Scott Gumbleton?

[Higgs Boson]

Yeah nah.

 

[Blackas87]

Ok a first round pick was a little over the top but really we dont need to go to the draft this year at all, we already have so many kids and there aren't too many stars in this years draft anyway. Next years draft is when we should be looking at topping up with kids again.

The number one thing we need is to get a big key forward this off season, while Butcher would be our number one target, we probably wont get him, we have to look at other options, good key forwards are hard to come by and this guy has got natural talent and a big frame, the only problem is his injuries but if he can get over them he can become a decent player.

 

[RandB]

Can't believe that people would be against giving him a rookie spot should the chance come up (which it won't). Do you think we owe the likes of Cameron Johnstone anything, they'll be gone this year.

Cameron Johnstone was put on the rookie list as a kid due to what he could have been. Why put Gumbleton on our rookie list due to what he'll probably never be? Sure, we rookied Campbell but at least part of his ticket was experience and maturity that others could learn from.

 

[Gazza_11]

This is ridiculous. Is definitely worth a spot and if comes good we'd be paying massive unders for him. Players have had greater injury troubles in the past and become champions.

 

[dees arent rabble]

gumbleton<fev

 

[Blackas87]

gumbleton<fev

Fev is better than Gumbleton but Fev would only be a short fix, Gumbleton could be a long term prospect.

 

[RandB]

This is ridiculous. Is definitely worth a spot and if comes good we'd be paying massive unders for him. Players have had greater injury troubles in the past and become champions.

Sounds reasonable but...


Gumbleton has historically been injury prone so it isn't just about past injuries it is future injuries and that is a judgement call a club has to make.

Ordinarily it isn't such a risk but you have to look at the position he plays (when not injured) and the rigours that position entails. The last situation you want to be in is where your KPF could go down at any time or is more likely to. This is before we even get him on the park if everything goes right.


Further, the way clubs are growing with resources, they're using rookie lists more to develop promising youth. So it doesn't just come down to "a spot" it comes down to which pick. How likely is Gumby to fall to us for a lower rookie pick and if he did what does that say about industry expectations of the bloke?


If we got him for nothing with a late rookie pick then fine, if the club wants to waste money on his re-hab go for it but the debate needs to be in terms of the percentages rather than the upside IMO.


If Essendon let a pick 2 KPF go it is for a reason.

 

[blured]

gumby is an injury prone hack get real

 

[King Of The Hille]

Essendon would demand other teams pay over the odds for him. For a 2nd or 3rd rounder I'd do it but not otherwise. Essendon would probably want more.

He doesn't have much currency. Had a stellar year last year for his circumstances but no games this year.

I'd do a straight swap for Sam Blease.

Wont make it IMHO.

EDIT: To above poster, isn't a hack by any stretch of the imagination flog get real

 

[MARC_]

You don't want him and we want him to stay.

End.

 

[Gazza_11]

We do want him, but we wouldn't trade Blease for him as a straight swap.

 

[Theseventhhamster]

yeah nah.

qft...

 

[Syrus]

We do want him.

No we dont.

 

[Ageing Demon]

This guy makes Grimes look like the paragon of a strong healthy body.
Why would we want someone who cannot get a game at Essendon.

 

[stretcharmstrong]

"a straight swap for Blease"

Nope.

 

[blured]

EDIT: To above poster, isn't a hack by any stretch of the imagination flog get real

Gumby gets talked up by F*#kwit essendon supporters like you. He remains an unproven injury prone hack until he lasts one full season