Rumour Thread

[jhndos]

personaly in my drunken stupor this is a fair deal


Dawes to Melb for pick 20 on trade to W/C for NicNat
anyone who thinks this cant happen is seriously affected as i am.

wake me when its done

 

[THATSGOLD]

How the hell can you say that?
That is one of the worst calls I have ever heard.

Firstly, If every club had this mentality there would be no ruckman in a few years.
Secondly, how do you propose we hit the mark every time we trade for a ruckman?
Thirdly, would you say the same thing if we currently had Cox and McIntosh at the ages of 21 at the moment?

The fact is if we were to do this there is no way we would ever get an advantage unless we had a superior midfield. Very, very rarely will a team give up their best ruckman easily and yet you are suggesting we can do this willy nilly whenever we need to like we did with Jolly. Sure Hawthorn can get a Hale, but their midfield is great. Collingwood can get a Jolly, but our midfield is great. But we would be so much better if we could develop a Cox or Naitanui or Sandilands. Trading for these guys is out of our capability.

Why don't we just trade for power forwards as well when we need them because most won't make it? The fact is all talls are risks, but if you don't have the talent to develop then you are screwed. The teams who do put the time into these players are the ones who benefit MORE than a team who would rather take the easy way out.

I agree there is risk, but high risk = high reward and two list spots is not stupidity.

Shit call. End Rant.

Because we went through it all with Guy Richards. Highly rated and then they finally debut and play ordinary. Hyped before they've even played and then not up to AFL standard. May as well just delist and draft midfielders backs and forwards and draft only mature ruckman!

 

[Copeland]

Ceglar and Witts probably wont even make it. Bringing up a young ruckman is a risk, bringing up two is stupidityand takes up two lists spots. Why do that when you can simply poach them at their best at the age of 25+ McIntosh is the bloke we should been looking at. Giles is keen to move. They're everywhere and ready to go unlike the two we have.

They cost us very little tho, Witts from the NSW scholarship program and Ceglar was steak knives with Krakouer from the Gold Coast. Our luck must change soon in regard to ruck drafting.

 

[THATSGOLD]

They cost us very little tho, Witts from the NSW scholarship program and Ceglar was steak knives with Krakouer from the Gold Coast.

By the time they're ready our window will be closed. True. Having two on the list though is crazy. One would be enough. That extra spot could be used for a midfielder.

 

[Number 10]

Because we went through it all with Guy Richards. Highly rated and then they finally debut and play ordinary. Hyped before they've even played and then not up to AFL standard. May as well just delist and draft midfielders backs and forwards and draft only mature ruckman!

Once again, if every team had this mentality there would be no good ruckman. Developing ruckman is always a risk but you're never going to get difference making ruckman unless you develop the best talent available.

 

[THATSGOLD]

Once again, if every team had this mentality there would be no good ruckman. Developing ruckman is always a risk but you're never going to get difference making ruckman unless you develop the best talent available.

How long do you keep them around for before they "Delevop" and when do you make the call that they've made it? It will be disappointing if they debut and they're just plain not up to it after the amount of time we've nutrued them for. Daniel Farmer was kept for 2 years and shown the door.. drafted at pick 46 or so.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

By the time they're ready our window will be closed. True. Having two on the list though is crazy. One would be enough. That extra spot could be used for a midfielder.

The draft must really piss you off, what with all those untried kids getting put on club lists

 

[THATSGOLD]

The draft must really piss you off, what with all those untried kids getting put on club lists

How many players have we had on our senior list longer that him without debuting have turned in to genuine senior players?

 

[the distributer]

Because we went through it all with Guy Richards. Highly rated and then they finally debut and play ordinary. Hyped before they've even played and then not up to AFL standard. May as well just delist and draft midfielders backs and forwards and draft only mature ruckman!

Just like every Collingwood draftee.

 

[Quicky]

How long do you keep them around for before they "Delevop" and when do you make the call that they've made it?

I think you are being incredibly ignorant regarding the time it takes for a ruckman, even talls in general, to develop. You seem to be expecting them to be debuting within two years and shaking the AFL apart in that same time. It is totally unrealistic to think this will occur.

 

[THATSGOLD]

I think you are being incredibly ignorant regarding the time it takes for a ruckman, even talls in general, to develop. You seem to be expecting them to be debuting within two years and shaking the AFL apart in that same time. It is totally unrealistic to think this will occur.

Why have two guys on the list that will take so long when you need more depth. Wouldn't one list spot be enough?
Jolly
Wood
Ceglar
Witts
Four list spots. Thats nearly 10% of the senior list. Two that aren't even ready to play.

 

[THATSGOLD]

I would would have
ONE senior ruckman
ONE back up ruckman
ONE development ruckman although I'd rather just have another back up ruckman.

 

[MeisterBot]

To be fair, Witts was actually drafted as a forward, then he had that massive growth spurt. Upside as a ruckman is too great to ignore when you're a competitive beast standing at ~210cm.

Besides, I think it works out fantastically for 2013 and beyond.

Jolly has 1-2 years left maximum and will need to be rested often, giving Witts and Ceglar some exposure before they come in a permanent fixtures. Wood comes in if Jolly suffers a serious injury. Personally, would rather have Giles/Martin but I wouldn't dare jeopardise our first round picks in this draft.

 

[Quicky]

Why have two guys on the list that will take so long when you need more depth. Wouldn't one list spot be enough?
Jolly
Wood
Ceglar
Witts
Four list spots. Thats nearly 10% of the senior list. Two that aren't even ready to play.

I can't agree with you. I think if you looked at most other teams they would have at least that many spots dedicated to ruckman. Having only three players who are rucks leaves you very vulnerable to injury.

 

[THATSGOLD]

Jolly
Draft Mctonish.. ready to play.
Lynch backup.
Delist two of Wood Witts or Ceglar Clear 2 spots.
Dawes traded..

 

[THATSGOLD]

I can't agree with you. I think if you looked at most other teams they would have at least that many spots dedicated to ruckman. Having only three players who are rucks leaves you very vulnerable to injury.

I havent noticed any other afl teams running around with three senior listed ruckman in their reserves. Seems a big waste..

 

[loki04]

They cost us very little tho, Witts from the NSW scholarship program and Ceglar was steak knives with Krakouer from the Gold Coast. Our luck must change soon in regard to ruck drafting.

I think it's more Ruck development, the club seems to want lean beanpole runners (pre Jolly) yet the best ruckmen are Bulls like Jols, Primus, Keating and Ottens etc.

 

[MyManLynch]

Why have two guys on the list that will take so long when you need more depth. Wouldn't one list spot be enough?
Jolly
Wood
Ceglar
Witts
Four list spots. Thats nearly 10% of the senior list. Two that aren't even ready to play.

It's a numbers game.....drafting/recruiting young rucks is a long term investment. All the eggs in one basket & that player fails to make it.....then what? Best to have a couple of long term options, with the hope that one of them makes it.
Collingwood are hoping either Witts or Celgar will make it. Can't win a flag without a good ruckmen.
1990 Monky, 2010 Jolly, 2013 - 2020 Jolly then Witts, Celgar or trade/free agency for another ready made?

 

[eddiebankbalance]

Rumour is good, apparently I'll be buying a new dog within 5 years. I miss the old one

 

[wednesdaywarrior]

Fair call eddie b. I was going to say - since it's been such a welcome revelation to find so many fellow teachers on here, we probably should start a separate group - like the 'Big Footy Board of Educators', to avoid p .... off the other punters. I noticed in today's Age Melbourne (predictably) arguing that pick 20 on its own is more than fair for Dawes (after they were rumoured to spot up pick 13). Can't help feeling like we're being a little dicked around with this trade. They better start putting some sugar on the deal or I reckon we should review that whole 'give them money for free' scenario on Queens birthday. That's the thing about those arrangements, for all of our benevolence it still gets us treated like crap at the trade table and me in the staffroom by pompous Melbourne supporters. I reckon we've helped the doggies out on this front as well. Maybe they should have a good think about where their bread is buttered and just hand over pick 6. The other scenario which many have suggested: let's just keep Dawes.

 

[jimmy35]

Happy enough to read about the different lives people have IRL myself but a bit odd considering I got bounced the other day by some overzealous knob about going off topic.

 

[wednesdaywarrior]

Happy enough to read about the different lives people have IRL myself but a bit odd considering I got bounced the other day by some overzealous knob about going off topic.

It's hard not to get distracted when the actual trade news and rumours move at such a slow rate. Probably good to be a bit tolerant in these anxious times! The alternative I guess is to just make stuff up. Like, oh, I just heard Melbourne have done a complete 360 on their whole attitude to this trade and have decided to give us pick 4, 20, Clarke and Trengove for Dawes. I understand the need to talk about work. Every now and then mine intrudes on football and Collingwood (as tiresome as that can be).

 

[76woodenspooners]

Folks,

There has been a teacher's thread created here where you're able to continue the conversation without being interrupted by pesky trade period rumours

If you don't like the title, PM the mods an alternative one and we'll change it.

 

[Pennypacker]

Ceglar and Witts probably wont even make it. Bringing up a young ruckman is a risk, bringing up two is stupidityand takes up two lists spots. Why do that when you can simply poach them at their best at the age of 25+ McIntosh is the bloke we should been looking at. Giles is keen to move. They're everywhere and ready to go unlike the two we have.

Although I think Witts will turn out to be a gun in the near future, I agree I think we need to focus on bringing in a proven gun ruckman and agree with your two suggestions in Giles and McIntosh.

It concerns me people are throwing around the idea of picking up Mark Seaby though. Why would we want another Cam Wood clogging up our list???

How many times can we get burnt by picking up dud reject ruckman like McKee, Richards, Wood etc before we realise the importance of recruiting proven in-form ruckman?!!!

 

[RuFiO]

Although I think Witts will turn out to be a gun in the near future, I agree I think we need to focus on bringing in a proven gun ruckman and agree with your two suggestions in Giles and McIntosh.

It concerns me people are throwing around the idea of picking up Mark Seaby though. Why would we want another Cam Wood clogging up our list???

How many times can we get burnt by picking up dud reject ruckman like McKee, Richards, Wood etc before we realise the importance of recruiting proven in-form ruckman?!!!

McKee wasn't too bad. Obviously not worth what we paid for whatever it was. But yeah, I'd like for us to go for Giles or H-Mac. I think Giles would cost too much though. And if North really are considering taking pick 39 or whatever it is from Geelong they I think the club should really consider looking at it. Although not sure how he's pulled up from his last surgery.

I like Paul Roos' idea of just trading for ruckmen instead of drafting them yourself since it's so hit and miss. And if it's a miss you've wasted probably 5 years of a spot on the list because it'll probably take that long to evaluate whether they're good or not. Granted you'd have to pay overs to trade one in as opposed to drafting, but we just can't seem to get it right with drafting ruckmen. Whether it's because of drafting the wrong player itself and/or development.