Rumour GFC 2018 Player Trading, Drafting, FA, Rumours, and Wish lists - PT3

[cats_09]

I highly doubt C Guthrie is on the trade after his just sign a new contract.
I'd rather keep House then Gardner. .

I agree - only reason I could see for that though is that maybe they'll get more value from Cuthrie as a contracted player than losing him as a free agent. Could indicate theres an FA they are after and if we lost Cuthrie as an FA it would mean no compensation pick, but by trading him as a contracted player we get either a pick, player or combination in return. But more importantly, has Cam given any indication that he even wants to look at other clubs & is interested in a trade - if not, then it's going to be hard to trade him.

 

[year of the cat]

I highly doubt C Guthrie is on the trade after his just sign a new contract.
I'd rather keep House then Gardner. .

He is. Being contracted gives us more leverage.

 

[Turbocat]

Looks good.

On Williams, I think I read that he was the highest rated ruck in the TAC last year as an under ager and has added the key forward bit this season.

I think they have been trying to add the KPF to his CV as he is not 200cm and may struggle as a pure ruckman.

 

[Stocks_go_Up]

Again why would we give Cuthrie 3 years after serious ankle surgery? Unless its a smart way of offloading him and getting something in return because he is contracted... That would be a smart thing for once. It could blow up in our face though if no one wants him or we get SFA in return. His value is dropping each week...

 

[foxdog50]

I agree - only reason I could see for that though is that maybe they'll get more value from Cuthrie as a contracted player than losing him as a free agent. Could indicate theres an FA they are after and if we lost Cuthrie as an FA it would mean no compensation pick, but by trading him as a contracted player we get either a pick, player or combination in return. But more importantly, has Cam given any indication that he even wants to look at other clubs & is interested in a trade - if not, then it's going to be hard to trade him.

I just can't believe how much of a slide Guthrie gone down in the pass 3 years. . It's such a shame, as I thought by now he be in our top 6 players, but his in our bottom 6 players.
We would be lucky to even get a round 3 pick. It would of been better to get a compo pick instead of trading as been contracted the other team will put demands in Geelong plays for a % of his salary

 

[foxdog50]

He is. Being contracted gives us more leverage.

Want a 6 pack of frothies that he will be at Geelong next year lol

 

[cats_09]

Again why would we give Cuthrie 3 years after serious ankle surgery? Unless its a smart way of offloading him and getting something in return because he is contracted... That would be a smart thing for once. It could blow up in our face though if no one wants him or we get SFA in return.

Yes all surgery is serious, but its not like he underwent an ankle reco or something to that end - it was to repair the syndesmosis injury suffered against the Eagles, the same surgery that Selwood had last year in the lead up to the finals, and Libba had in 2016 ahead of the Bulldogs finals campaign.

He could have always bypassed surgery but recovery could have taken 4 months & he would have missed most of the season - surgery is used to stabilise the injury & aid in a quicker recovery.

Please don't make out like the procedure he had is 10 steps above what it was in reality - realistically there should be no long term issues with his ankle from that specific injury & surgery.

 

[cats_09]

I just can't believe how much of a slide Guthrie gone down in the pass 3 years. . It's such a shame, as I thought by now he be in our top 6 players, but his in our bottom 6 players.
We would be lucky to even get a round 3 pick. It would of been better to get a compo pick instead of trading as been contracted the other team will put demands in Geelong plays for a % of his salary

I'd start playing him on the wing & let him be an offensive first player rather than having him starting in the backline where he is meant to be defend first and then provide run out of the backline secondary.

His best games have come when he has played through the midfield, which is doubtful of happening at the moment with how stacked our midfield is - unless they replace Scooter with him and have Guthrie play in that tagging role which he has successfully done in the past - but if that won't happen, run him off the wing

 

[Turbocat]

Heard a few little tit bits this morning. House, Hayball gone. C.Guthrie is on the trade table at the end of the year. Scarlett has apparently ripped through a few players during the year including Z.Smith and Thurlow. Don’t be surprised to see both move on.

.. ripped thru as in pointed out their failings? Scarlett has been mentioned as a senior coach.. but one thing he may have to contend with is shaping his message. Hard to know without knowing the specifics.. maybe they really are falling short of a standard that he feels needs to be set. Probably no great surprise.

House... I look at him as exactly the same as Abbott. If the club is not going to give him a go.. then why put him on the list. With the players we put into yesterdays side.. a marking player like House would not have been out of place. Maybe the spot he is holding probably needs to go to someone who has ruck to their cv as well. There has to be doubts about Buzza? Is he worth persisting with but he is contracted..

 

[Turbocat]

Again why would we give Cuthrie 3 years after serious ankle surgery? Unless its a smart way of offloading him and getting something in return because he is contracted... That would be a smart thing for once. It could blow up in our face though if no one wants him or we get SFA in return. His value is dropping each week...

Id ask what do we expect to get in trade V what would he get as a FA.. and the FA comp would be far more certain.. as shown with Motlop clubs will look at players when its only dollars but as them to trade and it becomes a different calculation. Im not so sure I agree that its was smart at all...unless we already know who is interested ... Wasn't there a photo of Guthrie at Ess on here somewhere?

 

[Down at K Park]

Heard a few little tit bits this morning. House, Hayball gone. C.Guthrie is on the trade table at the end of the year. Scarlett has apparently ripped through a few players during the year including Z.Smith and Thurlow. Don’t be surprised to see both move on.

We could have let him go as a fa and gotten decent compo. Wtf would we sign him for 3 yrs in the hope we can trade him. Ridiculous.

 

[Stocks_go_Up]

Id ask what do we expect to get in trade V what would he get as a FA.. and the FA comp would be far more certain.. as shown with Motlop clubs will look at players when its only dollars but as them to trade and it becomes a different calculation. Im not so sure I agree that its was smart at all...unless we already know who is interested ... Wasn't there a photo of Guthrie at Ess on here somewhere?

Yes - he was spotted at the Essendon carpark ! I agree I would have preferred FA compo than take a gamble - especially since his value is dropping faster than a rock.

 

[Down at K Park]

Here’s an out there suggestion. How about we draft someone who can hit the side of a barn by foot.

 

[Turbocat]

This year may be disappointing Vdubs, but it has been quite predictably so.

List management has been questionable for some time - not poor, exactly, but questionable.
I reckon being a so-called 'destination club' post-flags clouded the List Management team's judgement - just because players were open to coming to Geelong doesn't mean we had to take them all at the expense of investing in youth.
I'm not talking about Dangerfield, obviously - that was a blue-moon opportunity and the club was right to pursue the chance to bring him onboard.

Then again, our drafting has been pretty poor for a while now, with our first selections being used questionably :

#15 on Smedts in 2010 - injuries, indifferent form and the club not sure if they wanted him to play forward or back
#32 on Hamling in 2011 - never given so much as an opportunity, the club went with the likes of Rivers (who was ok for 2 seasons)
#16 on Thurlow in 2012 - a knee injury along the way, but has never put together a string of solid games
#16 on Lang in 2013 - undersized midfielder who'd suffered a broken leg in the lead-up to the draft; showed glimpses here and there but not enough
#10 on Cockatoo in 2014 - played one good game in a draft year ruined by injuries. AFL career has followed suit.
#59 on Gardner in 2015 - not a high selection, but will probably go the same way as Hamling, behind senior players and given no chance to develop at senior level.
#26 on Parfitt in 2016 - developing, can't complain with his progress
#22 on Fogarty last year - long way to go for Fogarty, too early to judge but I have reservations

So even if we'd gone in a different direction and hit the draft a bit harder, there's no guarantee we'd have fared any better.

As for Chris Scott, you may be inclined to give him a pass, but I don't - he's done ok to have the team winning enough H&A games to qualify for finals most years - and some years we were seemingly in a great position to make an assault on the flag - but come finals time the team has been exposed as finals frauds; e.g. losing to Freo in Melbourne twice (once at Geelong!!), blowing a double chance two years running (13/14) by dropping the Qualifying final on each occasion, and being on the receiving end of beltings in 2016 (Sydney) & '17 (Tigers & Crows).

It'll be no revelation to me if this team falls off a cliff next year whatsoever; Dangerfield, Hawkins and Duncan are all still around their peak but I'd be surprised if any improved next year. Selwood and Ablett are every chance of dropping off in output. The rest of the list is competitive, but not finals material and certainly not flag material.

I agree with you that we need to bolster the list significantly, and the 'bottom 12' (!) sounds about right - hopefully if we try to replenish the list Wells and co. remember to select blokes who can kick the football, because I have concerns over the footskills of every one of Parfitt, Fogarty, Kelly and Menegola.

Very Good post.. A post that is worthy of more discussion... id hate to see just get lost in a review thread...so hope you don't mind me quoting into here..

Im not sure if agree with all of your points but you make very good case. Its been a long longtime where we have added the cream of youth , a lot of our kids are good ..not many bad not many have great potential... they mostly look like they will have to take time... and as we have seen you can play these types.. and then 50-80 games in find those games have been wasted...

We have a lot of debutants...maybe too many... if all the players we had given games to were any good ..they would not be getting games. So what we have to do is focus who is our future and stop the ins and outs. Is Parsons our player..if so just shut out all the noise and play him... but equally we must be hard eyed..stop giving games to dry wells. Henry is one who I can say has secured his spot. A Rookie. If Rookies are doing that it probably say something but others that were picked earlier.

I dont think we need as many players as 10-12 ..what i think we need is replacements for our old elite. Joel Selwood came in as icing on a group already assembled. Where is our next Joel? Hawkins Nathan Ablett Blake Scarlett ... unless we have some hidden Father Sons somewhere.. we will need to find a way to add tall talent thru the draft/trade this time.

When all of our young guys play well..or should I say are allowed to play well we can look good... but worrying when Ablett is the standout against Haw ..at 34.

 

[CatFan79]

#inwellswebust ?

 

[Cronin]

Here’s an out there suggestion. How about we draft someone who can hit the side of a barn by foot.

 

[year of the cat]

We could have let him go as a fa and gotten decent compo. Wtf would we sign him for 3 yrs in the hope we can trade him. Ridiculous.

I can only assume tgat because we’ve been on the wrong end of losing uncontracted players that by contracting him we are in a better negotiating position.

All I was told was that he is on the table. Whether there is interest is another thing.

 

[year of the cat]

Want a 6 pack of frothies that he will be at Geelong next year lol

See my last post. I’d trade him for a 4th rounder. I think he’s shit. I assume the club has a slightly higher opinion of him.

 

[year of the cat]

.. ripped thru as in pointed out their failings? Scarlett has been mentioned as a senior coach.. but one thing he may have to contend with is shaping his message. Hard to know without knowing the specifics.. maybe they really are falling short of a standard that he feels needs to be set. Probably no great surprise.

House... I look at him as exactly the same as Abbott. If the club is not going to give him a go.. then why put him on the list. With the players we put into yesterdays side.. a marking player like House would not have been out of place. Maybe the spot he is holding probably needs to go to someone who has ruck to their cv as well. There has to be doubts about Buzza? Is he worth persisting with but he is contracted..

I heard the tone of the message was apparently pretty harsh.

 

[Cataholic]

I heard the tone of the message was apparently pretty harsh.

Appoint him senior coach now.

He won't pussyfoot around.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

He is. Being contracted gives us more leverage.

Where did you get this mail from? If we wanted him out it would have been easier to offer him lowball $ so he picks another club for more $. To re-sign him and then have to try and convince him to go and convince another club to trade assets for someone they could have got for salary only, makes no sense to me it doesn't sound believeable.

 

[00VicWard001]

I heard the tone of the message was apparently pretty harsh.

He would be so disappointed that we haven’t come on as a team. I honestly doubt it’s to do with coaching, sometimes it’s up to the players to just man the f*ck up and be winners.

The intangible is everything. Richmond and the Dogs showed it.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I can only assume tgat because we’ve been on the wrong end of losing uncontracted players that by contracting him we are in a better negotiating position.

All I was told was that he is on the table. Whether there is interest is another thing.

We're not though because other clubs could have got him for free I dont see why theyd now trade more for him especially in his current form. We are stuck with him.

 

[cats_09]

Where did you get this mail from? If we wanted him out it would have been easier to offer him lowball $ so he picks another club for more $. To re-sign him and then have to try and convince him to go and convince another club to trade assets for someone they could have got for salary only, makes no sense to me it doesn't sound believeable.

The other issue I see with it is we re-signed Zac at the same time - so if we turn around a couple of months later and say we no longer want his older brother, it could make things a little awkward.

I know there's some on here who will be glad to see the back of both brothers, but it doesn't seem a good way to deal with players & improve club culture etc.

 

[year of the cat]

Where did you get this mail from? If we wanted him out it would have been easier to offer him lowball $ so he picks another club for more $. To re-sign him and then have to try and convince him to go and convince another club to trade assets for someone they could have got for salary only, makes no sense to me it doesn't sound believeable.

Don’t shoot the messenger! Heard it from a reliable source.