The Untouchables

[Trickster]

Back in 1993 (for those who can remember), Collingwood needed to satisfy Brisbane with players to conjure a deal for Nathan Buckley. History tells us we traded out Troy Lehmann and Craig Starcevich along with our top pick from memory (which I'm pretty sure they used for Chris Scott)

But just prior to that we also provided them with a list of 10 players who were untouchable (the untouchables as they became known) but all others were on the table. The untouchables included the likes of Graham Wright, Damian Monkhorst, Jason McCartney (yes he was one of them!) and Paul Williams among others...

If we had to comprise a list of 10 untouchables in this day and age, it would be interesting to see how people would rate the current crop. For what it's worth, and I'm sure this will spark some debate, here is mine in order...

For simplicity, I've limited this to those who have debuted therefore excluding Scharenberg and Freeman and it's irrespective of contract status.

1) Pendlebury
2) Cloke
3) Grundy
4) Beams
5) Sidebottom
6) Broomhead
7) Williams
8) Langdon
9) Witts
10) Adams

For those left off this list, I'm not saying they're not valuable and they should be traded but these are the players which I would least like to lose (and therefore we'd need to replace) given our current list position and limiting this to 10 and keeping in line with the 10 untouchables.

I've factored in and injuries and form here as well as potential upside of some players. Hopefully this is the nucleus of our next premiership side.

 

[Baird]

You forgot Elliott

 

[Morganashlee]

1) Pendlebury
2) Cloke
3) Beams
4) Elliott
5) Sidebottom
6) Grundy
7) Adams
8) Broomhead
9) Langdon
10) Seedsman

 

[soreplums]

1) Pendlebury
2) Cloke
3) Beams
4) Elliott
5) Sidebottom
6) Grundy
7) Adams
8) Broomhead
9) Langdon
10) Seedsman

Scharenberg, Freeman. I know they haven't played, but they should be on the list

 

[Trickster]

You forgot Elliott

I had Elliott just outside along with Kennedy. As I mentioned, I'm not saying I think he should be traded, but I believe the upside and the value of others is higher.

But it's just an opinion, there's no right or wrong, I'm more interested in how we rank our players and what individuals consider important.

 

[Morganashlee]

Scharenberg, Freeman. I know they haven't played, but they should be on the list

OP stated only players that have debuted, otherwise
1) Darcy Moore

 

[TheFreshBanana]

Good movie

 

[Trickster]

OP stated only players that have debuted, otherwise
1) Darcy Moore

I was going to make comment on him also that he's not to be included

 

[Morganashlee]

I was going to make comment on him also that he's not to be included

Don't understand why we can't consider a kid that doesn't play for us as one of our untouchables?

 

[soreplums]

OP stated only players that have debuted, otherwise
1) Darcy Moore

Correct! My bad

 

[DAWESOME!!]

I think at the moment we only have maybe 5 truly untouchable players:
Pendles
Cloke
Beams
Sidebottom
Elliott

If expanding out to 10, I guess it's
Scharenberg
Freeman
Broomhead
Grundy
Witts

 

[Gone Critical]

I start with

Pendles
Cloke
Beams
Swan
Reid
Elliot
Sidebottom

These are the seven best at the club and should never leave. Swan in particular should be on every list. You just don't trade out legends of the club. Destroys your fabric

After this comes the youngsters

Grundy
Witts
?10 nobody stands out

 

[Cringle]

I start with

Pendles
Cloke
Beams
Swan
Reid
Elliot
Sidebottom

These are the seven best at the club and should never leave. Swan in particular should be on every list. You just don't trade out legends of the club. Destroys your fabric

After this comes the youngsters

Grundy
Witts
Armstrong

Fixed

 

[DAWESOME!!]

Yeah, chuck Swan in there. Just figured no one would want to trade for him in any case.

 

[ThisIsJake]

Pendlebury, Beams and Sidebottom(lol at people who wanted to trade him) are unequivocally untouchable. They are the base of our midfield and the only thing keeping us from plummeting down the ladder with our young list.

Cloke is an obvious one, but Reid has opinion divided. Elliot is completely untouchable for me, he is improving week by week and has potential to burn.

Most of our young guys are untouchable, that being both of our 2012 and 2013 draft classes. But young players like Josh Thomas or maybe even Seedsman are far from untouchable in my mind, no doubt they have potential but we have players like Kennedy and Broomy who are already quickly surpassing them.

 

[Collingwood HQ]

Next year will be the year to do this list, the current 10 are nearly depressing.

 

[THATSGOLD]

1.Pendlebury.

Everybody else is replaceable and better players out there at other clubs in their position.

 

[MyManLynch]

Why 10? If we were to insist upon an untouchable list, surely we can make it 12 or 13 if we choose.
Pendles, Beams, Sidebottom, Cloke, Reid, Elliott, Grundy, Broomhead, Kennedy, Adams, Scharenberg, Freeman.
I have chosen 12, who are our future. We cannot trade into a draft to secure picks 6 & 10, then promptly trade those players out the following year (unless we really screwed up the selections).

 

[vjknight]

then to apply a value on whoever is not named.

thats where things can/do/will get ugly.

 

[Ketchup]

Pendlebury.

Everyone else if the offer is right and favors us is free to go.

 

[Scodog10]

I start with

Pendles
Cloke
Beams
Swan
Reid
Elliot
Sidebottom

These are the seven best at the club and should never leave. Swan in particular should be on every list. You just don't trade out legends of the club. Destroys your fabric

After this comes the youngsters

Grundy
Witts
?10 nobody stands out

Those 7 are mine.

From there I would be stating that any player drafted post 2012 (Grundy, Kennedy, Broomhead, Ramsay, Freeman, Scharanberg, Langdon & Marsh) is also untouchable because their value is yet to be determined.

I think it's idiocy for players that early in their career to be traded unless they desperately want out. Josh Kennedy in the Judd trade is a perfect example. Having that trade over again and it's just about a straight swap.

 

[Gone Critical]

Those 7 are mine.

From there I would be stating that any player drafted post 2012 (Grundy, Kennedy, Broomhead, Ramsay, Freeman, Scharanberg, Langdon & Marsh) is also untouchable because their value is yet to be determined.

I think it's idiocy for players that early in their career to be traded unless they desperately want out. Josh Kennedy in the Judd trade is a perfect example. Having that trade over again and it's just about a straight swap.

Yeah agreed no way we would look to trade out our youngsters but if say Port made a play for Broomhead and he wanted to go and a fair deal could be achieved I think it would be done

Collingwoods immediate job is to make sure the interstate youngsters are happy and see the Pies as an attractive club to be at.

 

[iGNITER]

Depends on what the offer is.

 

[mattys123]

Pendles
Cloke
Reid

Then the kids;

Scharenberg
Freeman
Broomhead
Kennedy
Witts
Grundy
Langdon

It's harsh but under the right situation I'd trade out anyone else.

 

[Scodog10]

Yeah agreed no way we would look to trade out our youngsters but if say Port made a play for Broomhead and he wanted to go and a fair deal could be achieved I think it would be done

Collingwoods immediate job is to make sure the interstate youngsters are happy and see the Pies as an attractive club to be at.

100% agree I actually had that caveat in there (ala Adams last year) I don't know why I took it out.

In that scenario (I'm not sure either way) Port will be kicking themselves because 8 weeks ago his value was roughly what we drafted him at so circa pick 20. If he decides he wants out (and I wouldn't blame him) his value has now jumped to Port's first rounder as a minimum.

That's how quickly things can change with those youngsters.

In regard to the second part I have no faith on that front since Walsh departed. IMO, just because a player doesn't want to go long term on a deal doesn't mean they don't want to stick around long term!

For instance we've got a number of highly paid players nearing the end (Swan, Ball, Young and unfortunately Lynch) so if I'm a youngster coming out of contract I'm going short term and cashing in when that deal ends and I have more currency. Broomhead may just be one of those types of kids and if he and his management are keeping their cards close to their chest a muppet like Eade can quite easily start to lose confidence in him signing.

To provide some perspective Witts, Elliott and Beams all signed long term deals too early and others may not be that silly....