Judd for Jonathon Brown?

[Mead]

This year? Feck no.

'Good' midfielders might be a dime a dozen in the competition, but there is a very elite category, maybe about 10 members at most, of players who go beyond just being talented midfielders, and have the ability to be champions and genuine game breakers.

Voss is one of them, ditto McLeod, Black, Harvey and Buckley and Hird. Cousins and Crawford are pretty much on the threshold.

Judd is one of the very rare players out there who seems destined for that- he has the physical tools, the mindset, and the skills. And if he is going to break into that category, he'll probably do it in '04, now that he's got through his second year, signed up for the long term, and learned to handle taggers. Maybe he might drop short of the true super-elite category, but I'd prefer to find out before we decide to send him east. I do find it rather ironic that 2 months ago, Judd was a superstar, AA certainty, best athlete in the southern hemisphere, et al, then he re-signed, and suddenly all the melbournites are convinced he's an over-rated show pony. Sour grapes?

Frankly, I don't understand the obsession with 'trade for player XY or Z, asap!' Of course Jonathan Brown would be bloody nice, but losing Judd would be a calamity which would blow a gaping hole in where we are strong, not to mention the enormous off field harm it would do to this club to have gone all out to sign a young gun, sold the club to him profusely, and then once he'd chosen us, gift wrap him for another club?

9 times out of 10, trading is a mug's game. Check Freo's high profile signings over the past few years for examples of this.

Croad. (big oops) (admittedly, McPharlin was reasonable compensation) You could have had Judd instead, however.

Farmer (superstar one day, also ran the next)

Headland. (Super high profile signing, average. McPhee has been just as good as him, and thats even before you throw the draft picks into the equation.)

Trades tend to eat up quality, and burn salary cap space.

If West Coast did trade Judd, it would probably result in me being the closest I have ever been to not renewing a membership. We sucked up to this kid, did everything we possibly could to get him to sign, and to his credit, he's shown enormous maturity and loyalty to our club. To kick him out the door after he's shown loyalty when everyone was suggesting he would go would be a pretty despicable thing to do. This isn't Leigh Brown we're talking about, after all.

 

[Kenny_01]

Originally posted by Mead
You could have had Judd instead, however.

And then no Polak. I'll take Polak. No way we could have got both of them.

Originally posted by Mead

Headland. (Super high profile signing, average. McPhee has been just as good as him, and thats even before you throw the draft picks into the equation.)

So Judd gets tagged and struggles... he is just going through the motions. First season where Headland gets tagged... and now he is average?

Yes, he didn't have the greatest of seasons (had surgery mid-season as well which doesn't help) but If Headland had the space McPhee did, people would still be raving about him. Every game he has been let free, he has played very very well. I had him down for 3 BOG's this season... not too bad for an average footballer. And you can expect him only to improve.

If we didn't have Headland, then I severely doubt both Bell and Hasleby would be All-Australians.

And I'd still take Farmer over Heath Black. We had to pay someone good money, and he deserved it after what he showed at Melbourne. His form hasn't been the same year but now he is on less money on his new contract and we're happy to have him.

Croad has obviously been dissapointing this year but you can't always win.

With all these overpaid hacks everyone says we have (Croad, Farmer, Longmuir, Headland, Clive) you would think we would have finished near the bottom 4, not the top 4.

 

[Kenny_01]

And before I forget, McPhee hasn't been as good as Headland. He has played a good month of footy, and all of a sudden everyone thinks he has a great season. The only game he had any real impact was against the Eagles where he played on Embley and kicked 4 against him. He is a talented kid though, and hopefully he has a good career with the Bombers.

 

[USAEagle]

This is a pointless post as the CBA says that a player cannot be traded in the first year of a contract and Judd is....in the first year of his new contract.

 

[littleMAGPIEkid]

dont u understand theres such things as hypothetical questions??

 

[The Passenger]

Judd for Brown??? hmmmmm, probably not.

As I said on the trade board I had Pavlich, Judd, Riewoldt as the top three players in the comp for trade value, followed a bit back by Jon Brown at 4.

Brown is sensational and playing at CHF, would be a great asset to us.

Good midfielders may be much easier to find, but freak midfielders like Judd aren't, and they are just as, if not more damaging than very good CHF's, because they get their hands on the ball more often.

And besides, I think Andrew McDougall has all the potential in the world to be as good as just about any CHF in the competition - but whether he delivers on that is anothre question.

 

[USAEagle]

This is good...a 37 year old being lectured by a little magpie kid. rolleyes)

Sure I do, but a hypothesis has to have some basis in possibility. This trade in fact would not be possible until the end of 2004.

 

[Kenny_01]

And to answer the question, no I wouldn't do the trade... I'd rather keep Judd.

 

[The Passenger]

Just on Judd as well, when he's at hes best, he's already very close to the most damaging player in the comp. I'd have Andrew McLeod clearly number 1 at his best, and than a group of Judd, Pavlich, Goodes, Lloyd, Voss and Buckley are all about level.

But, as is the case for most second year players, he is quite inconsitent. He does have the hallmarks of being a rather inconsitent player, but that's ok, because if he only fires up for 11 games a year, than there's more likely than not at least 9 wins in those games....

I think he just adds the perfect balance to our midfield - Cousins the prolific ball winner, Kerr the in and under player, Fletcher the consumate all round midfielder, and Judd the killer.

The other plus about Judd, because he is so good when he's at his best, he always cops a tag, so it takes the attention of Kerr, Cousins and Fletcher. And IMO if Judd turns up to play, there won't be a tagger in the comp that will be able to stop him so it will essentially be a useless tag anyway.....

 

[littleMAGPIEkid]

Originally posted by USAEagle
This is good...a 37 year old being lectured by a little magpie kid. rolleyes)

Sure I do, but a hypothesis has to have some basis in possibility. This trade in fact would not be possible until the end of 2004.

the fact is this trade would never happen, and that throwing in that "this cant happen because rah rah rah" was pointless because pple are posting in this thread just as a fantasy trade.

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by Kenny_01
And then no Polak. I'll take Polak. No way we could have got both of them.

Hmm, i have been doing a fair bit of freo slagging off lately, but anyway- I assume you mean that if you had have taken player X, then someone else would have taken Player Y? I really don't think that's a certainty- at the very least, you could have had Polak, and another very good draft pick.

Originally posted by Kenny_01
So Judd gets tagged and struggles... he is just going through the motions. First season where Headland gets tagged... and now he is average?

Yes, he didn't have the greatest of seasons (had surgery mid-season as well which doesn't help) but If Headland had the space McPhee did, people would still be raving about him. Every game he has been let free, he has played very very well. I had him down for 3 BOG's this season... not too bad for an average footballer. And you can expect him only to improve. If we didn't have Headland, then I severely doubt both Bell and Hasleby would be All-Australians.

Headland: 15.8 disposals, 0.81 Goals, 4.3 Marks, 2.6 tackles

Judd: 18.2 Disposals, 2.2 marks, 1.26 Goals, 3.2 Tackles
(Can anyone remember where he ended up ranking in the AFL for clearances?)

Judd has been significantly better this year than he was last. Not to mention the fact that he is two years younger than Headland, and made his debut three years later.

I get the impression Des has gone backwards since he left the Lions, would you agree? So Judd has been forced to deal with taggers and still managed to improve as a player.
Meanwhile Headland has wilted under the pressure so far- he may or may not come good, but there certainly isn't any guarantee that he will. Why can you expect him to improve then? At least with Judd, you have a player who has shown a logical progression of being better in season 2 than he was in season 1?
Once upon a time, people would have expected Croad to improve...

Originally posted by Kenny_01
And I'd still take Farmer over Heath Black. We had to pay someone good money, and he deserved it after what he showed at Melbourne. His form hasn't been the same year but now he is on less money on his new contract and we're happy to have him.

Croad has obviously been dissapointing this year but you can't always win.

With all these overpaid hacks everyone says we have (Croad, Farmer, Longmuir, Headland, Clive) you would think we would have finished near the bottom 4, not the top 4.

So Farmer looked worth it at the time, but wasn't. Croad looked worth it at the time, but wasn't. Headland looked worth it at the time- but hasn't been, so far at least.

At the time Freo recruited Croad and Farmer, I was spitting that we didn't make a play for them. I was hoping against hope that we'd get Headland last year, but now looking back, I'm glad the club saw it differently. All I'm saying is that trading for big names tends to be enormous folly.

I'm not knocking the quality of Freo as a side, all I'm saying is they got where there are due to a few canny high draft selections excellent development from the rookie list, solid drafting with the lower picks, (imo, look at Haddrill, Woods, Hayden, Sandilands, Medhurst, for the reason Freo have gone forward as a team) and a good coach. If anything, their 'high profile' trades have held them back further than they've advanced them.

 

[TheRealBuzz]

I've always been of the opinion that Brown is overrated. And a bogan.

But, then again, I also thought Juddy was also a tad overrated by the football public.

Still, I wouldn't make the trade.

 

[chrisjudd3]

How is Judd cocky littlemagpie?

He is one of the highest profile players IN WA but only by the design of the media, he stays away from the spotlight often and when he's on the tv, he keeps to himself often and limits his words.
He's a true professional for a player of his age, and its clear football is his main aim, not the glitz and glamour and hubris-like status.

Everyone jumped on the Judd bandwagon to say how good he is, now everyone is parasitical jumping on boardwagon aboard the bag Judd wagon. Judd never asked for it, never even wanted it, now people like you want to tear him apart from a pretty uneventful second half of the season. The media is the one who overrated Juddy far above his second-year player status. The fans were influenced by the media and had the stupid idea that he was the greatest in the world.

Frankly, he is good player, one of the best youngsters around, but, like most players, still has to learn much much more about football yet. Where were all the detractors in the first half of the season????

 

[LongBombFromOutside50]

The way I see it, both are extremely talented footballers with the ability to become outright superstars of the competition over a long period of time.

Brown is only 21, yet is already one of the top two centre half forwards in the league. He is Carey-like in the way he hits the packs hard, has an unlimited amount of courage and is deadly by foot, being capable of pinpointing a pass onto a team mate's chest or roosting the ball 60+ metres. Unlike most other 21 year old key position players who are still developing their body strength and learning to cope with the physicality and demand of playing in one of the hardest positions on the ground at the highest level, Brown is one of the strongest players in the league, and is also deceptively quick off the mark or on the lead. Despite being such a big man, his skills by hand and at ground level are equally adept, proven by his 30 metre handball into the arms of a full speed Akermanis (who goaled as a result) in the SF on Friday night.

Judd is 19, and has the ability to be one of the 'elite' midfielders in the next two years. His pace from naught to a hundred is as good as anyone in the league, and his clean handling of the ball
at ground level almost rivals the crisp hands of Koutoufides in his prime. His balance is sensational, as evidenced by his riding of the bump from McManus in the round 22 derby, and laying a perfectly executed handball on his knees to a team mate. As well as having elite athleticism, his kicking is almost always well weighted to a team mate, and can penetrate long distances. He is capable of tearing a game apart like he did against Brisbane in round 12 and to a lesser extent, Carlton in round 15.

The fact remains, almost all of the premiership winning sides of the ninetees and the twenty-first century have all had dominant CHFs. Hawthorn in '91 had Brereton, Essendon in '93 had Hird, Carlton in '95 had Kernahan, North Melbourne in '96 and '99 had Carey, Essendon in 2000 had Lucas, and Brisbane in 2001 and 2002 had Brown (although niggling ankle injuries prevented his 2002 season from being as good as his 2001). West Coast and Adelaide are really the only premiership winning sides to not have had a dominant CHF, although Langdon and Robran were still very good players.

The four sides still in the race for the premiership also all have a dominant CHF. Port have Tredrea, Collingwood have Tarrant, Brisbane have Brown and Sydney have Goodes, who was playing there for the majority of the season before Ball injured his shoulder. Despite having vastly different styles of play, all these CHFs are dominant players, probably the top four CHFs in the league, and all have played a major role in getting their respective sides to where they are now.

I'm not doubting the fact that Judd is, and will be an outstanding player, but Brown is as good as Carey on his day, and he has the time and the ability to be as good as him throughout a period of five consecutive seasons. Brown would allow McDougall to play as a full forward, and have Gaspar and Glass learn to play their footy in key defensive positions. The loss of Judd cannot be underestimated, but the midfield of Cousins, Kerr, Fletcher, Embley, Jones, Chick et al is still very strong, and rotating Sampi and Chambers as midfielders/half forwards would also help cover the loss of Judd.

As I said before, I'd be inclined to do this trade in an instant.

 

[Kenny_01]

Originally posted by Mead
Hmm, i have been doing a fair bit of freo slagging off lately, but anyway- I assume you mean that if you had have taken player X, then someone else would have taken Player Y? I really don't think that's a certainty- at the very least, you could have had

Yep, it's always hypothetical and hard to predict but if we had taken Judd with pick 1, I am guessing (and that's all it is) that St. Kilda would have taken Hodge and then WC Polak, leaving us with Ball or Sampi. Considering that Ball wanted to finish his schooling in Melbourne, it probably would have been Sampi... but it's all hypothetical. But I very much doubt we could have got both Judd and Polak.

Originally posted by Mead

Headland: 15.8 disposals, 0.81 Goals, 4.3 Marks, 2.6 tackles

Judd: 18.2 Disposals, 2.2 marks, 1.26 Goals, 3.2 Tackles
(Can anyone remember where he ended up ranking in the AFL for clearances?)

Judd has been significantly better this year than he was last. Not to mention the fact that he is two years younger than Headland, and made his debut three years later.

I get the impression Des has gone backwards since he left the Lions, would you agree? So Judd has been forced to deal with taggers and still managed to improve as a player.
Meanwhile Headland has wilted under the pressure so far- he may or may not come good, but there certainly isn't any guarantee that he will. Why can you expect him to improve then? At least with Judd, you have a player who has shown a logical progression of being better in season 2 than he was in season 1?
Once upon a time, people would have expected Croad to improve...

Gone Backwards? Hard to say. He certainly hasn't been as prominent as last season, but he is learning to play with the added attention and will end up a better player than he was a year ago. Wilted under the pressure? That's a bit tough, he is still learning to play with the attention. Breaking the tags he has been getting is tough and only the really best players can do it consistantly. You can say Judd wilted under the pressure when he started getting very close attention towards the end of the year, but he is also in a similar situation and learning to adjust. You don't lose your ability and Headland shows when given any space that he can carry the ball and deliver it to our forwards better than anyone on our list. It's harsh saying he has gone backwards though. Kerr wasn't as good this season as last season, but would you say he has gone backwards?

And why are you comparing Headland's and Judd's stats? I didn't compare their seasons. You were comparing McPhee's season to Headland and saying he was just as good which was a ridiculous statement.

And we can expect Headland to improve as I said as he learns to play with the attention and hopefully he won't have a niggling ankle injury next season. Even still, he commands a tag and so if even if he doesn't have a great season, he takes the attention away from someone else which is invaluable to our side. He has shown numerous times that if you don't tag him, he can cut up the opposition with his runs through the lines and his delivery to our forwards, as I said.

And yes, Judd has shown a logical progression but it doesn't work like that. Again, I'll bring up the example of Kerr. Is it not a reasonable assumption to think he will improve, even though his 2003 wasn't as good as 2002? And most first year players will improve... it's another thing improving from your 3rd season to your 4th season, 4th season to 5th season and so on. Obviously not everyone does come on as you would hope. Croad's confidence has been shot to pieces this year, but he is still only 23 and can improve. Football is very much a game of confidence, and unfortunately for us he doesn't have much of it at the moment.

Originally posted by Mead

So Farmer looked worth it at the time, but wasn't. Croad looked worth it at the time, but wasn't. Headland looked worth it at the time- but hasn't been, so far at least.

At the time Freo recruited Croad and Farmer, I was spitting that we didn't make a play for them. I was hoping against hope that we'd get Headland last year, but now looking back, I'm glad the club saw it differently. All I'm saying is that trading for big names tends to be enormous folly.

I'm not knocking the quality of Freo as a side, all I'm saying is they got where there are due to a few canny high draft selections excellent development from the rookie list, solid drafting with the lower picks, (imo, look at Haddrill, Woods, Hayden, Sandilands, Medhurst, for the reason Freo have gone forward as a team) and a good coach. If anything, their 'high profile' trades have held them back further than they've advanced them.

You can say they weren't worth it (and yeah, up to now, they havn't been on the field atleast), but we have made many trades work in our favour. We've got Carr, Simmonds, McPharlin, Cook, Bell, etc. from trades.

We were going to lose Black anyway and we gained Farmer, I doubt we lost anything there.

Look at Port Adelaide and how many players they have recruited. A lot of their players are recycled or 'high profile' recruits.

Another thing is that higher profile recruits have a lot of expectation on them (especially when recruited to struggling clubs) and are often unfairly judged compared to other players on the list because of the weight of expectation. They also take a bit of time to settle in and adjust to new roles, the coaching, etc.

So yeah, you can say Croad and Farmer weren't worth it, but at that time our club was in deep **** only winning 2 games and losing millions of dollars, so they did help bring some confidence back to the club and everything has been uphill since then. And they both still have time to play some good footy for our club.

Generally, I do agree with you though. You want to develop as many players as possible and not depend on trading. When quality players like Headland become available though, you still take them if you can. It's a matter of getting a good blend of both so you can get the balance of your side right. Collingwood is a good example. Malthouse joined them with a reasonably poor list... he has developed them really well as well as recruited a few players to fill in the missing gaps and now he has a club fighting it out for the flag.

One last thing, given your stance on recruiting, you must be pretty dissapointed about recruiting Chick? If you are going to knock Croad, Farmer and Headland, you may as well be consistant and have a go at Chick.

 

[chaosx123]

Originally posted by Kenny_01
If you are going to knock Croad, Farmer and Headland, you may as well be consistant and have a go at Chick.

It's spelt "consistent".

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by chaosx123
It's spelt "consistent".

Score one, chaos.

On Chick, well, the jury is out. He's had an average to good season, but the bar is considerably lower than it would be for Desmond, because we gave up less to get him. I suppose its similar to Farmer in that regard, although I very much doubt Chick started on the sort of salary Farmer was being paid.

I suppose as useful as Chick as been this year, I can see the merit of not having done the trade though. He came cheap, but the draft pick we gave up was high enough that it could have made a pretty substantial difference in the sort of player we got out of the draft. By going for the more experienced Chick, we're, to a lesser extent, doing an Adelaide, mortgaging our future and expecting a premiership to be forthcoming over the next 2-3 years. Doing that with one mid range first round pick might be an acceptable gamble, doing it two years running with more valuable picks (if we go after Rawlings or Hay) is pretty much ensuring a tougher run further down the track.

Really, the point I'm trying to make is that every time a team engineers a high profile trade, they're gambling that they know something that the other side doesn't- trades are very rarely win win, indeed, sometimes there seems to be almost no correlation between how a player performs at one club and how they perform at another. Using the example of Judd, its pretty clear that no matter how good or bad he might be any other club, he's doing pretty well right now, appears to be suited to West Coast, and his headed for a future where at worst he'll be either solid, classy contributor, and at best he'll be a superstar. Now, if we trade him, there is absolutely no guarantee that the player we get in return will do well with us- players struggle to fit in, they get homesick, they just have trouble with the new system and coaching staff, etc etc etc. So, to trade Judd, I'd want a good enough deal to compensate us for the loss of Judd *and* the chance that whoever we picked up might not do well at West Coast- of course, the other club'd be stuck with the same situation with Judd, maybe he wouldn't take to a new team, so they'd want more value than him to compensate them for that possibility. So the situation you are left in is whether nobody in their right mind will trade unless one side has the other over the barrel, or both are prepared to take enormous chances. In general, I think it is a far better possibility to keep the trading to a minimum and concentrate on growing your own talent.

 

[larrikin]

Originally posted by Mead
By going for the more experienced Chick, we're, to a lesser extent, doing an Adelaide, mortgaging our future and expecting a premiership to be forthcoming over the next 2-3 years.

I agree - to an extent. Sure, we may have picked up another quality player with pick #10, but for every Chris Judd, there's at least another 20 Jaxon Crabb or David Antonowicz's out there. The Eagles new what they were getting for Chick, and were happy with it.

The other point is you can't have a club full of 18 year olds. It simply doesn't work. Young guys need leadership, and there aren't too many Haydn Bunton Jnr's out there who can captain coach at 19 (who else watched Talking Footy?). Not only did we get a good player in Chick, but we got a role model and leader for many of the young players around the club and his legacy will live on longer than the 3-4 years he plays.

 

[Captain Random]

Originally posted by chaosx123
It's spelt "consistent".

If your name was correct, you'd be spelling it as "Dz*8!p~23".

Chen, I agree that we should concentrate on growing our own talent, in preference to doing showstopper trade deals. However, the obvious flipside to our "take the best player in the draft" philosophy was that it assumes that trades would need to take place at some stage, otherwise we'd end up with 18 midfielders. Put genuine quality on the table and, combined with the magnetic lure of Cottesloe Beach, we should be able to take our pick of the homing pigeons.

On another sort-of-related note, I've just read Dockers supporters elsewhere (who would be pretty gunshy of dealing with us, you'd think) discussing the prospect of picking up Callum Chambers. That's food for thought, isn't it ... what deal would we do there?

 

[no1bankteller]

Larrikin

I do not think we are doing Adelide with Chick as we have used him to supplement our core and help with the leadership around the Club. We have not billed hims as a saviour ala Hedland or Carey.

Last yeart I was actually hoping that we would get Chick, and if that meant missing out on Hedland so be it, as I see Chick as a team player and a very strong leader and you can never have enough of these type of players. The expectations around Chick are far less then those of most other recruits from last year and he has fufilled his role well.

Chick still has an important role within the club and I would love to see him moved into the backline as a back pocket of back flank where his quickness, desperation tackling and work ethic would come in very handy.

 

[larrikin]

Originally posted by no1bankteller
Larrikin

I do not think we are doing Adelide with Chick as we have used him to supplement our core and help with the leadership around the Club. We have not billed hims as a saviour ala Hedland or Carey.

I thought that was basically what I said

 

[The Oracle]

Originally posted by no1bankteller
Who would make this deal?

I know I would without blinking!

Only a Brisbane Supporter would want to make a trade like that !!

 

[Voice of Reason]

Originally posted by Kenny_01
Look at Port Adelaide and how many players they have recruited. A lot of their players are recycled or 'high profile' recruits.

I'd argue that the most important players at Port are the home-grown ones, like Tredrea, James, Francou (yes I know), Cornes, Burgoynes, Brogan. They are a blended team with a couple of important players added to the mix to supplement their home-grown - Paxman and Primus being the two much older ones who have been really successful.

The high profile Hardwick and Pickett haven't (IMO) been that good for Port - they were intended to win the flag - and haven't yet, though I still think they might this year.

Overall the saviour signing like Carey usually doesn't work.

I'll defend Chick too - although I was disappointed in his season, he's a good pick up for us - the right sort of experienced hard-bodied player with good character. I would've liked Headland too of course and do believe that he will be better for this season's experience where he's had to cop more of the attention.

But neither Croad nor Farmer were worth it IMO, before or since the trade. Both labelled as franchise players or "saviour signings", cost too much, contribute too little.

 

[no1bankteller]

Spot on Voice!