Rumour GFC 2025 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists Pt 1

[CatToTheFuture]

Would absolutely love him down here but realistically will he leave now that the suns look to be steeping in the right direction?

I think we need to pick a great mid in a tanking side. LDU and Rowell are non-starters. Reid won't be up for trade for another year.

Our options are Butters (please yes), Oliver (please no), or the other I would take a swing at is Walsh given Carlton are sinking like a stone.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

It really needs to ****ing stop been saying this for the last two years he needs time the expectations of him being a Joel Selwood and being a superstar day dot is beyond ridiculous

Let the kids develop, they will have bad patches and make mistakes but that’s all part of it I think a lot of posters have forgotten how our crop of stars in the past took a long time to become what they did.

But Mullin played a good game and we need a whipping boy.

 

[Baudolino]

It really needs to ****ing stop been saying this for the last two years he needs time the expectations of him being a Joel Selwood and being a superstar day dot is beyond ridiculous

Genuine question: in your view, is it ever okay to appraise the performances of young players and have opinions about their development trajectory? If so, what is the context in which you would be fine with people doing that? If not, why is it unreasonable for fans to have opinions about young players, when clubs clearly evaluate their development all the time?

 

[Hinkley29]

Instead of commenting on which sarcasm/jokes you do or don't pick up on, you could always stay on topic by actually offering your own opinion on what was being discussed.

Pot shots from the sidelines about discourse seem to be your preference. Not for the first time either.

Don’t take offence, I am just riffing on the old staple trucking backing up beeping noise gag.

Or do you not have a sense of humour?

 

[Strange Cat]

Genuine question: in your view, is it ever okay to appraise the performances of young players and have opinions about their development trajectory? If so, what is the context in which you would be fine with people doing that? If not, why is it unreasonable for fans to have opinions about young players, when clubs clearly evaluate their development all the time?

There is criticism and then there’s criticism…turning them into a whipping boy over a game where multiple players didn’t stand up isn’t the time and place imo..it’s tiring seeing the pile on with some of the kids after a loss

Just need to recognise the context around the difference imo

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Rowell is going to have a top 20 player in the league season.

Oliver will be lucky to end up in the top 100. His disposal arsenal is 1m safe handballs and scrappy dump kicks. Can't chase or tackle effectively, shocking on the spread and doesn't have agility in tight spaces any more.

Rowell is seriously levels above Oliver now.

He is my current very early tip for the brownlow.

We know historically when he fires he polls votes and gets umpire attention.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

There is criticism and then there’s criticism…turning them into a whipping boy over a game where multiple players didn’t stand up isn’t the time and place imo..it’s tiring seeing the pile on with some of the kids after a loss

Just need to recognise the context around the difference imo

I think as long as the criticism is fair and just and the person making it has genuine concerns as opposed to a negativity agenda they are trying to validate, then it’s all game.

I have been harsh on oasin mullin, and was happy for others to point out if I got a call on his performance wrong also. yet he played a very good game on the weekend and was one of our best out there yesterday.

Really depends how posters go about it. If you are an arrogant chest beater who has to be “right all the time and can’t be proven wrong” then it’s not a very productive chat

 

[The_Koulouriotis_Fan]

Genuine question: in your view, is it ever okay to appraise the performances of young players and have opinions about their development trajectory? If so, what is the context in which you would be fine with people doing that? If not, why is it unreasonable for fans to have opinions about young players, when clubs clearly evaluate their development all the time?

It’s always ok to offer some criticism of course. But you should be objective. I think posters need to understand that players like Clark are developing and not just write them off because they’re not a world beater yet. I always assume that a player will surprise me and look for the positives, its certainly more exciting to believe in something then to hate on it. Cattothefuture is a very measured poster in terms of criticism eg. Clark and his tank. Remember they are human beings not commodities and we shouldn’t view them as such. No one is saying don’t be critical, but don’t be an arseh*le is the general rule.

 

[Footy Smarts]

It’s always ok to offer some criticism of course. But you should be objective. I think posters need to understand that players like Clark are developing and not just write them off because they’re not a world beater yet. I always assume that a player will surprise me and look for the positives, its certainly more exciting to believe in something then to hate on it. Cattothefuture is a very measured poster in terms of criticism eg. Clark and his tank. Remember they are human beings not commodities and we shouldn’t view them as such. No one is saying don’t be critical, but don’t be an arseh*le is the general rule.

I think the swings in opinion is the most crazy thing. Whipping boys have a good game and then it's completely ignored one week later if they struggle.

Last week Clark was arguably our best in the first half. He's still got that same ability one week later. But he has a poor game and he's an obvious bust.

SDK has got coaches votes twice in 7-8 games as a number 1 ruck. When has Stanley ever done that? Yet a couple of less good but not awful games (dropped marks the biggest issue last night) and apparently SDK in the ruck is one of the dumbest moves a coach has ever made and we must bring back a cooked Stanley.

If Mullin has a quiet game next week how quickly will this week be forgotten? My guess is extremely quickly.

Both Guthries, Miers, Kolo, J Henry and Blicavs all went through their time as whipping boys. All the good they did was ignored and they were never going to make it for various reasons. Not all the ones now will make it like that but we have an unbelievable record of developing super players out of one time whipping boys.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

What if the stubborn people are all sacked?

Then it's possible but I think it's unlikely they all get sacked. What happened with Bartlett shows how poisonous their culture is.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I think we need to pick a great mid in a tanking side. LDU and Rowell are non-starters. Reid won't be up for trade for another year.

Our options are Butters (please yes), Oliver (please no), or the other I would take a swing at is Walsh given Carlton are sinking like a stone.

From what I have heard Walsh is one of the few who doesn't want to come back to the country it's unlikely. Frankly I think getting worpel back would be more likely (not that I necessarily want him). Butters would be a great shout and is possible bur we will have to compete with a lot of clubs there.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

He is my current very early tip for the brownlow.

We know historically when he fires he polls votes and gets umpire attention.

Rowell will have Anderson and Miller take too many votes off him. Historically it's easier to win the brownlow as a stand-up mid in a middle of the road to poor side where your team-mates don't take votes off you.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Random question

Who 'could' we have selected with the r1 pick we used on Clark 7/8 whatever it was

Phillipou is a figjam who I doubt culturally we would have picked and ginbey is ok (he has a more mature body than Clark but isn't substainally better) but not great. The only other realistic option was Holland's but a wing wasn't a priority for us. Clark will be fine long term.It was just an average draft at the top end unlike the year after where osullivan plus some other top 10 players will be guns.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I agree with you about him being our most disappointing player since 2022, but the bolded part is definitely not true. If anything his trade value right now is significantly higher than the actual value he offers to the side when he's out there. Young, multi-position 200cm+ key position players with a premiership on their resume already are a rare commodity. The prospect of him returning to his 2022 level will also be seductive to potential buyers, as everyone can see the potential is there. I guarantee we'd get a very good deal for him if we decided to trade him out while contracted (if we're assuming the rumours of a recent contract signing are correct).

There's two reasons we can't trade him. One is thanks to the Conway issue etc we don't have other ruck options so you couldn't countenance trading him unless you got another good ruck in. And second in his current form we wouldn't get an offer that reflects what he's really worth. Plus Tom was a very slow burn and didn't really come in until 12 months ago so the club is likely to persist with Sam and hope he hits the same trajectory.

 

[Baudolino]

There's two reasons we can't trade him. One is thanks to the Conway issue etc we don't have other ruck options so you couldn't countenance trading him unless you got another good ruck in. And second in his current form we wouldn't get an offer that reflects what he's really worth. Plus Tom was a very slow burn and didn't really come in until 12 months ago so the club is likely to persist with Sam and hope he hits the same trajectory.

To be clear, I'm not advocating trading him. Just saying that imo we'd get an extremely good deal (i.e. high picks) if we did trade him. I have the opposite view of you, I think we'd receive more than his current value to the side if we traded him now. I still probably wouldn't do it though, as it's possible he comes good again.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Rowell will have Anderson and Miller take too many votes off him. Historically it's easier to win the brownlow as a stand-up mid in a middle of the road to poor side where your team-mates don't take votes off you.

Didn’t stop bartel winning a brownlow or ablett in 09 or some other gun top 4 mids. I think your main point of reference is probably cripps you are thinking of in recent times??

The votes he got for the season he had was a bit of a discredit to the credentials of the brownlow.

In no way did he produce an all time record vote worthy season

 

[Hinkley29]

I think the swings in opinion is the most crazy thing. Whipping boys have a good game and then it's completely ignored one week later if they struggle.

Last week Clark was arguably our best in the first half. He's still got that same ability one week later. But he has a poor game and he's an obvious bust.

SDK has got coaches votes twice in 7-8 games as a number 1 ruck. When has Stanley ever done that? Yet a couple of less good but not awful games (dropped marks the biggest issue last night) and apparently SDK in the ruck is one of the dumbest moves a coach has ever made and we must bring back a cooked Stanley.

If Mullin has a quiet game next week how quickly will this week be forgotten? My guess is extremely quickly.

Both Guthries, Miers, Kolo, J Henry and Blicavs all went through their time as whipping boys. All the good they did was ignored and they were never going to make it for various reasons. Not all the ones now will make it like that but we have an unbelievable record of developing super players out of one time whipping boys.

It makes sense that players who are whipping boys early in their careers become good players.

A player becomes a whipping boy early in their career usually because they keep getting picked when Johnny public thinks they don’t deserve their spot. So why do they keep getting picked when they are in average form? Because the coaching staff sees qualities in them that are worth persisting with and worth plowing games into. Now, the coaching staff is nearly always better at judging these things than Johnny public, so the players in this situation usually work through their early form stumbles and become very good players.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

There's two reasons we can't trade him. One is thanks to the Conway issue etc we don't have other ruck options so you couldn't countenance trading him unless you got another good ruck in. And second in his current form we wouldn't get an offer that reflects what he's really worth. Plus Tom was a very slow burn and didn't really come in until 12 months ago so the club is likely to persist with Sam and hope he hits the same trajectory.

I think the difference sadly is that Tom is a lot more physical and brutal with his footy and attack on field that Sam is.

Sam has a much softer approach to the contest and lacks mongrel, and his brother has quite a keen awareness of this and went after him physically which was a demonstration to the rest of the league

 

[geelong_crazy26]

It makes sense that players who are whipping boys early in their careers become good players.

A player becomes a whipping boy early in their career usually because they keep getting picked when Johnny public thinks they don’t deserve their spot. So why do they keep getting picked when they are in average form? Because the coaching staff sees qualities in them that are worth persisting with and worth plowing games into. Now, the coaching staff is nearly always better at judging these things than Johnny public, so the players in this situation usually work through their early form stumbles and become very good players.

Yes and no. Plenty of examples of players who don’t come on despite the persistence. Sometimes they just have a role for them early on that they can adhere to and stick with but struggle to grow and develop beyond that as they age.

Quite often these players will either be an early draft pick or have some exceptional athletic trait.

Several examples of failures for us in recent times:
1. Parfitt
2. Murdoch
3. Esava
4. Lang

Sometimes it works out, but you will also get a lot of misses in there

 

[Kobe Gryant]

I think we need to pick a great mid in a tanking side. LDU and Rowell are non-starters. Reid won't be up for trade for another year.

Our options are Butters (please yes), Oliver (please no), or the other I would take a swing at is Walsh given Carlton are sinking like a stone.

Walsh would be a clear upgrade over anyone except Holmes - and maybe Smith - but I'd still be wary.

Take the name value and the excellent 2021 season away, and just look at his last few years. He's not the same player since his chronic back/hamstring injuries have shown up.

Even hobbled like that, he'd still easily find a spot, but he won't be cheap. We'd be paying for 2021 Walsh, but be receiving 2023-25 Walsh is my point.

It's not an Oliver situation because he's a model citizen and a ripping kid by all reports, but it's similar in the sense that we would want them for what they used to be, not what they are on current evidence.

If we're not in the race this year, I'm incined to just go to the draft to be honest.

With Tassie coming in, if we're going after a big move, you really want confirmation that they're going to be the difference IMO, or they're so young that it won't matter.

Rowell would be that difference, Butters and LDU likewise. Reid would fit the young category where you're basically paying for a ridiculously expensive draft pick.

Walsh and Oliver are neither here nor there on current form IMO. Better than a lot of what we have, but not so good that they're going to change things.

 

[The rabbi]

On Matt Rowell and the ability (or lack thereof) of clubs to lure him out of the Gold Coast Suns.

 

[Hinkley29]

Yes and no. Plenty of examples of players who don’t come on despite the persistence. Sometimes they just have a role for them early on that they can adhere to and stick with but struggle to grow and develop beyond that as they age.

Quite often these players will either be an early draft pick or have some exceptional athletic trait.

Several examples of failures for us in recent times:
1. Parfitt
2. Murdoch
3. Esava
4. Lang

Sometimes it works out, but you will also get a lot of misses in there

Parfitt was not a whipping boy until the end of his career at Geelong. He also played 130 games including a premiership. I would consider that a very successul career.

Sav and Murdoch got games because they filled needs in positions we needed. Sav also got paid and netted us a decent trade haul, I would consider that a success.

Murdoch never got there unfortunately. And Lang was just bad.

 

[The_Koulouriotis_Fan]

Yes and no. Plenty of examples of players who don’t come on despite the persistence. Sometimes they just have a role for them early on that they can adhere to and stick with but struggle to grow and develop beyond that as they age.

Quite often these players will either be an early draft pick or have some exceptional athletic trait.

Several examples of failures for us in recent times:
1. Parfitt
2. Murdoch
3. Esava
4. Lang

Sometimes it works out, but you will also get a lot of misses in there

I think the point is that the coaches aren’t always right. But they have to have belief and give players a go, it’s then up to the player to make it and sometimes they don’t. I much prefer that we give players a chance.

The four you mentioned all had really good breakout moments in games early in their careers. Parfitt is the anomaly of the lot there because he actually had become a pretty solid, if not spectacular player and then it all fell apart and it’s hard to see why.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Parfitt was not a whipping boy until the end of his career at Geelong. He also played 130 games including a premiership. I would consider that a very successul career.

Sav and Murdoch got games because they filled needs in positions we needed. Sav also got paid and netted us a decent trade haul, I would consider that a success.

Murdoch never got there unfortunately. And Lang was just bad.

You will rarely get players gifted games in these scenarios unless it is a position of need ontop of everything else.

I think more the point is they showed high promise thru natural ability or incredible athletic traits that go pursued with games but never eventualised or made the grade.

Esava is a borderline C grade defender at port and is not exactly a fan favorite. The rest got plenty of games thru coaches persevering and ended up in their prime years delisted.

Could also probably add several others to that list like smedts etc.

Sometimes it works out, others it doesnt

 

[geelong_crazy26]

I think the point is that the coaches aren’t always right. But they have to have belief and give players a go, it’s then up to the player to make it and sometimes they don’t. I much prefer that we give players a chance.

The four you mentioned all had really good breakout moments in games early in their careers. Parfitt is the anomaly of the lot there because he actually had become a pretty solid, if not spectacular player and then it all fell apart and it’s hard to see why.

Yes they showed something at one point, but all besides esava who is just a C grade key defender in a team with shallow depth, are all now delisted and got delisted in their primes