Bernie Vince?

[Dundalis]

Dundalis despite your quite breathtaking rant on our lack of ruck depth, the whole proviso of us getting HMac is built around us getting him cheaply, which will not happen!!!!

Its a hypothetical that is a complete and utter waste of time, much the same as the Scully talk of late on here, because none of us are willing to give up anything decent in order to get these players. I bet that if we were into HMac North would ask for Wellers and our 1st round pick and you'd be crazy to make that deal so I really don't get why we're discussing a bloke that's rising 27 with achilles issues as a potential recruit, whether we supposedly lack depth in that area or not.

This is all ignoring the fact that he has to choose to come to us as clearly the second ruck when at least 2 other teams (Richmond and GWS) could provide around double the salary and almost double the game time. So career wise him moving to us wouldn't be a smart choice!

If we're serious about another ruckman take a look at bloody Hampson who's clearly 3rd in line at Carlton, he spends more time up forward than HMac, is only 23 and will come at a helluva lot cheaper price under both the salary cap (which could become a concern) and through the trade to get him

Oh and btw despite your bleak outlook on him, Wood has the 100% faith of the coaching staff and the player group that he can do the job (refer to MM's mid week presser). Its just up to the man himself as to whether he can ever reach his full potential much the same as blokes like Wellers and Vince for various other reasons.

I never said the McIntosh trade would or should happen, in fact just the opposite. You've gone on a long winded spiel yourself about McIntosh, when he wasn't even the real focus of my argument. I was responding to your comment that our ruck division is strong and not in any need of reinforcement. It's not. It's weak and lacking in depth. You might want to look at where Collingwood is in terms of team hitouts for just an example of the quality of our ruck "depth", given Jolly has missed games. Even with Jolly we aren't a strong side when it comes to a ruckmans main duties.

Wood is unathletic and soft. He's also lazy and doesn't have the mentality to reach his potential. I think that's pretty plain to see for all but the most one eyed supporters. I guess you were advocating the likes of Guy Richards before he got delisted also? We've had players like Wood fail at this club the last decade. It's not going to be a different story this time.

 

[mdc]

The Wood = Richards arguments are so lazy.

 

[dylan123]

. Unless they give us Vince and a first or second rounder for Wellers, the deal should not be done.

Vince and our first round draft pick for Wellingham!

 

[PieBeast]

Vince and our first round draft pick for Wellingham!

We won't even accept that.

 

[Magpie_Magic]

Vince and our first round draft pick for Wellingham!

I know. It's ridiculous to conisder considering Vince has had one good season in his entire life while Wellers hasn't ever even come close to playing a poor game in his career.

You'd be winning in the deal. It's a shame for you it would never happen. I wouldn't trade Wellers for anyone on your list and I mean that.

 

[Shade]

Not even Tippet ??

 

[Magpie_Magic]

Not even Tippet ??

Especially Tippett.

 

[dylan123]

I wouldn't trade Wellers for anyone on your list and I mean that.

I guess that's why you are not in charge of trading for Collingwood.

 

[blaze036]

Lets go after O'Meara first before vince. as jelly bean said we havnt got a really high draft pick in ages and i think it would be fantastic for us if we could get a potential very high pick in this gws mini draft. Realistically it probably wont be o'meara but there are some other fantastic kids

 

[blaze036]

the only way i could see this as a positive for the magpies is if the trade was something like vince + pick 20ish for Wellingham and our 2nd pick(not sure exactly what that'll be, mid 40's)?

not sure how adelaide would react to that deal, but vince really isnt THAT important

 

[TheFreshBanana]

I'd trade him for Dangerfield.

 

[PieBeast]

I guess that's why you are not in charge of trading for Collingwood.

I guess thats why you're probably in charge of trading for Adelaide LOL

There's only one player on your list who I would consider a direct swap for Wellers - Sloane. And thats cause just like Wellers he has an untapped potential IMO.

 

[blaze036]

if we lose pendlebury / thomas... get vince and O'meara if possible... in the long run thats not too bad for us. it would dampen the heartbreak i would feel from losing either of them

 

[Magpie_Magic]

I guess that's why you are not in charge of trading for Collingwood.

Because I'd prefer to keep a solid, consistent performer over trading him for players from a team that recently kicked a solid three goals for an entire game?

I stand by keeping Wellingham over anyone you have.

 

[dylan123]

I know. It's ridiculous to conisder considering Vince has had one good season in his entire life while Wellers hasn't ever even come close to playing a poor game in his career.

Also, it's much easier to play good football in a strong team, look at Prismall for an example. He looked like he was going to be a great player on the Geelong list when he was surrounded by Bartel, Ablett, Corey, Chapman, Ling etc yet on the Essendon list he has been exposed and has been pretty poor. Very similar to Vince playing his best footy when Adelaide looked to be a semi contender in 09 (as I and a few other Collingwood supporters have already pointed out on here).

I'd love for Adelaide to get Wellingham on our list but not at the expense of Vince and our first round draft pick.

 

[daics_35]

I hope we dont get Vince at all tbh, there is no need and his style doesnt suit us. I would look at Dangerfield if I was involved with the club but I cant see him replacing anyone in the time. Now that Dean Baily has left the club its almost certain that Tom Scully will leave, maybe we could go after him but only if Daisy is leaving.

 

[Scodog10]

I never said the McIntosh trade would or should happen, in fact just the opposite. You've gone on a long winded spiel yourself about McIntosh, when he wasn't even the real focus of my argument. I was responding to your comment that our ruck division is strong and not in any need of reinforcement. It's not. It's weak and lacking in depth.You might want to look at where Collingwood is in terms of team hitouts for just an example of the quality of our ruck "depth", given Jolly has missed games. Even with Jolly we aren't a strong side when it comes to a ruckmans main duties.

Wood is unathletic and soft. He's also lazy and doesn't have the mentality to reach his potential. I think that's pretty plain to see for all but the most one eyed supporters. I guess you were advocating the likes of Guy Richards before he got delisted also? We've had players like Wood fail at this club the last decade. It's not going to be a different story this time.

My mistake I was pretty worked up at the time over something else

Do you really feel though that a lack of hit-outs is strong evidence that we have a weak ruck division? We were in the bottom 2 last year for hit-outs as well on the back of Jolly being AA worthy over the course of the second half of the season!

As a club due to our free flowing game style we often have less ball-up's than say a team like Sydney so there is less opportunities to win hit-outs anyway. I'd be far more concerned with where our hit-out to advantage rate sits and also the hit-out to advantage rate of our opponents. I'd say we'd come out on top in that area in most games which is far more important than gross hit-outs won and thus a greater pointer to the relative strength of our ruck division.

The fact that I believe Wood has more talent in his left nut than Richards speaks volumes of what I thought of him. But it's still rather confusing as to why those two would be mentioned in the same breath anyway. As even though Wood may go down as a trade blunder it won't be due to a lack of talent, it'll be because of the points you raised above (Richards was in the unfortunate position of having those traits and being talent-less).

Gotta say I'm surprised anyone would knock back pick 10 and Vince for Wellers. It would be a strong deal for us IMO.

 

[Quicky]

Also, it's much easier to play good football in a strong team, look at Prismall for an example. He looked like he was going to be a great player on the Geelong list when he was surrounded by Bartel, Ablett, Corey, Chapman, Ling etc yet on the Essendon list he has been exposed and has been pretty poor. Very similar to Vince playing his best footy when Adelaide looked to be a semi contender in 09 (as I and a few other Collingwood supporters have already pointed out on here).

I'd love for Adelaide to get Wellingham on our list but not at the expense of Vince and our first round draft pick.

I don't necessarily disagree with the premise here but Prismall struggled at Geelong. Maybe not the best example to use. I'm thinking lately maybe Harry O might be the same sort of player at a weaker side. Love Harry, his dash and daring but he really does benefit from having a tight defensive unit around him in support. Glosses over his weak points.

 

[dylan123]

My mistake I was pretty worked up at the time over something else

Do you really feel though that a lack of hit-outs is strong evidence that we have a weak ruck division? We were in the bottom 2 last year for hit-outs as well on the back of Jolly being AA worthy over the course of the second half of the season!

Fwiw, Minson did manage to get 56 hit outs against Collingwood in round 6 (I think Jolly may have missed that match).

Gotta say I'm surprised anyone would knock back pick 10 and Vince for Wellers. It would be a strong deal for us IMO.

I don't think you guys are knocking that one back, more of saying that's what you believe is fair. But from an Adelaide perspective I certainty wouldn't want to give up that much for Wellingham.

I don't necessarily disagree with the premise here but Prismall struggled at Geelong. Maybe not the best example to use. I'm thinking lately maybe Harry O might be the same sort of player at a weaker side. Love Harry, his dash and daring but he really does benefit from having a tight defensive unit around him in support. Glosses over his weak points.

He did struggle to break into the side but I'm sure many of us expected him to be a big player in a few years time (which is why for memory Essendon gave up a second round draft pick for a guy that had just done his knee) because when he was playing he was racking it up. But he was just one that came off the top of my head and I'm sure there would be better examples.

I guess you don't really get to see just how good/bad your players are until a few losses and I've certainly seen plenty of weaknesses in the Adelaide side this year...

 

[Quicky]

He did struggle to break into the side but I'm sure many of us expected him to be a big player in a few years time (which is why for memory Essendon gave up a second round draft pick for a guy that had just done his knee) because when he was playing he was racking it up. But he was just one that came off the top of my head and I'm sure there would be better examples.

I guess you don't really get to see just how good/bad your players are until a few losses and I've certainly seen plenty of weaknesses in the Adelaide side this year...

Yeah I must admit I was a big supporter of us recruiting him when we were suffering post Buckley midfield blues and struggling a bit in that area. I was more referring to Prismall struggling in the seniors. He tore the twos apart. Which is where the bullish optimism came from. In fact I wonder how this story would read if it werent for injuries.

 

[dylan123]

Yeah I must admit I was a big supporter of us recruiting him when we were suffering post Buckley midfield blues and struggling a bit in that area. I was more referring to Prismall struggling in the seniors. He tore the twos apart. Which is where the bullish optimism came from. In fact I wonder how this story would read if it werent for injuries.

Did he really struggle in the seniors though? Just looking at his stats, in 2008 he played 12 games, one which including the match where he did his ACL at the start. Excluding that game he averaged 23 touches a game which is pretty impressive considering you would assume Ablett, Bartel, Corey, Selwood etc would have been getting most of the ball.

Yeah, I guess he adds to the list of "what if he never got injured" sort of players which unfortunately we will never know. Although having said that, I don't think he has lost much run or such since coming back from Essendon but his actual foot skills have been the real let down which have been exposed with the extra pressure he has been under from been in a weaker side.

 

[THATSGOLD]

If we were trading in a midfielder we wouldn't be trading out a midfielder for him! SIMPLE!

 

[Quicky]

I guess it was awhile ago and not my side but that was my impression. I could have it wrong. I mean we all know stats don't lie

 

[sr36]

If we were trading in a midfielder we wouldn't be trading out a midfielder for him! SIMPLE!

I agree. I only reckon we would chase Vince if we were to trade one of mids/flankers for one of the GWS 17 year olds.

 

[dylan123]

I guess it was awhile ago and not my side but that was my impression. I could have it wrong. I mean we all know stats don't lie

Haha you could be right, but stats are normally one of the better things to go off unless you are willing to go watch all of his replays which I for one am not!