Koby Stevens.

[Hard_to_Beat]

Even if it was possible (and even if Caddy didn't exist) there is no way the Bombers would want to do that.

Stevens is not worth an upgrade from 17 to 9.

He's not worth a 1st round upgrade. Period.

 

[Western Madness]

Has played average games for West Coast and doesn't really set the WAFL on fire (I love him but its true) will get peanuts for him

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

Has played average games for West Coast and doesn't really set the WAFL on fire (I love him but its true) will get peanuts for him

Inside mids take time. Cunnington only started playing consistent good football this season.

 

[Suma Magic]

He's not worth a 1st round upgrade. Period.

Not even a single spot at the bottom of the first round?

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

Not even a single spot at the bottom of the first round?

Weeeelllll, you know what I mean.

 

[blueboy25]

Has played average games for West Coast and doesn't really set the WAFL on fire (I love him but its true) will get peanuts for him

He had been very good in the WAFL before he got injured.

Maybe a big WAFL grand final this week may bump his price.

 

[keviewiggle]

He had been very good in the WAFL before he got injured.

Maybe a big WAFL grand final this week may bump his price.

We keep him at all costs.
We won't get a better player after pick 25 in the draft.
So why consider letting him go?

 

[Kwality]

We keep him at all costs.
We won't get a better player after pick 25 in the draft.
So why consider letting him go?

is he up to AFL footy? Yes/no? If no, grab whatever, or failing that delist him.

 

[THE_GUN]

If I was west coast, I would be looking at either Melbourne's 3rd round pick #45 or Bulldogs #46 pick

I dont think many clubs will be trading their 1st or 2nd round selections - specially for Stevens but both the doggie;s and Dee's need inside mids with their personell turnovers this year

 

[Eastern Rangers]

If I was west coast, I would be looking at either Melbourne's 3rd round pick #45 or Bulldogs #46 pick

I dont think many clubs will be trading their 1st or 2nd round selections - specially for Stevens but both the doggie;s and Dee's need inside mids with their personell turnovers this year

If that was the case upgrading a rookie would be a smart idea.

 

[Jazz71286]

If I was west coast, I would be looking at either Melbourne's 3rd round pick #45 or Bulldogs #46 pick

I dont think many clubs will be trading their 1st or 2nd round selections - specially for Stevens but both the doggie;s and Dee's need inside mids with their personell turnovers this year

Word is we are interested and would probably offer our second round pick (36). Stevens would provide immediate assistance to Selwood who has been doing the in and under work alone all year.

 

[Goldfish]

If I was west coast, I would be looking at either Melbourne's 3rd round pick #45 or Bulldogs #46 pick

I dont think many clubs will be trading their 1st or 2nd round selections - specially for Stevens but both the doggie;s and Dee's need inside mids with their personell turnovers this year

It's unlikely we will even use our 3rd round pick as we may be upgrading a rookie (ie. Dick) meaning we only make 2 live selections in the draft... A lot will depend on what happens over the trade period, depending who comes and goes will clearly determine how many we need to take.

IMO Stevens is worth a second round pick, or at least an upgrade on our second pick. In the past we have had a tendancy to upgrade picks and even bundle up picks we won't use, ie. Stevens + our 3rd for a 2nd etc.

As stated previously, I would rather keep him, but if he has decided he wants out and a few clubs are interested we will just make the best of a bad situation.

 

[Jeremias]

If I was west coast, I would be looking at either Melbourne's 3rd round pick #45 or Bulldogs #46 pick

I dont think many clubs will be trading their 1st or 2nd round selections - specially for Stevens but both the doggie;s and Dee's need inside mids with their personell turnovers this year

That's probably about correct in terms of the draft pick that West Coast can realistically expect for Stevens, but I can't see him being on the radar of the Western Bulldogs.

Not sure another inside midfielder is what they really need. They seem to have a fair few of them.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

It's unlikely we will even use our 3rd round pick as we may be upgrading a rookie (ie. Dick) meaning we only make 2 live selections in the draft... A lot will depend on what happens over the trade period, depending who comes and goes will clearly determine how many we need to take.

IMO Stevens is worth a second round pick, or at least an upgrade on our second pick. In the past we have had a tendancy to upgrade picks and even bundle up picks we won't use, ie. Stevens + our 3rd for a 2nd etc.

As stated previously, I would rather keep him, but if he has decided he wants out and a few clubs are interested we will just make the best of a bad situation.

Well we should use our third pick irrespective of it's number. But an upgrade on a third rounder isn't worth buggery all, as clubs get away from the top picks in the draft their rankings on potential draftee's gets further and further apart.

Clubs upgrade picks because they have someone in mind that they won't risk lasting another round and “that” round in this years draft is the second round, if it's a third round pick it's someone we wouldn't risk lasting the rookie draft and that doesn't constitute a player of equal value to Stevens.

In the past a third round pick was around 33-48 in an uncomprised draft. Now 33 is an mid to early second rounder.


As i said before, don't suggest a pick that is unlikley to secure a player of replacement value.

 

[Goldfish]

Well we should use our third pick irrespective of it's number. But an upgrade on a third rounder isn't worth buggery all, as clubs get away from the top picks in the draft their rankings on potential draftee's gets further and further apart.

Clubs upgrade picks because they have someone in mind that they won't risk lasting another round and “that” round in this years draft is the second round, if it's a third round pick it's someone we wouldn't risk lasting the rookie draft and that doesn't constitute a player of equal value to Stevens.

In the past a third round pick was around 33-48 in an uncomprised draft. Now 33 is an mid to early second rounder.

As i said before, don't suggest a pick that is unlikley to secure a player of replacement value.

Agree, which is why I stated I think Stevens is worth a second rounder?

 

[GarnerSmash]

How are Mckinley and Edwards going?
Do you really want another one?

How's pick 86 going?

 

[blueboy25]

So why consider letting him go?

You may have no choice in the matter, he is not contracted so could potentially walk for nothing.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

You may have no choice in the matter, he is not contracted so could potentially walk for nothing.

Not when we have a senario like this.

 

[WCE_Phill]

If Geelong are interested;

Stevens + 17 + 55 for picks 15 and 36?

Would give the WCE picks 15, 36 and 38. Importantly picks in front of Fremantle.

Bulldogs may be interested, for a big bodied inside mid whose done 3 preseasons.

Stevens + 38 for pick 27?

 

[Jimmy_the_Gent]

How's pick 86 going?

We were just happy with the list space

 

[The Falcon Strike]

How's pick 86 going?

A lot better than McKinley

 

[GarnerSmash]

A lot better than McKinley

Yeah, nah.

At least we used McKinley.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Yeah, nah.

At least we used McKinley.

A bit like how Hitler used poison and a pistol in Berlin.

 

[GarnerSmash]

A bit like how Hitler used poison and a pistol in Berlin.

You really think that was witty, don't you?

 

[The Falcon Strike]

You really think that was witty, don't you?

I got to watch Downfall the other night for the first time - quite an impressive film. The term "shot yourself in the foot" sprung to mind with McKinley - particularly given his spud-like performance in Rd 1 2011 helping us get the season off to a good start.