The Unexpected trades

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by nananana catman
I honestly think there is no way in hell geelong would trade Tom Harley. I dont know if you can remember back to the start of the season but he was injured and it cost us big time. i know im a little bit behind the topic but.... meh Kinglsey possibly but not Harley.

As for Ian Perrie, I dont think wed give up pick 7 for an erratic kick who doesnt kick goals consistently. we have enough of them already .

Geelong would do well to trade Harley for Perrie IMO, because it would mean Graham would move back to defence where he plays his best footy with Scarlett in the key back roles. Also, end up with a solid target up forward to take the pressure of the kids (Playfair, McCarthy, etc).

 

[Crow-mosone]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
In 2002, Doughty was this man and in 2003 it was Burton. If we are to add to our midfield then it would have to be the in and under type not another outside player. We have Burton, Doughty, Begley and Reilly coming through (just to name a few).

I just don't see the point in trading for a 24 year old that will not make your best 22 no matter how much he costs. I would rather take a punt at youngster even if we pay a bit more. As CrowBoi said, McMahon would be a better option but as you pointed out he would cost more. BUT in the long run you will get better value out of McMahon than you would out of Eagleton.

The player I would really like for this role would be Daniel Motlop but he might be a bit out of our reach

Now Stiffy, I am not trying to pick on you here. But the guys you listed don't have much pace, or have not established themselves yet. Burton is an endurance athlete, begley is a tall running defender, doughty isn't in the team and reilly is an unknown at this stage - though he looks promising. These guys do not perform this role, if they did we wouldn't look so slow and predictable moving the ball from down back.

a 24 year old has another 8 years at least, and if in form Eagleton certainly makes our team. without a doubt. If he's not, we haven't lost much. that's all.

I'm talking about a low risk gamble with a potential high return.

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by Crow-mosone
Now Stiffy, I am not trying to pick on you here. But the guys you listed don't have much pace, or have not established themselves yet. Burton is an endurance athlete, begley is a tall running defender, doughty isn't in the team and reilly is an unknown at this stage - though he looks promising. These guys do not perform this role, if they did we wouldn't look so slow and predictable moving the ball from down back.

a 24 year old has another 8 years at least, and if in form Eagleton certainly makes our team. without a doubt. If he's not, we haven't lost much. that's all.

I'm talking about a low risk gamble with a potential high return.

It is a gamble, because a regular player in the bottom side is no certainty to get a game in a side like Adelaide's.

On the other hand Doughty would be a regular with the Bullies.

Eagleton did play okay though in the last 11 games for the Doggies - averaged 19 disposals for those 11 games.

I'd do the trade with the following adjustment

Eagleton and Bullies' 3rd round pick

for

Doughty and Crows' 3rd round pick.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by macca23
Eagleton and Bullies' 3rd round pick

for

Doughty and Crows' 3rd round pick.

I could live with that. We improve our standing in the 3rd round by 10 or 11 places which would give us a crack at a decent prospect.

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by macca23
Eagleton and Bullies' 3rd round pick

for

Doughty and Crows' 3rd round pick.

The Bulldogs are as likely to agree to that as they are to agree to swapping Daniel Schell for Robert Murphy.

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by DaveW
The Bulldogs are as likely to agree to that as they are to agree to swapping Daniel Schell for Robert Murphy.

I have the same thoughts about a straight swap of Eagleton for Doughty.

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by macca23
I have the same thoughts about a straight swap of Eagleton for Doughty.

Exactly. Eagleton's value is long way above Doughty's.

 

[Crow-mosone]

Bullies will want to sell eagleton while his value is slightly high again, rather than be stuck with him. he is now tradeable, when 6 months ago he wasn't.
They would want much more than Doughty right now, but come the end of the week, the price might be a lot lower.

might, being the operative.

 

[DaveW]

Eagleton will stay at the Doggies.

They paid a fortune - trade wise - to get him. They'll hang onto now that he's come good.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by DaveW
Eagleton will stay at the Doggies.

They paid a fortune - trade wise - to get him. They'll hang onto now that he's come good.

Cool, because I would prefer to keep Dogga than trade for Eagleton.

 

[DaveW]

I can't believe how highly some people rate Doughty. He was clearly a surplus player in 2003.

Although if he stays, it's a boost for South Adelaide at least.

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by DaveW
I can't believe how highly some people rate Doughty. He was clearly a surplus player in 2003.

Although if he stays, it's a boost for South Adelaide at least.

Surplus doesn't mean that you can't play.

In 2002 when we finished 4th, Doughty played everyone of the 25 games, and held his position with good footy.

In 2003 he got squeezed out with the transfer of Burton from playing as a forward to a wingman, plus the emergence of Reilly and the use of Hart, Begley and at times Torneyand Massie on the other wing.

Equally I can't believe how highly you rate Eagleton who averages less than 14 disposals per game over 72 games as an on-baller for the Bullies.

The facts barely justify your statement that "Eagleton's value is long way above Doughty's."

Doughty is good enough to play AFL consistently. A lack of opportunity might just mean that his career will be elsewhere other than at the Crows.

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by macca23
Surplus doesn't mean that you can't play

It means you're not good enough.

Doughty has minimal trade value.

I'm not a big fan of Eagleton. But the Bulldogs would value him highly.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by DaveW
It means you're not good enough.

Doughty has minimal trade value.

I'm not a big fan of Eagleton. But the Bulldogs would value him highly.

Dogga was a victim of a lack of opportunities in 2003 & wasn't given a fair run given the poor form at times from Bode, Ladhams, etc.

Sure he won't get us anywhere near a 1st round pick, but he is a better player than Eagleton who has been given too many chances to prove himself. Dogga would only dream of the opportunities that Eagleton has been given. Hence why I believe it is in his best interests to trade him, as he would confortably make the starting line-up for at least half the AFL teams.

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
Dogga was a victim of a lack of opportunities in 2003 & wasn't given a fair run given the poor form at times from Bode, Ladhams, etc.

Sure he won't get us anywhere near a 1st round pick, but he is a better player than Eagleton who has been given too many chances to prove himself. Dogga would only dream of the opportunities that Eagleton has been given. Hence why I believe it is in his best interests to trade him, as he would confortably make the starting line-up for at least half the AFL teams.

I couldn't have put it better.

Spot on.

 

[DaveW]

Doughty was a victim of lack of opportunities because he wasn't good enough.

He sometimes couldn't get a game ahead of the likes of Gallagher, Mattner and Begley.

His last game against Collingwood was rather ordinary.

Doughty doesn't fit the Dogs' needs anyway. So I don't know why everyone thinks we can ship him off to Footscray.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by DaveW
Doughty was a victim of lack of opportunities because he wasn't good enough.

He sometimes couldn't get a game ahead of the likes of Gallagher, Mattner and Begley.

His last game against Collingwood was rather ordinary.

Doughty doesn't fit the Dogs' needs anyway. So I don't know why everyone thinks we can ship him off to Footscray.

IMO, Dogga is a better player than Gags, Mattner & Begley. These guys were all given more games than him not because of football ability! Dogga has played more good games in 2002, than the 3 of these combined in 2003.

Playing Doughty at CHB on Burns was a stupid matchup, as he is on-baller. Ayres should take the blame for that one. Also, I hate rating or playing guys for only 1 game, as it doen't give a fair reflection of their ability.

 

[naughty monkey]

Doughty started like a house on fire in 2002 and got worse the longer the season went. He was very lucky not to get dropped from just after the halfway mark of the season.

Let's keep this in perspective, fellas.
He's a 24 year old that's has one handy season

 

[maccas_no1]

Dogga is a good player and should be retained on the AFC list in 2004 and beyond, he got lost a little in Ayres's stupid idea's of try a different player in a position they dont play for a week they play bad and get dropped it happened to Gallagher and mattner also

I would rate Dogga a better player than Bode..................Dogga is more consistant

I'd trade Bode before Dogga

 

[lozstar]

Originally posted by maccas_no1
'd trade Bode before Dogga

Bet that Ayres will do it the other way around, or give Dogga no chances at all next year

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by maccas_no1
I would rate Dogga a better player than Bode..................Dogga is more consistant

I'd trade Bode before Dogga

You're kidding?????

Bode is twice the player that Doughty is. Doughty with his buildshould go in and get the hard ball not skirt around the packs like a girl. Bode with his frame is always at the bottom of the pack doing the hard yards. Doughty might have a better build than Bode and is a better kick and marks but apart from those 3 attributes, Bode sh|ts all over him.

Just because Bode had a poor year in 2003 (Thanks to Ayers) he is being bagged.

Bode is a better player than Doughty. If I had to trade one of those it definetly wouldn't be Bode.

 

[maccas_no1]

You just said it Stiffy..........Better kick and Better Mark more solidly built

Sorry I rate Dogga higher than Bode

If Bode plays well he is great but he isnt on song he is useless, Dogga isnt that type of player he gets in and has a go every week

 

[maccas_no1]

So in what areas does Bode **** all over Dogga?????

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by maccas_no1
You just said it Stiffy..........Better kick and Better Mark more solidly built

So by your reasoning Ben Rutten is a better player than Mark Stevens??????

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by maccas_no1
So in what areas does Bode **** all over Dogga?????

Reading of the play
Handballing
Endurance
Clearences
Goalkicking

If the in and under types struggle Doughty chases easy ball or will have a quiet game.

Lets face it we have a surplus of players of Doughty's type while we are thin on Bode types.

Trading Bode before Doughty would be a very dumb move by the AFC.