List Mgmt. 2014 list discussion - drafts, free agents, trades, retirees, delistings and more

[manboob]

You are delusional if you think you will offer a third round pick Year of the Cat. You gave a second rounder for McIntosh last year, Shaw is twice the player.

Collingwood have 6 clubs chasing him. You need to understand the theory of demand/supply.

Shhhhh

 

[manboob]

Tend to agree.

Looks like Buckley is at his wit's end with him and wants him out.

Moving Shaw on (along with the bulk of his contract) might be enough to get a deal done (with us or any other club) as long as they believed they got something that might appease the fans.

Cue Trent West?

 

[year of the cat]

You are delusional if you think you will offer a third round pick Year of the Cat. You gave a second rounder for McIntosh last year, Shaw is twice the player.

Collingwood have 6 clubs chasing him. You need to understand the theory of demand/supply.

It's more an indication of how little I want him rather than what I think true market value is for him

 

[Pivo]

That's fine as long as GWS aren't stupid enough to do a direct swap for Adams.

Matter for Collingwood & GWS boards.

 

[thejester]

I don't understand how you can sit down at a press conference and say 'we can't make the mistake of overrating the list', equivocate on Chapman and then turn around and look to blow a first rounder (or a second rounder and a list space) on a 27 yr old half back who has cracked the shits with playing on half back. Shaw doesn't address any of the deficiencies we saw in the prelim and if he does play at half back takes the spot of the Thurlow, who I'm totally confident could play 22+ games next year and not look out of place.

 

[manboob]

Matter for Collingwood & GWS boards.

Nah cause I want Adams

 

[Pivo]

I don't understand how you can sit down at a press conference and say 'we can't make the mistake of overrating the list', equivocate on Chapman and then turn around and look to blow a first rounder (or a second rounder and a list space) on a 27 yr old half back who has cracked the shits with playing on half back. Shaw doesn't address any of the deficiencies we saw in the prelim and if he does play at half back takes the spot of the Thurlow, who I'm totally confident could play 22+ games next year and not look out of place.

It's alright, I don't think he'll land here.

Other clubs can offer more than us and Collingwood would, like any club, want to broker a deal that benefits them.

I don't believe us to have the right pieces.

 

[year of the cat]

God I hope he doesn't nominate us

 

[FredLeDeux]

I don't understand how you can sit down at a press conference and say 'we can't make the mistake of overrating the list', equivocate on Chapman and then turn around and look to blow a first rounder (or a second rounder and a list space) on a 27 yr old half back who has cracked the shits with playing on half back. Shaw doesn't address any of the deficiencies we saw in the prelim and if he does play at half back takes the spot of the Thurlow, who I'm totally confident could play 22+ games next year and not look out of place.

I doubt we would be this interested if we saw him just as a HBF.
It seems to me that the 2 possible spots we want him for would be
- A long outside runner to back up Duncan, given the question mark over Varcoe. However, I doubt Shaw would have the tank, or that he could build it at his age.
- Bartel's spot as the 7th man behind the ball, ie the key initiator in our main scoring source, namely goals from turnovers at half-back. This would also allow Bartel to play as the marking medium in the F50, replacing Johnson and Menzel.
I don't really know, however, it's just an attempt to make sense out of something that otherwise doesn't make sense to me - ie the fact that we appear to be so interested in getting him.

 

[_Me_]

It's alright, I don't think he'll land here.

Other clubs can offer more than us and Collingwood would, like any club, want to broker a deal that benefits them.

I don't believe us to have the right pieces.

Collingwood will be pressured to look after a shaw

 

[Pivo]

I doubt we would be this interested if we saw him just as a HBF.
It seems to me that the 2 possible spots we want him for would be
- A long outside runner to back up Duncan, given the question mark over Varcoe. However, I doubt Shaw would have the tank, or that he could build it at his age.
- Bartel's spot as the 7th man behind the ball, ie the key initiator in our main scoring source, namely goals from turnovers at half-back. This would also allow Bartel to play as the marking medium in the F50, replacing Johnson and Menzel.
I don't really know, however, it's just an attempt to make sense out of something that otherwise doesn't make sense to me - ie the fact that we appear to be so interested in getting him.

I've stopped trying to understand what we are doing list wise. Other people get paid to do that job.

 

[FredLeDeux]

I've stopped trying to understand what we are doing list wise. Other people get paid to do that job.

I never said I was doing it for free. I am keeping a check on the number of people who read my posts, and there will be a reckoning.

 

[Pivo]

I never said I was doing it for free. I am keeping a check on the number of people who read my posts, and there will be a reckoning.

Cheque is in the mail.

 

[darren forssman]

God I hope he doesn't nominate us

+1....if we gave a second rounder for the white elephant i dread what we will give up for shaw.

we need to be saved from ourselves.

 

[Stig_90]

I could see Shaw being a bit like Martin and ending up back at Collingwood, especially if Daisy goes.

 

[AM]

You are delusional if you think you will offer a third round pick Year of the Cat. You gave a second rounder for McIntosh last year, Shaw is twice the player.

Collingwood have 6 clubs chasing him. You need to understand the theory of demand/supply.

The Age is speculating that because of the Collingwood connection (O'Bree and Caracella) we might be in the hunt.

It would mean our first round draft choice, $400k+ and a dickhead. No thanks.

 

[Hoffy95]

Would be hypocritical to go after Shaw if they cut Chappy.

You're cutting one of our best ever players and arguably our best ever finals performer coming off a BOG performance who CLEARLY would be a perfect fit in a side aiming for a flag. So if he is cut they MUST be aiming beyond 2014. The club could not argue otherwise. Yet to then pick up a past his best reject from another club to 'fill a hole', half the player Chappy is, and keep a young bloke out of the team just stinks of double standards.

 

[dazbroncos]

Not sure if this is possible with player movement...but as its silly season.... what about a 3 way trade....

Shaw to Geelong for 2nd pick and we take his contract.

Shaw, 1/2 contract and West to GWS

Adams to Geelong.

So in essence, we eat 1/2 of Shaw's contract but lose West in the deal and get Adams in return.

Gets us a need filled, we eat some SC space but we get Adams and keep our 1st rounder.

GWS gain 2 solid experienced players and fill maturity needs.

Pies clear SC space and lose DH #1 and get a extra 2nd round pick.

GO Catters

 

[gogeelongcats]

We could not loose Chapman, a loyal clubman who is the heart and soul of the place for a dickhead like Shaw.
ADAMS is the player we would be after based on a needs basis. Young, Tuff, Consistent in and under

 

[manboob]

Shaw, 1/2 contract and West to GWS

Interesting though. But are you allowed to do that kind of thing?

 

[bulletproof]

Also, Hawthorn traded to fill needs. At best, Shaw fills a slight need given departures of Milburn and Hunt and now Enright probably next year. We have FAR greater needs than a running back pocket.

The only way it makes any sense is if Collingwood is so desperate to get rid of him they will give him away cheaply (which immediately raises questions about his fitness) but then with so much interest in him I think they'll strike a decent deal. From Collingwood's point of view they already have got Thomas off their books so you would think salary cap is not driving this.

It makes no sense to trade for a player at that age when he is in the free agent age bracket. We could get a similar aged player for just cash.

 

[Cat Addict]

Not sure if this is possible with player movement...but as its silly season.... what about a 3 way trade....

Shaw to Geelong for 2nd pick and we take his contract.

Shaw, 1/2 contract and West to GWS

Adams to Geelong.

So in essence, we eat 1/2 of Shaw's contract but lose West in the deal and get Adams in return.

Gets us a need filled, we eat some SC space but we get Adams and keep our 1st rounder.

GWS gain 2 solid experienced players and fill maturity needs.

Pies clear SC space and lose DH #1 and get a extra 2nd round pick.

GO Catters

Daz, any chance that there is still hope for Eardley. Seems strange not to give him another year. Maybe they delisted him with the plan to take him in the ND. So he is not counted as a rookie elevation and we can use a low pick on him. Then would only need to make 1 mandatory pick in the ND, with the other rookie elevation(s). Due to them looking at trading our big picks for Adams etc.

 

[crocsta]

Lets forget about all this trading unless its for free agents. Our greater strength has been drafting and developing.

We have hardly wasted an early pick in last 10 years and we suddenly want to trade these away.... Trading you get want you pay for a player as it's a market with known players, drafting is a riskier approach.

We don't have many picks so only option is to take riskier path of drafting. Time to trust Wells and keep some of our scarce quality picks.

 

[Catdog]

Daz, any chance that there is still hope for Eardley. Seems strange not to give him another year. Maybe they delisted him with the plan to take him in the ND. So he is not counted as a rookie elevation and we can use a low pick on him. Then would only need to make 1 mandatory pick in the ND, with the other rookie elevation(s). Due to them looking at trading our big picks for Adams etc.

I think this could be a option, long shot maybe but def a chance!

Bathie also with our problem with talls, would be a nice fall back time will tell
and thats the drama with being impatient!

 

[year of the cat]

Not sure if this is possible with player movement...but as its silly season.... what about a 3 way trade....

Shaw to Geelong for 2nd pick and we take his contract.

Shaw, 1/2 contract and West to GWS

Adams to Geelong.

So in essence, we eat 1/2 of Shaw's contract but lose West in the deal and get Adams in return.

Gets us a need filled, we eat some SC space but we get Adams and keep our 1st rounder.

GWS gain 2 solid experienced players and fill maturity needs.

Pies clear SC space and lose DH #1 and get a extra 2nd round pick.

GO Catters

Not allowed to ontrade players Daz.