Brad Ebert asks to be traded to Port

[FishingRick04]

same id be happy to keep him but the club sees it differently

Sometimes all the talent in the world doesnt matter if ya attitude is garbage

 

[bringbackbucky]

Mots wouldn't sign another contract with Port even if we offered him one...

 

[Adz2332]

^ why not?

 

[ash_78]

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

No one can justify giving Pettigrew a contract over Motlop, unless Motlop has done further things off the field that none of us know about, which I honestly doubt.

Disgusting

Motlop does not want to play for us. Discussion on Trade Week Radio is that nobody will take him... leaves us in an interesting position whether we want to offer him a 1 year contract (and if he would change his mind if it was his only option) or let him slide, effectively ending his career. Wouldn't bother me to lose him and move on.

Heads should roll if Grew is re-signed.

 

[RangaInTeal]

Anyone else think that our number 16 one day will become a pure midfielder?

Nope, he is a Half Back Flanker, pure defender! I could see him as a rotation option but seems more H.Shaw/M.Matiner than he does L.Hayes/S.Mitchell.

People compared him to L.Hodge and Hofge's beat footy is also played from a flank...

 

[bringbackbucky]

^ why not?

He's fallen out with the coach.

 

[PortBrillance]

wtf is a "pure midfielder"

Is that a trendy new word or something?

 

[Portia]

Its a way of indicating that they are one of the guys that get 25 touches playing through the centre square, as opposed to 25 touches occasionally venturing in there but mostly `quarterbacking' at half back.

 

[Spadge]

wtf is a "pure midfielder"

Is that a trendy new word or something?

yep it is...
much like "brillance"

 

[tealpower]

There's talk that we've offered Pettigrew a contract FFS

If Pettigrew stays and Motlop is delisted, heads need to roll.

Don't misrepresent this as I agree with Pettigrew having a contract offer, but he's a contingency player that will back up our tall stocks if any of them were to go down injured. Port Adelaide only has three tall defenders of note in Carlile, Chaplin and Trengove. Paul Stewart's injury and regression in form showed the lack of depth in the list. You don't have to agree with signing Pettigrew but acknowledge that he may be kept on the list as depth coverage.

Daniel Motlop has created more problems off the field than any other Port Adelaide player in recent memory. Whilst he appears to have cleaned up his act, it seems that he's hell bent on leaving which opens up a spot for another junior to develop. There's no spot for him as a defender which leaves him struggling to secure a forward position with the emergence of a Butcher-Schulz tandem filled in with the Eberts (I'm assuming Brad [if signed] will play as a high forward and rotate through the middle) and Gray.

Over reacting never gets anyone ahead. Rationalize a decision before discrediting the reasons for such a decision.

 

[manureid]

Crowtiser site reporting that Geelong have offered pick 26 for Ebert and Eagles will accept.... #rolleyes

Of course, Brad has to agree.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

Crowtiser site reporting that Geelong have offered pick 26 for Ebert and Eagles will accept.... #rolleyes

Of course, Brad has to agree.

Bloody Geelong. What is in this for them? They know he wont come, just making it harder for us to get him for 33.

 

[PatientMental]

LOL

"
Ebert must approve any trade. But his manager Justin Reid told AdelaideNow on Tuesday: ``He is not going there (to Geelong).' '
"

Shame, he'd fit right in at Geelong being there 40th Midfielder.

 

[Portia]

Just like when Melbourne reportedly offered pick #5 in 2003 for Stevens when he didn't want to go there, it is irrelevant.

 

[Puddy]

Ebert will not go to Geelong

 

[ash_78]

Don't misrepresent this as I agree with Pettigrew having a contract offer, but he's a contingency player that will back up our tall stocks if any of them were to go down injured. Port Adelaide only has three tall defenders of note in Carlile, Chaplin and Trengove. Paul Stewart's injury and regression in form showed the lack of depth in the list. You don't have to agree with signing Pettigrew but acknowledge that he may be kept on the list as depth coverage.

Yeah except the concept of keeping depth players on the list outside of your best 22 (especially when you're at 6pm on the premiership clock) went out the window about 5 years ago. You go all out to build a future premiership list, not hang onto players in case you get injuries. Guaranteed strategy to continually finish mid-table and never properly challenge.

 

[tealpower]

Yeah except the concept of keeping depth players on the list outside of your best 22 (especially when you're at 6pm on the premiership clock) went out the window about 5 years ago. You go all out to build a future premiership list, not hang onto players in case you get injuries. Guaranteed strategy to continually finish mid-table and never properly challenge.

I don't agree with you. If Pettigrew occupies a position on the Port Adelaide list between say 37-40, then it's not an issue given there is 10-15 players ahead of him that the coaching staff would be looking to develop. Naturally, they are given preference in team selection.

The only way Port Adelaide improves the list under your suggestion is through the draft, trading or beginning in 2012, free agency. Two of those options can not occur before this year's trade week.

I'm not suggesting you should agree with Pettigrew being offered a contract but it would be wise to rationalize why it may have occurred given the stage of list development Port Adelaide is at.

 

[ash_78]

I don't agree with you. If Pettigrew occupies a position on the Port Adelaide list between say 37-40, then it's not an issue given there is 10-15 players ahead of him that the coaching staff would be looking to develop. Naturally, they are given preference in team selection.

The only way Port Adelaide improves the list under your suggestion is through the draft, trading or beginning in 2012, free agency. Two of those options can not occur before this year's trade week.

I'm not suggesting you should agree with Pettigrew being offered a contract but it would be wise to rationalize why it may have occurred given the stage of list development Port Adelaide is at.

Of course you have to assess the rationale behind the decision - I have and I disagree with both the philosophy behind the decision as well as its outcome. But I'll save the anger until we hear something official.

 

[tealpower]

Of course you have to assess the rationale behind the decision - I have and I disagree with both the philosophy behind the decision as well as its outcome. But I'll save the anger until we hear something official.

Especially when Darling, Lycett, Karnezis and Watson were all available with our first pick in the 2010 draft. Peculiar list development I agree.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Adelaide now have #24 for Gunston so they'll be next in with an offer.

 

[JMint]

And now Adelaide's pick #24 comes into play !!!


Edit: FF in too soon

 

[Enviable Tradition]

Adelaide now have #24 for Gunston so they'll be next in with an offer.

Was just thinking the same thing.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Saw Mots in a cafe on Henley Beach road on Monday. Looked pretty relaxed and very fit. Didn't talk to him but didn't look like a bloke who was worried about his lot.

I have no idea what the club is going to do, but purely based on body language I don't reckon he is going anywhere.

 

[simba_]

Nope, he is a Half Back Flanker, pure defender! I could see him as a rotation option but seems more H.Shaw/M.Matiner than he does L.Hayes/S.Mitchell.

People compared him to L.Hodge and Hofge's beat footy is also played from a flank...

well apparently he was the best midfielder in his team, but their midfield was good enough to have Jacobs play this ultimate sweeper man role that we've played Sal in and had Hartlett in but should probably develop Jacobs in. he's always been a midfielder not a defender but we'll probably need him doing both as Hamish isn't going to play every game in the middle if he plays them all.

my best 22 is the same as gopower put out a few pages ago but with Jacobs in the mix for Salopek. but it's just too outlandish to proclaim we do have a best 22 that we'll have out there playing together for a string of games. I wonder if we've ever had a game where Rodan and Hartlett were in the middle together, against the Saints last year, not sure about this year as Hamish was down back a lot. we can guess how we'll balance the team though and we have more of a chance of a competitive midfield when we have more options for inside outside and flexible players that can go up front (like maybe Ebert and Cassisi and Banner) and down back (Jacobs Hartlett Sal).

 

[THE_GUN]

The chances are that port will be made to give up 28 for brad & cant really see you guys getting him any cheaper tbh.

Port should just put 28 on the table for 1 hour and tell west coast to take it or it will no longer be available & brad will come to you via psd.

Watch them jump & You guys can move on to the next trade without having to F*** around with playing games.

Brad Ebert is easily worth a pick between 10-15 in this draft.