List Mgmt. Player Ages Thread

[eth-dog]

I feel dirty.

And why the **** would we secure the number one pick and give it up for Griffin?? Would love him - but at THAT high a price?

I would take pick 1 for Griffen every single day of the week and twice on sunday's. Absolute superstar. Think of it this way:

Griffen for Bellchambers and Pears

 

[Jade]

I would take pick 1 for Griffen every single day of the week and twice on sunday's. Absolute superstar. Think of it this way:

Griffen for Bellchambers and Pears

Hmmmm........

Dunno; Bellchambers is a loss.

 

[chrisdon16]

Since Daniher came in it's been a curse for T Bell. Daniher is obviously the coaches pet. But I still don't think Bell will leave Essendon, and I don't think Essendon will trade him


CTRL + Q to Enable/Disable GoPhoto.it


CTRL + Q to Enable/Disable GoPhoto.it

 

[Rancid Trogs]

Hmmmm........

Dunno; Bellchambers is a loss.

He's not our best ruck, our best forward, or our best ruck / forward. Therefore he is expendable

 

[Phone]

So i'll throw one out there:

Pick 1 from GWS for Bellchambers and Pears.

gws reject. perhaps reply back with pick 11

 

[Rancid Trogs]

gws reject. perhaps reply back with pick 11

Change Pears to Hooker and add Crameri. What say you to that GWS?

 

[Pweter]

Hooks is stronger, just as fast, has a better reach and has better hands. You also neglected to mention that Hooker is by far a better reader of play behind the ball

But Hooker looks funny when he runs and in his first game back after a decent hamstring tear he was chasing Buddy when he kicked that goal.

Clearly the evidence I have presented makes a compelling case for "Hooker = trade bait".

On the flip side of the coin, Pears doesn't look funny when he runs and he wasn't chasing Buddy when he kicked that goal.

Clearly the evidence I have presented makes a compelling case for "Pears > Hooker".

 

[chrisdon16]

Pears/Hooker/Melksham for Pick 1

 

[Zach Package]

Yoda_

What's the situation with zone selections? is it a F/S like bidding system? or just if we want a player we must trade with GWS to get him?

Spitballing specifically about Willie Rioli here

 

[Phone]

It's hard to believe GWS will trade the number pick 1 for a bunch of players who are unproven in the circumstances they will find themselves in at GWS. Particularly if we can't even throw in our first round pick. Pears last played a good season seasons ago. It might have been a fluke. He can't be defined as an established back which is presumably what GWS want. TBC hasn't played a whole season as a ruckman. He's not established as a ruckman. He's potentially a no. 1 ruckman, but he's never proven it over a whole season, his run of good forms ends and he drops down to the reserves. Can't be considered a star or superstar, and don't you think GWS want one a star or superstar in a trade for the number 1 pick? Crameri hasn't really proven he's not a flat track bully, and Hooker as we know is perhaps not the man to play on gorillas and hence not the man to play on the guys GWS probably need him to play on, without even getting into the fact Hooker perfectly suits our needs. You're not getting the number 1 pick by saying "dyson and a 3rd rounder and a 4th rounder".

So there's those issues relating to whether GWS even want those guys and certainly the price they'll play for those guys, and there's also the issue of those guys wanting to play for GWS. If TBC wants to leave Essendon, and Collingwood or Hawthorn want him, where do you think he says to trade him to? I'd say the number 1 pick is practically unobtainable, particularly if we're dealing with GWS directly.

 

[Yoda_]

Just putting it out there guys but GWS aren't trading pick 1 (a potential superstar) for bit part ok players.

First round picks alone these days are reserved for guns, something Pears, TBC and even Hooker are not. Perhaps Crameri could be apart of a deal but even then it might be clutching at straws.

As far as I know eth-dog that is correct, you bid, a club matches or slips through. A club like GWS may not even bid for a player like little Willy and we pick him up for nothing in the rookie draft.

 

[HirdyLannister]

We can dream though ?

 

[BrunoV]

Oh my god. You really haven't watched football since 09, have you?

It's not that. It is just that for a lot of watchers the first impression is the only impression.

 

[BrunoV]

In the modern AFL, where 18 teams = a diluted draft pool, Essendon's current ladder position meaning we don't have access to the top picks and the previous 3 years compromised drafts, the only drafting advantage a club can get is through the F/S rule. Utilising the James Hird Academy, we can at least be hopeful that our F/S prospects are of draftable quality. Hence their positions on my proposed list.

The half our 'best 22' you speak of aren't quality enough to ensure a premiership. In fact, they all reek of the bottom 6 players St Kilda carried in 3 grand final losses. Hence my removing them for more talented, younthful and athletic options.

The only positional stocks you've mentioned that are actually weakened are the ruck stocks. But the reality is that TBC would be a back up to Ryder, which is a) detrimental to his career and development, and b) irrelevant to our game day ruck stocks (unless injury occurs).

Our genuine flag window opens up from 2014. My drafting perhaps pushes it back a year, but extends it at the back end to ensure a genuine dynasty and avoids bottoming out quickly.

Josh Toy is no doubt a risk, but if you get him for nothing you lose nothing. It is important to remember there is a reason he was pre-selected by Gold Coast as a 17 year old - he was in the top 3 youngsters in his draft year.

Your move

Sorry, not going there. These are all just troll points which are either taking the piss or not worth responding to. If you want my responses, they're essentially contained in my posting history.

 

[JDavey]

First time in a while we are injury free and enjoying some depth and we are talking about trading it away?
Interesting!

 

[BrunoV]

Just putting it out there guys but GWS aren't trading pick 1 (a potential superstar) for bit part ok players.

First round picks alone these days are reserved for guns, something Pears, TBC and even Hooker are not. Perhaps Crameri could be apart of a deal but even then it might be clutching at straws.

As far as I know eth-dog that is correct, you bid, a club matches or slips through. A club like GWS may not even bid for a player like little Willy and we pick him up for nothing in the rookie draft.

So given that GWS is reducing list size are there any steals? Any Toys that we might actually be able to develop into something?

 

[Zach Package]

First time in a while we are injury free and enjoying some depth and we are talking about trading it away?
Interesting!

We've been through this before, 2 years ago it was Ryder for O'Meara

 

[Pweter]

So given that GWS is reducing list size are there any steals? Any Toys that we might actually be able to develop into something?

We needed to get in last year. Port landing Hombsch and Neade for a 2nd round draft pick was a massive steal.

 

[Zach Package]

We needed to get in last year. Port landing Hombsch and Neade for a 2nd round draft pick was a massive steal.

Neade I think was basically an ask and you shall receive situation, GWS didn't want him, may as well give him to someone who did.

As far as victims of the list squeeze go, I can think of a couple.

Sam Darley. 7-8 games last year as a running defender. Hasn't broken in this year, looks AFL standard if i had to make a call based on his 2012. Could be lured by the promise of senior footy at a WB/Melb/StK type club. A Taswegian I believe.

Shaun Edwards. Speedy tall utility from the NT, hasn't played seniors this year. not sure of his situation, possibly worth a look.

Sam Frost. Brother of Jack I think. Melbourne boy, KP size and can play both ends according to his Giants website profile. Is still considered depth, even with no Davis or Cornes. Maybe worth a look should we lose a KP player, not sure how they view him internally though.

Gerald Ugle. Quick, indigenous small forward. has played 1-2 games and hasn't shown that much from memory. If I were to say right now, he's probably gone at the end of the year.

There are also a couple that we'd have to trade something of decent value to get, but would be well worth it IMO. Bugg, Haynes, Buntine and Sumner are all victorians and could be lured home with the promise of solid senior games, because they've all been sort of shuffled in out and around in the past 18 months, and I'm not sure how they fit in to be frank.

Bear in mind that the real squeeze comes in 2015, until then they still have a list size of 50, which won't be standard afl size until 2019 ). The main squeeze you get this year is because they've just got so many high draft picks that will all be wanting to play senior footy, and they can't play all of them

 

[calyam]

Neade I think was basically an ask and you shall receive situation, GWS didn't want him, may as well give him to someone who did.

As far as victims of the list squeeze go, I can think of a couple.

Sam Darley. 7-8 games last year as a running defender. Hasn't broken in this year, looks AFL standard if i had to make a call based on his 2012. Could be lured by the promise of senior footy at a WB/Melb/StK type club. A Taswegian I believe.

Shaun Edwards. Speedy tall utility from the NT, hasn't played seniors this year. not sure of his situation, possibly worth a look.

Sam Frost. Brother of Jack I think. Melbourne boy, KP size and can play both ends according to his Giants website profile. Is still considered depth, even with no Davis or Cornes. Maybe worth a look should we lose a KP player, not sure how they view him internally though.

Gerald Ugle. Quick, indigenous small forward. has played 1-2 games and hasn't shown that much from memory. If I were to say right now, he's probably gone at the end of the year.

There are also a couple that we'd have to trade something of decent value to get, but would be well worth it IMO. Bugg, Haynes, Buntine and Sumner are all victorians and could be lured home with the promise of solid senior games, because they've all been sort of shuffled in out and around in the past 18 months, and I'm not sure how they fit in to be frank.

Bear in mind that the real squeeze comes after 2015, until then they still have a list size of 50, which won't be standard afl size until 2019 eek: ). The main squeeze you get this year is because they've just got so many high draft picks that will all be wanting to play senior footy, and they can't play all of them

Did like the look of Darley last season.

Another one I'd add is Anthony Miles. Only 21 and seems out of favour at the Giants but has a good capacity to find the football.

 

[eth-dog]

Really only interested in pick 1 or WHE from the Giants tbh

 

[Zach Package]

they've also got pick 10, originally given for Phil Davis, but given back in the Brad Crouch trade

 

[Yoda_]

::NEWSFLASH::
Greater Western Sydney will reduce their list post 2014 season

 

[Yoda_]

So given that GWS is reducing list size are there any steals? Any Toys that we might actually be able to develop into something?

You talking state league products or rival AFL clubs (namely GWS in this instance)?

 

[hurlygurdy]

One thing i really like about our list atm is that we have great depth across the board. Wouldn't it be a big win just to hold onto to what we have? Next season I'd love to have TBC, Pears and Gumby in the wings, while Merret and the other more junior players continue to develop... This injury free period we are in is almost unheard of in the clubs history. If we had had more of a normal season so far, many or all of the players talked about as trade bait would be firmly entrenched in the starting 22.