Mega Thread Delist/Trade/Draft Super-mega-ultrathread

[Keys]

Isn't Kerry's contract up at end of this season. I will be sad to see him go, but might be sadder to see him try to go around again ....

End of next year before Kerr is out of contract

 

[captcha]

Anyone think Tunbridge will get elevated off rookie list? He's just the type of big inside mid we need 6'3" 90+ kgs

 

[Underdog]

Anyone think Tunbridge will get elevated off rookie list? He's just the type of big inside mid we need 6'3" 90+ kgs

He's achieved more than 14 disposals in a game just twice, the last two weeks he has amassed 16 and 22 disposals. He is VERY unproven. He certainly hasn't earnt a call up.

 

[Chris_6678]

He's achieved more than 14 disposals in a game just twice, the last two weeks he has amassed 16 and 22 disposals. He is VERY unproven. He certainly hasn't earnt a call up.

I watched him play on the weekend and was impressed when he was in the midfield. Has a bit of mongrel in him and kicked about 7-8 I50,s.....more of a chance of him getting a gig in the midfield then someone like Darling.

 

[Underdog]

Why would we put our CHF into the midfield?

 

[Chris_6678]

Why would we put our CHF into the midfield?

People seem to think he would be good there..but i would rather him as a CHF or FF.

 

[Underdog]

People seem to think he would be good there..but i would rather him as a CHF or FF.

Unless we have another competent tall to replace him, it seems counterintuitive to use him in the middle. Unless people think he's a clearance king, he can achieve the same influence around contests as a flanker ala Masten. However, it's creating a BIG hole up forward.

 

[The Passenger]

I didn't think this was new thread worthy, but I read a somewhat interesting article in the herald sun over the weekend, entitled "What if Melbourne picked Nic Naitanui"

The premise being would we have picked Jack Watts at 2...

Maybe i'm reading to much into it but i was a little suprised by this comment:

"To be honest (whether to take Watts) wasn't a decision we had to make because we did get that late inkling that Jack was going to Melbourne and Nic was going to be available at No.2, which saved a bit of debate.''

Now it does say earlier we did all on homework on NicNat, Watts, Yarran, Rich and Hill and visited families etc,. which is to be expected but i'm just surprised by the "which saved a bit of debate" part of it.

Surely it should've been very well nutted out as to who we were taking if Melbourne took NicNat. It's not like there are loads of permutations for the guys to worry about. They other took NicNat, in which case we go to our number two priority. Or they overlook him and we take him. No matter how sure we were that melbourne were taking watts, it's not like it was that hard to have our second priority "debated" and decided upon before we go into the draft.

Reading too much into it or rightly a little off put by that comment?

 

[Keys]

I didn't think this was new thread worthy, but I read a somewhat interesting article in the herald sun over the weekend, entitled "What if Melbourne picked Nic Naitanui"

The premise being would we have picked Jack Watts at 2...

Maybe i'm reading to much into it but i was a little suprised by this comment:



Now it does say earlier we did all on homework on NicNat, Watts, Yarran, Rich and Hill and visited families etc,. which is to be expected but i'm just surprised by the "which saved a bit of debate" part of it.

Surely it should've been very well nutted out as to who we were taking if Melbourne took NicNat. It's not like there are loads of permutations for the guys to worry about. They other took NicNat, in which case we go to our number two priority. Or they overlook him and we take him. No matter how sure we were that melbourne were taking watts, it's not like it was that hard to have our second priority "debated" and decided upon before we go into the draft.

Reading too much into it or rightly a little off put by that comment?

Reads like a typical Claytons style West Coast answer - answering the question when you're not really answering the question. Doesn't say that we would have taken Watts or that we wouldn't have just that we didn't have to consider it which I'm sure is bullshit. There's no way they wouldn't have discussed at length who they would take if Melbourne had a last minute change of heart and picked Naitanui just as there's no way they'd tell anybody outside the club who that was

 

[Eastern Rangers]

He's achieved more than 14 disposals in a game just twice, the last two weeks he has amassed 16 and 22 disposals. He is VERY unproven. He certainly hasn't earnt a call up.

It's more of the point that we don't have to elevate him. There is still 9 H&A games plus potential finals for him to earn his call up.

I think his game against East Perth in round 7 was super, he had 14 disposals and a DT score of 118.

 

[Big Tones]

Unless we have another competent tall to replace him, it seems counterintuitive to use him in the middle. Unless people think he's a clearance king, he can achieve the same influence around contests as a flanker ala Masten. However, it's creating a BIG hole up forward.

The argument from lots of people was that the midfield has been crap and we could use Darling to boost the effort in the middle while keeping JK, Lecca and Hill as forwards. My argument to those wise men is that if they believe we don't need Darling up front, then trade him for O'Meara. win/win

 

[captcha]

we don't need Darling up front, then trade him for O'Meara. win/win

Never!

 

[Chris_6678]

The argument from lots of people was that the midfield has been crap and we could use Darling to boost the effort in the middle while keeping JK, Lecca and Hill as forwards. My argument to those wise men is that if they believe we don't need Darling up front, then trade him for O'Meara. win/win

Hell no to trading Darling..one day he is going to a top 5 player in the AFL!

 

[captcha]

Hell no to trading Darling..one day he is going to a top 5 player in the AFL!

One day he will get offered a multi-million dollar deal from gw$

 

[Big Tones]

Never!

c'mon we got Darling for pick 26 in the same year that David Swallow went as no.1 and Harley Bennell went at 2. Wouldn't you take one of Gold Coast gun mids for our gun Jack?

 

[Big Tones]

One day he will get offered a multi-million dollar deal from gw$

good prediction..... but I think it might be sooner than 'one day' and it might be Gold Coast not GW$

 

[Chris_6678]

c'mon we got Darling for pick 26 in the same year that David Swallow went as no.1 and Harley Bennell went at 2. Wouldn't you take one of Gold Coast gun mids for our gun Jack?

Seeing as its looking like we will get a high pick this year i would rather use that pick plus a player to get that trade done. In a few years Darling will be a gun.

 

[the harry]

c'mon we got Darling for pick 26 in the same year that David Swallow went as no.1 and Harley Bennell went at 2. Wouldn't you take one of Gold Coast gun mids for our gun Jack?

No.

You're also ignoring the fact that ruthlessness at the trade table can have a significantly negative effect on the whole team because of issues relating to job security, trust in the club ect.

 

[Big Tones]

I'm not ignoring it - I'm counting on it. We've got too many - this team needs a good shake up. Yes injuries have had a severe impact, but from pre-season too many players were not putting in the intensity needed to win games.

 

[mick06]

Hell no to trading Darling..one day he is going to a top 5 player in the AFL!

I would trade Darling for Omeara.

Darling may be top 5. Omeara will be top 2.

 

[ziad]

The argument from lots of people was that the midfield has been crap and we could use Darling to boost the effort in the middle while keeping JK, Lecca and Hill as forwards. My argument to those wise men is that if they believe we don't need Darling up front, then trade him for O'Meara. win/win

While I am not drawn to a trade involving JD, he has limitations - no left, not good handball, and has been kept in check several times because he is undersized for a KPF. I see him a a great HFF later on. Given this if we have a good KPF to replace him I would take the trade for O"Meara. But it would not be offered because of the points I have made.

 

[ChampRevesby]

While I am not drawn to a trade involving JD, he has limitations - no left, not good handball, and has been kept in check several times because he is undersized for a KPF. I see him a a great HFF later on. Given this if we have a good KPF to replace him I would take the trade for O"Meara. But it would not be offered because of the points I have made.

He's just turned 21, he has another a good 10 years and he wont hit his straps for another 2-3.

 

[Eaglemaniac]

Gold Coast wont trade O'Meara for anyone or anything IMO. They would trade Bennell, Swallow or Prestia before they trade O'meara. The kid is going to be something special if he keeps going the way he is going.

 

[happy_eagle]

As home sick as some GC players may be, there isnt really much reason for them to leave
They will win a flag in a couple of years, then may return

 

[eaglespremiers]

Gold Coast wont trade O'Meara for anyone or anything IMO. They would trade Bennell, Swallow or Prestia before they trade O'meara. The kid is going to be something special if he keeps going the way he is going.

And from what I understand there are many who rate Martin even higher.