Essendon's Talls

[Wild Bill]

Last year Melksham put on too much weight too quickly and it affected his performance. The fact that he's slimmed down and has clearly improved and has become a solid contributer, especially in the last month (with the exception of the GC game- but he got a knock early and was playing injured for the rest of the game). 2012 Melksham was horrible though

He is having a better year but still can be lazy and decision making can be an issue. He needs to spend as much time as possible with Jobe.

 

[eth-dog]

He is having a better year but still can be lazy and decision making can be an issue. He needs to spend as much time as possible with Jobe.

Still showing good signs for somebody who's 21 years old

 

[yaco55]

Think that some of the debate or the lack of debate in the last page, is not befitting of the D and T Board.

 

[Shadeeq]

I can see the reason why Essendon were so keen on him, especially as the future for essendon is spuds like Melksham. So yes, I would prefer Caddy and by some distance.

You say essendon massively overrate our players and then claim Hooker is worth a 3rd round upgrade at best. Please....
Mate is there really any need for this crap? It is bay 13 material at best. We get it - you don't rate Hooker and you don't like Essendon. But it's not really interesting and adds nothing to the board.

 

[Ants]

No club would trade for a mediocre talent like Hooker, let alone give up a decent pick. Hooker is at best an upgrade on a third round pick, like Spangher last year. A swap of say pick 72 for pick 66.

All clubs have got access to mediocre talent in their VFL teams.

So was Bellchambers the other week, in an effort to bump up his trade value.

He's a shocking footballer. Lost count of the number of goals he was directly responsible for against essendon.

Note that the third quote is about a player from another team and from a different thread. Bluespooner is obviously a troll who goes around just criticising other teams players. Either that, or he doesn't have the first understanding of other team's players or the value of draft picks. He's been told that his valuation is way off since other clubs rated Hooker higher last year, Hooker is obviously even better this year, and yet he wants to argue that he's only worth a single third round pick.

So I'm leaning towards troll.

 

[BRWB]

Interesting discussion as Bulldogs supporter, I can see some value in Gumby. However, many people seem to be overlooking that as uncontracted player he can go via the PSD for nix which the Bulldogs look like having a highish pick..

Bulldogs are also interested in Pick 1 (Boyd)

While three ways are a bit unlikely, I would have thought there are links between GWS, Ess and Bullies that could achieve something...

Example

GWS: Get - Pick 3, Bellchambers and Tom Williams
Lose: Pick 1, Pick 11

Bombers: Get: Pick 11, Pick 21 (noting with threat of PSD may get nothing without a trade like this, this is Bombers incentive to do the deal)
Lose: Bellchambers, Gumbleton

Dogs: Get - Pick 1, Gumbleton
Lose: Williams, Pick 3, Pick 21

 

[The Prosecutor]

Interesting discussion as Bulldogs supporter, I can see some value in Gumby. However, many people seem to be overlooking that as uncontracted player he can go via the PSD for nix which the Bulldogs look like having a highish pick..

Bulldogs are also interested in Pick 1 (Boyd)

While three ways are a bit unlikely, I would have thought there are links between GWS, Ess and Bullies that could achieve something...

Example

GWS: Get - Pick 3, Bellchambers and Tom Williams
Lose: Pick 1, Pick 11

Bombers: Get: Pick 11, Pick 21 (noting with threat of PSD may get nothing without a trade like this, this is Bombers incentive to do the deal)
Lose: Bellchambers, Gumbleton

Dogs: Get - Pick 1, Gumbleton
Lose: Williams, Pick 3, Pick 21

Essendon has shown A LOT of faith in Gumby and he is very much aware of it. He won't be part of PSD shenanigans. Bellchambers might, but we'll see.

 

[Yoda_]

Think that some of the debate or the lack of debate in the last page, is not befitting of the D and T Board.

yep, agree with this

sometimes gets to me when opposition supporters rate and tell others the value of there respective players.


TBC improvement in the past 20 months has been so rapid that any club wanting a 1st choice ruckmen or an improvement on there current ones would be lining up for his services.


As for our other KPP's, sadly I dont think Gumby will be apart of our future success'. He really is a one trick pony who doesn't offer much at ground level, and despite getting his body is a shade of the player we saw when selecting him with pick 2 in the 2007 draft.

Doubt clubs will be lining up for Tayte Pears services, and if he were 'sold', then I doubt Essendon would get his true worth (probably third round value IMHO) whilst Cale Hooker isn't a 'gun' as some see him, he has been a bloody solid player for Essendon this year and is ALOT better than what people give him credit for.

 

[Andronicus]

What do you see the value if the 4 mentioned players to us. Not what you think we would get, but considering what they are worth to us.

Lots of fans seem to deal in what they would like, rather than real worth, bearing in mind players can be worth different things to different teams.

 

[Yoda_]

What do you see the value if the 4 mentioned players to us. Not what you think we would get, but considering what they are worth to us.

Lots of fans seem to deal in what they would like, rather than real worth, bearing in mind players can be worth different things to different teams.

not quite understanding what your asking there pal, what are you trying to ask? what would we like?

 

[Andronicus]

not quite understanding what your asking there pal, what are you trying to ask? what would we like?

Nah, I mean forget about the trade table, and what other teams would give up.

Purely from our perspective, what are they worth to our team. ie we could get overs for some players because they are a better fit for another team, but in terms of what they are worth to us, where would you put them.

For example, a team that really needs a KPF would have Gumby starting every game, so he would be worth (plucking a figure out of the air) a second rounder. Whereas we have an abundance of tall forwards, so to us he is worth perhaps a 3rd.

Another way to look at it is.........if they weren't on our list, what would we give up to get them. Figured you seem to have a pretty balanced view on most topics.

 

[Yoda_]

Nah, I mean forget about the trade table, and what other teams would give up.

Purely from our perspective, what are they worth to our team. ie we could get overs for some players because they are a better fit for another team, but in terms of what they are worth to us, where would you put them.

For example, a team that really needs a KPF would have Gumby starting every game, so he would be worth (plucking a figure out of the air) a second rounder. Whereas we have an abundance of tall forwards, so to us he is worth perhaps a 3rd.

Another way to look at it is.........if they weren't on our list, what would we give up to get them. Figured you seem to have a pretty balanced view on most topics.

ok, i get you know

TBC: wouldn't be accepting anything less than a first rounder for him. Worth far, far to much to Essendon than what we would get for him.

Tayte Pears: 3rd round pick at most. Tradable in so forth that we have guys who can play KP/3rd tall.

Cale Hooker: Some may laugh at me, but purely from a worth to Essendon p.o.v, I wouldn't accept anything less than a first round pick/2 x second round picks similar to what was tabled by the Saints last year. He has taken his game to another level this year and is a real general in defence.

Scott Gumbleton: Despite finally getting his body right, I still don't see him in our long term plans. A second round pick would get the job done IMO, but can definitely see someone pulling out a first rounder that I would take and run with.

Stewart Crameri: Going against the grain here, but Crameri is more dispensable than what people make out. What he does offensively far outweighs the defensive deficiencies he has. At a guess, a 1st/2nd round pick + a young star/best 22 player could get the deal done IMO.

 

[bluespooner]

Note that the third quote is about a player from another team and from a different thread. Bluespooner is obviously a troll who goes around just criticising other teams players. Either that, or he doesn't have the first understanding of other team's players or the value of draft picks. He's been told that his valuation is way off since other clubs rated Hooker higher last year, Hooker is obviously even better this year, and yet he wants to argue that he's only worth a single third round pick.

So I'm leaning towards troll.

I know there are a lot of essendon posters on the draft board but anyone challenging the notion that Bellchambers, Hooker, Pears and Gumbleton are worth first round picks in your world is a troll. Clearly, some essendon posters on here believe if they state these essendon players are worth that type of currency often enough it is going to happen. This is just delusional thinking.

Stating Hooker is the number one in the league for intercept marks and holding that up as to what his value is on the trade table is just absurd. Firstly, I didn't even know they took stats for intercept marks but there you go another meaningless statistic telling you absolutely nothing about what a player is like.. From my perspective the only meaningful marking statistic is the number of contested marks a player makes.

For mine, Gumbleton due to the questions over his fitness and durability will always be a punt for a club, but there might be a desperate enough club to offer a pick around about 35.
Hooker, well he isn't a bad footballer but also he isn't a world beater (posters claiming he is worth a first round draft pick or two second round draft picks could be construed by non-essendon posters as being trolls) I would have his worth on the trade table as somewhere around about pick 35.
Bellchambers, I don't think he is that good, I would only offer a third round draft pick; clearly inferior to Jacobs and he went for a second round draft pick. Hampson and Warnock will quite possibly be on the market next trade period and I think most clubs would prefer either of those.
Pears, is a hard one to judge, a West Australian club might have some interest or a club short on KPDs but realistically you couldn't expect more than a third round draft pick.

The other thing over-hanging all this is the fact that essendon players may well be subject to sanctions for taking banned substances, so any club trading with essendon would need to take this into account. For the record I think Spangher is a better key position player than Pears and is comparable to Hooker in ability and talent.

Note, a number of carlton posters were suggesting Paul Bower at the end of 2011 was worth an early second round draft pick, as it was no one traded for him and he lasted just one more year on carlton's list before being delisted. If essendon are unable to trade some of these players mentioned then it wouldn't surprise me if they are delisted come the end of 2014.

 

[HirdyLannister]

If you are watching the essendon/port game it will show you why hooker an TBC are worth a lot higher picks than what you have listed, we haven't over valued them.

Edit - Hooker 22 disposals, 7 intercept marks and 10 marks in total for half time.

 

[King Of The Hille]

I know there are a lot of essendon posters on the draft board but anyone challenging the notion that Bellchambers, Hooker, Pears and Gumbleton are worth first round picks in your world is a troll. Clearly, some essendon posters on here believe if they state these essendon players are worth that type of currency often enough it is going to happen. This is just delusional thinking.

Stating Hooker is the number one in the league for intercept marks and holding that up as to what his value is on the trade table is just absurd. Firstly, I didn't even know they took stats for intercept marks but there you go another meaningless statistic telling you absolutely nothing about what a player is like.. From my perspective the only meaningful marking statistic is the number of contested marks a player makes.

For mine, Gumbleton due to the questions over his fitness and durability will always be a punt for a club, but there might be a desperate enough club to offer a pick around about 35.
Hooker, well he isn't a bad footballer but also he isn't a world beater (posters claiming he is worth a first round draft pick or two second round draft picks could be construed by non-essendon posters as being trolls) I would have his worth on the trade table as somewhere around about pick 35.
Bellchambers, I don't think he is that good, I would only offer a third round draft pick; clearly inferior to Jacobs and he went for a second round draft pick. Hampson and Warnock will quite possibly be on the market next trade period and I think most clubs would prefer either of those.
Pears, is a hard one to judge, a West Australian club might have some interest or a club short on KPDs but realistically you couldn't expect more than a third round draft pick.

The other thing over-hanging all this is the fact that essendon players may well be subject to sanctions for taking banned substances, so any club trading with essendon would need to take this into account. For the record I think Spangher is a better key position player than Pears and is comparable to Hooker in ability and talent.

Note, a number of carlton posters were suggesting Paul Bower at the end of 2011 was worth an early second round draft pick, as it was no one traded for him and he lasted just one more year on carlton's list before being delisted. If essendon are unable to trade some of these players mentioned then it wouldn't surprise me if they are delisted come the end of 2014.

I wonder if you caught the game this evening.

 

[Bugz]

ok, i get you know

TBC: wouldn't be accepting anything less than a first rounder for him. Worth far, far to much to Essendon than what we would get for him.

Tayte Pears: 3rd round pick at most. Tradable in so forth that we have guys who can play KP/3rd tall.

Cale Hooker: Some may laugh at me, but purely from a worth to Essendon p.o.v, I wouldn't accept anything less than a first round pick/2 x second round picks similar to what was tabled by the Saints last year. He has taken his game to another level this year and is a real general in defence.

Scott Gumbleton: Despite finally getting his body right, I still don't see him in our long term plans. A second round pick would get the job done IMO, but can definitely see someone pulling out a first rounder that I would take and run with.

Stewart Crameri: Going against the grain here, but Crameri is more dispensable than what people make out. What he does offensively far outweighs the defensive deficiencies he has. At a guess, a 1st/2nd round pick + a young star/best 22 player could get the deal done IMO.

You are vastly overrating some of your players. Crameri is not worth anywhere near that amount. Pick 20-30.

Gumbleton is playing VFL and injury riddled. 3rd rounder at very best. I think teams would offer more for Pears.

And I seriously doubt Hooker would get you a 1st rounder. Josh Gibson only got two mid second round picks and he is/was a more versatile player.

 

[Yoda_]

You are vastly overrating some of your players. Crameri is not worth anywhere that amount. Pick 20-30.

Gumbleton is playing VFL and injury riddled. 3rd rounder at very best. I think teams would offer more for Pears.

And I seriously doubt Hooker would get you a 1st rounder. Josh Gibson only got two mid second round picks and he is/was a more versatile player.

I was asked what he is worth to us not what he is actually worth..

Gumbleton you would probably get on the cheap, Crameri is a different proposition to anything in the league and has runs on the board hence my value of him and you mustn't of watched Hookers game tonight to see how vastly important and awesome he is to Essendon ?

 

[Red Black and Blue]

You are vastly overrating some of your players. Crameri is not worth anywhere near that amount. Pick 20-30.

Gumbleton is playing VFL and injury riddled. 3rd rounder at very best. I think teams would offer more for Pears.

And I seriously doubt Hooker would get you a 1st rounder. Josh Gibson only got two mid second round picks and he is/was a more versatile player.

If you can't afford them don't cry about it, we're happy to keep them.

 

[King Of The Hille]

People seriously overate the value of draft picks. How many players in the 10-30 pick range have become 100+ game players?
10-20%?

Hooker has taken a massive step forward this year, I think a late first round pick is reasonable. Gumbleton we'd ask for a second round pick, and be offered a third rounder, which from an Essendon point of view is unders, but from an external POV fair.

Crameri would be of similar value to Hooker in my opinion. Possibly less.

I'd rather keep the players and stick the picks where the sun don't shine.

 

[bluespooner]

If you can't afford them don't cry about it, we're happy to keep them.

I think you will find this thread was started by an essendon poster, suggesting essendon had a problem with too many talls on their list:

"Essendon has a problem. We have too many talented talls to fit in our side. Pretend for a moment you're an opposition recruiter, and you need someone, what would you be interested in offering Essendon for any or all of the their tall players".

It is not a matter of other clubs not being able to afford them, it is more a matter of posters on this board suggesting clubs will not be extorted in reaching a trade for any of these players.

The imbalance in essendon's list should become even more evident in coming weeks if Watson and Stanton are forced out for an extended period, where their shortage of quality midfielders will get exposed. It is essendon posters now and their club come the trade period which will be desperately attempting to shop some of these players.

 

[RearNaked]

will be keeping all of them

 

[eth-dog]

I think you will find this thread was started by an essendon poster, suggesting essendon had a problem with too many talls on their list:

"Essendon has a problem. We have too many talented talls to fit in our side. Pretend for a moment you're an opposition recruiter, and you need someone, what would you be interested in offering Essendon for any or all of the their tall players".

It is not a matter of other clubs not being able to afford them, it is more a matter of posters on this board suggesting clubs will not be extorted in reaching a trade for any of these players.

The imbalance in essendon's list should become even more evident in coming weeks if Watson and Stanton are forced out for an extended period, where their shortage of quality midfielders will get exposed. It is essendon posters now and their club come the trade period which will be desperately attempting to shop some of these players.

A Carlton poster lecturing Essendon supporters on imbalanced lists? That's awkward

 

[bluespooner]

A Carlton poster lecturing Essendon supporters on imbalanced lists? That's awkward

It must be a matter of leaving your brains at the door when you support essendon. The thread was started by an essendon poster, stating essendon had a problem with too many talls on their list.

Logical thinking is clearly awkward for you.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

The imbalance in essendon's list should become even more evident in coming weeks if Watson and Stanton are forced out for an extended period, where their shortage of quality midfielders will get exposed. It is essendon posters now and their club come the trade period which will be desperately attempting to shop some of these players.

I don't see any imbalance. Our midfield competed quite well against one of the fittest in the competition today with Watson injured early, Stanton on one leg and Hocking out. I thought Kavanaugh, Browne and O'Brien would be best 22 this year, and they are all playing seconds. Depth is not an issue.

Having an abundance of talls doesn't mean they will come on the cheap, it means we have the control of supply. Especially in a midfielders draft. If teams want one this isn't the bargin basement and based on "reports" they are in demand.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

It must be a matter of leaving your brains at the door when you support essendon. The thread was started by an essendon poster, stating essendon had a problem with too many talls on their list.

Logical thinking is clearly awkward for you.

We can have differing opinions to others who support the same club.