Analysis Danger + Kerridge VS Milera + Menzel + Gore

[My name geoff]

Dangerfield doesn't count imo because we didn't have a choice as already mentioned.

Menzel for Kerridge and the second round pick is interesting.
Did Port end up with that second rounder, which they used on Bonner? We don't exactly need another mid sized defender though decent youth is always handy.
Kerridge had elite endurance but what else did he bring to the table?
Menzel a lot of upside but equally as much risk (injury/fitness/attitude), will be handy in a few years when Betts is gone.
atm I think its a win for us, didn't give up much at the end of the day.

I'm not sure if Kerridge played any different Thursday night to how he did when he was at the Crows, but he looks like an animal so far! He looks like he has A-grade potential from what I've seen!

 

[Iron]

So what. We can still compare what we go from the situation. We still had choices in what we negotiated for. That is what this thread is for.

Thread to me seemed like a comparison of danger and kerridge with three players we decided to go with in the inevitable trade. Which for mine, makes no sense.

We should compare what we chose to get with what we chose not to get. Only then can you make a valuable comparison. Otherwise we're just patting ourselves on the back as if getting rid of a top 5 player in the league was our master plan.

 

[Draft Bored]

3 players who want to be at the club versus 1 player who wanted to be at the club. We're in front already.

 

[Dc9798]

I'd re-visit this comparison in 3 years time, too early to tell especially given how young Milera & Gore are.

 

[King Elvis]

I'm not sure if Kerridge played any different Thursday night to how he did when he was at the Crows, but he looks like an animal so far! He looks like he has A-grade potential from what I've seen!

Kerridge has huge potential; we just prefer to play experienced plodders.

I think he'll go very well for you guys.

 

[Jars458]

Kerridge has huge potential; we just prefer to play experienced plodders.

I think he'll go very well for you guys.

Whilst true, the fact is we needed to give to get Menzel who is not a plodder. Kerridge a worthy sacrifice.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

The important thing to remember is we didn't have a choice. The comparison is pointless.

Well yes we did, we did have a choice no matter how unpalatable that may have been the choice was there.

We just chose not to take up another option.

 

[Iron]

Well yes we did, we did have a choice no matter how unpalatable that may have been the choice was there.

We just chose not to take up another option.

That's like saying I have a choice not to jump off a cliff. Of course it's a choice, but it isn't worth mentioning because it's dumb.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

That's like saying I have a choice not to jump off a cliff. Of course it's a choice, but it isn't worth mentioning because it's dumb.

There you go!

Option 1 - We could have held out and said to the Cats we want 2 x first rounds pick and we don't care what you have promised others.....just get us another first round pick- and in my mind this was the most realistic option especially if you listen to the interview with Wells....far short of jumping of a cliff.
Option 2 - We could have said to Danger we are not trading you, if you don't sign you go into the draft.
Option 3 - We could have said to Danger if you want to go fine but we will trade you to the highest Melbourne based bidder.

As I said some possible outcomes might not be what you really want but none the less they are options.

 

[Iron]

There you go!

Option 1 - We could have held out and said to the Cats we want 2 x first rounds pick and we don't care what you have promised others.....just get us another first round pick- and in my mind this was the most realistic option especially if you listen to the interview with Wells....far short of jumping of a cliff.
Option 2 - We could have said to Danger we are not trading you, if you don't sign you go into the draft.
Option 3 - We could have said to Danger if you want to go fine but we will trade you to the highest Melbourne based bidder.

As I said some possible outcomes might not be what you really want but none the less they are options.

Option 3 is not an option, option 2 is jumping off a cliff, option 1 is as close to doing what we did as you can get without jumping off a cliff. Still jumping off a cliff though.

Sorry but unless you've got two choices a sane person would make, that really isn't a choice. It's lip service calling it that.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

Option 3 is not an option, option 2 is jumping off a cliff, option 1 is as close to doing what we did as you can get without jumping off a cliff. Still jumping off a cliff though.

Sorry but unless you've got two choices a sane person would make, that really isn't a choice. It's lip service calling it that.

Sorry but that is totally irrelevant.

 

[GROTTO]

There you go!

Option 1 - We could have held out and said to the Cats we want 2 x first rounds pick and we don't care what you have promised others.....just get us another first round pick- and in my mind this was the most realistic option especially if you listen to the interview with Wells....far short of jumping of a cliff.
Option 2 - We could have said to Danger we are not trading you, if you don't sign you go into the draft.
Option 3 - We could have said to Danger if you want to go fine but we will trade you to the highest Melbourne based bidder.

As I said some possible outcomes might not be what you really want but none the less they are options.

This is where Danger screwed us, no one can really begrudge a player wanting to go home. Where it became an issue is when we had no leverage and the campaigner specifically wanted to go to Geelong.

Imagine if we could have selected the Demons, would have led to two top 5 draft picks.

 

[My name geoff]

Kerridge has huge potential; we just prefer to play experienced plodders.

I think he'll go very well for you guys.

Whilst true, the fact is we needed to give to get Menzel who is not a plodder. Kerridge a worthy sacrifice.

Hopefully turns out to be a win/win.

From what ive seen of the two I feel Menzel's best will probably be better, but Kerridge seems a far better fit for our team. I thought Kerridge may have a bit of spud potential based on the game time he was getting at the Crows but going into round 1, I would now rather see Kerridge's name on our team sheet than Menzel's.

 

[GrommoT]

Thread to me seemed like a comparison of danger and kerridge with three players we decided to go with in the inevitable trade. Which for mine, makes no sense.

I think it does make sense ... I think many would like to know whether we got a much better return than what we lost. Of course, it's only really a few years down the track that we can analyse this comparison properly right and now we can only guess at what we might have gotten but we can have a go at it.

 

[FAITH]

wouldnt take too much out of nab kedg is always a goer and super fit but he doesnt have the skills to be elite imo similar to van berlo

 

[Iron]

Sorry but that is totally irrelevant.

Haha okay. This post certainly would suggest so.

 

[King Elvis]

Hopefully turns out to be a win/win.

From what ive seen of the two I feel Menzel's best will probably be better, but Kerridge seems a far better fit for our team. I thought Kerridge may have a bit of spud potential based on the game time he was getting at the Crows but going into round 1, I would now rather see Kerridge's name on our team sheet than Menzel's.

I think Kerridge will be a very good, consistent player.

I think Menzel will be a good player, who plays great quarters, and the odd great game.

 

[Iron]

I think it does make sense ... I think many would like to know whether we got a much better return than what we lost. Of course, it's only really a few years down the track that we can analyse this comparison properly right and now we can only guess at what we might have gotten but we can have a go at it.

I think it's fair to want them to turn out better in the end, because it means we'll have got a bit lucky (even with a certain amount of judgment that can be applauded), but to compare them in the "look at our master stroke" way is misleading.

 

[My name geoff]

I think Kerridge will be a very good, consistent player.

I think Menzel will be a good player, who plays great quarters, and the odd great game.

Spot on

 

[Iron]

This is where Danger screwed us, no one can really begrudge a player wanting to go home. Where it became an issue is when we had no leverage and the campaigner specifically wanted to go to Geelong.

Imagine if we could have selected the Demons, would have led to two top 5 draft picks.

Melbourne never offered two top 5 draft picks. This is a myth.

 

[Stiffy_18]

People need to realise that we did not trade for here and now. We targeted players for the long term that could possibly play games this year. Menzel will play games for us this year if fitness allows. So will Gore and Milera but for all 3 of these guys, it is about the longer term outcomes.

I think what we did is the classic money ball move. We lost some contested inside ball, some marking, some pace and some goal kicking power with Dangerfield so we basically replaced him with 3 players. Menzel will provide the marking and the goal kicking, Gore the inside contested ball and Milera the break away pace. Interestingly, all 3 are better kicks than Dangerfield but don't quite cover all areas at the level than Dangerfield does.

Bottom line is that this trade should be judged at least 3 years from now. Dangerfield will have an immediate impact on Geelong and will likely win a Brownlow before his career is out. Kerridge will add some much needed grunt to the Blues midfield and will get more opportunities than he would have at the Crows.

For us, I suspect, neither of the 3 will play all the AFL games this year but in 3-4 years time all will likely be in our best 22 and key players for us. It's a bit like Judd to Carlton trade. Carlton was a clear winner early on but in time one could argue that WC might have won the trade overall. I think it will be similar story with us and this trade.

 

[FAITH]

this isn't meant to be a final judgement thread on the trade but more how those players are going.

 

[Bicks]

wouldnt take too much out of nab kedg is always a goer and super fit but he doesnt have the skills to be elite imo similar to van berlo

Bullshit!

Certainly not elite but a very solid B grader, better composure under pressure and far better disposal than Nathan van Berlo for starters, only thing he and Van Berlo have in common is elite endurance and both are very solid citizens as AFL players go.

 

[FAITH]

settle down, aren't I entitled to my opinion?

 

[Bacon8]

this isn't meant to be a final judgement thread on the trade but more how those players are going.

If it's not a final judgment, why have a poll, especially since Danger hasn't even suited up for the Cats yet?