this year that is worth pick 6 now that they are not getting Horne Francis (that is just some guess work from reading some of the Adelaide posters responses in their draft thread). The players they are interested in should be available down the draft order.

 

[sr36]

Why would adel trade pick 4 for our future first? Where’s the benefit for them? If daicos gets bid on at 2 or 3, we then have to trade out pick 4 anyway.. but adel are not trading it for just our future first

With people talking about the big gap after the first 4. I get the impression that the guys available that will fall to Adelaide at 6 aren't rated as highly as they usually are that draft range. But I expect we'd have to throw in one of those 30s picks.

 

[sr36]

Yeah but if his forward position is in the VFL but there is a spot on the backline in the AFL surely he doesn’t say no to that or worry

He isn’t a best 22 player currently, hopefully he becomes that on our forward line but it can’t be cut and dried. He couldn’t get games at Geelong forward or back, that is why he is a t Collingwood. Geelong didn’t ask much for him.

I don't think the bolded is realistic as he'll play forward in preseason, if he doesn't perform well enough he won't get a senior game at either end. If he performs well enough, he'll debut in the forward line. If he doesn't perform well enough in the preseason, he'll play ressies wherever the coaches see fit.

 

[BEEG]

Our first rounder next year should be a key defender

Forward would finally be nice.

 

[jonbe54]

Well there would be the option of just banking Adelaide's future second as well.

I think Van Rooyen or Bazzo are sufficiently good prospects to have a crack at in this year's second round though, if the opportunity to do so presents itself.

Whichever way it goes hopefully our development department is up to speed now because it hasn't been for a while and with this influx it's going to need to be in top gear and running as smooth as a Rolls.

 

[Scodog10]

Why would adel trade pick 4 for our future first? Where’s the benefit for them? If daicos gets bid on at 2 or 3, we then have to trade out pick 4 anyway.. but adel are not trading it for just our future first

For me the discussions moot until we have a future 2nd, but the obvious benefit to them is the extra puzzle piece in any move on Lukosious/ Rankine post 2022 because they’ll potentially have access to two picks in the 5-10 range. The problem is I agree I can’t see it happening as a straight up swap of firsts and given what we did with 22 I don’t see us having any type of sweetener either.

 

[Gone Critical]

I don't think the bolded is realistic as he'll play forward in preseason, if he doesn't perform well enough he won't get a senior game at either end. If he performs well enough, he'll debut in the forward line. If he doesn't perform well enough in the preseason, he'll play ressies wherever the coaches see fit.

Yeah most likely but say the circumstance where he is doing ok but Kelly has edged ahead and gets the nod for the 3rd KPF spot. Next week Roughie is injured, Keane out of form and Kreuger is the best option to take Roughies place. He isn’t going to say I won’t play cause it’s not forward.

I am not saying it’s not likely he plays forward, that’s the 1st option whether VFL or AFL. But if a backline spot jumps up and becomes his 1st option he would jump at it. Playing AFL games has to be his 1st wish

 

[Scodog10]

I don't think your list helps your argument hugely. Only 3 of that group of 7 fit the top 20 draft pick description. A couple of them were taken in the same range we picked Mclarty and Kelly and one of them wasn't selected in the draft until he was a mature ager.

4 of the 7 were top 20 and splitting hairs between 20 and 25, but yeah let’s say we remove the guys from Whiskeys list we never had access to (all of them) and the 3 guys taken post 20 (despite having access to them and perhaps having them top 10 on our draft board…).

Let’s then say we go at 50% would we or would we not be better off with 2 of Allen, Curnow, McKay or Naughton over Treloar and Stephenson?

 

[Scodog10]

Yeah most likely but say the circumstance where he is doing ok but Kelly has edged ahead and gets the nod for the 3rd KPF spot. Next week Roughie is injured, Keane out of form and Kreuger is the best option to take Roughies place. He isn’t going to say I won’t play cause it’s not forward.

I am not saying it’s not likely he plays forward, that’s the 1st option whether VFL or AFL. But if a backline spot jumps up and becomes his 1st option he would jump at it. Playing AFL games has to be his 1st wish

This is the type of discussion that only takes place on an Internet forum amongst supporters. In this scenario a well coached club brings in a Wilson/ Murphy, has Howe lineup on the second tall and then changes Maynard’s role.

This discussion is of course neglecting that Kelly is a KPD, but in your scenario Kreuger/ Kelly only become options once all three of Keane, Moore and Roughead are unavailable.

Edit: it’s also worth noting in your attempts to downplay Kreuger as best 22 you’ve ignored Begg, Johnson and McMahon as forward options. I think you’re argument around Kelly forward is flimsy at best.

 

[jonbe54]

This is the type of discussion that only takes place on an Internet forum amongst supporters. In this scenario a well coached club brings in a Wilson/ Murphy, has Howe lineup on the second tall and then changes Maynard’s role.

This discussion is of course neglecting that Kelly is a KPD, but in your scenario Kreuger/ Kelly only become options once all three of Keane, Moore and Roughead are unavailable.

Best, most in form player for position - no favourites and no exceptions.

 

[Gone Critical]

Our pro scouting is a lot better than your post would suggest it is…

I’m not suggesting I know how good he is but like almost any player he needs to show he belongs as an AFL player. Until he does he isn’t a top 22 lock. Hopefully he will be locked in during 22.

 

[Gone Critical]

This is the type of discussion that only takes place on an Internet forum amongst supporters. In this scenario a well coached club brings in a Wilson/ Murphy, has Howe lineup on the second tall and then changes Maynard’s role.

This discussion is of course neglecting that Kelly is a KPD, but in your scenario Kreuger/ Kelly only become options once all three of Keane, Moore and Roughead are unavailable.

Edit: it’s also worth noting in your attempts to downplay Kreuger as best 22 you’ve ignored Begg, Johnson and McMahon as forward options. I think you’re argument around Kelly forward is flimsy at best.

It was just an example to back why I don’t think Kreuger is yet rusted on as a forward only.

 

[Scodog10]

I’m not suggesting I know how good he is but like almost any player he needs to show he belongs as an AFL player. Until he does he isn’t a top 22 lock. Hopefully he will be locked in during 22.

Post deleted. It seems you are questioning the pro scouting considering he was targeted in consecutive off seasons and the lengths you’re going to in order to downplay his Rd 1 chances? It’s akin to a Hawthorn supporter talking down Lynch as a Rd 1 option.

 

[snagbreac]

I don't think it would be very good of us to lure Krueger here under the promise of forward time to then play him back

If he did play back, it would be after a failed stint as a forward. He certainly sees himself as a forward player, not a defender.

On Nokia 4.2 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Scodog10]

It was just an example to back why I don’t think Kreuger is yet rusted on as a forward only.

You are familiar with Kreuger’s background in the system aren’t you? He was a forward thrown back out of necessity with Geelong having Hawkins, Cameron, De Koning and Ratugolea ahead of him. Johnson is just as likely as a defender in our mix if he can’t get a gig in our forward line (I like him as a long term Howe replacement).

Reading between the lines I feel like you aren’t keen on a speculative tall being a first choice KPF having never played at senior level as a forward? In the search for common ground that’s a point I can agree with because it makes me uncomfortable, but in a rebuild it’s a path that needs to be explored because there are no consequences to getting it wrong whereas throwing a guy back after he’s spent a pre-season forward has consequences, IMO.

He is also a perfect fit for our mix with his mobility and size while the ball is zinging around a bit early season. Once we get into late May/ June when the grounds get heavier he’ll drop off so it’s important to get an early look at him.

 

[manicpie]

Why would adel trade pick 4 for our future first? Where’s the benefit for them? If daicos gets bid on at 2 or 3, we then have to trade out pick 4 anyway.. but adel are not trading it for just our future first

I know bro, I'm just wishing, but if Adelaide are keen then we should go for it