Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Sure, that is my point. We don't need an A grade ruckman, we need injury coverage for Stanley for two to 3 years. How much would spend on a player that you actually don't want playingThey are both minimum 3 years away from being realistic week to week picks at AFL level. Rucks take forever. Especially cat B ones who were offered contracts to play basketball in Greece this time last year.
Ceglar is not going to hinder their development anymore than Stanley/Fort were. They're not on the cusp, Geelong will know they have long term projects.
Sure, that is my point. We don't need an A grade ruckman, we need injury coverage for Stanley for two to 3 years. How much would spend on a player that you actually don't want playing
Ceglar + 59 for Geelong's pick 34.
Hawks covering 50% of the salary.
Pretty reasonable considering Cats are throwing everything and the kitchen sink at 2022 before the cliff dive/mass retirements begin.
But Ceglar is a worse player than Stanley lol, and Geelong is not playing Ceglar alongside Hawkins and Cameron in the forward lineCeglar + 59 for Geelong's pick 34.
Hawks covering 50% of the salary.
Pretty reasonable considering Cats are throwing everything and the kitchen sink at 2022 before the cliff dive/mass retirements begin.
But Ceglar is a worse player than Stanley lol, and Geelong is not playing Ceglar alongside Hawkins and Cameron in the forward line
I think I just threw up in my mouth. Why give up more than our existing back up ruck for a back up ruck? It's your own fault if your overpaying him. If there's future picks coming back and it's 41 going out i could live it otherwise it's a trade that actively makes us worse offCeglar + 59 for Geelong's pick 34.
Hawks covering 50% of the salary.
Pretty reasonable considering Cats are throwing everything and the kitchen sink at 2022 before the cliff dive/mass retirements begin.
Pretty sure we just handed Stanley a 2 year extension and the guy that Ceglar is replacing didn't play a game last year.That's a matter of opinion, obviously with how strong the link to the cats has been, Geelong disagrees.
Not sure you'd find many supporters, no matter the club, who rate Stanley higher than Ceglar.
That's a matter of opinion, obviously with how strong the link to the cats has been, Geelong disagrees.
Not sure you'd find many supporters, no matter the club, who rate Stanley higher than Ceglar.
He is an upgrade on Stanley (although for some strange reason Stanley normally beats him)
If you could go ahead and prevent us from making a spud trade here that would be just swellCeglar was just about ready to never play for Hawthorn again before Reeves rolled an ankle and he played the game of his life against the Swans. I’d still take him as ruck depth with the Hawks picking up part of the tab if he can’t get to the Cats.
I have a feeling the Salary is more to get yoou up too the 95% minimumFuture 3rd sounds right. Hopefully hawks don't buckle on the salary to much.
Future 3rd sounds right. Hopefully hawks don't buckle on the salary to much.
I would expect the cats to do what they did with Jenkins and Higgins and a few others where we split the last year of their contract over two years if the salary cap is the issue. It extends their careers and gets them out of being overpaid. Outside chance you're doing it to hit the cap floor too. I don't think the cap piece is a huge talking pointFuture 3rd sounds right. Hopefully hawks don't buckle on the salary to much.
Would surely just be keeping him if that was the caseI have a feeling the Salary is more to get yoou up too the 95% minimum
I mean you could but it would waste a list spot. He's probably not playing at any level for you from next yearWould surely just be keeping him if that was the case
The problem is when he plays he plays quite well. Hard to not pick a bloke that deserves a game. Surely any trade getting done here is going to be pretty irrelevant picks wise?I mean you could but it would waste a list spot. He's probably not playing at any level for you from next year
It will be pretty irrelevant. For us he's just replacing a back up that we haven't reached for in 18 months and every chance we don't reach for ceglar eitherThe problem is when he plays he plays quite well. Hard to not pick a bloke that deserves a game. Surely any trade getting done here is going to be pretty irrelevant picks wise?
since when?But Ceglar is a worse player than Stanley
Brilliant!
He will provide no end of frustration to our vfl coach thenLooking forward to watching him constantly tapping it down to Geelong's opponents. Think he give them a decent presence around the ground