Rumour GFC 2016 Player Trading, Drafting, FA, Rumours, and Wish lists.

[Pure_Ownage]

Surprised you like that quite frankly Pure_Ownage.

I wasnt liking the first bit about the coach-dont be fooled by a straight bat in public he will be asking plenty of questions of the players in private but more the second bit about mediocrity and second tier players. SJ was right when he said most of those guys have stagnated and i wouldnt be against looking at trades that might improve the list if i was the list manager. Not saying i would trade them all but they are definitely not untouchable and some of them need a wake up call (and not just motlop).

 

[Footy Smarts]

There will be no panic because there is nothing wrong. We are a great side who just had a bad night. We will roll out the same excuses as we did in 2012, 13, 14 & 15. Next year is our year and we want all the old and slow guys to go around again.

We have plenty of players with currency but the club wouldn't have the balls to move them on. Apart from Motlop and Mackie, all i hear on this board is get rid of Kersten, Clark, Murdoch, Smedts, Vardy and GHS and they didn't even play on Friday. By the way Friday night was not a 1 off. We have been bog average since we smashed the bulldogs at Etihad in the middle of the season.

Duncan - pick 15-20
Blicavs - pick 25-30
Caddy - pick 25-30
Motlop - pick 15-20
Guthrie - pick 20-25

There are 5 examples of players with currency, but let me guess, that will tear the fabric of the playing group apart. Well where was the fabric on Friday when we let Sydney kick the first 7 goals.

Be bold and dont accept mediocrity.

That's not "be bold and don't accept mediocrity" that's be moronic and throw the baby out with the bathwater. Guthrie has just turned 24, completely changed the match during our first final, was in AA form for a big chunk of the year (struggled badly for 6-8 weeks) and should still improve yet you want to give him up for a pick outside the top 20? That's sheer stupidity! If we'd reacted like this to our last group of guns Scarlett, Enright, Bartel, and a heap of others would never have won a premiership at Geelong.

All of those guys are too good, have too much talent and we've put too much time into them to just throw it in for junk picks. It seems Motlop has some issues that may mean we decide to cash in on him. But gutting our young core group of players for junk picks who will take years to come through, while Hawkins, Danger and Selwood will become too old anyway is just mindbogglingly stupid.

 

[year of the cat]

Sure. Maximise the number of i50s, flood with numbers to make exit difficult, hope to score through sheer weight of numbers (literally).

Is that really a legitimate system though? As you say it's just relying on sheer weight of number of entries. Problem being that when you the opposition are able to repel your attack time and again, the lack of an actual system as we saw against the Swans becomes an issue.

 

[Boxhead_31]

Can you tell me what "our style" is, particularly in relation to our forward system?

Sure can, and what's more, I can describe it in 5 words:
"Bomb It Long To Tom"

 

[catempire]

Is that really a legitimate system though? As you say it's just relying on sheer weight of number of entries. Problem being that when you the opposition are able to repel your attack time and again, the lack of an actual system as we saw against the Swans becomes an issue.

I think the fact that it generated 18 wins - 9 against top 8 sides - means its irrefutably a "legitimate" system. Legitimacy isn't necessarily enough though. We have seen that now.

 

[Mahlepi]

Sure can, and what's more, I can describe it in 5 words:
"Bomb It Long To Tom"

And blame Tom for not marking it

Despite 3 guys being on him

 

[catempire]

I wasnt liking the first bit about the coach-dont be fooled by a straight bat in public he will be asking plenty of questions of the players in private but more the second bit about mediocrity and second tier players. SJ was right when he said most of those guys have stagnated and i wouldnt be against looking at trades that might improve the list if i was the list manager. Not saying i would trade them all but they are definitely not untouchable and some of them need a wake up call (and not just motlop).

Smacks of supporters sore and raw about a prelim final loss. You don't trade players of their calibre by choice.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Ellis-Yollmen seems keen to leave the Crows. He can play.

 

[Footy Smarts]

Ellis-Yollmen seems keen to leave the Crows. He can play.

Would consider him as a cheap pickup if some of our depth players walk. If GHS wants out a straight swap would be an option.

 

[Mahlepi]

If pick 15 or better was provided I'd trade Stanley

 

[Footy Smarts]

If pick 15 or better was provided I'd trade Stanley

Why? We've spent ages trying to get in a ruckman just to trade them for a guy who won't be any good for years? Pretty sure they were his first 2 finals ever no? He'll be much better for the experience. At worst we've got a competent ruckman-forward for 5+ years. If things go well he could still be a dominant player.

 

[Turbocat]

Smacks of supporters sore and raw about a prelim final loss. You don't trade players of their calibre by choice.

That may well be tested if Motlop rumours are true. He is contracted and Geelong would have the choice.

 

[UnitedWarrior93]

Trade out a ruckman/Forward and one that is pretty good at it?

I'd keep Stanley.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Smacks of supporters sore and raw about a prelim final loss. You don't trade players of their calibre by choice.

Of course and i never said trade all of them but certainly consider offers on their merits if they are a net inprovement to the side.

I can understand the frustration as all of guthrie duncan caddy motlop and blicavs have the talent to be genuine A graders and they have shown it in patches but not consistently enough and at their age it should be more consistent. When lesser players like mccarthy have progressed and when menzel has had a 33 goal season off 4 years out but those 5 have not taken the steps forward they ought to questions will be asked and rightly so. I wouldnt trade them but equally i wouldnt agree with accepting that where they are now is good enough or the best they need to get to-that would be accepting mediocrity (not saying you are at all just looking at the topic as a whole).

 

[manboob]

Smacks of supporters sore and raw about a prelim final loss. You don't trade players of their calibre by choice.

That's just it. They are not that calibre. They all averaged about 20 touches a game and Motlop aside couldn't even manage a goal to go with that. They are OK players. But you can't have a quarter of your team i.e. the rest of your midfield/half-forward line depth (outside the key players) throwing up such average numbers and giving such limited impact.

 

[Footy Smarts]

That may well be tested if Motlop rumours are true. He is contracted and Geelong would have the choice.

Motlop only signed on until he hit free agency. You never trade a talented player of that age who could still improve, is a good influence on the group and wants to be there long-term. If Motlop goes I think it'll be mainly a case of getting in before he walks as a free agent which means we get low compensation and can't target a free agent either. There are reasons why it might make sense for him but they're rare situations that shouldn't exist for the other guys.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Might not get a first rounder for him. But still probably get good value... might even be able to package him up with Vardy...

Vardy strikes me as a Richmond type of signing. Like for like for Vickery.

 

[Turbocat]

I think the fact that it generated 18 wins - 9 against top 8 sides - means its irrefutably a "legitimate" system. Legitimacy isn't necessarily enough though. We have seen that now.

I agree. The ultimate test is finals success ..whether its cattle or the system is probably debatable based on personal biases. Id debate that bringing in Freo IP is the way should have gone.. it doesn't really sit comfortably with me ...unless they win it. They did not.

 

[catempire]

I wouldnt trade them but equally i wouldnt agree with accepting that where they are now is good enough or the best they need to get to-that would be accepting mediocrity

Big difference between the two. Anyone who accepts what they delivered this year is kidding themselves. But going to the lengths of trading them is nonsense Internet forum stuff. Sorry (not sorry).

 

[Turbocat]

Motlop only signed on until he hit free agency. You never trade a talented player of that age who could still improve, is a good influence on the group and wants to be there long-term. If Motlop goes I think it'll be mainly a case of getting in before he walks as a free agent which means we get low compensation and can't target a free agent either. There are reasons why it might make sense for him but they're rare situations that shouldn't exist for the other guys.

CE's assertion was choice. He is contracted. Trading him may be proactive but its a choice. When he is uncontracted the choice has gone , so it seems choices is contributing to many clubs looking at being proactive.

 

[catempire]

That's just it. They are not that calibre. They all averaged about 20 touches a game and Motlop aside couldn't even manage a goal to go with that. They are OK players. But you can't have a quarter of your team i.e. the rest of your midfield/half-forward line depth (outside the key players) throwing up such average numbers and giving such limited impact.

They are the calibre of a second rung of players. Won't ever be carrying the side but must do more if we are to win a flag, I don't dispute that. It's the trade part I strongly dispute.

 

[Lana]

Is that really a legitimate system though? As you say it's just relying on sheer weight of number of entries. Problem being that when you the opposition are able to repel your attack time and again, the lack of an actual system as we saw against the Swans becomes an issue.

It worked move often then not this year, to me it broke down against Sydney for two reason. The first was why we lost, the second is why we struggled to come back. We saw the second for most of the Hawthorn game, only late in the 3rd quarter (in both games) did we start to get on top on the back a few good centre clearances.

1) We couldn't put them under any pressure, our inability to put any real physical pressure early in game resulted in us leaking a lot of goals. Which meant that later in the game we couldn't put any mental pressure on them as they had an almost unassailable lead. Usually repeat entries result in the defensive structure breaking down by defenders getting worried and making mistakes, and those mistakes cause further mistakes. But since they were 7 goals up after quarter time the defenders had little to be stressed about, they could afford to makes 4 bad mistakes in row and still hold a comfortable lead.

2) Our clearances (especially centre clearances) had no depth to them, (if that's not clear then our clearances didn't result in deep disposals I50) our player did get clean takeaways resulting in long kick that went to the flanks rather than to 1 on 1 30 metres out in front of goal. Since we rely on clearances to generate most of our fast I50 entries. We became extremely one dimensional on the attack which made it even easier for the Sydney defenders.

 

[hamG]

We need a full time small forward and adjusted attacking movement. We didn't draft Lang with our first rounder to be a defensive forward. Caddy needs to set himself to at least try and be our best clearance player (his hands are not fast enough to do that job currently). Bombing it long to our overly tall players (not just Hawkins) does not get it done in finals. Waiting for the game to open up to begin scoring doesn't work against good finals teams.

One terrible quarter ruined a pretty good season so we are overly critical of flaws right now. But let us be honest, the club will be going into the post season to top up and have another go.

As for Motlop, his 2013 season is falling further and further behind. I remember thinking there was 4-5 games that we won that year simply because of his brilliance and how damaging he was with the ball. Unless there is a significant behind the scenes reason I would keep him because the odds of replacing his talent are low.

 

[Lana]

That's just it. They are not that calibre. They all averaged about 20 touches a game and Motlop aside couldn't even manage a goal to go with that. They are OK players. But you can't have a quarter of your team i.e. the rest of your midfield/half-forward line depth (outside the key players) throwing up such average numbers and giving such limited impact.

I think they're all capable of playing at a higher level and all of them have shown at various points but they haven't as a group put it all together.

I don't think their seasonal production is the issue. Guthrie and Duncan average 23 disposals a game (puts them 70th in the competition for average disposals), Caddy averages 20 but he is kicking more than a goal a game( just 4 goalless games for the season). Motlop is averaging 19 disposals but kicking 1.5 goals a game. It probably their lack of "best on ground" type games back in our 2007 to 2011 era pretty much anyone in our midfield rotations could take the lead and tear games a part but they way these guys defer to Selwood and Dangerfield is the issue, those two should be the first among equals but they are carrying too much of the load, each appears in 75% of our centre bounces. I want to see Dangerfield and Selwood spend less time as inside mids and give the other guys more opportunities to take charge of the midfield.

I don't see any point in trading them for relative scraps, it is highly probably that any replacement we bring in would be of lessor quality.

 

[manboob]

They are the calibre of a second rung of players. Won't ever be carrying the side but must do more if we are to win a flag, I don't dispute that. It's the trade part I strongly dispute.

How long do you keep them all for though? Personally, I'd look strong at trading two of Motlop, Duncan, Caddy, Blicavs or Guthrie. Or simply accept that their ability means they are better suited as forward pockets.