Rumour GFC 2023 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists Pt1

[cats_09]

As we are now getting into the season and we are starting to get a bit more serious with discussion, seems a suitable time to post the following as it's repeatedly shown itself to be a value reference tool in trade & draft discussion

And as per normal, thanks to Lore for putting this together - always a fantastic reference tool



And yes this post is now stickied - makes it easy to keep track of (can easily reverse this though if needed)

 

[ShaunWDT]

Depends on what you classify as good pick or nothing pick. They offered us a mid 2nd (p33) last year and i agree we will only get about the same for a trade in him this year-an early 20s pick would be the dream..a mid to late 2nd is the likely outcome. Which to me is still not a 'nothing' pick.

Its nothing in a compromised draft which could easily be the worst talent pool to pick from in 20 years.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

if we start puling quality players year after the flag and make it 4-6th this year or better..... there will be Royal Commission, a Revolution and thermo nuclear events.

Im all for it - pass me my radiation suit. QC Wig and HK machine pistol lol

GO Catters

You don't need a trench all that deep to survive the blast. Some iodine tablets and you're laughing

 

[dazbroncos]

It's interesting though...with this new 'pick purchasing' template...do you think that it might actually enable us to stay up even longer - given how clever we are at managing our salary cap?

For example, let's say we take on Whitfield's 1 MIL salary, and then instead of GWS giving us a pick, they go 'ok Ash has said he wants to leave too and go to you guys - so we're keeping our pick but you can have the gun player instead.'

Essentially, instead of us giving them our Pick 10, we get Ash and Whitfield for nothing, except salary. Even if Whitfield is past it, we still use our Pick 10 at the draft and get a gun kid, whilst also bringing in Ash and Whit, who could still surprise with a fresh start at a new club.

That's what interests me the most about this mechanism, as clubs won't care where the player goes, but the player definitely will care where they go. If a player has a choice between a cashed up Hawks, North, or us - who are they realistically gonna choose?

No matter how far we fall down the ladder, players will always come to us because we have the work/life balance that other clubs don't, we always aim for success, and our culture is the stuff of legend.

Sam Mitchell's been licking his lips thinking it'll benefit him and his Hawks, but honestly, like Bowes last year, I think it'll benefit those clubs who are both well run in sal cap terms and in a general organistional sense + in contention, and with a culture of success and work/life balance.

Clubs like Brisbane, us, Freo and Sydney, all offer these type of benefits - or a 'sea change' of sorts. We've always been one step ahead when it comes to new implementations, and I reckon we'll see another curveball like something I mentioned above this trade period.

Could you imagine the collective toy throwing if we brought in TDK, Doedee, Whit and Ash (don't see Parish leaving) - using all these mechanisms...for essentially the mid 20's pick that TDK would cost? The AFL world would lose its mind, haha.

Great post but I think youve answered your own question right there.

WE have a clear ( granted unknown to specifics) pay structure thats been in place and been at the root of our successes IMO for well over a decade and more.

Spending less each time gives that little bit or a lot left over in the Kitty ( pun intended) and we saw that with Bowes.

No reason it can't continue with the list cycle we will be clearing out this year and next. Even if Tomma goes around again we still lose Smith. 2E, Menegola, Parfitt and Ceglar all move on (mostly)

The best part is that for other clubs to do the same takes 3-5 years to clear the incumbent contracts and institute the system - cant be done until the old contracts get off the books so its not like club X can suddenly turn it around in a year.

GO Catters

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Great post but I think youve answered your own question right there.

WE have a clear ( granted unknown to specifics) pay structure thats been in place and been at the root of our successes IMO for well over a decade and more.

Spending less each time gives that little bit or a lot left over in the Kitty ( pun intended) and we saw that with Bowes.

No reason it can't continue with the list cycle we will be clearing out this year and next. Even if Tomma goes around again we still lose Smith. 2E, Menegola, Parfitt and Ceglar all move on (mostly)

The best part is that for other clubs to do the same takes 3-5 years to clear the incumbent contracts and institute the system - cant be done until the old contracts get off the books so its not like club X can suddenly turn it around in a year.

GO Catters

If the afl allows teams to trade out cap for picks it changes the game pretty substantially.

 

[Shadow89]

What Essendon did well with Weideman is similar to what Collingwood & Carlton both tried at times with McStay & the McKay/Curnow combo, was that they tried isolating Ratugolea deep where he was one-out with his opponent, and from the stands it was clear ER wasn't totally comfortable in that situation

Against Adelaide, where he did really well against Tex is that Tex liked playing further up the ground meaning he wasn't isolated close to goal. It allowed ER more freedom to go for his marks, and at times to even drop off Tex and just play the ball

If I'm the opposition coach and ER is lining up in defence, I'm instructing his direct opponent to stay deep and asking the other forwards to keep the space deep open so that it becomes harder for us to drop back in support of ER, and that if we do it likely means theirs open teammates

Was interesting, as I was watching vison from The Round So Far, and as much as Sav had a terrible night, our defence as a whole really was all at sea. There was this really awful clip, where SDK was standing miles off Gulden, and just stayed back rather than going up with him, and then Amartey takes the mark and Gulden just ran around on his own in the forward 50.

Numerous instances they showed, and I don't know if it was Sav that unbalanced it, but we really did not have our defence in order at all on Friday night. Really interesting watch, and good vision, for anyone else who's interested too

(16:43 - 17:45) -

TRSF: Port's EPIC winner, fading champion 'hard to watch'

Riley Beveridge and Kane Cornes bring you The Round So Far for round 16

www.afl.com.au

 

[D BRIDGE]

Numerous instances they showed, and I don't know if it was Sav that unbalanced it, but we really did not have our defence in order at all on Friday night. Really interesting watch, and good vision, for anyone else who's interested too

I don't necessarily think Sav unbalanced the defense.

I think he played a poor game and was ineffective in his role (hence why he was subbed out).

A potentially unbalanced defense can still play well if all players are switched on and doing what they need to do.

The most perfectly balanced backline in the world will still leak goals if players in it are playing without a clue.

Sav played a very poor game... Time will tell if he turns it around.

 

[cats_09]

Was interesting, as I was watching vison from The Round So Far, and as much as Sav had a terrible night, or defence as a whole really was all at sea. There was this really awful clip, where SDK was standing miles off Gulden, and just stayed back rather than going up with him, and then Amartey takes the mark and Gulden just ran around on his own in the forward 50.

Numerous instances they showed, and I don't know if it was Sav that unbalanced it, but we really did not have our defence in order at all on Friday night. Really interesting watch, and good vision, for anyone else who's interested too

(16:43 - 17:45) -

TRSF: Port's EPIC winner, fading champion 'hard to watch'

Riley Beveridge and Kane Cornes bring you The Round So Far for round 16

www.afl.com.au

We definitely looked off defensively on Friday night, especially the first half

I don't think we were unbalanced on Ratugolea's inclusion alone, but rather it was the combination of his inclusion AND no real omission from the defensive unit which bought about the unbalance - and that's on the MC

Against Melbourne our defenders seemed to better understand their roles, but when we then added another tall into the mix there was confusion as to who was doing what at times

On Friday night it felt like with the MC, that rather than moving the magnets around to form a team along the standard lines of:
FB: x 3
HB: x 3
C: x 3
HF: x 3
FF: x 3
F: x 3

B: x 4, and sub

And one that seems to bring better balance, they instead picked who they felt/deemed were the best 22 available players and then tried to move the magnets around to fit them into the final team and hoped they'd go ok with the spot they found themselves in


A good example of that is Guthrie who isn't a wing - many may have him in the best 22 players on the list, but if the only available spot for him is the wing, then he shouldn't be in the senior team because we definitely have better options for that position. I think that should have been Knevitt, if not Bowes or even try Mullin for a turn of speed


If they believe Sav is in our best defensive unit, then make the decision to omit someone and have clearly defined roles for those playing

 

[D BRIDGE]

A good example of that is Guthrie who isn't a wing - many may have him in the best 22 players on the list, but if the only available spot for him is the wing, then he shouldn't be in the senior team because we definitely have better options for that position. I think that should have been Knevitt, if not Bowes or even try Mullin for a turn of speed

I'd take Dempsey or Knevitt on a wing before Zuthrie for sure.

Bowes is still a big ? for me.

 

[Samason]

We definitely looked off defensively on Friday night, especially the first half

I don't think we were unbalanced on Ratugolea's inclusion alone, but rather it was the combination of his inclusion AND no real omission from the defensive unit which bought about the unbalance - and that's on the MC

Against Melbourne our defenders seemed to better understand their roles, but when we then added another tall into the mix there was confusion as to who was doing what at times

On Friday night it felt like with the MC, that rather than moving the magnets around to form a team along the standard lines of:
FB: x 3
HB: x 3
C: x 3
HF: x 3
FF: x 3
F: x 3

B: x 4, and sub

And one that seems to bring better balance, they instead picked who they felt/deemed were the best 22 available players and then tried to move the magnets around to fit them into the final team and hoped they'd go ok with the spot they found themselves in


A good example of that is Guthrie who isn't a wing - many may have him in the best 22 players on the list, but if the only available spot for him is the wing, then he shouldn't be in the senior team because we definitely have better options for that position. I think that should have been Knevitt, if not Bowes or even try Mullin for a turn of speed


If they believe Sav is in our best defensive unit, then make the decision to omit someone and have clearly defined roles for those playing

I totally agree, they have also tried ohenry in wing to no effect. He and zuthrie need to play forward and back or not at all

 

[Shadow89]

We definitely looked off defensively on Friday night, especially the first half

I don't think we were unbalanced on Ratugolea's inclusion alone, but rather it was the combination of his inclusion AND no real omission from the defensive unit which bought about the unbalance - and that's on the MC

Against Melbourne our defenders seemed to better understand their roles, but when we then added another tall into the mix there was confusion as to who was doing what at times

On Friday night it felt like with the MC, that rather than moving the magnets around to form a team along the standard lines of:
FB: x 3
HB: x 3
C: x 3
HF: x 3
FF: x 3
F: x 3

B: x 4, and sub

And one that seems to bring better balance, they instead picked who they felt/deemed were the best 22 available players and then tried to move the magnets around to fit them into the final team and hoped they'd go ok with the spot they found themselves in


A good example of that is Guthrie who isn't a wing - many may have him in the best 22 players on the list, but if the only available spot for him is the wing, then he shouldn't be in the senior team because we definitely have better options for that position. I think that should have been Knevitt, if not Bowes or even try Mullin for a turn of speed


If they believe Sav is in our best defensive unit, then make the decision to omit someone and have clearly defined roles for those playing

It is a problem with us though, that unfortunately, Scott and co. do have their favourites, and we do try to 'squeeze' them in - citing 'flexibility.'

My ideal line up moving forward would probably be:


B: Bews (stopper), SDK (full back), J. Henry (3rd man up/can play tall or small)

HB: Zuth (intercept and drive from half back), Kolo (centre half back), Stewart (intercept and drive from half back)

C: Tuohy (winger who floats back into defence and then down forward - feels this has been his best role), Blics (bid bodied mid), Holmes (hard running winger/inside mid when needed)

FO: Stanley (main ruck/float forward or act as 7th defender), Atkins (defensive mid to hold others accountable), Danger (starting burst mid)

HF: O. Henry (goal kicking 3rd tall), J. Cameron (half forward drifting up the ground/link up player), Miers (link up forward/goal kicker)

F: Close (pressure forward with tank to get up the ground and beat opponent back), Hawkins (full forward/ruck), Rohan (pressure forward/3rd or 4th tall)

INT: Duncan (utility who can player wherever he is needed at any point), Bruhn (rotation burst mid), Stengle (rotation goal kicking small forward), I. Smith (rotation winger who allows Tuohy or Duncan to play as 7th defender if needed - this could also be Menegola if he gets back to full fitness)

Sub: O'Connor (utility who can play defence or mid, and who is always solid when needed)

EMG: Bowes, Knevitt, Ratugolea, Dempsey

 

[Gunf]

We definitely looked off defensively on Friday night, especially the first half

I don't think we were unbalanced on Ratugolea's inclusion alone, but rather it was the combination of his inclusion AND no real omission from the defensive unit which bought about the unbalance - and that's on the MC

Against Melbourne our defenders seemed to better understand their roles, but when we then added another tall into the mix there was confusion as to who was doing what at times

On Friday night it felt like with the MC, that rather than moving the magnets around to form a team along the standard lines of:
FB: x 3
HB: x 3
C: x 3
HF: x 3
FF: x 3
F: x 3

B: x 4, and sub

And one that seems to bring better balance, they instead picked who they felt/deemed were the best 22 available players and then tried to move the magnets around to fit them into the final team and hoped they'd go ok with the spot they found themselves in


A good example of that is Guthrie who isn't a wing - many may have him in the best 22 players on the list, but if the only available spot for him is the wing, then he shouldn't be in the senior team because we definitely have better options for that position. I think that should have been Knevitt, if not Bowes or even try Mullin for a turn of speed


If they believe Sav is in our best defensive unit, then make the decision to omit someone and have clearly defined roles for those playing

That is the big thing the MC need t figure out quick isn't it.

Is Sav best 22? if yes who goes out.
Or if Sav is best 22 and they want to play that many talls they need to figure quickly how that will work because last game it did not at all(midfield not showing up didn't help)

 

[CatToTheFuture]

I don't necessarily think Sav unbalanced the defense.

I think he played a poor game and was ineffective in his role (hence why he was subbed out).

A potentially unbalanced defense can still play well if all players are switched on and doing what they need to do.

The most perfectly balanced backline in the world will still leak goals if players in it are playing without a clue.

Sav played a very poor game... Time will tell if he turns it around.

I agree with this. If we actually were successful in pressuring Sydney into the long bomb then we would look like defensive geniuses.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Its nothing in a compromised draft which could easily be the worst talent pool to pick from in 20 years.

Last years draft was shallower than this ones by far. Id take a pick in the 30s this year easily over last year (which is why it was still the right call to keep him 12months).

 

[Shadow89]

That is the big thing the MC need t figure out quick isn't it.

Is Sav best 22? if yes who goes out.
Or if Sav is best 22 and they want to play that many talls they need to figure quickly how that will work because last game i did not at all(midfield not showing up didn't help)

It's either him or Kolo - they both can't play in the same side, as they both play the same role (see above). SDK is a non-negotiable

 

[Gunf]

It is a problem with us though, that unfortunately, Scott and co. do have their favourites, and we do try to 'squeeze' them in - citing 'flexibility.'

My ideal line up moving forward would probably be:


B: Bews (stopper), SDK (full back), J. Henry (3rd man up/can play tall or small)

HB: Zuth (intercept and drive from half back), Kolo (centre half back), Stewart (intercept and drive from half back)

C: Tuohy (winger who floats back into defence and then down forward - feels this has been his best role), Blics (bid bodied mid), Holmes (hard running winger/inside mid when needed)

FO: Stanley (main ruck/float forward or act as 7th defender), Atkins (defensive mid to hold others accountable), Danger (starting burst mid)

HF: O. Henry (goal kicking 3rd tall), J. Cameron (half forward drifting up the ground/link up player), Miers (link up forward/goal kicker)

F: Close (pressure forward with tank to get up the ground and beat opponent back), Hawkins (full forward/ruck), Rohan (pressure forward/3rd or 4th tall)

INT: Duncan (utility who can player wherever he is needed at any point), Bruhn (rotation burst mid), Stengle (rotation goal kicking small forward), I. Smith (rotation winger who allows Tuohy or Duncan to play as 7th defender if needed - this could also be Menegola if he gets back to full fitness)

Sub: O'Connor (utility who can play defence or mid, and who is always solid when needed)

EMG: Bowes, Knevitt, Ratugolea, Dempsey

I actually love that team but a few notes

C Guthrie will hopefully be back so we need to open a mid spot for him and yes he is best 22 at his best.


Not so much on the team but a few extra notes.

I would be trying Mullin in a few different roles ala Small forward/wing/Running HBF and a lockdown small defender. As i think he has the potential to play almost any role apart from talls.

We should be trying to transition someone to take over Bews role as a small defender. That person could be Mullin/Zuthrie or MOC. Not seen enough from the VFL to pencil someone from it into that role.

 

[Shadow89]

I actually love that team but a few notes

C Guthrie will hopefully be back so we need to open a mid spot for him and yes he is best 22 at his best.


Not so much on the team but a few extra notes.

I would be trying Mullin in a few different roles ala Small forward/wing/Running HBF and a lockdown small defender. As i think he has the potential to play almost any role apart from talls.

We should be trying to transition someone to take over Bews role as a small defender. That person could be Mullin/Zuthrie or MOC. Not seen enough from the VFL to pencil someone from it into that role.

Yeah I'm in the same boat with replacing Bews with Mullin in the side (and then shifting say O'Connor into that stopping role) - but he's got a long way to go 'til he gets there, IMO.

Guth absolutely, but who knows if he gets back this year. Be a simple swap of Bruhn to sub and Guth to starting midfield, O'Connor emergency and Dempsey out of the emergencies. Would love to see him get back this year, but it's a very long time to miss footy to come in and impact straight away - and he was pretty 'off' at the start of the year anyway.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

I actually love that team but a few notes

C Guthrie will hopefully be back so we need to open a mid spot for him and yes he is best 22 at his best.


Not so much on the team but a few extra notes.

I would be trying Mullin in a few different roles ala Small forward/wing/Running HBF and a lockdown small defender. As i think he has the potential to play almost any role apart from talls.

We should be trying to transition someone to take over Bews role as a small defender. That person could be Mullin/Zuthrie or MOC. Not seen enough from the VFL to pencil someone from it into that role.

I had thought Mullin would be great to take over from Bews as he has the physical traits. I think he's fundamentally an offensive player though.

Would be a great way to get him games though

 

[Gunf]

I had thought Mullin would be great to take over from Bews as he has the physical traits. I think he's fundamentally an offensive player though.

Would be a great way to get him games though

Yeah i could see us using him in the Bews role until we get someone for it and unleash him as an attacking play.

Would allow us to get games into him whilst transitioning away from Bew.

And no i don't hate Bew i actually love him but his time is coming to an end sooner rather then later.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Yeah i could see us using him in the Bews role until we get someone for it and unleash him as an attacking play.

Would allow us to get games into him whilst transitioning away from Bew.

And no i don't hate Bew i actually love him but his time is coming to an end sooner rather then later.

Bews has been great but what got him a game early was speed and physicality tagging small forwards out. From there he's learned how to create a bit of rebound and attacking play. But you take away the one wood and he doesn't seem to be able to apply the new skills like he once did.

I love the guy but he's looking like an old 29 years old

 

[CatsDoItBetter]

A few thoughts:
I really hope Sav stays but they need to find a role for him and others down back that is best for they team. One of the things that changed heading into last season was playing to players strengths rather than worrying about deficiencies.
The height down back and positioning is one thing we need some better run and delivery from the d50. It’s something we need to look at this year and a problem longer term.

We should have a group of players who will be off the list at the end of the year through delisting/retirements etc.
We need to find a ruck but I’d also be looking for a couple of small defenders.

We look a midfielder short this year which is led to some chat about who we could target to fill the gap.
But will we have the same issue next year? Guthrie will be back and development of Bruhn, Clark, Holmes and others may fill that gap.

If we can add someone of Parish’s quality then yes but with him close to re-signing there’s not a lot of similar options available.

Parfitt has been really disappointing but I wouldn’t be opposed to keeping him for another year to see if he can get back to where he was. We will get minimal in return and shouldn’t have an issue with list spots. A big pre season could see him back in the midfield mix.

But of a left field option but maybe we could get Dekoning for a cheaper price if we took Martin and his contract as well. I know we had some interest in him when he was in the 17 year old draft.

 

[ShaunWDT]

Ports supposed Sav offer screams BS to me anyway, he wouldnt even get a game for them right now yet they are paying him 600-700k plus a year? Turn it up...

 

[ShaunWDT]

Am all for investing game time into Mullin but you get him to play Bews role we are easily a 2 or 3 goal a game worse side for it.

 

[Gunf]

Am all for investing game time into Mullin but you get him to play Bews role we are easily a 2 or 3 goal a game worse side for it.

Just because you are trying him in that role doesn't mean Bews would be dropped.

We could give Mullin a chance at it when Bews is injured needs a rest or against crappy sides.

We could also get him to learn it in the VFL but either way we are going to need a replacement for Bews eventually so why not start now.

 

[foxdog50]

Though we love Neales development are we sure Foster will make it as a KPF
Mitch G has shown he has what it takes to play AFL and IMO you bring in those players regardless

Look fair enough. But I think he would want to go to a place where he will get games, I couldn't see him getting game a Geelong next year. I'd rather pass on him and hit it in draft ( with the pick of Esava if he decides to go) I just would like to reward the forward roll with the kids we have. Just my personal view

 

[foxdog50]

You're right... please dont take things personally just a bit of passion seeping into my morning, yesterday.
No hard feelings at all. That goes for all those on here.
Love the views, perspectives and the argy bargy that goes on.
Beats fakebook supporter pages hands down.
Cheers Bud.

I don't comment on much at all on Facebook or post much, but I had to leave those sill Facebook fans pages.. so many on there have no idea. FMD I remember the days when Motlop form with Geelong, there were so many of them. Saying leave Motlop alone! He will find form bla bla , his been a good servant . Facebook supporters don't have much idea