Trade/Delistings/List Management 2010 Thread

[Kong]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

Apologies for my senior moment. Boak vs Reimers.

If you go on the raw stats at the same age and stage of their career then Boak easily covers Zaharakis. That's NOT even debatable.

Don't get me wrong, I rate Boak higher than Zaharakis.

But to compare a forward pocket with a midfielder on stats alone is silly. You wouldn't compare the effectiveness of Cyril and Palmer on stats alone now, would you.

 

[wapower]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

Don't get me wrong, I rate Boak higher than Zaharakis.

But to compare a forward pocket with a midfielder on stats alone is silly. You wouldn't compare the effectiveness of Cyril and Palmer on stats alone now, would you.

Absolutely not. I was trying to give Essendon supporters some ground without actually stating Travis Boak is in a different echelon of player to David Zaharakis (who I like very much).

 

[DVD Player]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

I humbly disagree and this is why Boak vs Zaharakis & Boak vs Myers. FWIW I think Zaharakis will become a very handy footballer for Essendon.

That is at the same stage of their respective careers.

What do those stats prove? That one spends all his time in the midfield, while the other spends half his time up forward?

 

[Duckworth]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

I love reading these threads how each club over rates their own players. You have to give up something good to get something good.

With your biased eye looking at a trade you should feel on the being 'hard done by' side of the deal... that should be about fair.

 

[larson]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

1st pick + Myers

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

Ah the classic case of talking up your own players to be much better than they actually are. Lets look at the facts

Both predominantly lead up small forwards. Agree?

Ebert 124 games 185 goals

Monfries 97 games 97 goals

It's more to do with the facts:

• Ebert is a gigantic [strike]head[/strike] ****
• Ebert has been average at best for at least 2-3 years
• Ebert is starting to get a bit old
• Ebert is a gigantic ****

Gus has nothing to do with my comment.

Gus + 1st rounder I'd be reasonably happy with for Boak.

 

[Longy413]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

I was enjoying the fanciful comments on the Essendon board until I came to this one. I can only assume you're being serious which is somewhat embarrassing. Boak is streaks ahead of both of them right now.

Travis Boak is a top 5 pick who is beginning to really break out after one of the best starts to a junior midfielders career at Port Adelaide. If you think we're going to let him go on the cheap or for fringe players you are sorely mistaken.

Boak at minimum will be a good player and a pick. I tend to stay away from overrating our players as it leads to nowhere and disappointment in the long term. Perhaps some of you should try the same when establishing fair or equitable value.

Sorry, I didn't realise I needed to elaborate in full detail on something that I thought was reasonably simplistic.

Boak is not a better footballer than Zaka, Reimers and Melksham put together (I saw Melksham because he was our last first round draft pick and the suggestion was that we also include a first round pick).

I was comparing their skill sets. Not statistics.

In saying Boak doesn't do anything on the footy field that the other two do, it was my implication that Boak isn't a better kick, better mark, better reader of the play than the other two.

What your stats comparison doesn't show is that in Boak's first year, he played in a grand final. His relative experience in year two was far superior to that of Zaka's. Leigh Matthews believes that a final adds ten games experience to a player.

Your stats comparison also doesn't show that Zaka has played as a small forward, not in the midfield.

As for Reimers, he's a small forward. An impact player. He plays more like Motlop than Boak. He's had a stack of injuries and has probably contributed to turning the screws in five or six games over his career.

Right now, would I rather have Boak than either of Zaka or Reimers, absolutely. Would I swap both of them for him, no ****ing way.

Zaka and Reimers have all the tools to be seriously good AFL footballers and I'd take a punt that Zaka could be as good as Boak.

My comment on Boak's consistency carried an implication that I'll be sure to explain in further detail going forward, that he's a contributor in each game he plays, that he doesn't have bad games or quiet games, something that can't be said for the two Essendon lads.

Boak is already playing like a seasoned midfielder, he is well ahead of the other two. I know that. But his skill set isn't superior to our lads.

 

[wapower]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

Sorry, I didn't realise I needed to elaborate in full detail on something that I thought was reasonably simplistic.

Boak is not a better footballer than Zaka, Reimers and Melksham put together (I saw Melksham because he was our last first round draft pick and the suggestion was that we also include a first round pick).

I was comparing their skill sets. Not statistics.

In saying Boak doesn't do anything on the footy field that the other two do, it was my implication that Boak isn't a better kick, better mark, better reader of the play than the other two.

What your stats comparison doesn't show is that in Boak's first year, he played in a grand final. His relative experience in year two was far superior to that of Zaka's. Leigh Matthews believes that a final adds ten games experience to a player.

Your stats comparison also doesn't show that Zaka has played as a small forward, not in the midfield.

As for Reimers, he's a small forward. An impact player. He plays more like Motlop than Boak. He's had a stack of injuries and has probably contributed to turning the screws in five or six games over his career.

Right now, would I rather have Boak than either of Zaka or Reimers, absolutely. Would I swap both of them for him, no ****ing way.

Zaka and Reimers have all the tools to be seriously good AFL footballers and I'd take a punt that Zaka could be as good as Boak.

My comment on Boak's consistency carried an implication that I'll be sure to explain in further detail going forward, that he's a contributor in each game he plays, that he doesn't have bad games or quiet games, something that can't be said for the two Essendon lads.

Boak is already playing like a seasoned midfielder, he is well ahead of the other two. I know that. But his skill set isn't superior to our lads.

Good to see some people have good senses of humour. You've left me in stitches.

 

[Longy413]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

Good to see some people have good senses of humour. You've left me in stitches.

So a trade of Boak for Zaka, Reimers and Melksham is fair and reasonable?

You're kidding aren't you?

Boak is worth three really good young players?

Boak isn't Chris Judd or Gary Ablett you know?

Would you trade Hartlett, Krakouer and Moore for Hurley?

 

[wapower]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

So a trade of Boak for Zaka, Reimers and Melksham is fair and reasonable?

You're kidding aren't you?

Boak is worth three really good young players?

Boak isn't Chris Judd or Gary Ablett you know?

I'd take Zaharakis plus your first round draft pick and possibly second in the compromised draft.

 

[Longy413]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

I'd take Zaharakis plus your first round draft pick and possibly second in the compromised draft.

So you agree.

Thanks.

 

[wapower]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

So you agree.

Thanks.

That if combined all three are the equal of the singular Travis Boak? I know Travis is an outstanding talent and if you wish to paint that as the value for him then yes I agree with you.

 

[HighettBomber]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

They owe us one for Wanganeen, how about we take him for nothing and call it even?

 

[Longy413]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

That if combined all three are the equal of the singular Travis Boak? I know Travis is an outstanding talent and if you wish to paint that as the value for him then yes I agree with you.

ESL?

Would you trade Hartlett, Krakouer and Moore for Hurley?

 

[wapower]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

ESL?

Would you trade Hartlett, Krakouer and Moore for Hurley?

No I wouldn't. Hurley isn't a proven commodity albeit an exciting talent. Your use of example is a poor one especially your initial comment.

 

[Longy413]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

No you wouldn't, because no one would trade three emerging young players for one emerging young player.

You wouldn't do it for any second tier players in the comp.

You wouldn't do it for Griffen, Montagna, Dal Santo, J McVeigh.

You wouldn't do it for younger players like Murphy, Gibbs and co.

Why would we think that Reimers, Zaka and our first rounder, someonline like Melksham is worthy of Boak?

We wouldn't. We'd take the punt that one of those three might develop to be as good as Boak and that the two others will develop to be very good players themselves, giving a collective output that is far superior to that of Travis Boak.

 

[wapower]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

No you wouldn't, because no one would trade three emerging young players for one emerging young player.

You wouldn't do it for any second tier players in the comp.

You wouldn't do it for Griffen, Montagna, Dal Santo, J McVeigh.

You wouldn't do it for younger players like Murphy, Gibbs and co.

Why would we think that Reimers, Zaka and our first rounder, someonline like Melksham is worthy of Boak?

We wouldn't. We'd take the punt that one of those three might develop to be as good as Boak and that the two others will develop to be very good players themselves, giving a collective output that is far superior to that of Travis Boak.

You were stupid enough to suggest that three players combined was a worthwhile argument let alone to think I would fall into your trap of playing along. I've even started a poll expecting a 100% yes response rate to illustrate to you just how stupid a comment it actually is.

You've shot yourself in the foot by comparing your players against Travis Boak and by making the comment that you live in the hope that one of the three will rise to Travis Boak's level. If that's not an illustration that most of your comments regarding skill and ability are ill advised then I cannot help you.

Personally I believe the market value is a good young player plus a first round draft pick possibly second depending on the quality of that junior.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

So basically what you're saying is that an A-grade (or soon to be A-grade) player is worth three youngsters, all of whom have shown A-grade potential and the ability to perform at AFL level. Sure, they may well finish up as B- or C-graders, but they may also finish up as A-graders.

I don't think you'll find anyone here selling Boak short. If he's not A-grade, he will be by the end of this year or next. Giving up three youngsters - all of whom having shown ability at this level - for anyone short of Ablett, Brown or Riewoldt (and possibly not even those three) is madness.

 

[Godzke]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

First Rounder + Zahkarkis + Reimers, the last two have to be on the table in my view.

jesus christ

 

[wapower]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

So basically what you're saying is that an A-grade (or soon to be A-grade) player is worth three youngsters, all of whom have shown A-grade potential and the ability to perform at AFL level. Sure, they may well finish up as B- or C-graders, but they may also finish up as A-graders.

I don't think you'll find anyone here selling Boak short. If he's not A-grade, he will be by the end of this year or next. Giving up three youngsters - all of whom having shown ability at this level - for anyone short of Ablett, Brown or Riewoldt (and possibly not even those three) is madness.

Absolutely not. As a matter of fact I think it's a ridiculous proposition. The three players combined are of far more value to Essendon than Port Adelaide.

In discussion with other team supporters and looking at the values set in the trade market of recent years, I would think a quality youngster plus the first round draft pick in this compromised draft would be fair value.

If deals could be swung and players not offered then something similar to the Shaun Burgoyne deal would definitely suffice. That's what I would think is fair for Ryan Griffen and Travis Boak is slightly ahead of Griffen at the same stage in their careers.

 

[Longy413]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

You were stupid enough to suggest that three players combined was a worthwhile argument let alone to think I would fall into your trap of playing along. I've even started a poll expecting a 100% yes response rate to illustrate to you just how stupid a comment it actually is.

You've shot yourself in the foot by comparing your players against Travis Boak and by making the comment that you live in the hope that one of the three will rise to Travis Boak's level. If that's not an illustration that most of your comments regarding skill and ability are ill advised then I cannot help you.

Personally I believe the market value is a good young player plus a first round draft pick possibly second depending on the quality of that junior.

No trap, all I've suggested is that the collective output of the two players plus a first round draft pick that were suggested by someone else, is greater than that of Boak's and intimated we should continue to invest in and have faith in the young talent we've got rather than giving it up to for another young player (who I imagine will stay anyway).

I stand by that, that's not ill advised at all.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

Absolutely not. As a matter of fact I think it's a ridiculous proposition. The three players combined are of far more value to Essendon than Port Adelaide. In discussion with other team supporters and looking at the values set in the trade market of recent years, I would think a quality youngster plus the first round draft pick in this compromised draft would be fair value. If deals could be swung and players not offered then something similar to the Shaun Burgoyne deal would definitely suffice.

So longy's original post was fine then.

First rounder + Monfries would be a fair deal in my eyes. It's a lot for us to give up, especially given the likelihood that we'll finish somewhere in the bottom 8, but Boak is, as I said before, an A-grader, or about to be.

 

[wapower]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

No trap, all I've suggested is that the collective output of the two players plus a first round draft pick that were suggested by someone else, is greater than that of Boak's and intimated we should continue to invest in and have faith in the young talent we've got rather than giving it up to for another young player (who I imagine will stay anyway).

I stand by that, that's not ill advised at all.

I agree that the comment was ill advised and stupid. Perhaps the way we have both gone about addressing Boak vs 1+2+3 rather than addressing Boak vs 1, Boak vs 2 and then Boak vs 3 would have been better.

I wholeheartedly agree that the output of three should be far greater than 1. The issue is Boak demonstrated more at the same stages of their careers and is threatening to explode his game to another level right now.

So longy's original post was fine then.

First rounder + Monfries would be a fair deal in my eyes. It's a lot for us to give up, especially given the likelihood that we'll finish somewhere in the bottom 8, but Boak is, as I said before, an A-grader, or about to be.

The problem becomes where would Angus Monfries fit in Port Adelaide's structure? I can't see him offering something we don't already have and I'm unsure the club would plan on turning him in to a midfielder. The premise of the trade would be right but Monfries isn't the type of player we need let alone the quality of player that would be demanded in a trade.

Longy413's original post that Boak has more value than Monfries is spot on. Longy413's subsequent posts suggesting Zaharakis and Reimers have shown they could potentially be better footballers than Boak is opinion which isn't necessarily backed by fact. When pressed further the argument of position and consistency was brought up. Boak at the same career point compared favourably and this created the obvious tension.

 

[Longy413]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

Boak's consistency was in my first post on the subject.

Of course they could potentially be better footballers than Boak. It's a rather open ended statement.
Essendon insiders believe that Zaka has the ability to develop into the best player on our list, better than Pears, Ryder, Hurley, Watson and co.

There's no tension, I was well aware that Boak had a fantastic start to his career, but a statistic based comparison give the positions the players play in is about as relevant in the trade suggestion in the first place.

 

[wapower]

Re: Travis Boak -> Essendon?

Boak's consistency was in my first post on the subject.

Of course they could potentially be better footballers than Boak. It's a rather open ended statement. There's no tension, I was well aware that Boak had a fantastic start to his career, but a statistic based comparison give the positions the players play in is about as relevant in the trade suggestion in the first place.

Perhaps we should just keep trade valuations to Supercoach values then . My apologies if I have come across abrasive. It was not my intent.