List Mgmt. 2017 Trade & FA Targets Part 3

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

Yep, if only we'd done the same with every kid on our list who'd had a quiet first season


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sorry for posting a different opinion then yours, I forgot that every player we pick will be the next Judd.
And everything we post must be positive because that makes you a better supporter thanks for the feed back
 
4 is better than 3. We could have 2 of them playing on the ball at any given time.
Membrey and Stringer?

That would surely be a boost to our Membership

2vvmlfo.jpg
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sorry for posting a different opinion then yours, I forgot that every player we pick will be the next Judd.
And everything we post must be positive because that makes you a better supporter thanks for the feed back

Your opinion was noted & I posted a response.

Maybe you could back up your opinion with some insight.

I think Long showed quite a bit at times this season. Especially in the Richmond game. Great pressure, tackled like a madman, hit targets, ran out of legs. He got lost in the pace of a few other matches though. Plenty to work with after another pre season

See, opinion with a bit of explanation as to why I have that opinion.

Never mentioned Judd & never mentioned your negative posting.

If you can't handle people responding to your posts other than to agree with you then maybe don't post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I think JohnOneMillion (can't recall his nic) keeps saying the Josh Kelly isn't over yet, and he will still come to the Saints. The "signed with Giants" is smoke and mirrors and maybe a way to avoid distraction during finals.
I reckon after the re-signing is finally announced, Mr John will become invisible like a ghost, will no longer post on here as John, and will just come back with a new nic. Just my thoughts.
 
imo he will not be on our list in 2 years hope wrong but that was just plain silly
im not one to bag out a player in fact i tend to lean on the over possitive side of things when it comes to players but with that draft i reckon we could have got long with a rookie pick i dont think there were many clubs reshuffling their picks after we called his name ... i would have gone with any of Parfitt, Fisher, Bolton or Darcy over Long .. thankfully we got Battle who i reckon was the best that was left after that ..
i really hope im wrong but Long doesnt fill me with confidence
 
Talk of Stringer puts me in the mind of the Andrew Lovett trade. Although our part was a straight Pick 16 for Lovett, just to remind this is how the whole group of trades panned out and how much Hawthorn made out like bandits in that group of trades:

Port got pick 16, which they used on Jasper Pittard, and pick 9 which got them Andrew Moore - ended up being a bit of a journeyman, 60 games over six years.
We burnt 16 to trade in a guy who never played a game for us.
EFC burnt 16 to Port via Hawthorn to get Mark Williams, who'd play five more AFL games. They got Carlisle at 24 as part of the trade but. Fyfe went at 20 in the same draft
Hawthorn got Burgoyne, then in a separate trade got Gibson.

You can see how Hawthorn got set up for their run of premierships, they won it by the length of the straight.

That's my feeling about Stringer, particularly if it is multi way. In a few years time looking back, there will be a big winner, and a big loser.
 
im not one to bag out a player in fact i tend to lean on the over possitive side of things when it comes to players but with that draft i reckon we could have got long with a rookie pick i dont think there were many clubs reshuffling their picks after we called his name ... i would have gone with any of Parfitt, Fisher, Bolton or Darcy over Long .. thankfully we got Battle who i reckon was the best that was left after that ..
i really hope im wrong but Long doesnt fill me with confidence

Over on another board, anyone who expresses lack of confidence in Long is called all sorts of names, with an implied "racist" undertone.
I agree with you, in that Long seems undersized (yes, I know he's young) but his body type will never lend itself to gaining much extra muscle.
I think the club was seduced with the genetic link with Michael Long.
Long is not someone I see as a senior player at all.
Agree with you on Battle, he could be a type of Tom Lynch or similar, he has definitely got a lot of upside
 
Talk of Stringer puts me in the mind of the Andrew Lovett trade. Although our part was a straight Pick 16 for Lovett, just to remind this is how the whole group of trades panned out and how much Hawthorn made out like bandits in that group of trades:

Port got pick 16, which they used on Jasper Pittard, and pick 9 which got them Andrew Moore - ended up being a bit of a journeyman, 60 games over six years.
We burnt 16 to trade in a guy who never played a game for us.
EFC burnt 16 to Port via Hawthorn to get Mark Williams, who'd play five more AFL games. They got Carlisle at 24 as part of the trade but. Fyfe went at 20 in the same draft
Hawthorn got Burgoyne, then in a separate trade got Gibson.

You can see how Hawthorn got set up for their run of premierships, they won it by the length of the straight.

That's my feeling about Stringer, particularly if it is multi way. In a few years time looking back, there will be a big winner, and a big loser.


If you do that for any trade then some sides will win and lose. I suppose it depends if you are happy plodding along and never taking a punt. What if we thought that way before the Carlisle deal. Most likely don't get Gresham either.
 
I don't understand the heat being put on Long after only one year, if we trade him to the dogs they'll probably turn him into another Johannisen-type who took what 4 or 5 years to really hit his straps?

Long is an elite kick, fast, loves tackling and can kick goals… he could be a serious upgrade on Mav if we persist and develop him properly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top