Rumour GFC 2017 Player Trading, Drafting, FA, Rumours, and Wish lists - PT2

[strauchnyy]

You seriously want people you are sledging with “fan boy” to engage in a serious discussion?

Nothing savage meant by it.

Whats wrong with a little fun?

I'm a motlop fanboy, dangerfield fanboy. Sledge away

 

[Daniel McL]

An absolutely star? Seriously? He is the most overrated kid in the game.

Yes seriously. He'd destroy your boy Stanley. Lever is the perfect defender for today's game. Was 2nd behind J. McGovern for intercept marks (ahead of Rance) and at such a young age will only get better. His agility & sidestep for someone who's done an ACL is amazing. Melbourne's defence will be fantastic.

 

[Grimoz]

How is that possible. He is not a Free Agent and is currently contracted. Surely the dogs would accept any offer they get rather than delist him for nothing? Have I missed something?

???? Did you quote the right post? Spencer plays for Melbourne not the dogs

 

[zb14]

The 2007 team was built with players from last century under a system that had no free agency and where trades where less common. It’s just not comparable.

What is going on now is one big expiriment. There’s no right or wrong way. We will need to look back in a decade and reflect.

Yes, I agree with you in essence. I'm of the view, though, that we are better off using 20 on say Watts than an 18 y.o. for our "experiment". Because the clock is ticking on our experiments useful life. Now, if Wells is indeed playing a game of brinkmanship with other clubs re targets, all good and well. thats why i'll judge when we have some definitive outcomes at the end of trade. However, pragmatically speaking, it is irrefutable that a mature player is more likely to be useful for us than a green kid for the next season or two. And before people cite Richmond and the likes of Castagna, Butler etc. There is no Richmond flag minus Martin, Cotchin, Rance and Riewoldt. And on the sliding scale of valuable cogs the likes of Houli, Vlastuin, Prestia, Nank, Caddy etc come well ahead of the likes of Castagna, Butler in delivering Tiger success. 20 has a value for us right now, but that value is far less likely in the draft.

 

[dazbroncos]

An absolutely star? Seriously? He is the most overrated kid in the game.

Not sure he's overrated - he is pretty good.


However, the question I want to see answered is how much of his success to this point was due to the group around him and can he replicate it role wise at the Ds.

McDonald, Lever... Will he be asked to be more accountable and not drift off as much? It will be interesting.

GO Catters

 

[Seeds]

wtf has happened in the past three pages.

Yeah there is no racism problem with this board at all.

 

[Sticksman]

wtf has happened in the past three pages.

Yeah there is no racism problem with this board at all.

?

 

[catempire]

Yes, I agree with you in essence. I'm of the view, though, that we are better off using 20 on say Watts than an 18 y.o. for our "experiment". Because the clock is ticking on our experiments useful life. Now, if Wells is indeed playing a game of brinkmanship with other clubs re targets, all good and well. thats why i'll judge when we have some definitive outcomes at the end of trade. However, pragmatically speaking, it is irrefutable that a mature player is more likely to be useful for us than a green kid for the next season or two. And before people cite Richmond and the likes of Castagna, Butler etc. There is no Richmond flag minus Martin, Cotchin, Rance and Riewoldt. And on the sliding scale of valuable cogs the likes of Houli, Vlastuin, Prestia, Nank, Caddy etc come well ahead of the likes of Castagna, Butler in delivering Tiger success. 20 has a value for us right now, but that value is far less likely in the draft.

We did try to use 20 on Stringer and were rebuffed. The fact is Watts just isn’t worth it.

 

[CatsDoItBetter]

Do the Smith and Lever trades mean things might start to fall for Geelong? Hopefully Motlop makes a decision today as well.
We really do need to find a second forward option. I don’t want to see Harry playing there next year. I’m more than happy to see Black be given more games as I think he can play a role. And I hope Menzel is there next year but Watts or someone smiliar is a must.
Wells did rule out Crameri didn’t he? With slim pickings he’d be an option but not one that I’d take.

I do rate Buzza and think regardless of who comes in he will play a role. He competes, tackles and creates pressure. So he allows another tall to play with him and Hawk. As long as the tall isn’t someone like Stanley who falls over their feet.

 

[nananana catman]

That may be true on a superficial level. For instance, the 7-11 team had say Ottens, Harley, Mooney (trade), Egan (Banker), FA wasn't applicable, and I don't recall a Black hail mary trade equivalent in those sides either. But a deeper analysis suggests otherwise. The notable difference is the backbone of those premiership teams was built on the draft. Even the trades, particularly in Mooney and Harley case, were effectively like draftees given their ages. Ottens was the closest thing to a "trade", and he was what, 24 maybe, when he came.

07 premiership team. 19 of the 22 came from draft (86%). Reflective of a CLEAR list management approach, and thats discounting 3 very clear, targeted youthful "trades".

17 Prelim team. 14 of 22 came from draft (63%). However, this figure includes draftees drafted before even first '07 Flag in Mackie, Lonergan, Selwood, Hawkins, Taylor so skews the draft figure. 2 mid-aged State Leaguers in Menegola, Stewart. 1 FA in Selwood. 5 trades in Danger, Hendo, Stanley, Tuohy, Smith (23%). The really "relevant' draftees in this team are Motlop, Menzel, Duncan, Kola, Bews, Blicavs, Lang, Parfitt, Cocky (40%). So really, a very different mix and approach to what delivered success last time for us.

you're talking about 5 players being the difference between a clear list management approach? Don't forget in 07 Byrnes (Rookie) Rooke (Rookie) and the number of good draft picks that were used in the lead up to that time that failed. Players in the 2007 team were drafted as early as the 90's too (Wojcinski, Scarlett, King, Harley, Mooney)...

Spriggs, Bray, Gardiner, Foster, Tenace were all very good draft picks that didn't eventuate in this time. Even in a good draft the strike rate is about 50%. What has compounded the issue of using the draft since then is that we have had much higher picks than over this era.

Getting Scarlett, Gary Ablett and Hawkins for nothing helped immensely too.

And Pure Ownage beat me to it. FA didn't exist then.

 

[THE CAT WRANGLER]

top 4 isnt an achievement, winning a flag is

so if we arent doing something to get closer to that then we are failing

Exactly

 

[strauchnyy]

Essendon will still get stringer.

They will package 24 & 28 for a mid/late first rounder (tigs' 17 pick) and that'll be enough.

I hope we get Stringer, but Essendon's deal with GWS doesn't really affect it.

 

[zb14]

Taking into account of course that the lists that delivered us success have gradually been decimated by attrition in the process, and are irreplaceable, and we don't have access to superdrafts.

Yes, the flip side of that of course is that the 18 team competition has seen an appreciable drop in standard of premiership lists, and quality of football. We don't need a '7-'11 quality team to salute these days either, so by extension, that reflects in just what you need in draft/trade haul too. Goodness knows what our 08 side (which is when we were at absolute peak IMO) would do in todays competition. We'd need Stephen Hawking to figure it out.

 

[Sttew]

Why Sttew? What are we not doing that we should be doing here?

I am worried about 2018. At the moment the ledger is tipped against us. We have already lost Mackie & Lonergan. We will lose Motlop, and probably Menzel, Lang and a few other fringe players. What do we get in return? Perhaps / probably Ablett.

In the past 3 or 4 years we have recruited experienced players to fill the void left by retirees, with the club openly declaring it was doing this because the premiership window was still open. The vibe I am getting now is that the club no longer sees the "window" open, which may be a realistic assessment given our finals performances.

Wells' comments yesterday did nothing to allay my concerns. I just don't like the look of the club going after players like Watts, raising our hopes, and then withdrawing because we cannot afford them or it is all too difficult dealing with the other club. My first question with the Watts comment yesterday was why didn't we check what Melbourne might be looking for before meeting with him twice? Yes, this may be a strategy of Wells to throw others off the scent, but it comes across as "amateurville".

I know things could change in the next week.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

top 4 isnt an achievement, winning a flag is

so if we arent doing something to get closer to that then we are failing

In all but 1 year under this system top 4 has been a requirement to win the premiership. If you’ve made the judgment we’ve now peaked good for you but I guess I’m just trolling

 

[Pack Specialist]

Can any of the Watts fanboys provide a response to this (Pack Specialist - I'm looking at you).

Before I start, Watts is a good honest tryer in his role, that is, an uncontested lead up 3rd tall/flanker. He does not play a contested KPP brand of footy. He needs space and time to exert his strengths (skill etc.). He is known to not appear committed, is no leader after 9 seasons and has been dropped in a poor team due to his lack of impact in games and general inconsistency.

Melbourne don't even want him. Worth a pick 35+ IMO.

So.. the questions for the fan boys is....

1) Given Geelong play a contested bash and crash style going forward, we like to run it up and bomb long into Hawkins without any forward system. We don't play an uncontested style of footy like Hawthorn. Given this, How is someone like Watts, who needs open space/uncontested possessions to impact games, going to thrive?

IMO he is not going to take those big grabs when we bomb it long, we don't play a style that suits Watts's strengths. We are not Hawthorn. My view is that our game style is incompatible for Watts to thrive, and he is going to be a massive whipping boy for not impacting games.

2) Geelong's biggest weakness is our mental fagility in September. We are stuck in prelim land not being able to lift when it matters. Watts is known to coast through, uncommitted on field, came back to preseason underdone, drops his head.. before you jump at me, this is what Melbourne supporters say, and I already posted an article confirming this that was posted on the Age a few days ago. We need players that are going to lift with Paddy and Joel when the going gets tough. Do the Watts fanboys really think Watts is the type of player that is going to lift and take the game by the scruff of the neck when the going gets tough in a prelim?

Looking forward to answers to my two questions above.

Firstly, I am a Geelong fanboy if anything and proud to be.

Where you are watching Watts take an uncontested grab on the wing, I've just watched him run 400 metres into space that other players don't see!

Our forward structure is a mess and we need a lead out type with a large tank to both open up space for Hawkins and deliver the ball inside 50.

With our contested brand, we need the outside types.

If being too much of an "inside" team is a problem the surely a player like Watts is a potential solution?

Watts averaged 6.5 marks and kicked 40 goals in 2016...so yes he can take those grabs!

Watts is exactly the type of guy who will win you games in finals...

He's a good player but somehow you insinuate that he is beneath Geelong Football Club standards?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I am worried about 2018. At the moment the ledger is tipped against us. We have already lost Mackie & Lonergan. We will lose Motlop, and probably Menzel, Lang and a few other fringe players. What do we get in return? Perhaps / probably Ablett.

In the past 3 or 4 years we have recruited experienced players to fill the void left by retirees, with the club openly declaring it was doing this because the premiership window was still open. The vibe I am getting now is that the club no longer sees the "window" open, which may be a realistic assessment given our finals performances.

Wells' comments yesterday did nothing to allay my concerns. I just don't like the look of the club going after players like Watts, raising our hopes, and then withdrawing because we cannot afford them or it is all too difficult dealing with the other club. My first question with the Watts comment yesterday was why didn't we check what Melbourne might be looking for before meeting with him twice? Yes, this may be a strategy of Wells to throw others off the scent, but it comes across as "amateurville".

I know things could change in the next week.

You’re just like your brother
You both must talk footy together a lot as the thought process is the same

 

[Spazz Cat]

Boy we must be very very lucky then mustn’t we.

Scott can’t coach
We can’t develop players
We’re a two man team
Can’t play interstate
Can’t play the G
Have no youth
Hawkins is insignificant
Our defence is too tall
No small forwards.
No CHF
Shit rucks
Underwhelming 2nd tier
Scott plays favourites with certain “pets”
Wells selects duds
We can’t lure players

Boy Simon Lloyd must be a genius to get us to top 4 with all the wrong things we’re doing

We can't play well at the G consistently. One of the major problems that our tall defense which works a treat at KP doesn't translate to KP.
We have no small forwards mainly due to injury.
Our second tier has been underwhelming for quite some time. Bar Duncan who is now first tier.
So yeah we are doing well to make the top 4.

 

[Armo7]

Instead, what we have done is a disjointed list management path. Draft a little here, trade in there,, lose someone wanted that is contracted, trade out R1's for peanuts, pick up an FA, top up with an unwanted hack here (Black, Lloyd?), pick up the obligatory VFL Banker or three etc.

You call it disjointed, I call it balanced and superbly executed (and no doubt the foundation for the success we have had in the last two years).

Using your words:

Draft a little here - Kolodjashnij and Lang (2013), Cockatoo and Gregson (2014), Menegola and Buzza (2015), Parfitt (2016)
Lose someone wanted that is contracted - Caddy only (we didn't want Varco)
trade out Brown ones for peanuts - Dangerfield, Henderson, 2E - I like them peanuts!
Pick up free agent - Scott Selwood
top up unwanted hack - Black, but hey you've got 44 list places to fill and some are therefore taking chances).
pick up the obligatory VFL banker - Ruggles & Stewart

So the draftees and the VFL pickups make up about six or seven of our best 22. There weren't enough quality free agents for quality tradable players for us to possibly pick up to replace them.

So your thesis that we had to go one way (the draft) or the other way (trading) completely is nonsense. A mixture of both is required, and the Club has done it beautifully.

 

[CatsDoItBetter]

Essendon will still get stringer.

They will package 24 & 28 for a mid/late first rounder (tigs' 17 pick) and that'll be enough.

I hope we get Stringer, but Essendon's deal with GWS doesn't really affect it.

If we get pick 19 for Motlop id love to trade that for 24 and 28. If we could hit the draft with 21,24 and 28 Wells would be salivating. But not sure Dees will accept pick 32 or whatever we have for Watts.

 

[zb14]

I’ll ask again because you didn’t answer last time I did: what trades are we not doing that we should be doing?

You need to go back and read my post a few back. Who isn't attainable in the current environment? It all comes down to how ruthless you wanna be. If you trade to set yourself up for a quick rebound tilt, you need to see it through, and achieve outcomes. Going to the draft with pick 19, 20 etc shouldn't be number 1 on the priority list. If it eventuates, it will be because we have failed to achieve desired outcomes.

 

[you pick one]

Firstly, I am a Geelong fanboy if anything and proud to be.

Where you are watching Watts take an uncontested grab on the wing, I've just watched him run 400 metres into space that other players don't see!

Our forward structure is a mess and we need a lead out type with a large tank to both open up space for Hawkins and deliver the ball inside 50.

With our contested brand, we need the outside types.

If being too much of an "inside" team is a problem the surely a player like Watts is a potential solution?

Watts averaged 6.5 marks and kicked 40 goals in 2016...so yes he can take those grabs!

Watts is exactly the type of guy who will win you games in finals...

He's a good player but somehow you insinuate that he is beneath Geelong Football Club standards?

We have got it you like Watts.

 

[Pack Specialist]

You need to go back and read my post a few back. Who isn't attainable in the current environment? It all comes down to how ruthless you wanna be. If you trade to set yourself up for a quick rebound tilt, you need to see it through, and achieve outcomes. Going to the draft with pick 19, 20 etc shouldn't be number 1 on the priority list. If it eventuates, it will be because we have failed to achieve desired outcomes.

Not a bad fall back option to be honest.

 

[Pack Specialist]

We have got it you like Watts.

I've just been answering what's put in front of me.

 

[Armo7]

You’re just like your brother
You both must talk footy together a lot as the thought process is the same

You need to take a break and then tune in at the end to see what the results are.

you'll have to be happy with prelim failures before the inevitable long rebuild

Nothing wrong with making the preliminary final as often as we have. And don't give me this rubbish that we have somehow put ourselves in a position where going a step further is outside of our reach.