More trivia

[jim440]

Round 21, '95 (or thereabouts, I'm doing this from memory), Daniel Bandy kicked six goals against Footscray at the Western Oval.
Q/ Who was the totally outclassed ******* we played on him?






























A/ Craig Ellis - maybe the trade wasn't so bad

 

[Westy_Boy]

Still want that 26th pick back though!

 

[Top Dog]

Originally posted by Westy_Boy





Still want that 26th pick back though!

Does anyone still know why we had to gove that away?

 

[PC28]

All I read was 6 goals and i knew who it was...

Then i read the rest and it was confirmed...

Bye Bye Ellis, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out...

 

[sigscotty]

Originally posted by Top Dog


Does anyone still know why we had to gove that away?

Because Luke Darcy's career would only last another three years if he was forced to keep carrying the ruck by himself.

 

[Westy_Boy]

Originally posted by Top Dog


Does anyone still know why we had to gove that away?

Don't know TopDog.

It just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

The thing that gets me is that we were compensating Melbourne for Simmonds, not Fremantle for Bandy.

Who was getting Simmonds ? Fremantle. If Simmonds is that bloody good, let Freo compensate Melbourne for him then!

Anyhow, how can Simmonds be worth a 26th pick? A pick which would have maybe snared us Hardwick ? A pick in a similar range to what was used by Carlton to get a proven player, in Murphy? Farmer and Bizzel went for picks only 8 and 9 spots higher? And we gave it away to help Simmonds cross to Fremantle, and for us to get someone like Bandy in return.

One things for sure -- A lot of Bulldog supporters will be watching the kid that gets selected with that 26th pick with a lot of interest!

 

[Westy_Boy]

Because Luke Darcy's career would only last another three years if he was forced to keep carrying the ruck by himself.

Yes and no.

Bandy is an ok forward -- a decent backman -- an ordinary ruckman. He is not the type of player to have a major influence on Darcy's workload in the ruck.

You may disagree, but despite that -- I'm not saying I don't want Bandy as I can see a lot of positives when comparing him to Ellis, and he could be used in a pinch hitting ruck role for small periods in a game, as you suggested -- But what I'm saying however is, why, oh why, a second round pick for a fringe player in return?

Given salary restrictions and clubs willing to offload some bloody decent players, a 26th pick would have been a huge carrot.

If we wanted a decent ruckman (who can actually ruck ), and we were hellbent on giving away that pick, use it in a package with someone like Cox to Port, for one of Lade/French. Just the pick alone would have probably netted Biglands.

Hell, even if we just just upgraded our third round pick offer of #49 to #42 for Brissy, we would have had another ruckman in Knobel for effectively nothing.

See what I mean? If we had to trade that pick (which I did not want us to do unless it was something bloody special), at least DO SOMETHING with it. Go out and get something of value. Do not throw it in the mix in what should have been an already secured 'straight swap' of Ellis for Bandy.

We've thrown it away. We've been dudded, we've been screwed. As long as the club understands that, that's the first and only positive to have come out of the trade to date.

I'll be happy to be proven a fool should the 26th pick turn out to be a dud, and we get 5 years of solid football out of Bandy.