Remove this Banner Ad

Untouchables Revisited

  • Thread starter Thread starter AM
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

A

AM

The standard you walk past is the one you accept
Veteran 10k Posts Casey Tutungi Future Fund
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Posts
24,824
Reaction score
23,891
Location
Here there and everywhere
AFL Club
Geelong
I'm just recovering from losing some of my best stuff in the forums cyber meltdown.:D

But a long lunch at the local with some fellow cat fans has done me no end of good. So, after being caned for having too many on my previously posted 'untouchable' list, I've done a little culling. Now there are only five 'untouchables'. The rest are on the table for a deal that would strengthen our list. The five are:
[1] Gary Ablett
[2] Matthew Scarlett
[3] Darren Milburn
[4] Cam Mooney
[5] Paul Chapman
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Unfortunately guys in order to get a quality player you've got to give up at least a good player. For example, we'd get nothing for Slade or McCarthy. Wouldn't want to see Corey [especially] or Bartel go but neither is quick and we really need to quicken up if we are to be competitive with the top teams.
 
Nobody is untouchable, they're just highly priced. If someone offered say, Chris Judd and Jonathon Brown for any one of those players, well the answer is obvious.

However have certain players have higher value for us than they do other teams either becuase of team balance or other factors, an ablett for example.
 
Ammo Man said:
Unfortunately guys in order to get a quality player you've got to give up at least a good player. For example, we'd get nothing for Slade or McCarthy. Wouldn't want to see Corey [especially] or Bartel go but neither is quick and we really need to quicken up if we are to be competitive with the top teams.
Click to expand...

Quality for quality is true, but your logic in giving up our best midfielder is puzzling.

Much has been made of our slower, more workhorse-like engine room, consisting of guys like Bartel, Corey, Ling, Enright, Kelly etc. And yes, it's probably true that, if we are to give up quality for quality, it will be one of that group who will go. But why would head straight to the top shelf when we have the bottom shelf waiting to be cleared out? Why offer around Bartel before Kelly?

And what exactly are you looking to get in return? Quality, quick, ready-made players? How many clubs will be willing to give those up? How many will be willing to effectively swap places with us and trade quick quality for the above?

Or are you considering draft picks? The hype surrounding this years crop is all good and well, but that hardly justifies trading our few quality midfielders (and I mean actual quality, not Kelly) for blatant potential.
 
Jim Boy said:
Nobody is untouchable, they're just highly priced. If someone offered say, Chris Judd and Jonathon Brown for any one of those players, well the answer is obvious.
Click to expand...

That is true, in every sense of the word "untouchable", but applying it in context to the game, I'm sure most will beg to differ in their application of the term.

Obviously you don't knock back a Judd + Brown package for someone like Scarlett, but applying reality to the context of the situation, it's unlikely anything as such would eventuate in the first place.

Guys like Judd can be labelled untouchable, because of the joint factor that they will never be dangled out on the open market by club choice (of course, the exception is through his own desire to leave) and it is highly unlikely that any other club will ever put forward a package seriously tantalizing enough to lure WC to even contemplate moving him under their free will (for obvious reasons by the other clubs - no player is worth that great a package really, and the salary cap/list restriction would oppose it).
 
Judd and Brown for Scarlett would be the steal of steals. To get Judd alone you'd have to give Scarlett plus & plus.

In this day and age clubs want players who give consistent high quality performances. A category Kelly wouldn't fall into, but Bartel would. I wouldn't want to give up any of our quality players but if one became available don't let's kid ourselves that we would get him unless we offered someone of about equal value. Otherwise it's likely to include early draft choices - something we should be extremely reluctant to forego.

It's tough to improve your list when you finish in the middle of the ladder cos you miss out on the real cream. Trading is the only option.
 
I think the question really is "who is expendable?", and what/who do we need on our list moving forward.

Eg. Do we really need all of Kelly - S.Johson - Corey - Enright - Tenace - Byrnes - etc ???

Obviously only one of our "bigger" names would be got rid of.

As others have said, no one is untouchable, because there is always an offer that could balance it - although it would never happen - eg. Judd = Scarlett + 1st rd + 2nd rd + half our list (whatever)- irrelevant - because the Eagles would never do it.

Mark my words - someone will go - we want another first round pick this year.

Who will it be? Could be anyone IMO - bar the whoever "untouchables" are.

At the endof 2004 nearly the whole list was publicly declared as "untouchable". Moloney was a casualty of the system. Even now I think it was fair enough trade to get Ottens - which was a risk.

Its all about the risk. Even if Moloney bloomed and made AA, I would still be happy with the trade.

Its a tough game. (The trading game that is.)
 

Remove this Banner Ad

There was talk on MMM today that Byrnes, Kelly and Tenace may be traded. If anyone saw the game today you'll know how important pace is. That's where the bullies killed the magpies. Kelly has had his chances and if we get a good deal then let him go. But Byrnes and Tenace are quick and we have a shortage of that type of player, so I hope we get speed in return if they are traded.

Get the message. Stephen Wells. Ability then PACE, PACE, PACE!:mad:
 
Ammo Man said:
There was talk on MMM today that Byrnes, Kelly and Tenace may be traded. If anyone saw the game today you'll know how important pace is. That's where the bullies killed the magpies. Kelly has had his chances and if we get a good deal then let him go. But Byrnes and Tenace are quick and we have a shortage of that type of player, so I hope we get speed in return if they are traded.

Get the message. Stephen Wells. Ability then PACE, PACE, PACE!:mad:
Click to expand...

Hasn't Byrnes just signed a new contract?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Ammo Man said:
Unfortunately guys in order to get a quality player you've got to give up at least a good player. For example, we'd get nothing for Slade or McCarthy. Wouldn't want to see Corey [especially] or Bartel go but neither is quick and we really need to quicken up if we are to be competitive with the top teams.
Click to expand...

If you want to get rid of a midfielder that is not quick and is incredibly overrated go straight for Cameron Ling. Our most underperforming player easily. Slower than Bartel or Corey. Had a horrendous year whereas the other two were at the very least serviceable. Does not use the ball well, decision making atrocious. And for some inexplicable reason won't get dropped (please don't give me the "leadership material" crap either).

If an offer was there trade Kelly and Ling at once. It might shake some of the overpaid egos out of their complacency. Won't happen with peabrain in charge though.
 
I'd still stick with my five untouchables.
[1] Gary Ablett
[2] Matthew Scarlett
[3] Darren Milburn
[4] Cam Mooney
[5] Paul Chapman

My pack-ya-bags five would be:
[1] McCarthy
[2] Slade
[3] Playfair
[4] Spencer
[5] Kingsley

Gardiner is hanging on by a thread.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom