Rumour Hugh Greenwood waiting to re-sign!

Remove this Banner Ad

loplop said:
It’s going to be all about the money offered, heard a few weeks ago that the club and HG both are willing to explore the trade option.

Hopefully we offer him a fair deal, we need match winners and HG is one of them
Click to expand...
:eek: Crows are happy to let him go? I'd be seriously disappointed if this is what happens.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

mick500 said:
Agree to disagree. Hasn't done enough to earn his spot imo, especially when you have Gibbs and jenkins kicking 6 in the sanfl . No I'm not saying it's a direct swap, but they could work it out if the selectors had a brain cell between them.
Click to expand...
I can understand not being completely sold on Gallucci as a player but you picked a pretty weird time to lose interest in him. His last couple of weeks have been excellent. Those beautiful long kicks into the forward line vs Richmond made it easy work for Tex and JJ. His short range delivery into the forward line is excellent too.
 
loplop said:
It’s going to be all about the money offered, heard a few weeks ago that the club and HG both are willing to explore the trade option.

Hopefully we offer him a fair deal, we need match winners and HG is one of them
Click to expand...
Hugh only has 1, maybe 2 contract negotiations left in a short career. He would be silly not to explore all options. But in the end of the day I still think he would prefer to stay at the club!
 
Golumless said:
Not at all. You do not take overpriced depth over any option at all as that is the single worst option a club can be in, as it is wasted cash which could either be used to keep a key piece or bring someone in.

Even if that 5th round is a complete dud, it is better then keeping CEY at 250k in the reserves. Premierships aren't won by what is sitting in the SANFL after all.
Click to expand...

CEY would be first choice backup for 3 midfielders. You need a player ready to go who can run big minutes in the midfield. He’s the only guy on our list that can cover for Sloane and 2 x Crouch without losing too much. He’s a must keep even if he is depth, none of the kids can cover the midfield role for any amount of meaningful minutes. Where the roles are peripheral like Dougie and Mackay, I agree, but not when it might be 80%+ TOG at stoppages and there’s 3 potential players to cover for.

Premierships are won by more than the your best 22. You’re a fair way off the mark.
 
1970crow said:
CEY would be first choice backup for 3 midfielders. You need a player ready to go who can run big minutes in the midfield. He’s the only guy on our list that can cover for Sloane and 2 x Crouch without losing too much. He’s a must keep even if he is depth, none of the kids can cover the midfield role for any amount of meaningful minutes. Where the roles are peripheral like Dougie and Mackay, I agree, but not when it might be 80%+ TOG at stoppages and there’s 3 potential players to cover for.

Premierships are won by more than the your best 22. You’re a fair way off the mark.
Click to expand...

If he is best 22 sure, but CEY value right now is he does what does you say cheaply.

Backups are all well and good, but they must be cheap, and CEY loses that with this contract as he'll go from a depth contract to a contract for someone that you'd want 22+ games out of as he should be commanding 300 - 350k whilst remaining as someone who is in the twilight zone of good enough for an AFL player, but not good enough to be anything more then depth in a good side (I do not expect this season to become the norm for Cam). No matter what he offers, that is a terrible situation for us to be in. Overpaying someone like CEY to sit in SANFL side because he can fill in for three roles is much worse then overpaying for someone like Mackay who at least was a questionable best 22 player over the journey, and outside midfielders are valuable when done properly.

If you can get CEY to stay without giving a payrise to putting him up to base pay for a non rookie (that's the max I'd offer), you do that all day, every day. If he is wanting to get paid, then it is time for Poholke to be the twilight zone player of capable depth, because we've lost the value CEY offers and he'll become a millstone for this club.

Saying you need depth to win premierships is only a part of that picture. The picture is you need that depth to be as cheap as possible, whilst retaining that capability. If you want list retention issues of your core? you overpay the back end of your roster because you've unnecessarily taken away money that you could have offered to keep someone more important.
 
I would prefer that we keep all of our players but it is interesting looking at what our midfield depth over the next couple of years will look like. Sloane, B.Crouch, M.Crouch, Greenwood, CEY, Gibbs, Seedsman and Atkins will all be expecting to still be best 22 midfielders/wingman. Jones and Rowell (assuming that we draft Rowell with pick 1 this year) will play some midfield time next year and in 2021 should be best 22 players, probably as flanker/midfielders along with McHenry. Milera and Gallucci will hopefully also be playing significant time in the midfield over the next couple of years. There are also Poholke if he continues at the current rate, Wilson and whoever else we draft over the next two years who could play midfield. We will likely play 7 specialist defenders, 5 forwards and 1 ruckman which means that a maximum of 9 of the mentioned players can fit into the midfield. We are certainly not going to be short of capable options (particularly inside midfielders) even if we do lose a a player or two.
 
Mr_Moogle said:
I can understand not being completely sold on Gallucci as a player but you picked a pretty weird time to lose interest in him. His last couple of weeks have been excellent. Those beautiful long kicks into the forward line vs Richmond made it easy work for Tex and JJ. His short range delivery into the forward line is excellent too.
Click to expand...

Well I went off him before the last 2 weeks I believe, where he hadn't touched it 15 times in a game once . That's not doing enough to keep you in the side when we had players of the calibre we do, running around in the sanfl. Still not sold on him yet, I hope he turns out to be a great player for us and kicks the winning goal in a GF, but I don't love what I'm seeing. These stats should have the coaches questioning whether he gets a gig week to week . I wouldn't have him as a walk up start is all.

He's not the only one, there's about 5 that are unproven, that don't do enough, but for some strange reason everyone wants Atkins to be dropped when he's racking up nearly 30 disposals and kicks goals.

Screenshot_20190619-121715.png
 
mick500 said:
Well I went off him before the last 2 weeks I believe, where he hadn't touched it 15 times in a game once . That's not doing enough to keep you in the side when we had players of the calibre we do, running around in the sanfl. Still not sold on him yet, I hope he turns out to be a great player for us and kicks the winning goal in a GF, but I don't love what I'm seeing. These stats should have the coaches questioning whether he gets a gig week to week . I wouldn't have him as a walk up start is all.

He's not the only one, there's about 5 that are unproven, that don't do enough, but for some strange reason everyone wants Atkins to be dropped when he's racking up nearly 30 disposals and kicks goals.

View attachment 694919
Click to expand...

Because disposals are a poor stat to justify why someone should be in the team or not?

14 disposals are fine if the damage there, and for Gooch, the damage has been there.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Betts are off said:
My god, this diatribe over Gooch's disposal count is getting bloody old!
Click to expand...

No doubt it's his biggest weakness currently, but really, if your biggest weakness is you don't get enough of the ball, it is a good sign that you're tracking well. Accumulation is one of those things that can be taught after all, or could just be a role switch away.
 
Golumless said:
Because disposals are a poor stat to justify why someone should be in the team or not?

14 disposals are fine if the damage there, and for Gooch, the damage has been there.
Click to expand...
I agree, although I'd still be wanting around the 20 mark and hopefully this will come as he develops. That said, we all froth over the 30 possy players, but every game they will be the exception and most of their teammates - the ones we think "had a good game" will be down around the 20 mark or less. My gut says 15-20, with damage, is the mark for someone in Gooch's role.
 
arrowman said:
I agree, although I'd still be wanting around the 20 mark and hopefully this will come as he develops. That said, we all froth over the 30 possy players, but every game they will be the exception and most of their teammates - the ones we think "had a good game" will be down around the 20 mark or less. My gut says 15-20, with damage, is the mark for someone in Gooch's role.
Click to expand...

20-22 would be my guess for Gallucci ceiling possession wise, however, that is a tantalising prospect considering how much he's doing with the ball at 14 disposals. Could be a real "under the radar" weapon to feed off of the Crouch brothers, especially if the defensive numbers get to the point they were at in the SANFL (and they're slowly getting there now).

13-17 with damage would be the mark now for Gallucci just because half forward is such a graveyard role disposal wise. More a case of do well with whatever scraps you have, more so then get a lot of ball.
 
doppelganger47 said:
:eek: Crows are happy to let him go? I'd be seriously disappointed if this is what happens.
Click to expand...
He has value and if it's decided our current core isn't going to get us any further then at 28 to start next year he's exactly the sort of guy you'd look to move out now while his value is at its highest.

I'm hoping we can keep him, but I understand both why we may choose to move him on and why Greenwood might be happy to do so and maximize the amount he can make. We can't pay him as a top tier player, but someone else might be able to and given his lack of earning from college until last year he will want the biggest deal he can get.
 
Betts are off said:
Hugh only has 1, maybe 2 contract negotiations left in a short career. He would be silly not to explore all options. But in the end of the day I still think he would prefer to stay at the club!
Click to expand...
Prefer to stay for sure, but he would rightly prioritise a big pay day over staying with the AFC.

Like you said only 1 contract left really and no one could seriously blame him for that.

I'd be doing the exact same thing at his age.
 
MRB37 said:
He has value and if it's decided our current core isn't going to get us any further then at 28 to start next year he's exactly the sort of guy you'd look to move out now while his value is at its highest.

I'm hoping we can keep him, but I understand both why we may choose to move him on and why Greenwood might be happy to do so and maximize the amount he can make. We can't pay him as a top tier player, but someone else might be able to and given his lack of earning from college until last year he will want the biggest deal he can get.
Click to expand...
(And this applies to CEY also, although we probably wouldn't want to lose both.)

I think there's a consensus about Greenwood and CEY that … well, what MRB37 said. There may (probably will) be clubs that will be prepared to offer both players higher $ / longer contracts than the AFC would be comfortable with, and for good reasons on both sides. If we lose either player to a club that is willing to pay them overs because their value to that club is perceived to be higher, then good luck and godspeed to both of them, and let's not have any melts about lowballing and player retention issues. But I wouldn't be happy if we lost both of them.
 
mick500 said:
Well I went off him before the last 2 weeks I believe, where he hadn't touched it 15 times in a game once . That's not doing enough to keep you in the side when we had players of the calibre we do, running around in the sanfl. Still not sold on him yet, I hope he turns out to be a great player for us and kicks the winning goal in a GF, but I don't love what I'm seeing. These stats should have the coaches questioning whether he gets a gig week to week . I wouldn't have him as a walk up start is all.

He's not the only one, there's about 5 that are unproven, that don't do enough, but for some strange reason everyone wants Atkins to be dropped when he's racking up nearly 30 disposals and kicks goals.

View attachment 694919
Click to expand...

I would like to see him get more of but he doesn’t really play in a high production position.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Rumour Hugh Greenwood waiting to re-sign!

Similar threads

Southerntakeover
Things that look better with hindsight than the Nicks re-signing
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
202
Views
10K
n4sir
n4sir
Scorpus
Player Watch Oscar Ryan - Signed to End of 2026
2 3 4
Replies
90
Views
11K
GreyCrow
GreyCrow
Scorpus
Player Watch Charlie Edwards - Signed to End of 2026
2 3 4 5
Replies
114
Views
14K
conVINCEd
C
Mutineer
News McAsey returns to football, Hmmmm
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
Mutineer
Mutineer
FR0GGY
Toast The great man signs on for 2024
2 3 4 5
Replies
105
Views
4K
Sanders
Sanders
B
Sliding doors - worrying signs and the way ahead
2 3 4
Replies
80
Views
4K
cleanhands
C
Southerntakeover
Is there any reason to attend home games?
2 3 4 5
Replies
113
Views
5K
n4sir
n4sir

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top