Trading - do the Crows need to "get some balls"?

[dogs105]

This is an extract from a thread on the Richmond board. I thought that I would reproduce it here, as the original poster didn't seem to want to, and I think that it is an interesting discussion point.
I think that Adelaide has actually pulled off some pretty good give-and-get trades.




quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Zombie
Just wondering what the Richmond fans are now thinking of the whole debacle of the Ben Holland trade at the end of last year?

K.Johnson and S.Goodwin were just a few of the names Adelaide may have traded to get Holland. Didn't happen and situations remain the same : Richmond still needs a midfielder and Adelaide still needs a key forward.

Some teams need to take a leaf out of Port Adelaide's book who have successfully recruited Hardwick, Montgomery, D.Waeklin, M.Bishop and J.Schofield in the last few years all who have been top performers for the Power who are now genuine premiership contenders. You need to give a bit to get a bit, some teams seem to be too scared that they are getting screwed at trading time to actually make any big trades. Adelaide is a prime example, need a good tall forward? Let's get a player who does nothing for bottom side freo and a player who is always injured and lets expect them to perform miracles and not get injured.

Some teams really need to get some balls when trading time comes around.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------





To which I replied:


I don't want to hijack the Richmond board, so maybe you could come over to the Adelaide board and post this there, and we could debate it. However, Nathan Bassett, Darren Jarman, Mark Stevens, Matthew Clarke, and now Matthew Bode have all been very good players for the Crows, obtained in 'give a bit and get a bit ' trades. Andrew McLeod has been a handy pick up, and the Crows gave up a youngster that they rated highly at the time to get him.

 

[napsyd]

Going back to Zombie's quote, I thought Richmond (or maybe Holland) pulled the plug on the Holland/Johnson deal, not us. Could be wrong. I don't think Goodwin was ever on offer either.

Anyway, I never thought it was a great deal at the time. Kane has stepped up even further this year, placing himself close to Adelaide's best player. I doubt Richmond could say the same about Ben Holland.

 

[MarksGirl-kbcrowgirl]

I wanted Ben Holland I thought he would be great. But he didn't want to come in the end and I am glad that it has worked out that way. We have gotten far better service from Kane Johnson this year and I hope he stays for many years to come. I don't remember Simon Goodwin being offered to Richmond. I don't think the club would trade him.

Mark Stevens has also played terrific footy and was part of the 98 premiership so I would say he was a terrific trade option. I might be biased cause he is my favourite but I also hope he is around for many more seasons!


k
xx

 

[PrideOf]

Someone's taking the angry pills because they couldn't offload Holland. Don't blame our recruiting mate - your CEO was trumpeting a huge coup being able to keep Holland and hold off our advances.

 

[Zombie]

Originally posted by dogs105


To which I replied:


I don't want to hijack the Richmond board, so maybe you could come over to the Adelaide board and post this there, and we could debate it. However, Nathan Bassett, Darren Jarman, Mark Stevens, Matthew Clarke, and now Matthew Bode have all been very good players for the Crows, obtained in 'give a bit and get a bit ' trades. Andrew McLeod has been a handy pick up, and the Crows gave up a youngster that they rated highly at the time to get him.

Sorry mate, never saw that. Sure Adelaide have doen some good deals in the give a bit, get a bit sort of trades, then again there are some which they haven't done so well at. Barry Standfield for 2 picks (B.Montgomery and J.Plunkett), Balraj Singh for Lance Picioane,Brodie Atkinson for Chad Rintoul,etc.

But the point was that every year Adelaide seems to be needing a quality tall forward but never seem to be willing to trade a good player for them. Last year they again failed to get a good tall forward so got a few "average" players like Fitzgerald and Schell to fill the gap, while losing Peter Vardy (IMO Adelaide's best forward) in the process.

BTW, I see Matthew Bode has been playing well for you guys but I would suggest you still got the worse end of that deal aswell by trading the draft pick away which landed Port with S.Burgoyne who IMO is going to be the next big thing in the AFL.

 

[S.J Rollin]

Calling Schell average is talking him up a wee bit dont you think...?

takes the odd pack pack you dont expect him to hold... but drops the bread and butter, fades like a Bali T-Shirt and doesn't bother anybody on the ground or on the scoreboard.

 

[ok.crows]

Re: Re: Trading - do the Crows need to "get some balls"?

Originally posted by Zombie


But the point was that every year Adelaide seems to be needing a quality tall forward but never seem to be willing to trade a good player for them. Last year they again failed to get a good tall forward so got a few "average" players like Fitzgerald and Schell to fill the gap, while losing Peter Vardy (IMO Adelaide's best forward) in the process.

Sorry mate, but you have got the entire wrong end of the stick here. Adelaide were willing to trade Kane Johnson for Ben Holloand.

Johnson is the better player of the two, Holland is just bigger & can take a key position.

This was a pretty fair deal as Adelaide offered it, Adelaide needed a key position player, Tigers needed a good midfielder. Kane Johnson has been the best midfielder amongst a pretty fair bunch in Adelaides midfiled.

Richmond scotched this deal, not Adelaide. Richmond would not offer Kane Johnson a decent salary. Offered him considerably less than he was getting in Adelaide. The very player who wanted to play in Melbourne and could fix Tigers midfield wwwoes, and Richmond offered him pittance. Then they further put the mozz on any trade by off-loading Daffy to relieve the cap pressure, and were able to offer Holland enough to stay.

Sorry Zombie, but this like many other deals Adelaide have tried to make - offer a fair deal but the other side will not trade.

Still, I'm not upset by it at all. Kane Johnson is a better player than Holland, has played far better footy this year, and has stayed at Crows. Crows have managed the best of this non-trade by far.

Thanks Richmond.

 

[Zombie]

I understand your point, I think Richmond were crazy not to see the deal through, with Gaspar, Richardson, Holland and Ottens as key position talls they really needed a decent midfielder and Johnson would have fit in nicely.

However, the Crows still failed to find a key position forward, that's the bottom line. You can say other team's weren't willing to deal but they need to go out and give a team an offer they can't refuse. Croad would have been a great pick up for the Crows last year, it would have been hard to get him but if Adelaide had given enough then they would have been willing to trade him to the Crows.

IMO Adelaide would be a great team if they had a good CHF, they have played well this year (better than expected) but I still think they will only just make the 8 (6th or 7th). Sides like Port, Brisbane, Collingwood, Melbourne, West Coast, Western Bulldogs all have 1 or 2 key forwards, Adelaide only has pinchhitters like M.Stevens who is a good player but cannot fill the CHF role.

I believe Adelaide would be a top 2 side if they could secure a decent CHF.

 

[Damp Squarie]

Originally posted by dogs105

Some teams need to take a leaf out of Port Adelaide's book who have successfully recruited Hardwick, Montgomery, D.Waeklin, M.Bishop and J.Schofield in the last few years all who have been top performers for the Power who are now genuine premiership

Look up the Duds theyve recruited over the ; Brent Heaver is still laughing all the way to the bank.

Richmond supporters should be dirty on Holland. He shXt on them in the end.
Johnson has been 2nd best for the Crows this year and Goodwin not far behind him. Im happy we didnt get Holland. Pavlich'll do me next year or Ben Rutten

 

[Damp Squarie]

Originally posted by MarksGirl-kbcrowgirl
I wanted Ben Holland I thought he would be great. But he didn't want to come in the end and I am glad that it has worked out that way. We have gotten far better service from Kane Johnson this year and I hope he stays for many years to come. I don't remember Simon Goodwin being offered to Richmond. I don't think the club would trade him.

Mark Stevens has also played terrific footy and was part of the 98 premiership so I would say he was a terrific trade option. I might be biased cause he is my favourite but I also hope he is around for many more seasons!


k
xx

So do I if he could kick straight from a set shot

 

[ok.crows]

Originally posted by Zombie

IMO Adelaide would be a great team if they had a good CHF, they have played well this year (better than expected) but I still think they will only just make the 8 (6th or 7th). Sides like Port, Brisbane, Collingwood, Melbourne, West Coast, Western Bulldogs all have 1 or 2 key forwards, Adelaide only has pinchhitters like M.Stevens who is a good player but cannot fill the CHF role.

I believe Adelaide would be a top 2 side if they could secure a decent CHF.

Stevens has been doing OK at CHF. Stevens is doing as good a job as Robran did ... and Crows won two flags with Robran at CHF.

But you are right in that another top-class player to hold down CHF (and perhaps put Stevens back to CHB which probably suits him more) would put Crows in the top echelon of teams.

Very good players are hard to come by. On Crows current list they have three or four players who might have been able to make CHF their own ... Stevens, McGregor, Perrie & Hewitt. There is also a rookie in development still, Ben Rutten. Crows also had Bown on their list, but dropped him ... and only now is Bown starting to become dominant for Norwood in this position.

Anyway, none of the candidates for this position at Crows has quite come through as a top-class option. Stevens is the pick of the bunch IMO.

Crows will keep trying to fill this "vacancy", even though it is not really vacant. After all, Crows are a top 4 side and amongst the highest teams in the scoring rates. CHF for Crows is not really "broken" at all (or indeed the overall team), compared with most clubs.

I think Crows can finish the minor round 4th or 5th this year. While Crows don't have quite the consistency of other contenders for this years flag, it remains within Crows reach. Crows are capable of some very good footy indeed, but are also prone to sometimes go walkabout.

It will depend on which Crows team shows up for finals matches. If the "good Crows" turn up for finals (as for example they did for that 9-goal last quarter against West coast in Perth) ... then a flag is not beyond them.

 

[PrideOf]

Originally posted by ok.crows
There is also a rookie in development still, Ben Rutten.

Yes, so why was Mattner brought up from the rookie list and not Rutten? Perfectly obvious yesterday was that without Stevens we have no CHF - even to the point that Gary structured our forward line with just two out in the goalsquare and no-one at CHF.

Great chance to promote the kid and run him around a bit. Stacks better option (and a chance for the future) apart from Ben Marsh, who'll be offloaded one minute into the 2002 trading season.

 

[Jerome]

Originally posted by PrideOf


Yes, so why was Mattner brought up from the rookie list and not Rutten? Perfectly obvious yesterday was that without Stevens we have no CHF - even to the point that Gary structured our forward line with just two out in the goalsquare and no-one at CHF.

Great chance to promote the kid and run him around a bit. Stacks better option (and a chance for the future) apart from Ben Marsh, who'll be offloaded one minute into the 2002 trading season.

I agree! I don't understand why Mattner was given a gig. Fitzy injured, Angwin not interested, Hentschel, Beinke, Hewitt all returning from injury and Stevens out - our big man dept is not looking too good. Rutten was the best choice.

We really need key forwards, at least 2 ruckmen and a goal sneak/rover for 2003.

I am sick of seeing the same guys get endless chances in this team - Crowell (drop him!), McGregor, Perrie, Beinke, Marsh. They really need to do something in the second half of the season. I am hoping the likes of Rutten and Smith (he must get a run in the Port Magpies senior team soon surely?) can stand up and and be consistant key possie players in 2003 and beyond. I really want to see some fresh faces have a go in this team.

Jerome

 

[Port01]

I think Finnin is a better prospect than Smith.

 

[Macca19]

Re: Re: Trading - do the Crows need to "get some balls"?

Originally posted by topjars


Look up the Duds theyve recruited over the ; Brent Heaver is still laughing all the way to the bank.

And we learned our lesson. We traded Andrew Balkwill and Ben Nelson for Brent Heaver. *shrugs*. Neutral result id think.

Heaver in the mid 90s was a very very good goalsneak...one of the best in the league. He had a top year in 93 and 94.
Chris Naish is another Port got laughed at for drafting but at the time he was a top goalsneak.
But oh well. Other than those 2 mistakes in the first two seasons....i cant think of a trading error Port has done.
We dont trade for trade sake which other clubs seem to do.

Crows have had some great trades in the past, but they do seem to trade for trade sake a bit.
I woulda been more willing to give up a quality player to get a quality tall forward than give up little to pick up an injury prone player who might never get over his injuries, and a hack.