Rumour GFC 2020 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists

[Turbocat]

Look probably a late 1st/early 2nd but I think where they are in their window they would prefer a player trade to a pick and I'm not sure we have anyone of similar value that we would be willing to give up so it's probably a 3 club trade if anything-he is contracted so they have the upper hand.

I like it rough terms... ex Falcon etc etc. Im not sure I like trading for a HBF. but he doe kick it well .. so a bit conflicted I guess . Anything mid 20's and back or a player that we have coverage for then Id be all for it. Id not be surprise if your three way thing works to a degree... I suspect we will lose someone... so that will give us more than we have atm

 

[dazbroncos]

We got an end of Rd1 Compo for Mots I think it was.. that then became like 22 something which becme GAJ If i remember correctly ( and if im wrong please corect me)

That said, or even if thats close, Menegola and Kolo aint gonna get anything close to that as they aint ginna pull the deal that Port paid Mots - what was it 600 a year or som rubbish??!?!

So - the trade out of them ( if FA applicable) wont net much.

And it its a regular trade then it will be even less. Zac Smith cost us pick 40 or 50 something.... or 2 picks in the 50's...

The value in this guys trading out just aint there IMO.

And we lose all the development time put into them. Are they gonna be A graders - unlikely - but what did we pay for them cost basis wise in the first place? Kolo was a pick in the 40's I think and Menegola was in the 60s. Getting 70 games from a pick 60+ player? Fair return at this point.

They are hitting their draft average - well actually probably above that in terms of games played for cost basis picked.

But getting rid of them no just seems counter intuitive at this point - 60+ plus games of development. Ever team has B grade players and needs them. Thats what these blokes are. Not sure getting 2 more picks in the 40's at best will help us that much. And you never know... they might lift some more.


GO Catters

 

[MacStradbroke]

Hope cats heirachy are watching the power/blues game, Ladhams putting on a clinic In the first half. Go and steal someone’s young ruckman just like the swans did to us.

 

[Turbocat]

We got an end of Rd1 Compo for Mots I think it was.. that then became like 22 something which becme GAJ If i remember correctly ( and if im wrong please corect me)

That said, or even if thats close, Menegola and Kolo aint gonna get anything close to that as they aint ginna pull the deal that Port paid Mots - what was it 600 a year or som rubbish??!?!

So - the trade out of them ( if FA applicable) wont net much.

And it its a regular trade then it will be even less. Zac Smith cost us pick 40 or 50 something.... or 2 picks in the 50's...

The value in this guys trading out just aint there IMO.

And we lose all the development time put into them. Are they gonna be A graders - unlikely - but what did we pay for them cost basis wise in the first place? Kolo was a pick in the 40's I think and Menegola was in the 60s. Getting 70 games from a pick 60+ player? Fair return at this point.

They are hitting their draft average - well actually probably above that in terms of games played for cost basis picked.

But getting rid of them no just seems counter intuitive at this point - 60+ plus games of development. Ever team has B grade players and needs them. Thats what these blokes are. Not sure getting 2 more picks in the 40's at best will help us that much. And you never know... they might lift some more.


GO Catters

I doubt we push trade players out the door, until I see the club willing to change its mindset we are more likely to be adding a PnP rather than draft a kid. Think in terms of us drafting Stephens last year with 16. I was happy enough with that but if the club could have spent 16 on a player 23-26 years old that was ready to add to our best22 and was the same cost to cap, I suspect thats their preference. Of course SC is a consideration as well so draft plays an important part. For example id say the often mentioned Caldwell or that type at GWS who is has already played and is ready to go, may appeal this year rather than another Stephens type but im sure he would impact our SC more than a drafted kid.

There are two sides to the 'trade out' debate debate .. Yes you might get min chips , with Menegola he cost min chips we got all these games and we might get not much more than we paid for him etc. If he had been offered a deal elsewhere , or if we Varcoed him.. " Have a look around Trav , we are not sure what deal we can offer you"... I doubt we get a heap whether with comp or trade. so totally agree with you on that.

What it does do is it means it creates a spot to play the kids, and cop the pain. I remember someone like Simon Arnott played 22 games in 99 , then in 2000 it was a handful, and was gone by 2001 I think. To me it was a create a spot type choice , and Arnott was not getting any better, get the guys like Sprigs and Corey and others to come in a develop.

So to me If we were to decide that we can't do it with the group we have ( and who would be surprised atm if we dont make the top4).. then getting games into the players we have , let alone worrying about the picks we get for the journeymen is a consideration.

Of Guthrie and Menegola , I just wish they would standup in a big game against a big opponent in a finals game etc, and put a solid season of games together , not just a couple. These two really seem to be close to the first dog kicked..but they seem to be happy to get under your feet. They sure can make it easy for some to make contact with their boots.

Having said that ... I do not think anyones form this year should be enough to be the final nail. Its too unusual. The AFL should not be taking about cutting spots back to 35 this year.. they should allow a bit of time, too many players and clubs would be doing it tough atm.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

What would you trade for him

I'd want some due diligence on the medical front. I know he's "fit" but look at his disposal stats before and after the calf injury.

"Third-placed Brisbane is also crossing its fingers on the welfare of a talented young backman in Alex Witherden, whom coach Chris Fagan reported had "felt something sort of pop" in his upper calf or behind his knee."

Above was the injury wrap from the game against the Hawks where he went down in the first quarter. Walked straight back out the next week with no time off. Averaged 16 disposals since, but was averaging 20 for the season to that point so a 20% drop off in getting his hands on it. Might be something in that or might not be.

 

[Turbocat]

I'd want some due diligence on the medical front. I know he's "fit" but look at his disposal stats before and after the calf injury.

"Third-placed Brisbane is also crossing its fingers on the welfare of a talented young backman in Alex Witherden, whom coach Chris Fagan reported had "felt something sort of pop" in his upper calf or behind his knee."

Above was the injury wrap from the game against the Hawks where he went down in the first quarter. Walked straight back out the next week with no time off. Averaged 16 disposals since, but was averaging 20 for the season to that point so a 20% drop off in getting his hands on it. Might be something in that or might not be.

Rule #1 for me when trading a player in.... dont expect them to give you any more than they are producing at their current club... so yes investigate.

 

[Turbocat]

We got an end of Rd1 Compo for Mots I think it was.. that then became like 22 something which becme GAJ If i remember correctly ( and if im wrong please corect me)

That said, or even if thats close, Menegola and Kolo aint gonna get anything close to that as they aint ginna pull the deal that Port paid Mots - what was it 600 a year or som rubbish??!?!

So - the trade out of them ( if FA applicable) wont net much.

And it its a regular trade then it will be even less. Zac Smith cost us pick 40 or 50 something.... or 2 picks in the 50's...

The value in this guys trading out just aint there IMO.

And we lose all the development time put into them. Are they gonna be A graders - unlikely - but what did we pay for them cost basis wise in the first place? Kolo was a pick in the 40's I think and Menegola was in the 60s. Getting 70 games from a pick 60+ player? Fair return at this point.

They are hitting their draft average - well actually probably above that in terms of games played for cost basis picked.

But getting rid of them no just seems counter intuitive at this point - 60+ plus games of development. Ever team has B grade players and needs them. Thats what these blokes are. Not sure getting 2 more picks in the 40's at best will help us that much. And you never know... they might lift some more.


GO Catters

Oh forgot... the comp for Motlop.... one has to have a certain degree of skepticism on what we got when ..it was know we want to bring Ablett back. The way they calculate comp is almost neferiouis , certainly shrouded in a cloak of duplicity ... add that the SCap is probably going to be affected ..and the comp is tied to age and money... id say you may as well play spin the bottle to see what comp you will get at any given time.

From memory it was reported he only way to get max comp is a player who is around 25 , and he is in the top 5% of players 25 and older... They would probably be R2 at best

I think the comp for Mots was 19 which we traded for Ablett and 24 which became Kelly. (I think)

 

[Turbocat]

Does this mean Cameron is happy in GWS..

 

[foxdog50]

Does this mean Cameron is happy in GWS..

To me that read that now he has to think about his options...

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Does this mean Cameron is happy in GWS..

The original rumour didn't come from his camp so highly likely he was never looking for a trade.

 

[Cataholic]

With the retirements looming up ahead the kids will find spots next year to play , this is the last volley shot for the senior players and if it doesn’t work so be it.

I really do think that some of the posters on this board who are crying out to play the kids (that can’t push into the side mind you) are going a bit too early with their criticism of CS. Next year will be a rebuild and when we don’t make the finals for the next few years the same posters will be attacking the club in earnest.

In short these posters will always have something to be unhappy about.

It's hard for the kids to 'push in' when there's no way for them to get game time, other than an odd scratch match which seems to count for stuff all anyway.

 

[Turbocat]

The discussion in the last couple of pages ..on trade outs for picks ...or as id prefer to say ..make space to give younger players a chance. Has been good. Of course our debate will have no affect at all on what our club does but still part of what we type is about what we would do. not what they will do.

I was thinking while watching Norths form the last few weeks ... just where would we be I wonder if everything the club had aimed for had come off..We probably would have Higgins and GStien playing for us ... would we better or worse with that outcome?

Clarkson is finally getting a bit of heat at Hawthorn but he stands by his approach, which seems to be more a fresh coat of paint rather than a rebuild... Its sort of hard to argue with the the tailor of the hawthorn wardrobe of success but is it starting to look like the tailors latest effort is reminiscent of the Emperor's new clothes. Just how much has the paint of coat relied on the foundation of the draft at the start of Clarksons era?

Haw, Syd and Geelong have been strong in the refurbish approach.. Syd have had the advantage of multiple NGA type players who would have gone at the top the draft . Heeney , Mills , Blakey were all better than any kid Geelong has had access to ...yet the Swans are still looking like they have been left on the vine too long.

We have been very clever, have blended trades and value drafts, had failures everyone does .. but our failure as I see it is we really have not replaced the old guys as our best players. Danger sure.. but after that we are still so reliant on the older players..and when the younger players are our best players.. just how good will we be?

There have been many that have been writing us off for a long time yet we have not dropped but soon ..Joel and Tom will be gone and then the last of the draft foundation we built flags on will be gone. Perhaps we could count Duncan but even he is not far from 30.. and MD has never been the main guy.

So to me its not so much about what we get for the Menegola in trade but more about trying to find players who can be the next group. Are we giving youth enough of chance? Do we have the quality of youth to give a chance? Playing a kid will probably mean less , which see us drop and then we will get access to better draft options. Having the good journey guys help us stay in contention and less chance to find the next Selwood.

If we just scrape into finals, and if we don't make top4 ... are we really in contention? If not.. do we just add more matures and continue on as we have with Menegola and Guthrie etc or do we try to go with the pain of playing younger types?

 

[Drunkcat]

Funny how Scott gets to the club finishes off Kelly Bartel Mooney Milburn Stokes Corey Chapman Johnson as too old then brings in so many old guys....I would like to dump Jenkins Touhy Henderson Stanley retire Ablett Taylor clear a few oldies

 

[My Tilly]

I think Geelong should use their first draft pick on the best talented ruckman available in the draft. It's a very risky choice as majority of ruckman are picked late and some even via the rookie draft but we need to also keep in mind it will take around 5 years to develop a ruckman so while Dangerfield, Hawkins, Selwood and Duncan will be gone by then, we won't have to be in this current situation again.

 

[foxdog50]

I think Geelong should use their first draft pick on the best talented ruckman available in the draft. It's a very risky choice as majority of ruckman are picked late and some even via the rookie draft but we need to also keep in mind it will take around 5 years to develop a ruckman so while Dangerfield, Hawkins, Selwood and Duncan will be gone by then, we won't have to be in this current situation again.

I wish we would, but for some stupid reason, they don't like to draft a kid that plys ruck, I think the last kid we drafted as a ruck was Trent West?

But does anyone know who is the best kid rucks in this year's draft?

 

[thecatattack]

Funny how Scott gets to the club finishes off Kelly Bartel Mooney Milburn Stokes Corey Chapman Johnson as too old then brings in so many old guys....I would like to dump Jenkins Touhy Henderson Stanley retire Ablett Taylor clear a few oldies

Stanley is 29, not old.

Tuohy is best 22 right now.

Retire Ablett, what a joke.

Jenkins hasn't even played a game.

By your stance, we might as well publicly execute all players once they turn 30.

 

[My Tilly]

I wish we would, but for some stupid reason, they don't like to draft a kid that plys ruck, I think the last kid we drafted as a ruck was Trent West?

But does anyone know who is the best kid rucks in this year's draft?

Riley Thilthorpe could be there for us as he has been touted as going within the top 20.
Last I read, he's over 200cm tall and can also play forward.

 

[Strange Cat]

Stanley is 29, not old.

Tuohy is best 22 right now.

Retire Ablett, what a joke.

Jenkins hasn't even played a game.

By your stance, we might as well publicly execute all players once they turn 30.

Logan Run

 

[Drunkcat]

Stanley is 29, not old.

Tuohy is best 22 right now.

Retire Ablett, what a joke.

Jenkins hasn't even played a game.

By your stance, we might as well publicly execute all players once they turn 30.

So next year we go with 14 players 30 or over in our best 22 Ablett will retire so no joke Stanley is 30 by years end Tuohy will ever be in our next flag side..so maybe you have no clue

 

[thecatattack]

So next year we go with 14 players 30 or over in our best 22 Ablett will retire so no joke Stanley is 30 by years end Tuohy will ever be in our next flag side..so maybe you have no clue

You're simply judging players on age and no other merit.

You wouldn't accept Goldstein because he's 32?

Gawn is 1yr younger than Stanley, Fyfe is too, are they too old too?

If we can improve our ruck situation I'd happily move on from Stanley, not because of his age though and what's the point of letting another ruck walk if we can't get a better player there? If Ablett wants to play on, we should let him. If 2e keeps playing better than players then he can play too.

I agree that Henderson is done and Taylor will/should be too. Jenkins I don't care about because he hasn't played a game yet and he's on a tiny contract for us so he can take up a list spot but you've judged him on nothing but age.

 

[Strange Cat]

So next year we go with 14 players 30 or over in our best 22 Ablett will retire so no joke Stanley is 30 by years end Tuohy will ever be in our next flag side..so maybe you have no clue

Bit harsh just to cut players based on their age and nothing else , who are you going to replace them with? Considering the list size get cut as well you’ll be leaving the club in a bad place.

 

[My Tilly]

You're simply judging players on age and no other merit.

You wouldn't accept Goldstein because he's 32?

Gawn is 1yr younger than Stanley, Fyfe is too, are they too old too?

If we can improve our ruck situation I'd happily move on from Stanley, not because of his age though and what's the point of letting another ruck walk if we can't get a better player there? If Ablett wants to play on, we should let him. If 2e keeps playing better than players then he can play too.

I agree that Henderson is done and Taylor will/should be too. Jenkins I don't care about because he hasn't played a game yet and he's on a tiny contract for us so he can take up a list spot but you've judged him on nothing but age.

I disagree with this because we are no longer in a position to win a flag.
You saw how easily we were bullied by Collingwood just as they did to us in the final last year. We aren't at that level.
We were a couple of years ago (even without a ruck) but we now play in bursts and when a game gets testing, we wilt under pressure. We completely turned the tables on Brisbane a few weeks ago but you really think if both teams meet again in a final, we can beat them?

This is why even gaining the best ruckman in the game next year, we just aren't going anywhere so why go down the road of recruiting 30+ year old for?
Why not look to developing players 22-24 and then by the time they do reach Stanley's age, we are in a much better position to impact the competition. We did this under Mark Thompson and it worked wonders.

 

[Drunkcat]

Bit harsh just to cut players based on their age and nothing else , who are you going to replace them with? Considering the list size get cut as well you’ll be leaving the club in a bad place.
[/QUOTE]
No it's not just on age they will never be in our next flag and you can not have 14 that are 30 or older in your best 22

 

[thecatattack]

I disagree with this because we are no longer in a position to win a flag.
You saw how easily we were bullied by Collingwood just as they did to us in the final last year. We aren't at that level.
We were a couple of years ago (even without a ruck) but we now play in bursts and when a game gets testing, we wilt under pressure. We completely turned the tables on Brisbane a few weeks ago but you really think if both teams meet again in a final, we can beat them?

This is why even gaining the best ruckman in the game next year, we just aren't going anywhere so why go down the road of recruiting 30+ year old for?
Why not look to developing players 22-24 and then by the time they do reach Stanley's age, we are in a much better position to impact the competition. We did this under Mark Thompson and it worked wonders.

We're basing the last Collingwood game when we were missing Duncan, Narkle, Stewart, Selwood in the first and even Clark ended up going down later on.

That's a fair chunk on injuries we had and our biggest hole is certainly at the ruck position. Do you think we wouldn't have fair better against Collingwood last season with a decent ruckman and not Blicavs in the ruck against Grundy (plus again, Ablett and Clark injured and Duncan going down. As is part of the sport)?

I don't think we're in a doom and gloom position as a playing list right now like people seem to think. A good run with injuries and a good ruck would definitely see us competing at the pointy end of the season imo.

 

[My Tilly]

We're basing the last Collingwood game when we were missing Duncan, Narkle, Stewart, Selwood in the first and even Clark ended up going down later on.

Collingwood were missing Sidebottom, Scharenberg, Greenwood and Howe but they still looked a step above.

Do you think we wouldn't have fair better against Collingwood last season with a decent ruckman and not Blicavs in the ruck against Grundy (plus again, Ablett and Clark injured and Duncan going down. As is part of the sport)?

Hawkins was held goalless (again).
Ablett was putrid.
Selwood was below his best.
Duncan gathered 13 touches.
Menegola gathered 16 touches.
Our best players were Kelly and Dangerfield.
If we had Goldstein in ruck, he would have broke even with Grundy but do we stop Sidebottom, Treloar, Pendlebury, Adams and Maynard from running amok? No we don't.

I don't think we're in a doom and gloom position as a playing list right now like people seem to think. A good run with injuries and a good ruck would definitely see us competing at the pointy end of the season imo.

All teams cop injuries.
We had a great run last season for the first time in years and it did nothing for us when it mattered.

Just imagine what were to happen if we lose Dangerfield to a long term injury. Imagine just how dire this list would be if that happened.