List Mgmt. 2019 Trade Thread - Part II

[Premium]

If Geelong puck up Stuv they are fast becoming a retirement village. Think he’d give them plenty but with Gablett, Selwood, Danger and Co they are seriously old.

Yes the last thing they need is a aging star - they need to hit the draft badly

 

[Mowman]

Crows would want our first round pick for Brad Crouch for sure.
I feel Dunstan is not much below B.Crouch , I just hope we find value when ever we decide who we want.
This is why Coniglio would be so good to get - just cash required - can Allan pull it off.

Disposals

43​

42​

40​

39​

36​

35​

35​

34​

33​

32​

Crouch 10 best games
Dunstan has been good this year since coming back in
But would have Crouch before him everyday of the week and twice on Sundays

 

[Premium]

Best place for Dunstan to go would be Gold Coast , but would he even consider it - even if he was paid way more than with us.
Swap for B.King

 

[Premium]

Disposals

43​

42​

40​

39​

36​

35​

35​

34​

33​

32​

Crouch 10 best games
Dunstan has been good this year since coming back in
But would have Crouch before him everyday of the week and twice on Sundays

On form Brad Crouch is a grade above , anyone averaging 30+ touches is pretty good.
and Crouch gives a bit more spread.

I still feel we keep Dunstan if we can't get any value for him - what that value is I don't know , but if we don't get the big fish he stays.

 

[Mowman]

On form Brad Crouch is a grade above , anyone averaging 30+ touches is pretty good.
and Crouch gives a bit more spread.

I still feel we keep Dunstan if we can't get any value for him - what that value is I don't know , but if we don't get the big fish he stays.

People want us to improve our list but don't want us to move on players that haven't been good enough to get us up the leader, we need to make hard decisions and be brutal

 

[Ducky Tie]

Gerard Healy continuing his good form of making it up on the go. Talking on Steven - “he hasn’t played any good footy with intent for a couple of years.” Yep just a b&f and 18 Brownlow votes last year.

 

[jwikked]

Gerard Healy continuing his good form of making it up on the go. Talking on Steven - “he hasn’t played any good footy with intent for a couple of years.” Yep just a b&f and 18 Brownlow votes last year.

he went hard at Battle constantly on the weekend. Like really targeted him. Does he have a bee in his bonnet regarding the Saints?

 

[gringo2011]

People want us to improve our list but don't want us to move on players that haven't been good enough to get us up the leader, we need to make hard decisions and be brutal

I still think you stock pile. Geelong don't move out a Mitch Duncan just because they have Ablett back. You want layers of depth and Dunstan is good enough with upside to keep, he costs little in wage but contributes and wouldn't get much in a trade. He's absolutely the type you ken. We probably lose half a dozen players this year easily as it is with Armo, Stuv, Billy Longer, Pierce, Roberton and Paddy all unlikely at this stage to go on. Could lose Carlisle as well. Those guys ike Dunny and Acres I would hold just for back up or improvement. If they get displaced they aren't worth heaps so won't lose much value.

 

[gringo2011]

he went hard at Battle constantly on the weekend. Like really targeted him. Does he have a bee in his bonnet regarding the Saints?

He seems to be a supporter and puts money into the club. Fans are the greatest critics.

 

[VDS66]

What's the knock on Constable?

 

[gringo2011]

What's the knock on Constable?

Speed and only had about 9 games so far.

 

[NarklesHelmet]

What's the knock on Constable?

Tank apparently. And not the quickest.

Doesn't appear to be much else wrong with him and you'd think the tank issues will get better within a couple of pre-seasons.

 

[gringo2011]

Tank apparently. And not the quickest.

Doesn't appear to be much else wrong with him and you'd think the tank issues will get better within a couple of pre-seasons.

If he's getting 30 possessions he's going alright for no tank.

 

[NarklesHelmet]

If he's getting 30 possessions he's going alright for no tank.

Yeah, that's pretty much why so many Cats fans and others see him as having such great potential and why they aren't happy he's not getting many games. Still racks up the numbers despite his issues meaning you'd think he'll only get better (my old man is a Cat's fan so I get the inside word from him... haven't see a great deal of Constable myself).

 

[VDS66]

Tank apparently. And not the quickest.

Doesn't appear to be much else wrong with him and you'd think the tank issues will get better within a couple of pre-seasons.

Haven't followed his career.

Is he an inside type that we need?

Tank is a concern given the game involves Two way running.

Skills?

 

[VDS66]

Yeah, that's pretty much why so many Cats fans and others see him as having such great potential and why they aren't happy he's not getting many games. Still racks up the numbers despite his issues meaning you'd think he'll only get better (my old man is a Cat's fan so I get the inside word from him... haven't see a great deal of Constable myself).

Interesting. Others threw his name up a while back.

Maybe him and their 2nd. Doubt we'd get their first plus him for Stuv.

 

[Sainttony]

Do we know who is out of contract at end of the year,

 

[NarklesHelmet]

Haven't followed his career.

Is he an inside type that we need?

Tank is a concern given the game involves Two way running.

Skills?

From what I hear, his strength is he's a natural footballer and ball winner. As Gringo mentioned, he has been able to rack up over 30 before quite early in his career.

He's one of those players every club has who fans seem to wish were getting more game time. From what I heard, he'll only get better with his tank and it sounds like they'd hate to lose him... that's coming from a Cats fan but he seems like a young bloke a lot of them are hanging their hat on and he isn't getting too many games so could be a decent get.

 

[AirWinmar]

Regardless of what any of us think, the club have offered him a one year deal, that's pretty in your face and I'm surprised at it, I thought three for sure. The alarm bells are ringing

Thats ridiculous if true. Dunstans much improved this year. Would be in our bests nearly every week

 

[Premium]

I still think you stock pile. Geelong don't move out a Mitch Duncan just because they have Ablett back. You want layers of depth and Dunstan is good enough with upside to keep, he costs little in wage but contributes and wouldn't get much in a trade. He's absolutely the type you ken. We probably lose half a dozen players this year easily as it is with Armo, Stuv, Billy Longer, Pierce, Roberton and Paddy all unlikely at this stage to go on. Could lose Carlisle as well. Those guys ike Dunny and Acres I would hold just for back up or improvement. If they get displaced they aren't worth heaps so won't lose much value.

Hope we don't lose Steven and Carlisle , because when fit they are in our best 5 players - I think we do a better job of retaining players than most clubs.
Also with a coach like Ratten and the atmosphere he brings to the club I'm sure we have a good chance of keeping both.
We need both fit and firing - watching Carlisle , he is no where near his best form and will only get better as the year goes on.

Brown is a difficult one , he by far our best Fullback atm , but we really need more offensive play from the back line - and if Clavarino , Joyce , Austin , Marsh are fit next year one of them need to make the step up - Austin has a year left on his contract and hopefully he can show he can play the position.
Marsh would be my selection at the moment to replace Brown atm.

The Dunstan conundrum to keep him or not
we have to realize he is our best option atm , but having Hunter Clark , Bytel , Steven , Hannebery all with injuries or improving if they get there act together it will be 4 players fighting for the position , then add on another mid we get during trade period and Dunstan will be excess.

Steele , Ross , Steven , Gresham , Hunter Clark , Hannebery / I don't want to see Dunstan go but something needs to change.

Our forward line should look better with Max King filling a role with Bruce and Membery.
However we have multiply small forwards now with Lonie , Long , Parker , Kent , Young , Hind and hopefully at least 2 or 3 can prove to be consistent performers.

 

[Stewart66]

In AFL player ratings we have Steele and Ross as 37 and 38 in midfield ranks and Stuv and Luke at 41 and 42. Gresham is classed as a small forward but is our top ranked player. I know you love those things.

Better still Dunstan , Marshall , Gresham & Ross have had more clearances than Dusty .

Pretty sure the Tigers are one of the lowest clearance teams in AFL.


Unfortunately they have defensive systems & structure & they love teams who turn the ball over .

 

[Keg on legs]

Just caught up on the thread.

As much as I love Stuv, if we can turn him into Constable I'd be over the moon. He's a strong, contested animal with nice skills. He'd be a starting mid in almost any other team.

 

[Enclosed_Animal]

Would luke Parker be gettable?

Yes. AND would be absolutely what we need. Walks in best player and captain. With Hanners and Parker that would have our on-field leadership and experience heading in a much better direction. Would take a monster deal, but IMO absolutely gettable.

But be prepared for the avalanche of criticism you get with throwing a midfield name like that up. A player is always either too inside, too outside, too old or would cost too much, too injured etc
Fyfe (cant kick)
Crouch (not outside enough)
Bont (cost too much)
Cripps (not outside enough)
Gaff (not inside enough)
McCrae (cant kick)
Caldwell (too injured)
Cunnigton (too slow)
Treloar (cant kick)
Sloane (too old)
Jelly (cost too much)
Constable (too slow)
Hanners (too injured)
Sheil (cant kick)
Pendlebury (too old)
Danger (cant kick) etc etc etc

The player might indeed be 'gettable, but that's not the point in here. Unless the same player is between 21-24, is equal balance inside and outside, is quick, is an elite kick on both feet in congestion and costs less than a second rounder then this board doesn't want him. And if this mythical hybrid perfect mid did somehow appear for a third rounder, someone will say they aren't gettable because the player will only want to play at a successful / big club.

My guess is most people will just ignore the actually 'gettable' part. with Most comments will just criticise the player. My guess with Parker is either too old or too slow.

Its exactly the same circular conversation going on in here with ruckman. If you mention making an offer for an established / good ruckman, a couple of posters will jump on and say "that would be bad for Marshall's development" and / or "they wouldn't want to play 2nd ruck." If you mention a backup level ruckman, the same person will say "they are no good and we should stick with what we have." If you stay stick with what we have, the same posters say "why would we do that. We need to improve". Ones that are experienced are too old with no upside, and ones that are young are too inexperienced and we need someone ready to play. And around and around we go …

But the one rule seems to be that any suggestion has to be a mid / ruck. Absolutely cannot suggest any other tall or flanker because this board is absolutely obsessed with 'fixing' the midfield. The forwards only perform badly because of the midfields delivery. The backs were beaten because the midfield didn't help out. Our midfield cant compete with other good midfields etc etc. It has become almost cult like and suggesting anything else is instantly derided.

Personally I think the backline is easily our biggest issue. But you fit in much better if you just say mids mids mids. Its just that any mid suggested is always wrong for some reason or other. And if no clear reason exists they will just resort to "statistics are crap. I trust the eye test. My eyes say he is no good"

 

[VDS66]

Yes. AND would be absolutely what we need. Walks in best player and captain. With Hanners and Parker that would have our on-field leadership and experience heading in a much better direction. Would take a monster deal, but IMO absolutely gettable.

But be prepared for the avalanche of criticism you get with throwing a midfield name like that up. A player is always either too inside, too outside, too old or would cost too much, too injured etc
Fyfe (cant kick)
Crouch (not outside enough)
Bont (cost too much)
Cripps (not outside enough)
Gaff (not inside enough)
McCrae (cant kick)
Caldwell (too injured)
Cunnigton(too slow)
Treloar (cant kick)
Sloane (too old)
Jelly (cost too much)
Constable (too slow)
Hanners (too injured)
Sheil (cant kick)
Pendlebury (too old)
Danger (cant kick) etc etc etc

The player might indeed be 'gettable, but that's not the point in here. Unless the same player is between 21-24, is equal balance inside and outside, is quick, is an elite kick and costs less than a second rounder then this board doesn't want him. And if this mythical hybrid perfect mid did somehow appear for a second rounder, someone will say they aren't gettable because the player will only want to play at a successful / big club.

My guess is most people will just ignore the actually 'gettable' part with Parker is most comments will either say too old or too slow.

Its exactly the same circular conversation going on in here with ruckman. If you mention making an offer for an established / good ruckman, a couple of posters will jump on and say "that would be bad for Marshall's development" and / or "they wouldn't want to play 2nd ruck." If you mention a backup level ruckman, the same person will say "they are no good and we should stick with what we have." If you stay stick with what we have, the same posters say "why would we do that. We need to improve". Ones that are experienced are too old with no upside, and ones that are young are too inexperienced and we need someone ready to play. And around and around we go …

But the one rule seems to be that any suggestion has to be a mid / ruck. Absolutely cannot suggest any other tall or flanker because this board is absolutely obsessed with 'fixing' the midfield. The forwards only perform badly because of the midfields delivery. The backs were beaten because the midfield didn't help out. Our midfield cant compete with other good midfields etc etc.
It has become almost cult like.

Personally I think the backline is easily our biggest issue. But you fit in much better if you just say mids mids mids. Its just that we don't want and / or cant get any of the mids mentioned ...

I like to call it the Goldilocks syndrome...

 

[Premium]

Yes. AND would be absolutely what we need. Walks in best player and captain. With Hanners and Parker that would have our on-field leadership and experience heading in a much better direction. Would take a monster deal, but IMO absolutely gettable.

But be prepared for the avalanche of criticism you get with throwing a midfield name like that up. A player is always either too inside, too outside, too old or would cost too much, too injured etc
Fyfe (cant kick)
Crouch (not outside enough)
Bont (cost too much)
Cripps (not outside enough)
Gaff (not inside enough)
McCrae (cant kick)
Caldwell (too injured)
Cunnigton(too slow)
Treloar (cant kick)
Sloane (too old)
Jelly (cost too much)
Constable (too slow)
Hanners (too injured)
Sheil (cant kick)
Pendlebury (too old)
Danger (cant kick) etc etc etc

The player might indeed be 'gettable, but that's not the point in here. Unless the same player is between 21-24, is equal balance inside and outside, is quick, is an elite kick and costs less than a second rounder then this board doesn't want him. And if this mythical hybrid perfect mid did somehow appear for a second rounder, someone will say they aren't gettable because the player will only want to play at a successful / big club.

My guess is most people will just ignore the actually 'gettable' part with Parker is most comments will either say too old or too slow.

Its exactly the same circular conversation going on in here with ruckman. If you mention making an offer for an established / good ruckman, a couple of posters will jump on and say "that would be bad for Marshall's development" and / or "they wouldn't want to play 2nd ruck." If you mention a backup level ruckman, the same person will say "they are no good and we should stick with what we have." If you stay stick with what we have, the same posters say "why would we do that. We need to improve". Ones that are experienced are too old with no upside, and ones that are young are too inexperienced and we need someone ready to play. And around and around we go …

But the one rule seems to be that any suggestion has to be a mid / ruck. Absolutely cannot suggest any other tall or flanker because this board is absolutely obsessed with 'fixing' the midfield. The forwards only perform badly because of the midfields delivery. The backs were beaten because the midfield didn't help out. Our midfield cant compete with other good midfields etc etc.
It has become almost cult like.

Personally I think the backline is easily our biggest issue. But you fit in much better if you just say mids mids mids. Its just that we don't want and / or cant get any of the mids mentioned ...

Animal you just summed up the board perfect - when we are getting flogged they want to get rid of everyone , then when you mention a B.Crouch he is to slow can't kick and is always hurt.