We NEED A Class Mids

[Yoda_]

I probably will get harshly criticised with this comment, though if we miss the finals, which is almost a given, I want us to finish 2nd last...That way we won't be getting called wooden spooners and we get the A grade midfielder we have been lacking, Daniel Rich...

at last someone that thinks like me. i like your thinking.

 

[The Donners]

Well if you haven't got a better option than Stanton be quiet for once. Stanton is a very good player, he is not a great 1st midfielder as he does not cope with tags well. However we get Rich or Swift, Stanton can go back to the no2/3 midfielder which is where he plays his best

You are correct. I don't have... ahem... we don't have a better option.

I'd love to be able to say Monfries...

 

[The Donners]

Donners will be thrilled with that.

He may also be delisting Stanton so you may well be able to pick him up in the pre season draft.

Leave me out of it. You've got nothing on me, slander will get you nowhere. You continually misrepresent me in your posts.

Read the thread, why is Stanton even being mentioned with A Class Mids? Give it up.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

You are correct. I don't have... ahem... we don't have a better option.

I'd love to be able to say Monfries...

Well if you haven't got a better option and it is clear you don't, stop bagging him, and we don't want WCE duds thanks.

 

[The Donners]

Well if you haven't got a better option and it is clear you don't, stop bagging him, and we don't want WCE duds thanks.

I'll bag or praise who I want.

I didn't say I wanted any WCE players. Why get on a forum if you can't read?

 

[Red Black and Blue]

I'll bag or praise who I want.

I didn't say I wanted any WCE players. Why get on a forum if you can't read?

I just enjoy the company

 

[The Donners]

I just enjoy the company

Thanks Jonesy! It seems as though you are one of only a few who don't take themselves too seriously on this wonderful outlet of "freedom of speech"!

You've gotta admit, I spice it up a little!

 

[StealthBomber]

The Donner + Daytripper = A F____ing good read!!! Keep it up lads

 

[The Donners]

The Donner + Daytripper = A F____ing good read!!! Keep it up lads

Thank you StealthBomber... I aim to please!

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I'll bag or praise who I want.

I didn't say I wanted any WCE players. Why get on a forum if you can't read?

You are the one that brought up Matt Rosa and Fletcher FFS!

 

[The Donners]

You are the one that brought up Matt Rosa and Fletcher FFS!

Yes I did but I never said anything about "getting" them. It seems so long ago now but I think it started when it was said neither of them would get a game at Essendon to which I said yes they would, which IMO they would get a game at Essendon. That's not to say I want them.

Back on topic: What can someone tell me about Rich and/or Swift?

 

[Merv]

Back on topic: What can someone tell me about Rich and/or Swift?

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=61

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Yes I did but I never said anything about "getting" them. It seems so long ago now but I think it started when it was said neither of them would get a game at Essendon to which I said yes they would, which IMO they would get a game at Essendon. That's not to say I want them.

Back on topic: What can someone tell me about Rich and/or Swift?

Fletcher would not get a game at Essendon with the new style of footy, Rosa would get one over Dyson but that is only because Dyson sucks balls, and it is replacing one turnover king with another. Both are as useless as each other!

 

[The Donners]

Fletcher would not get a game at Essendon with the new style of footy, Rosa would get one over Dyson but that is only because Dyson sucks balls, and it is replacing one turnover king with another. Both are as useless as each other!

Yeah, I know it would be replacing one turnover king with another, this was my entire point. One hack for another... I thought that was fairly simple to understand. Fletcher would still get a game. He'd get one over Slattery and Dyson just to name 2. An All-Australian premiership player would get a game at Essendon based on him being the player he was... much like Mcphee! Zing! Also for the fact he steps up for big games- see the '06 Grand Final. I wouldn't want him, I wouldn't want Rosa... I'd consider Priddis and Kerr though.

 

[TheFridge]

Interesting debate here - especially in light of the number of threads we have in the Port forum regarding a lack of KP forwards, and how we have instead used our draft picks on midfielder types instead.

I have noted a couple of posts suggesting the Dons would have been better off drafting the next best midfielder in the 2006 draft ahead of Scott Gumbleton.

I believe that Port were very keen, and hopeful, that one of Leuenberger, Hansen or Gumbleton might slip to our pick. As none of this trio did, we selected instead what we consider to be the second best midfield prospect of that draft in Travis Boak. On early form, I think it fair enough to suggest Selwood is ahead of both Boak, and Gibbs for that matter, although Boak is showing every sign of being "A" class for a long time.

Just for the sake of hypothetical debate - what would be your thoughts of Essendon trading Gumbleton for Boak? I would suggest such a trade might be viewed favourably by Port, despite how good the club feel Boak will be.... (If you would prefer, for the sake of argument, to consider a Pearce or Salopek instead, then feel free....)

Personally, I think Essendon need, and will, give Gumbleton time to develop as your future need for replacements for Lucas and Lloyd needs to be managed as much as addressing some shortfalls in your midfield.

I also think, from what I saw last week, that your ruck stocks appeared thin, and that your midfield brigade did not get an even run with Brogan and, to a lesser extent, Lade constantly getting first hand of the ball. Perhaps the issue you are feeling is more to do with a lack of an A grade ruckman than an A grade midfield. Note: I did see Bellchambers in the VFL the week before last and thought he looked pretty sound as a tap ruckman, so perhaps the future is not such an issue in this area at least.

 

[The Donners]

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=61

Thanks Merv!

 

[SirJimi05]

Interesting debate here - especially in light of the number of threads we have in the Port forum regarding a lack of KP forwards, and how we have instead used our draft picks on midfielder types instead.

I have noted a couple of posts suggesting the Dons would have been better off drafting the next best midfielder in the 2006 draft ahead of Scott Gumbleton.

I believe that Port were very keen, and hopeful, that one of Leuenberger, Hansen or Gumbleton might slip to our pick. As none of this trio did, we selected instead what we consider to be the second best midfield prospect of that draft in Travis Boak. On early form, I think it fair enough to suggest Selwood is ahead of both Boak, and Gibbs for that matter, although Boak is showing every sign of being "A" class for a long time.

Just for the sake of hypothetical debate - what would be your thoughts of Essendon trading Gumbleton for Boak? I would suggest such a trade might be viewed favourably by Port, despite how good the club feel Boak will be.... (If you would prefer, for the sake of argument, to consider a Pearce or Salopek instead, then feel free....)

Personally, I think Essendon need, and will, give Gumbleton time to develop as your future need for replacements for Lucas and Lloyd needs to be managed as much as addressing some shortfalls in your midfield.

I also think, from what I saw last week, that your ruck stocks appeared thin, and that your midfield brigade did not get an even run with Brogan and, to a lesser extent, Lade constantly getting first hand of the ball. Perhaps the issue you are feeling is more to do with a lack of an A grade ruckman than an A grade midfield. Note: I did see Bellchambers in the VFL the week before last and thought he looked pretty sound as a tap ruckman, so perhaps the future is not such an issue in this area at least.

Good post for the most part. In my opinion their is no way in the world Essendon would trade Gumby for a midfielder. It would be Robbing Peter to pay Paul. It might help to strengthen the MF but it will leave a huge hole in our future KPF prospects. I think you mentioned as much in your post. I think the best thing for Essendon is draft the best younf MF player avialable in this years draft and then try and develop him along with the other 6-8 young MF players. It may be worth going after a player such as Prismall but i wouldn't give up any of our young guns for him.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Interesting debate here - especially in light of the number of threads we have in the Port forum regarding a lack of KP forwards, and how we have instead used our draft picks on midfielder types instead.

I have noted a couple of posts suggesting the Dons would have been better off drafting the next best midfielder in the 2006 draft ahead of Scott Gumbleton.

I believe that Port were very keen, and hopeful, that one of Leuenberger, Hansen or Gumbleton might slip to our pick. As none of this trio did, we selected instead what we consider to be the second best midfield prospect of that draft in Travis Boak. On early form, I think it fair enough to suggest Selwood is ahead of both Boak, and Gibbs for that matter, although Boak is showing every sign of being "A" class for a long time.

Just for the sake of hypothetical debate - what would be your thoughts of Essendon trading Gumbleton for Boak? I would suggest such a trade might be viewed favourably by Port, despite how good the club feel Boak will be.... (If you would prefer, for the sake of argument, to consider a Pearce or Salopek instead, then feel free....)

Personally, I think Essendon need, and will, give Gumbleton time to develop as your future need for replacements for Lucas and Lloyd needs to be managed as much as addressing some shortfalls in your midfield.

I also think, from what I saw last week, that your ruck stocks appeared thin, and that your midfield brigade did not get an even run with Brogan and, to a lesser extent, Lade constantly getting first hand of the ball. Perhaps the issue you are feeling is more to do with a lack of an A grade ruckman than an A grade midfield. Note: I did see Bellchambers in the VFL the week before last and thought he looked pretty sound as a tap ruckman, so perhaps the future is not such an issue in this area at least.

Great post from a opposition supporter. As for Gumbleton being traded, and this is hypothetical, I'd want Boak and your first round pick for this year (preferably top 10). Hille is becoming a A Grade ruckman, but we lack that 2nd ruckman, Laycock sucks and Bellchambers is far too raw to tell.

 

[TheFridge]

Great post from a opposition supporter. As for Gumbleton being traded, and this is hypothetical, I'd want Boak and your first round pick for this year (preferably top 10). Hille is becoming a A Grade ruckman, but we lack that 2nd ruckman, Laycock sucks and Bellchambers is far too raw to tell.

Thanks for the compliment!

Boak plus a first round draft pick seems fair from a Bomber perspective and underscores that there is almost no way Essendon would trade Gumbleton... And neither should they, imo. KP forwards are the hardest players to develop and do take time and yet they are generally the most important players for a club in terms of structure and premiership winning capability.

I suppose my post really was directed at a couple of earlier posts in the thread that seemed to suggest that the recruitment team at Essendon had messed up by taking Gumbleton ahead of Selwood... Given that I rate Boak at the same level as Selwood, and given the amount of debate we have on the Port board regarding our future KP Forwards in a post Tredrea world, I thought the hypothetical question was worth asking....

 

[lamaros]

On early form, I think it fair enough to suggest Selwood is ahead of both Boak, and Gibbs for that matter, although Boak is showing every sign of being "A" class for a long time.

Gibbs is clearly the best prospect of the three if you ask me. When you consider his age and the quality of the team he's had to play in. Selwood is over-rated by a heap, Boak looks about as good as him.

Just for the sake of hypothetical debate - what would be your thoughts of Essendon trading Gumbleton for Boak?

If Gumby does well then we won't trade. If He doesn't get on the park then port won't trade (not for a fair deal, anyway). So it won't happen.

I also think, from what I saw last week, that your ruck stocks appeared thin, and that your midfield brigade did not get an even run with Brogan and, to a lesser extent, Lade constantly getting first hand of the ball. Perhaps the issue you are feeling is more to do with a lack of an A grade ruckman than an A grade midfield. Note: I did see Bellchambers in the VFL the week before last and thought he looked pretty sound as a tap ruckman, so perhaps the future is not such an issue in this area at least.

Laycock got kicked out of the team for a week due to poor form. I expect he'll be back next week if he shows anything this weekend. Ryder has hardly rucked at all at AFL level and showed a bit. Hill is in good form but can't do much with the midfield around him.

Rucks aren't that big an issue for us if you ask me, we need quality midfielders and need to get Lucas or Gumbleton into the side.

 

[hoogs]

Honestly, I was shot down before the season saying this, but we still have not got a A Class mid in our side. We need them ASAP. I would be doing everything to get 2 A Class mids in the next two drafts. But who could we offer?

- Watson (quite a possibility, and has trade value)
- McPhee (I like him, but as a forward I see nothing more than a solid forward, we could get a 1st rounder for him, and in a strong draft it would be good!)

What do you guys recon?

No one would give you a 1st rounder for McPhee. Problem with you guys is that if you're not making the finals, you're coming close and not getting high draft picks. That and Carlton kept tanking and getting the priority picks as well as the top picks.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Thanks for the compliment!

Boak plus a first round draft pick seems fair from a Bomber perspective and underscores that there is almost no way Essendon would trade Gumbleton... And neither should they, imo. KP forwards are the hardest players to develop and do take time and yet they are generally the most important players for a club in terms of structure and premiership winning capability.

I suppose my post really was directed at a couple of earlier posts in the thread that seemed to suggest that the recruitment team at Essendon had messed up by taking Gumbleton ahead of Selwood... Given that I rate Boak at the same level as Selwood, and given the amount of debate we have on the Port board regarding our future KP Forwards in a post Tredrea world, I thought the hypothetical question was worth asking....

Put it this way if they didn't change the Priority Pick rules we would have got BOTH Selwood and Gumbleton, so I am mighty annoyed about that still. But yes you are right, a great CHF is where most premiership sides are built (you guys had Tredrea at CHF). If we had 2 picks in the top 5, I 'd have taken Gumbleton at 2, and either Leunberger or Selwood at 4. But I can't see unless Gumbleton wants to go home, that we would trade him as he is vital for our success post Lucas and Lloyd. Boak is coming along nicely, and luckily you picked up Westhoff and he should be your CHF post Tredrea anyway, or am I wrong there?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

No one would give you a 1st rounder for McPhee. Problem with you guys is that if you're not making the finals, you're coming close and not getting high draft picks. That and Carlton kept tanking and getting the priority picks as well as the top picks.

You gave a 1st rounder for Tarrant, McPhee has similar credentials. I am not saying we'd get a 1st rounder but it is not out of the question. Put him on the table and see what clubs offer us.

 

[The Donners]

Gibbs is clearly the best prospect of the three if you ask me. When you consider his age and the quality of the team he's had to play in. Selwood is over-rated by a heap, Boak looks about as good as him.



If Gumby does well then we won't trade. If He doesn't get on the park then port won't trade (not for a fair deal, anyway). So it won't happen.



Laycock got kicked out of the team for a week due to poor form. I expect he'll be back next week if he shows anything this weekend. Ryder has hardly rucked at all at AFL level and showed a bit. Hill is in good form but can't do much with the midfield around him.

Rucks aren't that big an issue for us if you ask me, we need quality midfielders and need to get Lucas or Gumbleton into the side.

Gibbs is just as overrated as Sellwood. Gibbs has done nothing so far to suggest he warranted the no. 1 draft pick.

 

[The Donners]

You gave a 1st rounder for Tarrant, McPhee has similar credentials. I am not saying we'd get a 1st rounder but it is not out of the question. Put him on the table and see what clubs offer us.

We wouldn't get higher than a late 2nd round or 3rd round for Mcphee.