Mega Thread 2011/12 Trade/Draft/Delist Megathread - Mid-Trade-Week edition

[swannies]

I agree Beatlesmith not sure if Clark fits Melbourne, would have been perfect for Freo. They missed out on a big opportunity, but they probably were just as keen to draft a couple of players with their first round picks..probably Brad Hill.

We can only hope.

Must admit I haven't seen much of Newman at all. Could you give us an insight into the sort of small he is, ie: your traditional small crumbing forward or a shorter midfielder capable of playing the small forward role and a useful mid rotation.

I hope the latter, I'm of the opinion that your stay at home small forward will have a diminishing role at AFL level in the years to come with defensive efforts and versatility emerging as important qualities.

Also what's his pace and skills like?
And would he be around at our second rounder, or will we have to take him with 23/28?

Definitely the latter. Last game of colts he played, before being elevated to the league side, he had a 30 possession, 5 or 6 goal game, playing from the wing. Skills are beautiful, that left foot is dynamite. Runs and carries and links, with a bit more flair than, say Gaff. Murray also likes the contest, he reminds me quite a lot of Walters (Freo) in that respect, but he's not as agro.

Coincidentally, the other player the Eagles are supposedly keen on is a similar type, left footer, quick, runs and carries, can also crumb, from Claremont. Shannon Taylor.

 

[BradWCE]

Re: brad ebert quits west coast

I think we are required to de-list 3 from the senior list and either recruit from the draft, or upgrade from rookies to replace them. If Ebert gets replaced on the main list by Hill, we will still need to de-list 2 more players. I'd expect 2 of Dalziel, Wilson, Stevenson and Swift could be going.

They aren't going to delist Swift. Dalziell, Wilson and Stevenson would get delisted before Swift and we aren't going to delist 4 players.

 

[Masto]

Re: brad ebert quits west coast

Ebert and Jones already gone. I expect Dalziell and Wilson to also be gone. Take 4 picks and leave Hams on rookie

 

[Galileo9]

I remember I tried to have that debate with a Freo fan and they said they were fine because they had Bradley, Johnson and Mayne up forward as options

true but we arent any different. alot of people still bang on about wilson, hams and strijk as though they are some superstars.

 

[swannies]

true but we arent any different. alot of people still bang on about wilson, hams and strijk as though they are some superstars.

Actually, we're a lot different because Wilson, Hams and Strijk only got about 2 games between them all year, they're not the mainstay of our forward line.

 

[kane249]

Actually, we're a lot different because Wilson, Hams and Strijk only got about 2 games between them all year, they're not the mainstay of our forward line.

Exactly, we still have Kennedy, Lynch, Darling and Lecras ahead of them, who does Freo have ahead of Bradley, Johnson and Mayne?

Pav?
Anthony? (lol)

 

[SpaceClef]

Not really. They're cream on the top, they don't win you premierships. Usually the last piece of the jigsaw puzzle, if you will.

apologies in advance for the long post.
Swannies, you're by far my favourite poster on here in terms of making sense (GE is my favourite poster with sense taken out of the equation), but I was wondering if you could explain yourself here, as it gets bandied about on BF a fair bit.

How can a crumber who can run through the middle both "not win you premierships", but also be "the cream on top"? If we assume that 'the top' means a premiership side, then without the cream there is no premiership. Unless you mean that you can be a premiership side, but then win a second flag with a crumber?

I'm playing dumb here because I think these types are very important to a team overall. Opportunistic types, who flash in and out of games, flash nonetheless, and these players add the 'crazy subtle angles' to the otherwise uniform lines that constitute a football side. They are generally the crowd favourite (or most hated depending on who you support), and have shown to inject energy/momentum into teams.

I don't necessarily think Hill is this player, but it has been frustrating to see the Eagles seemingly ignore this idea entirely - moreso it seems than any other team in the comp.

 

[swannies]

apologies in advance for the long post.
Swannies, you're by far my favourite poster on here in terms of making sense (GE is my favourite poster with sense taken out of the equation), but I was wondering if you could explain yourself here, as it gets bandied about on BF a fair bit.

How can a crumber who can run through the middle both "not win you premierships", but also be "the cream on top"? If we assume that 'the top' means a premiership side, then without the cream there is no premiership. Unless you mean that you can be a premiership side, but then win a second flag with a crumber?

I don't necessarily think Hill is this player, but it has been frustrating to see the Eagles seemingly ignore this idea entirely - moreso it seems than any other team in the comp.

Because I'm referring to someone who is just a crumber / goal sneak, that doesn't run through the middle. People think this is a new idea, but it's not. Here I go sounding old (well, I am ), but when I played you played in the middle and then forward or back pocket, depending on your creativity, I guess. I wasn't very creative. This was because you didn't rotate players off the ground every 30 seconds, so you rested in the FP or BP, but you had to have another string to your bow.

You can only carry a lairy forward pocket type if the team is good, because they have to cover for that player's lack of accountability. It seems the better the goal sneak, the more unaccountable they are. Just my old school thoughts coming through.

The Eagles have not ignored it, they already have one, who is lax defensively but has tightened up in that area a lot this year. LeCras.
Can you imagine having 2 of 6 in the forward line that aren't great at applying pressure? Especially in the era of the forward press?

Now, I watch Swans every week and there's a bloke, whose not a goal sneak but he's a very good goal kicker. 70 odd goals last year, 51 this year. He drives me nuts though, because he will point up the field to other players to chase his man, or put pressure on. He can do it though, because if a goal is in the offing he will run like someone's planted a size 12 boot fair up his clacker.

You see my point? Sorry for the long answer.

 

[SpaceClef]

You see my point? Sorry for the long answer.

I understand, but gurncentral's original post to which i'm referring to said 'if we don't get a crumber who can run through the middle i'll blow my load' (or something to that effect )

I wasn't referring to a lairy forward like LeCras, and I don't think anybody who calls for a crumber in our side has someone like that in mind. I think what we all want is someone who applies forward pressure by being very quick, elusive, good at winning loose balls (both off the ground and by dispossessing), and able to do create a goal out of anything (be it via assists or a direct goal).

Watching Krakeour and Garlett in 2011, and Ballantyne last year - you can see defenders shit themselves a little when they're near the ball. they will give away free kicks or make disposal errors because they will overcommit to preventing them from getting to it.

I dunno, maybe i have my crumb-coloured glasses on. But I don't think Lecca is a good counter example, especially since he was drafted before the period I'm referring to (2006 onwards). Nico + the press has helped, but when a disputed ball goes to ground in our F50, I still think 8 times out of 10 it will get taken out by the defense.

 

[Coast_Watch]

Re: brad ebert quits west coast

Did you miss the memo that B Jones retired? We only need to move 1 more player on, but we've kept our options open with Wilson, Dalziell, Stevenson and a couple of others, still unsigned. Wilson and Dalziell are most likely to go, IMO, unless we still want to move 5+ players on and have 5 picks, which I highly doubt, as it's still a compromised draft.

On top of these we have Embley and Nicoski only signed to 1 year deals, so next year looks like we might make a bigger player movement.

I will stand to be corrected (again), but here goes: What I said was
"I think we are required to de-list 3 from the senior list and either recruit from the draft, or upgrade from rookies to replace them. If Ebert gets replaced on the main list by Hill, we will still need to de-list 2 more players. I'd expect 2 of Dalziel, Wilson, Stevenson and Swift could be going."

Of course if Hill doesn't arrive, then Ebert counts as an additional loss from the list (BJ + Ebert), and the de-list requirement falls to 1 player only - that IMO being probably Dalziell or Wilson, less likely Stevenson or Swift.

Yes next year may require a bigger intake, but the draft quality should be less diluted than this years.

 

[pantskyle]

Re: brad ebert quits west coast

Well the final day is here. So I guess we get Coniglio today.

 

[Kerrby]

Re: brad ebert quits west coast

We have 4 and a half hours left to get something for Valerie Ebertandernie and to trade for Josh Hill.

 

[QS]

Re: brad ebert quits west coast

I think we've had a pretty unsuccessful trade week thus far. The Ebert deal has dragged on far too long IMO.
Let's hope we know what we're doing here..

 

[Special Agent Utah]

Re: brad ebert quits west coast

I think we've had a pretty unsuccessful trade week thus far. The Ebert deal has dragged on far too long IMO.
Let's hope we know what we're doing here..

Exactly

I can't believe it has taken nearly 8 days to deal on Ebert. I know a lot of it is Port but surely it should be done by now.

 

[swannies]

I understand, but gurncentral's original post to which i'm referring to said 'if we don't get a crumber who can run through the middle i'll blow my load' (or something to that effect )

I dunno, maybe i have my crumb-coloured glasses on. But I don't think Lecca is a good counter example, especially since he was drafted before the period I'm referring to (2006 onwards). Nico + the press has helped, but when a disputed ball goes to ground in our F50, I still think 8 times out of 10 it will get taken out by the defense.

OK, I see what you're saying and would agree but I think we overlooked because we had more pressing needs through the middle, bigger bodies forward etc. We've been linked to a few over the past couple of years so you'd think it was time we were going to pull the trigger and we did 2 years ago, because we put Broome on the rookie list.

I will stand to be corrected (again), but here goes: What I said was
"I think we are required to de-list 3 from the senior list and either recruit from the draft, or upgrade from rookies to replace them. If Ebert gets replaced on the main list by Hill, we will still need to de-list 2 more players. I'd expect 2 of Dalziel, Wilson, Stevenson and Swift could be going."

Of course if Hill doesn't arrive, then Ebert counts as an additional loss from the list (BJ + Ebert), and the de-list requirement falls to 1 player only - that IMO being probably Dalziell or Wilson, less likely Stevenson or Swift.

Yes next year may require a bigger intake, but the draft quality should be less diluted than this years.

Yes, we have to delist 3, but we have already effectively delisted 2. Whether Hill arrives or not is irrelevant to the fact we have removed those 2. I agree on the Dalz or Wilson most likely gone, maybe both?

I think we've had a pretty unsuccessful trade week thus far. The Ebert deal has dragged on far too long IMO.
Let's hope we know what we're doing here..

I think we are simply fighting to stop having our pants pulled down to our ankles while the reaming goes on, we're trying to hold the around our knees at the moment.

 

[QS]

I think we are simply fighting to stop having our pants pulled down to our ankles while the reaming goes on, we're trying to hold the around our knees at the moment.

Ha.. I think you're right.. but I think it's more from Port being a bit unreasonable and trying to get something for nothing.

Surely though we should have looked at other options - that said, still just a scoach under 4 hours left. Mad Monday swannies.. Mad Monday.

I just missed something on TWR, but something to go down with us in the next 30 mins "allegedly".. anyone catch that?

 

[Jimmy_the_Gent]

Yeah, Josh Hill is ours in the next 30 minutes.

 

[QS]

Yeah, Josh Hill is ours in the next 30 minutes.

So in other words, it won't happen?

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Couple of done deals:

Lisle to Brisbane for pick 29.

Hawks then sent that to Freo for pick 38 and some swapping of late picks. Don't understand that one at all. Late-onset guilt about the Croad trades?

 

[Jimmy_the_Gent]

Hawks then sent that to Freo for pick 38 and some swapping of late picks. Don't understand that one at all. Late-onset guilt about the Croad trades?

This tweet is meant to explain it:

Trade Week Radio
Appears to be all part of a bigger picture deal that will be revealed shortly

 

[new breed]

Freo to use the Hawthorn Compo pick to GWS for a pre listed player , most likely Ryan Cook or Kyal Horsley maybe !

 

[Kerrby]

This tweet is meant to explain it:

Hopefully Freo is getting screwed over once again.

 

[Coledinho]

Couple of done deals:

Lisle to Brisbane for pick 29.

Hawks then sent that to Freo for pick 38 and some swapping of late picks. Don't understand that one at all. Late-onset guilt about the Croad trades?

Lisle worth pick 29 and Ebert pick 33. I dont even

 

[Jimmy_the_Gent]

So according to Pickering, we would've loved to have Davis but his age put us off.

Basically what everyone here thought.

 

[Avalor]

So according to Pickering, we would've loved to have Davis but his age put us off.

Basically what everyone here thought.

Yep, didn't want to rob one of our young guys of an opportunity - thoroughly agree here!