How far away from being the best are we?

[eagleye]

I was pondering this question and would like to know everyones thoughts.
How far away from being the bast are we?
What do we need to improve to be the best?
i started by thinking of our probable first 22 then was thinking who needed to get better to make us considerably better:

Wirrupunda Glass Hunter
Morrison Gaspar Collica
Embley Fletcher Judd
Chick Jakovich Jones
Matera McDougal Sampi
Gardiner Cousins Kerr

Inter: Cox Lynch Braun Staker

Emerg: Banfield Waters Green


i used the above team as the best 22. First of all we need a centre half forward as Jako is not a centre half forward and will not be heer next year. A CHF is the centre of the forward line and we need to discover a very good one or trade and get one next trading week ( i thought Jonathon Brown would be worth aggresivly pursuing ). Next we need a Better full back. Glass must chuck an Embley to carry the backline. Gaspar must get fit to play otherwise we might have to play Staker, Lynch, Hunter at CHB and none of them are elite players. Mind you Gaspar is not an elite player either but i am assuming he will improve with game time. Wirrapunda, Collica, or Morrison must be able to combat the small forwards like Stephen Milne. If that does not happen we need to find a new small backman.
I think if all these things happen we will win the premiership. But i am waiting to see how Woosha makes these things happen

GO EAGLES!!!

 

[sedders]

we are the best. every eagle fan knows that.

at what point last year were we on top of the ladder? about round 18 i think. and when did we injure our key players? about round 18 i think.

we are a bit of luck short of being the best on paper. If all those players do there best and dont get injured and jacko can keep up form for the year, there's nothing in our way.

Woosha will do it.

 

[Mead]

Hey eagleye, welcome to bigfooty!

That's probably a pretty reasonable best 22- if you have a look around on some of the other threads on this board, a lot of people have posted their thoughts on this, and most of them tend to be thinking along the same lines in terms of 22..

For what its worth, I think that last year proved that we were very good, but very fragile.
The midfield alone is good enough to win games. In 2003 We tended to beat teams by hanging on with them for a few quarters, and then wheeling out an absolutely awesome 10-15 minutes, where our midfield would win every clearance, and stack on the goals quickly, and hopefully put a big enough dent in the scoreboard to put us clear of the other team.

The problem with that method is that without Gardiner and our ace onballers, there really is no 'Plan B' if anything happens to stifle our run, or if we cop a run of injuries to important players, exactly as we did late last season. If our midfields starting 6 all remained in form and injury free from rounds 1 through 22, we'll be a top 2 or 3 team again. Unfortunately, that just simply never happens in football- Gardiner, clearly our most important player, has never played a 22 game season in his career. We can wheel out an identical team to last year and we'll probably win a lot of games, but the reality is, sooner or later injuries usually hit. Thats how AFL footy works, and it's pointless to just hope for luck- maybe all of our key players will have awesome seasons, play 22 games and be in great form week in, week out, but is that really something you'd be prepared to bet money on?

The reason we need to develop the kpp stocks is really to offer a definite plan B for when the midfield isn't dominating or when injuries hit- in other words, we need to be able to go head to head and at least break even in games where the ball is going into the oppositions' and our attacking zone an equal number of times. Obviously, quality key forwards and defenders would help this, although also the midfield needs a few tweaks to make it a bit more resilient.

Personally, I think that there are 4 guys who, all other things being equal, could make us the best side in the competition if they all came good. If at least a couple of them come good, we'll be serious top 4 contenders, if none of them do, then we'll be another also-ran fighting for a spot in the top 8.

1. Gaspar. Clearly our only kpp who is entirely AFL ready in terms of size, strength and skills. If he kicks the injuries, we've got a high quality CHB/CHF. If we get 15-20 decent games out of him, then we look much much better

2. McDougall. Huge wrap on him last year, developed significantly towards the end of the season. He's probably the kpp who I am most confident about going into this season. Everything about him suggests he could be an elite level CHF. His agility, marking, and booming kick probably mean he'd be wasted a bit at FF if he reaches his potential.

3. Cox. Not necessarily him playing as a kpp, but if Cox develops in a dominant AFL ruckman, it does two things- firstly, it gives us another option if (touch wood) Gardiner gets injured. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, if Cox can get on top of other ruckmen, it allows us to shift Gardiner forward for long periods, which gives us a very tasty, difficult to match up on FF/CHF combo of Gardiner/McDougall.

4. Glass. Gradually improved last year, and we just need him to continue to find a bit more. He doesn't have to take games by the scruff of the neck the way I'm hoping the above three will be able to, he just needs to be a decent negating FB who can limit star forwards to manageable scores. Very worried about the impact him missing preseason and the first few rounds will have on his whole season.

 

[back pocket]

That's a lot of words that I'm going to read right now, because I'm a bit busy, but I'm sure it makes a lot of sense. I'll just have a go at answering the topic question.

Long, Long Way.

 

[Jabber]

Ruck & midfield aren't going to get much better.
Flanks & pockets are solid.

Key positions - At least a year or two behind the rest of the squad, probably 3 away from matching it with the best. Not helped by team selection policy last season.

FB - Glass with a bit more experience is good enough, we don't need a star down there.
CHB - Gaspar if he remains fit should be ample.
CHF - Scrub Jako for Lynch. Lynch should provide more than we traditionally get out of CHF. Unless Jako has found a yard of pace, he should be warming the pine for most of the season.
FF - McDougall only has to better Haynes' & Wilson's output to be a winner for us.

Staker & Hunter can play solid troubleshooting roles forward and back.

Coaching - Long way to go, as evidenced by our continued uncertain KPP situation.

 

[The Passenger]

as soon as our KPP players develop the way they are expected to, than we'll be more than a premiership threat.

And there is talent there. MacDougall, Gaspar, Staker, Lynch, Seaby, Cox are very talented guys, but really only Cox has delivered consistent good games from that group.

Glass is a solid defensive backman without being great.

Paul Johnson looks to be a good footballer too.

Hansen is up and down, but i don't think he'll stay at the club for long.

but we definetaly need more options for downback who we know we can rely on. At the moment we're not really sure who we're going to be playing a second tall down back.

We've got Lynch shown signs in the WAFL down back, while Gaspar, MacDougall and Staker are all capable of playing down back but neither four are definate options down back.

 

[eagleye]

we all agree

basically we all agree that we need to improve in our key positions. I was a bit more critical of the backline then others but thats alright. My next question do you think if some of the above listed players improve not all then we should be active in th trading period next year to try and get a quality tall forward and/or full back?

ps. i have already stated my longing to have Jonathon Brown!

 

[Mead]

Re: we all agree

Originally posted by eagleye
basically we all agree that we need to improve in our key positions. I was a bit more critical of the backline then others but thats alright. My next question do you think if some of the above listed players improve not all then we should be active in th trading period next year to try and get a quality tall forward and/or full back?

ps. i have already stated my longing to have Jonathon Brown!

Jonathan Brown would be.... nice, but the problem with quality key position players, is they simply do not come cheap. Just assuming that someone like Brown was on the market (which he wouldn't be), you'd probably be talking something like Judd + a 1st round pick to make it work, which would blow a gaping hole in our side to fill another one. Obviously, if someone like Hay got homesick and was available at a bargain we'd be idiots not to bite, but failing that, we just have to develop from within.

In terms of where the rest of the team is, we've probably got about a 3-4 year window to win a flag whilst Cousins and Gardie are at the peak of their powers. If we don't have at least one bona fide key forward and defender by the end of this year, it probably a good time to start panicking, but rather than attempting to attract high priced recruits and dismantling our team to do so, I think we just need to start to really draft talls and nothing but, and if we are active in the trading period, it should be with a view to obtaining top ten picks to get a look at the real cream of the draft.

Really, though- McDougall, Gaspar, Glass, Hunter, Johnson, Hansen, Staker, Lynch, Beeck, Seaby and McConnell. (okay, and Carroll as well I suppose :S) That's a dozen names, most of whom have already shown significant promise, vying for 4 spots. The most important thing we need to do this year is give some of those guys the chance to turn that promise into performance.

 

[Moo]

Mead

Trouble is mate that it was time to draft quality talls 2 years ago.

I still am amazed that Judd was taken over Polak and Waters over any of the numerous other options ....now no need to call a Mead just yet this at a trolling effort - just on honest assessment.

Judd is undoubtedly good, but compare you midfield stocks to KPP's ....it is not anywhere near balanced.

We appear to have gone the other way ....3 ruckman, most of our recent high picks (pre-03) have gone on talls (minus Has) and now we are targeting the smalls. Big difference is that a Dunn or future small will come on in 1 -2 seasons, a McDoogs as we know takes time.

Now it is with the footy gods - if two of these boys dont step up this year and Jako wont gone on past another season (not counting this one) ...you will need another.

The non-existent forays into the trade market are also perplexing, with only Chick really being targeted.

The club obviously have a plan but it is not evident to me, even a Hay will only act as an extra tall to replace Jak .....you dont get better just stay the same. The other West Aussies are all smalls ...Cogs, Carr etc .

Basically your formula for success would be greatly assisted by Doogs showing what he can do, Gaspar getting fit and someone else standing up. I rate Glass but he is not a #1 defender (IMHO) and if you are relying on Carroll in your best 22 - I doubt a premiership is possible.

At the time I said (Buzz can attest) the mantra was quality talls to supplement Kerr, Judd, Banfield, Gardiner (mid field unit), Benny etc ....every early pick should have gone on best KPP not best available player.

Judd was a massive risk (structure wise) and one that is paying off, however I still believe that Polak would be more value to your club over the following seasons. Also would a Hall or a Morrison a Spaanderman over a Waters would ahve made more sense.

Mead?

Moo

 

[southjoy]

Originally posted by Moo
Mead

Trouble is mate that it was time to draft quality talls 2 years ago.

I still am amazed that Judd was taken over Polak and Waters over any of the numerous other options ....now no need to call a Mead just yet this at a trolling effort - just on honest assessment.

Judd is undoubtedly good, but compare you midfield stocks to KPP's ....it is not anywhere near balanced.

We appear to have gone the other way ....3 ruckman, most of our recent high picks (pre-03) have gone on talls (minus Has) and now we are targeting the smalls. Big difference is that a Dunn or future small will come on in 1 -2 seasons, a McDoogs as we know takes time.

Now it is with the footy gods - if two of these boys dont step up this year and Jako wont gone on past another season (not counting this one) ...you will need another.

The non-existent forays into the trade market are also perplexing, with only Chick really being targeted.

The club obviously have a plan but it is not evident to me, even a Hay will only act as an extra tall to replace Jak .....you dont get better just stay the same. The other West Aussies are all smalls ...Cogs, Carr etc .

Basically your formula for success would be greatly assisted by Doogs showing what he can do, Gaspar getting fit and someone else standing up. I rate Glass but he is not a #1 defender (IMHO) and if you are relying on Carroll in your best 22 - I doubt a premiership is possible.

At the time I said (Buzz can attest) the mantra was quality talls to supplement Kerr, Judd, Banfield, Gardiner (mid field unit), Benny etc ....every early pick should have gone on best KPP not best available player.

Judd was a massive risk (structure wise) and one that is paying off, however I still believe that Polak would be more value to your club over the following seasons. Also would a Hall or a Morrison a Spaanderman over a Waters would ahve made more sense.

Mead?

Moo

What you say all makes sense but don't forget before Judd came along we have been discussing the need for a quality midfield. Well Judd came along and has performed better than anyone in the AFL thought was possible, we also have signed hime for a further two years.
All clubs also draft on the best available player especially early in the draft. Waters did answer a big problem that we have and that is the decided toughness out of our backline and hopefully later aka Chick a hardness in the midfield.
We did draft talls for KPP as suggested by Lynch, Hansen, Johnson, Staker, Gaspar, etc and as someone posted earlier we needed to do this a couple of years ago. We did. Know we need for them to stand up. This is the real lottery of aLL DRAFT PICKS.Will they stand up?
Only time will tell!
If Lynch, McDougal and one other stand up this year as Embley did last year then we are in good shape! In this statement lies the enigma of the Draft.

 

[Ripper]

I would just like to say that I have popped in and seen this thread and wish you all the best for the coming season.

 

[Streaker]

Originally posted by RIPPER_46
I would just like to say that I have popped in and seen this thread and wish you all the best for the coming season.

The Question is "Is there a thread on the Eagles board within the last 2 weeks that you haven't popped into?".

 

[Ripper]

Originally posted by West Coast Stre
The Question is "Is there a thread on the Eagles board within the last 2 weeks that you haven't popped into?".

Us Freo supporters take an interest in what you blokes do. It is in our interest that you blokes don't "leak" too many points from the house of pain.

 

[Au_Blue#24]

Originally posted by RIPPER_46
Us Freo supporters take an interest in what you blokes do.

Understatement of the Century !!

 

[Streaker]

Re: Re: we all agree

Originally posted by Mead
Really, though- McDougall, Gaspar, Glass, Hunter, Johnson, Hansen, Staker, Lynch, Beeck, Seaby and McConnell. (okay, and Carroll as well I suppose :S) That's a dozen names, most of whom have already shown significant promise, vying for 4 spots. The most important thing we need to do this year is give some of those guys the chance to turn that promise into performance.

If you also add in Grayham and Embley from the rookie list as well as being able to send Gardiner or Cox forward and having Jakovich as a back up then you see we have quite a few KPP on our list.

Doogs has Full Forward wrapped up as far as I am concerned. Glass is serviceable at Full Back. That leaves CHF and CHB as our only 2 major concerns. I think that Hansen will be the one who steps up for the CHF position and Staker or Lynch will take the CHB position. Even if Seaby and Cox took over the ruck duties giving Gardiner a run at CHF we would have a better set up than we did last year.

I would love to see Gaspar fit but I would rather we wait until mid season to make sure he has fully healed rather than rushing him back in to the side.

 

[Ken Ackers]

I get a bit confused about the whole key position player issue. We have been drafting KPP players for the last 5 years or so but am I hearing the suggestion that we should only draft KPP? We have Gaspar, McDougall and Cox all of whom have real potential IMHO. We have Glass, Hanson, Lynch, Seaby, Staker, Hunter, Beek and Johnson who were all bargain picks (except Glass) who can hopefully step up this year or at least hold their own. We have possibly the best ruckman in the league (appologies to Adam Goodes). In the last couple of years we have lost McIntosh (an absolute Eagele legend) who has been on his last legs for a while, Haynes? and Wilson in terms of KPP and are could lose Jako next year (but I am in no way writing the big fella off - should start at CHF/FF this year for mine). So really we have lost Macca who has been injured quite a bit fo the last two and thats about it. We have made the finals for the last two in a row and it can be realistically expected that we will find one or two of these 10 (excluding Cox) KPPs to take on a key role this year. For mine, I have a concern over full back but other than this, we will find someone this year to take over at CHF, CHB and or FF. IF we just keep drafting KPPs people will be complaining that we dont have enough midfielders. As I have said, we have made the finals the last 2 years without much in the way of KPPs. We now have a great young group of players who can step up for us. That can only make us better.

 

[Mead]

Moo, aside from Judd over Polak, we've been picking up a fair range of talls. In 2000, we took McDougall at pick 5, in 2001 we got Seaby at 18, in 2002, Staker and Johnson, and McConnell this year.

As for the Judd issue, at the time I was honestly pretty surprised that we took some guy called Chris Judd over the local boy in Polak, but looking back, I just don't see what else we could have done. Judd has already shown himself to be an awesome, awesome player, but i get the feeling the ultimate proof of the pudding will show up this year, when he enters his prime. If he is as good as we all hope he is, then really, I think thats the be all an end all. Regardless of your team structure, you simply cannot pass up a Voss or Mcleod type.

I suppose it really does come down the the best available talent versus most useful to the team argument which rears its head at every draft, but looking back, I think we made the right decision. Minus Judd and plus Polak, we'd be a very different team but not necessarily a better one.

The thing is, we have the cattle. Most of our tall options have all shown promise, and there is enough of them there that we should be able to build a team out of them. 12 promising guys vying for 4 positions- there really isn't much point in having drafted more guys over the few years- if that were the case, we'd have 14 or 15 promising players trying for the same number of positiong.

I think the one thing the club has really not done properly, though, is give them opportunity at AFL level. Last year, people like Lynch, Hansen, McDougall, Johnson and Staker should have got 10-15 games under their belts each- partly to help them improve as individual players but also partly to give them experience of playing together as a unit. This is really the biggest error that the coaching staff have made over the last few years. The cattle are there, they're as good as can be expected given they've had little or no AFL exposure, we just need to get them out on the park and find out whether they can handle the big time or not.

If we make the same mistake this year and overuse Jakovich and Carroll at the expense of the younger guys, it will come back to bite us big time.

 

[Moo]

Mead

Take your point and glad you are taking my comments in the spirit they are meant - Judd looks the goods but time will tell (ditto Polak, Ball, Hodge).

The draft is interesting, in recent years the higher the pick the more "assured" you are of getting something of worth (in my terms a number 1 is hard to stuff up and a number outside the top 15 is even money ...over 40 and its a rarity). So if we except that the chance of capturing a Gardiner or Pav is on a sliding scale.

In 99 - Glass #11 (but lost Ball) and Gaspar #14 (Footy Gods)

2000 - McDougall # 5 (KPP), Kerr #18 and Humm #36

2001 - Judd #3, Sampi # 6, Seabes #18 Hansen #38

2002 - Traded #8 for Chick, Johnson #24, Staker #37

2003 - Waters #11 (185cm), Butler #20 (185cm) and
McConnell #26 (190cm)

Now Mead I take your point and Ken's about having plenty of talls, but it is the quality of the cattle (I agree that Woosh should have played them a tad more and at least you would have known who can play).

Look at the above list, apart from McDougall your last KPP taken in the top 10 was in 96 ...one M Gardiner (if I'm wrong I apologise but that is my read on it).

Even if we accept the 2003 Waters as necessary at 11 for his toughness edge (valid), why Butler at #20 - 185cm and 75Kg ...McConnell at #26.

Again accept Judd at 2001 at 3 as a good gamble, why Sampi at 6? ....Seaby 18 and Hansen 38. Now Sampi can play but he wont be your KPP in 2 - 3 years.

It seems to me that the club have taken a major risk, I would have thought not taking a KPP inside the top 10 in the last 7 years would have meant the footy dept maximising your chance of finding one that can play .....to me that means target the best tall with your early picks.

McDougall has taken his time ...and it is a big ask for young talls to play consistently (they take time). Who steps up if McDougall does not come on, Gaspar remains injured, Jakovich retires as I see it Johnson, Hansen, Seabey all must come on (not forgetting the rookie list ...Lynch, Cox, Zac ....solid but not world beaters).

Asleep yet? BTW Observer your still a knob.

Moo

 

[Streaker]

Originally posted by Moo
In 99 - Glass #11 (but lost Ball) and Gaspar #14 (Footy Gods)

What other choices were there in 99?
Other than Jonathon Brown, who was taken at 30 under the Father/Son rule, the only other KPPs of any note were Pavlich and Leigh Brown taken with picks 4 and 5

We took the best available.

Originally posted by Moo
2000 - McDougall # 5 (KPP), Kerr #18 and Humm #36

What other choices were there in 2000?

Dion Woods at 39 but I wouldn't consider him as Mister Consistant just yet. Maybe Sav Rocca?

Originally posted by Moo
2001 - Judd #3, Sampi # 6, Seabes #18 Hansen #38

What other choices were there in 2001?

Other than Polak there was Luke Molan, Paul Salmon or Mick Martyn. I prefer the choices we made.

Originally posted by Moo
2002 - Traded #8 for Chick, Johnson #24, Staker #37

What other choices were there in 2002?

Jared Brennan, Hamish McIntosh, Jason Laycock, Jay Schulz, Nic Smith, Tom Lonergan, Bo Nixon or maybe Tristan Cartledge. All houshold names wouldn't you say? Other than Brennan how many have played a game? Oh I almost left out Mick Martyn at pick 84. Johnson was considered a steal at 24 and although he hasn't given the goods yet I still expect him to make it.

Originally posted by Moo
It seems to me that the club have taken a major risk, I would have thought not taking a KPP inside the top 10 in the last 7 years would have meant the footy dept maximising your chance of finding one that can play .....to me that means target the best tall with your early picks.

Based upon the examples above I think we have done pretty well.

Originally posted by Moo
McDougall has taken his time ...and it is a big ask for young talls to play consistently (they take time).

Exactly.

Originally posted by Moo
Who steps up if McDougall does not come on, Gaspar remains injured, Jakovich retires as I see it Johnson, Hansen, Seabey all must come on (not forgetting the rookie list ...Lynch, Cox, Zac ....solid but not world beaters).

Not world beaters yet but what happens if McDougall does come up, Gaspar has an injury free run and two players from Johnson Hansen Seaby Lynch and Beeck etc do come on. You can look at it from a worst case scenario if you like but we could also do the same for the Freo squad.

Originally posted by Moo
BTW Observer your still a knob.

Agreed

 

[eagleye]

Re: Re: we all agree

Originally posted by Mead
Jonathan Brown would be.... nice, but the problem with quality key position players, is they simply do not come cheap. Just assuming that someone like Brown was on the market (which he wouldn't be), you'd probably be talking something like Judd + a 1st round pick to make it work, which would blow a gaping hole in our side to fill another one. Obviously, if someone like Hay got homesick and was available at a bargain we'd be idiots not to bite, but failing that, we just have to develop from within.
[/QUOTE


We would be stupid to give away juddy but say;
Fletcher + Macdoogal ( who may appeal through his potentiel ) or maybe a cox + 1 round dratf pick + 2nd round draft pick + maybe a chambers or something to sweeten the deal, wopuld be worth it for Jonathon Brown, or another quality forward who is still young, his impact in our side would be invaluable since we would now have the whole in our forward line closed and we can fully concentrate on the backline.

I have tipped us for 4th but i would confidently say 4th or 3rd if we had Jonathon Brown

If a tall does not stand up for the CHF or FF job next year we should go into crisis mode and enter trading!

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by Moo

BTW Observer your still a knob.

Well spotted!


The above post from West Coast Stre pretty much took the words out of my mouth. Looking down the list, its difficult to see who we could have taken ahead. In the 2001 draft (the last in which we had a top 10 pick, I'm looking down the list after Sampi, and I'm honestly having trouble seeing one guy drafted in the next ten or so picks who would be anything other than just another body to join Hansen/Johnson/Staker/Seaby queue. In fact the more I look at that draft, the more convinced I am we dodged a bullet getting Sampi when we did. Up to pick 22 (where, with our third pick we did indeed take a tall- Seaby)
there is not one tall who would do anything other than join the list of Staker, Johnson, Seaby, Lynch and co as a 'maybe' kpp. With the exceptions of Dal Santo and maybe Bartel (both smalls) if we had let Sampi slip at #6 for any of the other players available from 6-20 in that draft, at the moment it would have been an enormous blunder on our part. We'd have passed up a star calibre, player who has carved out a spot for himself in his starting 22 and booted 31 goals in his second year, for another likely looking lad to join the queue of raw, potential filled 'possible' tall options in another few years, which frankly we have no shortage of. By all means, if there was a readily available draftee only a season or so out from being a definite kpp option, then yes, maybe we should have bit, but there simply wasn't.

The following year, there is simply no way we could have passed up the Chick trade, any more than the dockers could have not bitten on Headland- he was a star calibre player available at significantly below market price, end of story. Our first two remaining picks in the draft then both went on talls.

This year, its really too early to tell. Waters looks like another best available option selection, and one which frankly I'm pretty happy with at this point. So, the only possible odd looking draft selection in recent year was taking a small (Butler) at 20 and waiting till 26 to grab a tall in McConnell. Until I see how those guys handle themselves at WAFL level at least, I don't think I'm prepared ot pass judgement on our recruiting committee.

As for the what-ifs, all that establishes is that we don't have more than 3-4 options waiting in the wings. That's hardly damning, one could just as well ask what Fremantle will do with their engine room if Simmonds keeps getting injured, and Sandilands, Schammer and Dunn don't step up as required. Footy is a game of chance, and maths would tell you that with 44 or so players vying for 22 places you're never going to have more than a couple of plan Bs at best for most positions.

 

[Mead]

Re: Re: Re: we all agree

Originally posted by eagleye

Originally posted by Mead
Jonathan Brown would be.... nice, but the problem with quality key position players, is they simply do not come cheap. Just assuming that someone like Brown was on the market (which he wouldn't be), you'd probably be talking something like Judd + a 1st round pick to make it work, which would blow a gaping hole in our side to fill another one. Obviously, if someone like Hay got homesick and was available at a bargain we'd be idiots not to bite, but failing that, we just have to develop from within.
[/QUOTE


We would be stupid to give away juddy but say;
Braun + Macdoogal ( who may appeal through his potentiel ) or maybe a cox + 1 round dratf pick + 2nd round draft pick + maybe a chambers or something to sweeten the deal, wopuld be worth it for Jonathon Brown, or another quality forward who is still young, his impact in our side would be invaluable since we would now have the whole in our forward line closed and we can fully concentrate on the backline.

I have tipped us for 4th but i would confidently say 4th or 3rd if we had Jonathon Brown

If a tall does not stand up for the CHF or FF job next year we should go into crisis mode and enter trading!

The first deal I would probably be prepared to trade for Brown, the second I would think about, but here's a test for you- go offer any of those trades to a Brisbane fan. Once they've stopped laughing, consider the fact that Jonathan Brown is a young superstar CHF, fully developed and with about 8 great years ahead of him. Why on earth would Brisbane, a team in the middle of their 'premiership window', throw away a key component of their success for a younger, less developed key forward who *might* one day be as good as Brown, and a honest backup midfielder who wouldn't get a place on their bench??
Several average players does not equal a great player when it comes to trading. Stop for a second and consider your reaction if someone like Hawthorn offered Vandenberg + Hunter + Stone + 1st Round pick for Judd.

The simple is answer is that in the absence of Brown developing an entirely unaccountable liking for Western Australia and demanding to be traded to us, what we'd have to offer for Brown (or Tredrea, or Pavlich, or Reiwoldt, or any of the other young, elite kpp about the place) would be so utterly prohibitive that it would hurt our team more than it would help. It just aint gonna happen. Fwiw, the only quality kpp I could see us getting a sniff at for a price that would be at all acceptable would be possibly Darren Gaspar, and only then if he has a poor comeback year this season and then wants to leave Richmon. In that situation we'd still be taking a punt on what could be damaged goods, but that's simply the way the trading game works. Teams don't fall over themselves to give other teams what they want.

 

[The Passenger]

what we really need is for either Cox or Seaby to come on as a KP forward (preferably FF allowing either Gaspar or MacDougall to play CHB and the other at CHF).

Cox has shown glimpses up there, but not consistently enough.

Gardiner has shown he can play at FF, but his ruckwork is far to valuable.

I'm really banking on Seaby coming through as a forward/ruckman.

If he does, we don't have a need for three quality ruckman, which would allow us to trade Cox (whom i'm a big rap for but he will always be second fiddle to Gardiner) for a good KPP at either end of the ground.

It's a big call on a guy who hasn't played a senior game yet, but a lot of the future success of this team depends on Seaby.

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by Black Thunder
what we really need is for either Cox or Seaby to come on as a KP forward (preferably FF allowing either Gaspar or MacDougall to play CHB and the other at CHF).

Cox has shown glimpses up there, but not consistently enough.

Gardiner has shown he can play at FF, but his ruckwork is far to valuable.

I'm really banking on Seaby coming through as a forward/ruckman.

If he does, we don't have a need for three quality ruckman, which would allow us to trade Cox (whom i'm a big rap for but he will always be second fiddle to Gardiner) for a good KPP at either end of the ground.

It's a big call on a guy who hasn't played a senior game yet, but a lot of the future success of this team depends on Seaby.

True that. But the other thing worth noting, though, is that Cox is still comparitively a young'un in a position where players tend to take a notoriously long time to develop. The figures he put on the board in his third year are pretty much where Gardiner was in his third year.

Cox (2003)- 11.2 Disp, 3.9 marks, 17.5 Hitouts a game. 10 goals 3 behinds for the year.

Gardiner (1999)- 13.8 disp, 4 Marks, 13.8 Hitouts a game. 4 goals 5 behinds for the year.

Not a huge difference there- if anything, Coxxxy is actually getting a fair chunk more hitouts in the ruck than Gardiner was at that time. Personally, i think Cox is one of the biggest keys to our success this year. If he can step up and be a dominant ruckman, than Gardiner can spend more time up forward- on one hand this limits the wear and tear on Gardies' knees by giving us two excellent ruckmen to share the load, and on the other, it gives us the option of playing Gardiner up forward for extended periods. I really like the McDougall/Gardiner CHF/FF line. Obviously, at present Gardiner is too valuable to leave out of the ruck for long, but if Cox steps up to similarly high standards, suddenly our forward line issues are solved.

 

[daddy_4_eyes]

Originally posted by Moo
Look at the above list, apart from McDougall your last KPP taken in the top 10 was in 96 ...one M Gardiner (if I'm wrong I apologise but that is my read on it).

Just out of curiosity, how many top 10 picks have we had in that time, and how many of those have we stuffed up on?