Bluemour Discussion Thread XVII - Coniglio means Rabbit in Italian!

[Robertio]

But is Sam a lock in recruiting two sound knees and legs he can use to resume his career as the best running defender?!

They said that about Dean Rice, he came back a different but better player.

 

[HARKER]

Forget what his worth to us or any other team, just purely a player's value when compared to similar quality players.

As for 6 years, that is extreme. Similar views were held regarding Gibbs and others, playing beyond 30 is rare for his type of player

He starts next year off as a 26 year old...27...28...29...30...31 - Making it 6 years.
Hill won't make it to 31? Why not and if not, when will he be finished? Even 5 years is a long time and particularly in consideration of our trajectory.

Re the other part? Of course it's valid. The quality of a player is heavily considered. How could it not be?

 

[Matty411]

Can’t see us getting Papley AND B.Hill without this and next year’s 1sts disappearing

If we're ever going to do that, it's this off-season. Can see us going hard at all of Paps, Hill, Cogs and Martin - hopeful coming away with 2 of them. If we get one of them with trimmings, excellent. 2? Big wraps. 3? Unbelievable. 4 would be a pipe dream.

 

[HARKER]

Harks, I think I am measured when it comes to trade worth of a player whether it is Carlton related or not.
I stated that Gibbs was worth a mid to late 1st and 2nd and that McGovern was worth a total value in the 13-17 range.
I wouldn't play a midish 1st rounder for Hill

I get it and I wouldn't want that to be the case either.

My point here is that sometimes one has to pay for what they want.
Hawthorn have done this with minimal fuss and have been rewarded for being a 'smart' club to trade with.

If we really want Hill, make sure it gets done.
No need to posture and end up with something you're going to make do with, as against the right piece dropped into the right place.

I think we have to be better than that and the right type can be more useful than for the better player.
We have plenty of good players now and need to develop them properly and just fill in the gaps.

Smalls with speed, run, goal-kicking nous etc. We don't need another 18 year old.....whatever.

 

[Arr0w]

He starts next year off as a 26 year old...27...28...29...30...31 - Making it 6 years.
Hill won't make it to 31? Why not and if not, when will he be finished? Even 5 years is a long time and particularly in consideration of our trajectory.

Re the other part? Of course it's valid. The quality of a player is heavily considered. How could it not be?

Again, you are focusing on Hill to be an outline, to buck the trend/average for a 2 way running outside player, that plays only one position, a wingman. History shows that type of player rarely, plays consistently beyond 30, not to mention staying on the park

Harks, I place trade value on all players. What can your $1 buy, sum of all parts.

I would rather Papley for our first pick, than Hill

 

[Stamos]

You must of misread my original post, take into account Hill's time left in the system as a consideration of value. Review other trades for other contracted 26 year olds, not just the top end players, but that mid range quality

Wellingham, younger - Pick 18
Vince, similar age - Pick 23
Christensen, younger - Pick 21
Greenwood, similar age - Pick 25
Redden, younger - Pick 17
Melksham, younger - Pick 25
Seedsman, younger - Pick 32
Caddy, younger + Pick 56 for Pick 24 + Pick 64

Hill is in that range

Vince was 28 when traded, not really similar to 26 and 3 months that Hill will be come trade week.

Not sure many of those other players stack up to Hill. Any B&Fs there?

Caddy is a gun, but wasn't rated or used correctly by the Cats, and the Tiges got a bargain.

 

[cookie monster]

Can’t see us getting Papley AND B.Hill without this and next year’s 1sts disappearing

Agreed
We'd be going all in

 

[Arr0w]

I get it and I wouldn't want that to be the case either.

My point here is that sometimes one has to pay for what they want.
Hawthorn have done this with minimal fuss and have been rewarded for being a 'smart' club to trade with.

If we really want Hill, make sure it gets done.
No need to posture and end up with something you're going to make do with, as against the right piece dropped into the right place.

I think we have to be better than that and the right type can be more useful than for the better player.
We have plenty of good players now and need to develop them properly and just fill in the gaps.

Smalls with speed, run, goal-kicking nous etc. We don't need another 18 year old.....whatever.

Never suggested going back to the draft versus Hill. Where our list is at, it still requires medium to long term vision and management, with the capital we have.

This is what sides like, Hawks, WC, Swans and Cats have done for years, they trade fairly, but never desperately overs

 

[SOWAH]

I’m confused now.

Definitely depth, there was a whole thread about it

 

[ferrisb]

Dept.....

h

I am very happy with the Department of H

 

[HARKER]

Again, you are focusing on Hill to be an outline, to buck the trend/average for a 2 way running outside player, that plays only one position, a wingman. History shows that type of player rarely, plays consistently beyond 30, not to mention staying on the park
Harks, I place trade value on all players. What can your $1 buy, sum of all parts.
I would rather Papley for our first pick, than Hill

So would I, but that's not the discussion we're having and if we want a wing-man though, why not get the wing-man?

As far as age is concerned. Who cares? Doesn't he fit into that wonderful age profile we keep raising, anyway?
So let's say he peters off as a 29 year old, giving us only 4 years - The question would be, could he be the right piece of the puzzle that will give us the ability to play in a Grand Final? This is more important.

We could just roll on building and building and becoming another GWS accumulating young quality ahead of compressing the list into having the right pieces across all lines. Having said that though GWS have other issues, but you get the point.

Anyway, I'm for getting the players we want and if the currency is a little higher than the ideal, so what?

 

[Coops93]

I know the conversation was a few pages ago, but Coniglio is absolutely worth getting at $1m a year and we should be able to accommodate that.

If the Tigs somehow managed to get Lynch it a ~$1m a season with the likes of Riewoldt, Martin, Cotchin, Rance, Houli et al then it shouldn't be a problem for us. There's examples every other year of a team squeezing in a blue chip priced player where you think they otherwise wouldn't be able to.

Realistically our premium $ players in the near future would be CCurnow, Cripps, Mckay, McGov and maybe Weitering.

Cogs wouldn't upset the balance at all and likely wouldn't push anyone out.

 

[Soapy V]

All at once? Or a couple?

Either or. Just some names I think would be good.

Actually don't care. Very confident SOS will get who/what we need this year. It's been in the planning for too long. Not fussed what we pay either. Not my problem.

As I have said before I have no doubt there are names we haven't even mentioned. Jack Martin is the one I'm fairly confident on.

Like last year I'll sit back and watch and once again I am sure I will be happy.

 

[Arr0w]

Vince was 28 when traded, not really similar to 26 and 3 months that Hill will be come trade week.

Not sure many of those other players stack up to Hill. Any B&Fs there?

Caddy is a gun, but wasn't rated or used correctly by the Cats, and the Tiges got a bargain.

Again you are narrowing the parameters. I said Vince was a Similar age, don't discount the fact that Vince could play multiple roles, inside mid, outside mid, tagger, HB distributor, lockdown defender

Redden, Christensen and Seedman don't stack up? Go compare their career averages. Hill is in a similar class. Let's not use a a BnF as an indicator of value, especially for a mid range side.

Cats undervaluing Caddy? One of the best clubs when it comes to trading players in and out and determining worth?

 

[Gethelred]

And where does he play? Inside mid with poor disposal, spread and defensive running.
Great insurance if cripps is injured but vfl with a healthy cripps. He suits bombers much more


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I suppose that's one side of the coin. The other is that he's 20 (21 in a month) and averages 24 possessions a game over that time with 5.5 tackles. If we got him in, we wouldn't need to move Kennedy out of the forward line; if Kennedy got that, we'd be pretty happy with him, no?

But I also kind of agree. He was a huge reason why we beat GC; he'd get the ball and break a tackle or 2, win the clearance clear of the stoppage, look up and scan for options before just blasting away. If we got him in, we would have to see his decision making (rather than his skills) as salvageable, and his work ethic as something that can be improved upon. He is clearly a bit of a ball magnet, which is something we need a bit more of.

For me, it comes down to where we see his trajectory, and how much he'd cost to get over.

 

[ferrisb]

Every year I think we are going to land a big fish. And every year we fail (post-Judd).

So I have taught myself not to get my hopes up.














But this year.....I just know we're going to land a/some big fish. I can feel it!

 

[Arr0w]

So would I, but that's not the discussion we're having and if we want a wing-man though, why not get the wing-man?

As far as age is concerned. Who cares? Doesn't he fit into that wonderful age profile we keep raising, anyway?
So let's say he peters off as a 29 year old, giving us only 4 years - The question would be, could he be the right piece of the puzzle that will give us the ability to play in a Grand Final? This is more important.

We could just roll on building and building and becoming another GWS accumulating young quality ahead of compressing the list into having the right pieces across all lines. Having said that though GWS have other issues, but you get the point.

Anyway, I'm for getting the players we want and if the currency is a little higher than the ideal, so what?

It is exactly the discussion we are having, if I have a 1st round pick the better value is Papley, if both were available. You have been banging on all year that we need to focus on small forwards as a priority, now you change tact and say that a wingman is more of the priority? That is a huge contradiction. If only Hill was available, I wouldn't change my offer, as his value is still the same. Hill could be the missing piece, personally I think we have more pressing needs and one player right now is not the missing ingredient

You need to stop with this agenda about not adding more young talent, not once have i used that as a counter to gaining Hill in this interact, despite my preference to ensuring we continue to add young players each year, whether that be with early picks, which I am happy to trade for the right mature player, or using later picks. So drop the Hill versus draftee counters

I have already stated that I think Hill is worth a mid 2nd round, I too would pay slight overs, but not pick 16 or lower as overall value

 

[Coops93]

Coniglio unlikely to leave at this stage.



#Bluemour

Booooo

 

[ferrisb]

Coniglio unlikely to leave at this stage.



#Bluemour

EDIT: Haha, didn't see Coops93's post.

 

[Blue Pulse]

Hill confuses me, apart from money (which he would be on good coin at Freo)why would he come to us, if he is unhappy at Freo why wouldn't he go back to Hawks? If he came to us, what is to stop him from wanting to go home again after 2 years? Just doesn't add up.

 

[T2B_]

Every year I think we are going to land a big fish. And every year we fail (post-Judd).

So I have taught myself not to get my hopes up.














But this year.....I just know we're going to land a/some big fish. I can feel it!

I dunno, we landed Andy Collins.

 

[HARKER]

I suppose that's one side of the coin. The other is that he's 20 (21 in a month) and averages 24 possessions a game over that time with 5.5 tackles. If we got him in, we wouldn't need to move Kennedy out of the forward line; if Kennedy got that, we'd be pretty happy with him, no?

But I also kind of agree. He was a huge reason why we beat GC; he'd get the ball and break a tackle or 2, win the clearance clear of the stoppage, look up and scan for options before just blasting away. If we got him in, we would have to see his decision making (rather than his skills) as salvageable, and his work ethic as something that can be improved upon. He is clearly a bit of a ball magnet, which is something we need a bit more of.

For me, it comes down to where we see his trajectory, and how much he'd cost to get over.

There's no absolute answer to this, but here's my concern and I've had it for some time - Playing players in their best positions makes for sound logic.
We've seen this first hand in recent weeks and whilst we had ECurnow and Murphy getting back to their standard, what's the flow-on effect been?
Dow's output has dropped, as has Fishers. That's on the stats alone, but you get the picture.

I like shiny new toys too, but I want them to be a different shiny new toy to the one I have.
I don't want the same toy, just to have to throw out the one I have, because it's not as shiny as the new one. It's the same toy FFS.

It is exactly the discussion we are having, if I have a 1st round pick the better value is Papley, if both were available. You have been banging on all year that we need to focus on small forwards as a priority, now you change tact and say that a wingman is more of the priority? That is a huge contradiction. If only Hill was available, I wouldn't change my offer, as his value is still the same. Hill could be the missing piece, personally I think we have more pressing needs and one player right now is not the missing ingredient

You need to stop with this agenda about not adding more young talent, not once have i used that as a counter to gaining Hill in this interact, despite my preference to ensuring we continue to add young players each year, whether that be with early picks, which I am happy to trade for the right mature player, or using later picks. So drop the Hill versus draftee counters

I have already stated that I think Hill is worth a mid 2nd round, I too would pay slight overs, but not pick 16 or lower as overall value

It's not the topic I had running through my mind when explicitly discussing Hill and don't recall discussing one over another.

Let's simplify this - I'm all for getting what one needs and if it costs a little more than perceived market value - So what?
Presumption: You seem to be a little more concerned about getting the best possible value and then extracting more value.
I'm on the Wright side of trading and maybe you're on the Dodoro side of things.

In the end I don't care for the method adopted but for the end result, but I do care should we miss on what we want, just to dig our heels in over a few spots in draft value.

 

[ferrisb]

I dunno, we landed Andy Collins.

One doesn't land Andy Collins......Andy Collins lands YOU!










I'm not really sure what that means

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

I’d be pretty happy with a Teague mentored by Roos coaching combo and a Tom Papley acquisition.

But seeing as most rumours completely contradict the previous one it all has to be taken with a grain of salt. And now I’m on blood pressure meds so I can’t take too much salt.

Nup, Teague doesn't need a Roos, god like, according to some, DOC type figure on a massive pay packet hovering over his head. He needs a senior assistant along side him.

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

Competition for spots will be fierce if we add another 3-4 best 22-30 players

Injuries will happen and we’ll at least have the depth to cover said injuries

The “D” word will finally happen

If we have a chance to bring in quality we do it every time

Thing I’m worried about is bringing them in on big $ and losing others we don’t want to lose

Footy landscape I spose

We are fast coming to a point where we will be losing players we don't want to because they are stuck in the seconds or they simply need to be trade bait. Cant wait for the melts when this happens.