Biggest Mistake - Clearing? Gaz Snr or Kanga Jnr?

[J0NNY B]

Or maybe YOU can just accept that you are wrong, and we can stop debating?

Or how about we both accept that people have different valuations on what losing Kennedy has gained and lost us, and that no-one has the definitive truth when it comes to such intangible measurements?

Hang on I love the debate, I was replying to the posters that are complaining about this topic being raised again.

I don't care if I am right or wrong. Kennedy showed in glimpses what he was capable of in his first game for box hill, not my fault if others didn't realize how good his inside work is.

Also, no comparison can be made with Mumford. He was a rookie with no contract and Geelong was restricted with salary cap. Tom Gillies is a better comparison. He lacked opportunity, had a year to run on his contract, a rival club circled and made an over the top offer, but Geelong rates him, so end of
story.

 

[eldorado]

Just a reminder, the three picks we got for McGlynn and Kennedy enabled us to add Stratton, Grimley and Suckling to our list (Suckling's rookie status accepted, but still required a pick)

 

[eldorado]

Hang on I love the debate, I was replying to the posters that are complaining about this topic being raised again.

I don't care if I am right or wrong. Kennedy showed in glimpses what he was capable of in his first game for box hill, not my fault if others didn't realize how good his inside work is.

Well, that's fine, I don't mind that the topic is being brought up again (it's a forum for opinions) but when a previous poster gave his opinion as to why trading Kennedy wasn't a stuff up, you told him to stop the 'denial and justification' and just accept it (that we screwed up). A statement I find difficult to accept.

Obviously, I'm in the camp that says we didn't lose too much, due to what we had, (lots of inside mids) and what we gained (Stratton, Grimley and Suckling). While it hurts to see a favoured son doing so well elsewhere, it's not really a screw-up as such...in my opinion anyway.

Now, drafting Thorp instead of Selwood or Riewoldt...lets not go there

 

[Brown Blood]

How does the acquisition of Burgoyne fit into this team philosophy? Surely Kennedy wouldn't have required any more money than a Burgoyne, so we keep Kennedy AND our No.9 pick. Discuss.

Good that you bring up bourgoyne because his recruitment helps explain why we couldn't keep kennedy.

1. They play quite different roles - burgoyne is an outside mid/defender (even fwd) - kennedy inside mid (& thats about it)
2. Bourgoyne is a premiership player who had played 150 games+, VP of his team & AA
3. Kennedy had played just 13 games
4. We had kennedy's role well & truly covered by better more experienced players but needed players like bourgoyne who is acknowledged as one of the most highly skilled midfielders in the afl

And when you look at the above you can understand why we couldn't match the offer sydney made which was reputably $400K pa with a 3 year contract or guarantee kennedy the sort of game time he was looking for.

 

[the walloper]

There is no doubt it was Gary Snr. We would have won 1983-1994 with Snr and then 2007-2011 with Gary Jnr under father/son considerations.

 

[Hawkas1988]

Just a reminder, the three picks we got for McGlynn and Kennedy enabled us to add Stratton, Grimley and Suckling to our list (Suckling's rookie status accepted, but still required a pick)

Exactly! Why are people complaining so much when he would still be behind Mitchell, Hodge, Lewis and Sewell.

Plus we gained Stratton, Grimley and Suckling.

I'm happy with how it all worked out to be honest.

 

[J0NNY B]

There is no doubt it was Gary Snr. We would have won 1983-1994 with Snr and then 2007-2011 with Gary Jnr under father/son considerations.

That is pretty cruel, reminding us what could have been - Ablett jnr, Kennedy, Sellwood. Could be the 2012 AA midfield.

 

[kolchak]

How does the acquisition of Burgoyne fit into this team philosophy? Surely Kennedy wouldn't have required any more money than a Burgoyne, so we keep Kennedy AND our No.9 pick. Discuss.

HP I was going to bring this up with you the other day. It's an interesting point. There are a lot things to consider, and at the risk of derailing the thread, it's why we should have definately played hard ball in the Burgoyne trade. Unless Burgers can one day break open a finals game, which was the intention for getting him, I'll never be happy with the trade.

 

[Slattery_20]

So far I think McGlynn has hurt you more than the other two. Still be getting games IMHO.


Burgoyne definitely adds something you lacked, pure outright classy carry & disposal. Still not entirely convinced he was value, but he's done his job, so far.

 

[kolchak]

So far I think McGlynn has hurt you more than the other two. Still be getting games IMHO.


Burgoyne definitely adds something you lacked, pure outright classy carry & disposal. Still not entirely convinced he was value, but he's done his job, so far.

The McGlynn trade netted us Stratton, it's actually the trade I'm happy with. I'd still think he'd be a fringe player for us. His endeavour is 110% but his foot skills are lacking. No slight on McGlynn at all, when we asked him to do a job, he went out there and gave it his all.

 

[Slattery_20]

The McGlynn trade netted us Stratton, it's actually the trade I'm happy with. I'd still think he'd be a fringe player for us. His endeavour is 110% but his foot skills are lacking. No slight on McGlynn at all, when we asked him to do a job, he went out there and gave it his all.

Wasn't he roughly pick 1 zillion ?

But yes, you would be happy with it and quite right. Just IMHO McGlynn would fill more of a need for you guys than Kennedy.

 

[ACTion Hawks]

HP I was going to bring this up with you the other day. It's an interesting point. There are a lot things to consider, and at the risk of derailing the thread, it's why we should have definately played hard ball in the Burgoyne trade. Unless Burgers can one day break open a finals game, which was the intention for getting him, I'll never be happy with the trade.

Would you be singing a different tune if we had beaten the Pies in the prelim last year? I recall Burgers being pretty awesome that day and definitely playing up to the big occasion.

I also think the leadership he brought in has to be taken into account. We have definitely turned things round from when we were a strictly non-indigenous club, to be leading the way (thankfully!!).

 

[kolchak]

Would you be singing a different tune if we had beaten the Pies in the prelim last year? I recall Burgers being pretty awesome that day and definitely playing up to the big occasion.

I also think the leadership he brought in has to be taken into account. We have definitely turned things round from when we were a strictly non-indigenous club, to be leading the way (thankfully!!).

Like Slattery says, he adds to our team, it's just in terms of value. If you know what I mean, and we could do a lot worse in a trade than Burgoyne, it's just we were in the position to dictate the terms on a quality player, just like the Swans did to us, and we failed to do so.

 

[Davo23]

There is no doubt it was Gary Snr. We would have won 1983-1994 with Snr and then 2007-2011 with Gary Jnr under father/son considerations.

With a disruptive person like Gary Ablett senior, we would have won fewer premierships; interesting that Geelong didn't win a premiership with him anchoring their forward line?

And we could not afford all the bail money and legal fees...

 

[Brown Blood]

........ and we could do a lot worse in a trade than Burgoyne, it's just we were in the position to dictate the terms on a quality player, just like the Swans did to us, and we failed to do so.

So who's the quality player you talk about?

 

[kolchak]

So who's the quality player you talk about?

I'm talking about Burgoyne.

 

[Brown Blood]

I'm talking about Burgoyne.

Why do you think we were in a position to dictate the terms - he said he wouldn't walk and port were playing hard-ball.

Different situation with kennedy & mcglynn.

 

[kolchak]

Why do you think we were in a position to dictate the terms - he said he wouldn't walk and port were playing hard-ball.

Different situation with kennedy & mcglynn.

He wanted out of Port Adelaide and our team was his preferred choice. Port played hard ball, when we should have played hard ball. It's the not the same situation, but I'm talking in context of list management and when you got the upper hand you should use it.

 

[Brown Blood]

He wanted out of Port Adelaide and our team was his preferred choice. Port played hard ball, when we should have played hard ball. It's the not the same situation, but I'm talking in context of list management and when you got the upper hand you should use it.

No - bourgoyne explicitly said he didn't want us to screw port so we had to facilitate a trade - and the fact is we didn't pay up for him when you consider as part of the trade we offloaded williams (whose knee was shot) to essendon.

If anybody got ripped off it was essendon .

 

[kolchak]

No - bourgoyne explicitly said he didn't want us to screw port so we had to facilitate a trade - and the fact is we didn't pay up for him when you consider as part of the trade we offloaded williams (whose knee was shot) to essendon.

If anybody got ripped off it was essendon .

Mmmm Stitching up Essendon with Williams for 3 years, yer I take it all back

 

[eldorado]

Any talk of us or any other team playing 'hard ball' is overstated and simplistic.

You only play hardball when you are prepared to walk away with nothing. When you want somthing, and both parties know it, you play ball, plain and simple.

Hard ball only happens in the real world when a player takes on a bunny. Port Adelaide are no more bunnies than we are, so a price was paid that was fair to both parties.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

Any talk of us or any other team playing 'hard ball' is overstated and simplistic.

You only play hardball when you are prepared to walk away with nothing. When you want somthing, and both parties know it, you play ball, plain and simple.

Hard ball only happens in the real world when a player takes on a bunny. Port Adelaide are no more bunnies than we are, so a price was paid that was fair to both parties.

Are they the ultra-lights or the bunnies? I can't keep up.

 

[J0NNY B]

I reckon we were all losers regarding Mark Williams. His 2008 year was unbelievable but his body never let him repeat it.

 

[mrcurly]

To answer the OP - Barry Rowlings.

Who are these two names added at the end of the subject title?

I'll second that one... with Peter Welsh not too far behind.

Its a great attribute to be able to win the ball, but if you just keep giving it back to the opposition then its pointless. That is JK's problem, eventually he may correct this, but despite his good season in '11 he was still burning possessions regularly.

GAblett mk1 had all the skills, but its a team game, and he was never going to fit into our 80's team with the attitude he had. Apart from that, he preferred to head back to the bush and do a bit of ferreting. He could not cope with the regimented Hawthorn style, which didn't seem to be a problem with Geoff or Kevin.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Be interesting to see how Peter Curran's kid's season turns out. I'm STILL surprised your power sides of the late 70's/80's haven't produced more sons of a good footballing ability.