Recruiting AFL Trade & Free Agency X - Club has elected not to fill list spot - Davey returning from injury?

[Lore]

Quick links: Player Contract Status | Draft Watch 2022 | JHA Father/Son and NGA | Adrian Dodoro

Spoiler: LIVE DRAFT ORDER (2022 Draft Order)

Spoiler: FUTURE PICK TRACKER (2023 Draft Order)

 

[faible]

He had one handball in a half of footy last week. Hird's not going to do any worse. You or I wouldn't have done any worse. We've seen what Ham can do, unfortunately he's a good VFL player, but not a good AFL player. Hird's been in the VFL for three years now - to be honest, in my opinion, he probably doesn't make it - but why not give him a go? He runs, chases, tackles and does everything Ham doesn't do. If one of them is blue collar, it's Hird. It just doesn't make sense to me.

It's sounding like I'm coming from a Ham vs. everyone else angle, I'm just suggesting that what Rutten says doesn't really align with what he does.

With the Voss thing - there's no rush to play him, I suppose - but there's also no harm in giving him a go, especially if he wants to really drive this blue collar mantra. Voss is the walking example of it. I do understand that right this second, he doesn't get a game based on form - but if Rutten wants this blue collar style, the options are there.

For the hundredth time, since people seem to miss this;

He's been benchwarming as a sub so the others can actually get meaningful development.

 

[bombreys]

For the hundredth time, since people seem to miss this;

Right - and for the last 2 weeks at least, that's proven to be the wrong call.

Having an AFL-standard sub against Collingwood well may have been the difference.

We actually played a kid who deserved a call up as the sub against North and it looks like we've found a player. He played a better half of footy than Ham has played at AFL level at any stage this year.

You can spin it any way you like, Rutten has persisted with Ham when he shouldn't have, going with him ahead of the types of players he says he wants to lead this club through its next finals run.

 

[faible]

Right - and for the last 2 weeks at least, that's proven to be the wrong call.

Having an AFL-standard sub against Collingwood well may have been the difference.

We actually played a kid who deserved a call up as the sub against North and it looks like we've found a player. He played a better half of footy than Ham has played at AFL level at any stage this year.

You can spin it any way you like, Rutten has persisted with Ham when he shouldn't have, going with him ahead of the types of players he says he wants to lead this club through its next finals run.

Would Menzie have been at the point he was, if he'd spent the last month being the unused sub on the bench?

Ham hadn't played a full game at any level in Rounds 15, 17 or 18, then was expected to walk in to a Round 19 game and fire.

People have very myopic views on this stuff, Ham has absolutely been hung out to dry as the Sunday sub so other guys can get actual game-time in the VFL.

A guy who is a decent but not amazing VFL player, has barely played a full game in a month at any level, looks out of place at AFL level.

He's a sacrificial lamb, Ham being exiled to the sub role has allowed guys like Menzie, Hird and Voss to get consistent game-time to even consider coming in and make an impact at AFL level.

 

[ant555]

His absolute insistence on playing Ham goes the complete other way. Not giving players like Hird or Voss a shot, who seem to fit the bill. We have Bryan running around getting 25 stats and 30 hitouts in the twos, but he wants to stick with a 31 year old ruck averaging 7 stats a game who flops forward in every second marking contest he's in. Dropping Baldwin from the ones after a win which was his best game, and where, playing as a key forward, he was easily our best pressure forward that day. He mostly selects the team based on name, not on form. Whether that's all his doing, I don't know - but I'm not really buying the 'blue collar' thing so far, it seems only to be words.

You can only play who is on the list and who is available.
Voss has been injured all year and is playing KPF.
They could have played Hird but he is not going to make it anyway .
Bryan is a 21 year old ruck.
Baldwin has needed time to play in the VFL.
Yes it is only words because we do not actually have a blue collar list but it was never about being blue collar straight away. It was about building a blue collar side. Maybe you need to listen to the words.
I think there has been a bit more blue collar coming through as the year has gone on.

Forgot to answer who I'd replace - and it's a tough one. I'm on the McGrath to D50 full time bandwagon.

Hopefully Heppell retires and we get someone out onto a wing for a bit longer.

He'll obviously go forward a bit too.

That is not taking anyone out of the current midfield to put Dunkley in. That was the question. Who goes out ? Parish , Shiel , Caldwell , Hobbs ?
Of course there are always injures.

 

[ant555]

Right - and for the last 2 weeks at least, that's proven to be the wrong call.

Having an AFL-standard sub against Collingwood well may have been the difference.

We actually played a kid who deserved a call up as the sub against North and it looks like we've found a player. He played a better half of footy than Ham has played at AFL level at any stage this year.

You can spin it any way you like, Rutten has persisted with Ham when he shouldn't have, going with him ahead of the types of players he says he wants to lead this club through its next finals run.

So because he plays one bloke who is not blue collar he is not trying to build a blue collar side . Yeah right. Next.

 

[bombreys]

Would Menzie have been at the point he was, if he'd spent the last month being the unused sub on the bench?

Ham hadn't played a full game at any level in Rounds 15, 17 or 18, then was expected to walk in to a Round 19 game and fire.

People have very myopic views on this stuff, Ham has absolutely been hung out to dry as the Sunday sub so other guys can get actual game-time in the VFL.

A guy who is a decent but not amazing VFL player, has barely played a full game in a month at any level, looks out of place at AFL level.

He's a sacrificial lamb, Ham being exiled to the sub role has allowed guys like Menzie, Hird and Voss to get consistent game-time to even consider coming in and make an impact at AFL level.

Myopic views? It's common sense.

The fix: don't make Ham (or anyone else for that matter) the sub four weeks in a row. Pick the side based on form.

You're clutching at straws there - you reckon Ham being the sub has led to Voss getting game-time in the VFL? Please.

 

[ant555]

Myopic views? It's common sense.

The fix: don't make Ham (or anyone else for that matter) the sub four weeks in a row. Pick the side based on form.

You're clutching at straws there - you reckon Ham being the sub has led to Voss getting game-time in the VFL? Please.

No you have not grasped it at all.
Voss was out for over 10 weeks. He has needed full games of footy for his development and fitness. Playing him as sub would have been useless for him and when Ham was actually getting selected in the side Voss was out injured or had just come back from injury.
Development of players is much better if the play full VFL games and not sit on the sidelines of AFL games for two plus quarters.

 

[bombreys]

You can only play who is on the list and who is available.
Voss has been injured all year and is playing KPF.
They could have played Hird but he is not going to make it anyway .
Bryan is a 21 year old ruck.
Baldwin has needed time to play in the VFL.
Yes it is only words because we do not actually have a blue collar list but it was never about being blue collar straight away. It was about building a blue collar side. Maybe you need to listen to the words.
I think there has been a bit more blue collar coming through as the year has gone on.


That is not taking anyone out of the current midfield to put Dunkley in. That was the question. Who goes out ? Parish , Shiel , Caldwell , Hobbs ?
Of course there are always injures.

That's my point tough, let's say for arguments sake Hird is a 20% chance of becoming an AFL player. Why, with his blue collar attributes, would you not give someone a go who's been on our list for 3 years, ahead of Ham, who we are 100% certain hasn't got a future at AFL level?

As for who goes out, maybe all of the above for a shared amount of time. I'd love to trade Parish, but that's not going to happen. Hobbs may have to go forward again. I think when you get an opportunity to land a player like Dunkley, you have to make it work.

 

[faible]

Myopic views? It's common sense.

The fix: don't make Ham (or anyone else for that matter) the sub four weeks in a row. Pick the side based on form.

You're clutching at straws there - you reckon Ham being the sub has led to Voss getting game-time in the VFL? Please.

Voss being the sub at AFL level on a Sunday afternoon would definitely not have gotten game-time in the VFL.

So yes, it's accurate.

 

[bombreys]

No you have not grasped it at all.
Voss was out for over 10 weeks. He has needed full games of footy for his development and fitness. Playing him as sub would have been useless for him and when Ham was actually getting selected in the side Voss was out injured or had just come back from injury.
Development of players is much better if the play full VFL games and not sit on the sidelines of AFL games for two plus quarters.

Voss is just a name I picked out. It could be any kid/player. Try McDonagh. Try Hird. We tried Menzie and it worked.

You don't get to say you want to be blue collar, and then when the chance to pick someone comes up, you go the other way.

 

[bombreys]

Voss being the sub at AFL level on a Sunday afternoon would definitely not have gotten game-time in the VFL.

So yes, it's accurate.

We better get Ham signed up then, I know there's quite a few players coming through the VFL that are going to want game-time and the only way they're going to get it is if he's the sub.

 

[citizen-erased]

That is not taking anyone out of the current midfield to put Dunkley in. That was the question. Who goes out ? Parish , Shiel , Caldwell , Hobbs ?
Of course there are always injures.

did a midfield proposal a bit earlier, but if i look at a whole team approach

Ridley - Zerk - Kelly
Redman - Laverde - D'Ambrosio
Merrett - Dunkley - McGrath
Langford - Jones - Hobbs
Guelfi - Wright - Stringer
Draper - Parish - Shiel
Perkins - Caldwell - Durham - Martin

Snelling, Heppell, Hind, Stewart missing from yday's team w/Shiel, Parish, Dunkley & McGrath added in
Cox, Reid, Menzie, Bryan plus pick 5 & Davey all candidates to step into that side in the near future too. so additional squeeze

midfield could see some pressure on an unlucky player if we are fully fit as i think Stewart was excellent fixing our fwd line targets.
Cox - where does he play probably determines who he pushes out (if he can!)
Menzie and Bryan may just end up quality depth/reserve options.

 

[faible]

We better get Ham signed up then, I know there's quite a few players coming through the VFL that are going to want game-time and the only way they're going to get it is if he's the sub.

No, no, dig up!

 

[brutus76]

I'm buying some bacon after all this Ham talk

 

[bombreys]

No, no, dig up!

What the hell you think I'm tryna do buddy boy!?

 

[bombreys]

I'm buying some bacon after all this Ham talk

Better yet... a Ham sub..?

 

[fairbump_playon]

He's a sacrificial lamb, Ham being exiled to the sub role has allowed guys like Menzie, Hird and Voss to get consistent game-time to even consider coming in and make an impact at AFL level.

It's ok to just be honest and call him a sacrificial ham.

 

[citizen-erased]

I'm buying some bacon after all this Ham talk

do yourself a favour and google Mr Vikkis.
the banana chutney is a ripper on bacon sangas. and i tell myself banana is fruit, therefore makes the sandwich healthy.

 

[MarkJohnson#1]

I think we can all agree that the sub needs to be outlawed next year. It's a disgrace to have to name players who theoretically may not play a game of football for weeks on end because they are the 25th player and there are no injuries along the way. It's staggering that the AFL have created this to begin with...

 

[Mikevk123]

Worth a decent pick IMO. they wont be giving him away

23 maybe. Wouldn’t offer anything over that. He looks Geelong bound atm

 

[TheGrizz]

If Whitfield is gettable (floated around the traps this morning) then that is a guy I would go hell for leather for.
We don't have a guy on our list that can match his combination of endurance, power running and foot skills at his best.

Offer to take his entire contract on and hopefully get a discount, though I doubt thw rumours that they would let him go are true.

 

[faible]

I think we can all agree that the sub needs to be outlawed next year. It's a disgrace to have to name players who theoretically may not play a game of football for weeks on end because they are the 25th player and there are no injuries along the way. It's staggering that the AFL have created this to begin with...

I actually don't mind the original implementation; concussion related only, with the mandatory 12 days out to be applied.

Apart from a 'pretend' concussion in a GF that drastically limits the ability for coaches to manipulate it.

The whole point was for clubs to cautiously manage concussion symptoms, instead of risking players going back out who might be concussed and the subsequent long-term issues from that. You could send someone back out who's done a hamstring, but there's limited future issues from doing so given they simply won't be able to do more than walk around slowly.

 

[ant555]

Voss is just a name I picked out. It could be any kid/player. Try McDonagh. Try Hird. We tried Menzie and it worked.

You don't get to say you want to be blue collar, and then when the chance to pick someone comes up, you go the other way.

Yep. Just keep picking out names without really knowing what is happening in the VFL.

 

[Bjchan13]

If Whitfield is gettable (floated around the traps this morning) then that is a guy I would go hell for leather for.
We don't have a guy on our list that can match his combination of endurance, power running and foot skills at his best.

Offer to take his entire contract on and hopefully get a discount, though I doubt thw rumours that they would let him go are true.

I think they'd let him go. He's 28, injury prone and overpaid. Can look good in a side full of contested beasts winning the footy for him. Not what id be looking at for us.

 

[Bjchan13]

23 maybe. Wouldn’t offer anything over that. He looks Geelong bound atm

Theres no way GWS accept pick 23 for Hopper. They haven't pushed him out the door and there's multiple clubs that will be interested.