Daniher is selfish

Remove this Banner Ad

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Veteran 30k Posts 10k Posts
Sep 12, 2001
32,218
1,518
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
Warning this may upset some, but is not a troll.


The only reason Daniher is trading pick#5 for a established player is to save his job. Melbourne don't have a list good enough for it to be worthwhile to get an established player in. He's probably weighing up that if he gets a 17/18 year old, they won't be ready for a few years. That's not going to keep him his job is it?

The board should tell him to keep the pick with an eye on the future. If he has to sacrifice himself, then so be it. It's not like he hasn't had 4 or 5 years to do the business.
 
I see where you're coming from BB, but look at it this way.

There is a very good chance we will trade pick 5 for Nick Stevens. At 23, he has plenty of footy left in him.

And who is to say that pick 5 is so great? Looking back on previous #5 picks, there have hardly been any stars.

2002- Jarrad McVeigh
2001- Xavier Clarke
2000- Andrew McDougall
1999- Leigh Brown
1998- Michael Stevens
1997- Luke Power

I would prefer Stevens to any of those players.

Having said that, I wouldn't trade pick 5 for Solomon, Jacobs or Holland. ND would be crazy to do that.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #4
Maybe, but if I were a Ds supporter, I'd rather take the risk with #5. I'd prefer an environment where the Ds have a few tough years and pick up some quality picks. Often when a club hits rock bottom, it takes a coach change and even a board room level change to get the momentum going in the right direction. And this helps with top quality youngsters.

I think the board should sacrifice Daniher and try to get some quality picks over the next few seasons. They're just not going to win a flag with the current group.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #5
Out of that list, I'd prefer Clarke and Power at 17/18 than Stevens at 23 - taking into account the D's current position.

As you said, forget the rest (Solomon, Jacobs, Holland). Stevens or Nathan Brown are the only 2 worth considering giving up pick 5. And maybe Trent Carroll;)
 
Not being selfish,

C'mon guys, please, stop this non sense!!

We have pick 3.

There is no guarnatees of getting a gun with pick 5!

Neale is doing this because its what is best for the club. We can win now, we have enough youth, and this is a weak draft. It has such trading power, we need to use that power to get us an established star, which is what we really need.

Please, wake up, Neale and the recruiting staff are doing this for the club, they know what is best!!!
 
Originally posted by chiliboy
Not being selfish,

C'mon guys, please, stop this non sense!!

We have pick 3.

There is no guarnatees of getting a gun with pick 5!

Neale is doing this because its what is best for the club. We can win now, we have enough youth, and this is a weak draft. It has such trading power, we need to use that power to get us an established star, which is what we really need.

Please, wake up, Neale and the recruiting staff are doing this for the club, they know what is best!!!

Do they now? Is that why we are so inconsistent, because they know what's best eh?

Stop going overboard.
 
Originally posted by CowboyFromHell
Do they now? Is that why we are so inconsistent, because they know what's best eh?

Stop going overboard.

Oh me oh my!!

I mean its obvious to all that we need star layers, not more kids, and yes, they do know what is best, and I thought I said all that very calmly? your the one getting agro..

I think it is great we are finally chasing payers, good on us!!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Originally posted by BT
Oh all right...

STUCK!

Thankyou! :)

Now for all my daily laughs I can just read this stickied post. :cool:
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Daniher is selfish

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top