Recommitted Jacob Hopper [re-signed until 2024]

[PMBangers]

 

[Thetrader15]

I don't mind F-S as I think that the longetitivity of players and supporters being involved with the clubs is a key part of the rusted on supporter base.

Academies shouldn't be a thing, if Sydney is a market the AFL wants to generate more players from, then the AFL should fund it and make the talent available to everyone.

I would like to see some consideration given to VFL / WAFL / SANFL players connected with AFL clubs, where if they've previously been draft eligible and have been at the club for the full-season, then clubs have some rights to match bids. Whether that comes with caveats that it must be a bid outside the first round etc...

Something that increases clubs investment in coaching and developing their VFL players would be a good thing, IMO.

I'd be ok if the rules for each team were the same. Unfortunately, they still aren't.

If we want to keep the FS rules in place, games should only be counted after all teams have entered the competition. For the pies to get a free pass at Peter Daicos who played most of his career before half were in the competition is not aligned with the considerations these clubs received after joining from their state league players.

Likewise, that NSW clubs had COLA was unfair.

Not all teams having academies - unfair, though this has been rectified to some extent.

If FS is to continue, clubs should have to pay full odds, and not be allowed to use more picks on that player than draft picks available, unlike what the Dogs were allowed to do last year with JUH.

I also think 100 games is too few for eligibility - make it 200 and you have a genuine legacy with the club. I mean really, is Rory Atkins a name that resonates with Adelaide? I think not.

 

[faible]

I'd be ok if the rules for each team were the same. Unfortunately, they still aren't.

If we want to keep the FS rules in place, games should only be counted after all teams have entered the competition. For the pies to get a free pass at Peter Daicos who played most of his career before half were in the competition is not aligned with the considerations these clubs received after joining from their state league players.

Likewise, that NSW clubs had COLA was unfair.

Not all teams having academies - unfair, though this has been rectified to some extent.

If FS is to continue, clubs should have to pay full odds, and not be allowed to use more picks on that player than draft picks available, unlike what the Dogs were allowed to do last year with JUH.

I also think 100 games is too few for eligibility - make it 200 and you have a genuine legacy with the club. I mean really, is Rory Atkins a name that resonates with Adelaide? I think not.

Disagree on the 100 v 200 games thing, I think 100 is fine, less than ~ 20% of players get there so it's a reasonable legacy.

Agree on the number of draft picks thing, that was changed, then removed specifically for 2020 from memory. You should only be able to use the number of draft picks that match the number of list spots available to stop exactly that from happening.

On the F-S thing; I get what you're saying, but that's becoming something that only affects a handful of teams now, Port has had F-S elgibile players and they were the most recent club to enter the AFL, so only GCS & GWS remain now. They'll be ~ 10 years or so off the first sons being eligible so there could be some argument made that if an ex-GWS / GCS player was to have a son in the draft, that maybe the games threshold could be lowered as a special dispensation, similarly to how the WA & SA clubs could claim F-S selections of guys who'd played for certain SANFL or WAFL sides.

 

[La Dispute]

Pretty underrated player. Always seems to have an impact when I watch GWS games, but doesn't have the all round skill set of someone like Taranto and flies under the radar. Classic plug and play inside mid.

Would be happy for Carlton to use a first rounder to grab him if he's keen on heading to Victoria.

 

[Colonial]

Pretty sure we already have threads whinging and moaning about academies being unfair while advantages to other clubs are ok elsewhere.

So if we could just stick to the trade value and will he or won’t he of Hopper that would be great.

 

[Morro]

Pretty sure we already have threads whinging and moaning about academies being unfair while advantages to other clubs are ok elsewhere.

So if we could just stick to the trade value and will he or won’t he of Hopper that would be great.

Tigers could use an inside bull badly. Our 1st rounder get it done?

 

[Turbocat]

Pretty sure we already have threads whinging and moaning about academies being unfair while advantages to other clubs are ok elsewhere.

So if we could just stick to the trade value and will he or won’t he of Hopper that would be great.

Does GWS need point this year?

 

[faible]

Pretty sure we already have threads whinging and moaning about academies being unfair while advantages to other clubs are ok elsewhere.

So if we could just stick to the trade value and will he or won’t he of Hopper that would be great.

Fine.

A 3rd for Hopper. Take it or leave it.

 

[Colonial]

Tigers could use an inside bull badly. Our 1st rounder get it done?

Doubtful

Does GWS need point this year?

Need point?

Fine.

A 3rd for Hopper. Take it or leave it.

No thanks.

 

[Turbocat]

Doubtful




Need point?



No thanks.

Points... for aca players?

 

[Colonial]

Points... for aca players?

Oooh, hmmm it’s interesting as we have maybe 1 academy player who will go early possibly top 10, but we also have the pies 1st so maybe not.

 

[Turbocat]

Oooh, hmmm it’s interesting as we have maybe 1 academy player who will go early possibly top 10, but we also have the pies 1st so maybe not.

Just thinking that it sort of affects what you would want for him. You may or may not want certain picks

 

[Colonial]

Just thinking that it sort of affects what you would want for him. You may or may not want certain picks

That is true. We also have an over abundance of tough ball winners but lacking speed so it’s a possibility one of those hard heads gets moved or decides to move on.

Our academy players this year I’ve only heard about 1 definite. And we have our 1st rounder and the Pies.

I guess a lot depends on how we go this year.

 

[Turbocat]

That is true. We also have an over abundance of tough ball winners but lacking speed so it’s a possibility one of those hard heads gets moved or decides to move on.

Our academy players this year I’ve only heard about 1 definite. And we have our 1st rounder and the Pies.

I guess a lot depends on how we go this year.

The little I have seen... has green gone past him? I think hopper would fill a need at Geelong with the likes of JS not getting any younger.. I think we have enquired about him before... although till Cameron we had never recruited a player from you.

Can you match R1 bids? Id have thought you use the R1 picks on players then anything after that your aca player.

 

[Colonial]

The little I have seen... has green gone past him? I think hopper would fill a need at Geelong with the likes of JS not getting any younger.. I think we have enquired about him before... although till Cameron we had never recruited a player from you.

Can you match R1 bids? Id have thought you use the R1 picks on players then anything after that your aca player.

I might be biased but Green has some of the cleanest hands in the league. He hasn’t gone passed Hopper from 2 years ago, but Hopper hasn’t improved, if anything gone slightly backwards(my opinion) since then. Green is going to be a lot better.
Should get a Rising star nod soon.
With Cogs still to return, and hopefully put in the position that is best for him, and with Bruhn and a few other young mids coming in I can see one being moved on.

You can, unless there’s been a change I haven’t heard of.
My guess is we use the Pies pick that’ll be hopefully fairly high(so far so good) on a player we need and want that isn’t academy, then match any bid on any academy prospects.
Lots of different things to be played out yet.

 

[Taylor]

Oooh, hmmm it’s interesting as we have maybe 1 academy player who will go early possibly top 10, but we also have the pies 1st so maybe not.

If he is going top ten then you might be fortunate enough to trade your current first near the end of the top ten and Hopper for a team's first inside the top five.

The issue would be if GWS also loses Free Agents for extra picks around the #10 mark - you don't really want those disappearing for points if you can avoid it.

 

[Morro]

Doubtful




Need point?



No thanks.

So what is he worth in your opinion if not a mid 1st rounder?

 

[Colonial]

So what is he worth in your opinion if not a mid 1st rounder?

An almost fully developed midfield bull?

Top 10 minimum.

 

[Davey33]

Pretty underrated player. Always seems to have an impact when I watch GWS games, but doesn't have the all round skill set of someone like Taranto and flies under the radar. Classic plug and play inside mid.

Would be happy for Carlton to use a first rounder to grab him if he's keen on heading to Victoria.

Absolutely not. We cannot afford to give up another first rounder.
Happy to swap Zac Williams back for him- even if we have to pay part of his salary!

 

[Orange crush]

Top 10 + a young kpd

 

[La Dispute]

Absolutely not. We cannot afford to give up another first rounder.
Happy to swap Zac Williams back for him- even if we have to pay part of his salary!

Compared to a speculative player in the draft? We’d love a Hopper type player to come in and collect 25 per game straight off the bat.

 

[Davey33]

Compared to a speculative player in the draft? We’d love a Hopper type player to come in and collect 25 per game straight off the bat.

Hopper was once also a speculative player in the draft!

 

[Colonial]

Absolutely not. We cannot afford to give up another first rounder.
Happy to swap Zac Williams back for him- even if we have to pay part of his salary!

Really? You would rather take the risk in the draft than a young contested bull who is already proven?

Nah you paid that salary to get him from us it’s your problem. Never was a mid.
Great rebound defender though.

 

[Davey33]

Really? You would rather take the risk in the draft than a young contested bull who is already proven?

Nah you paid that salary to get him from us it’s your problem. Never was a mid.
Great rebound defender though.

How y

Really? You would rather take the risk in the draft than a young contested bull who is already proven?

Nah you paid that salary to get him from us it’s your problem. Never was a mid.
Great rebound defender though.

We've recruited three mature age rebound defenders in the past two years.
Newman, Saad, and Williams.
We had another whom we forced into retirement and got back Docherty after the reconstructions.
Think we have enough?
Meantime recruited zero Midfielders (thru trades) despite numerous being available.

 

[Colonial]

How y
We've recruited three mature age rebound defenders in the past two years.
Newman, Saad, and Williams.
We had another whom we forced into retirement and got back Docherty after the reconstructions.
Think we have enough?
Meantime recruited zero Midfielders (thru trades) despite numerous being available.

That has nothing to do with what I said.

I said Williams isn’t a mid but a great rebound defender. As to you having plenty, well you silly buggers went a paid a fortune for him to get there.
Also said that Hopper is worth more than a top 10 pick as he isn’t an unknown and also a competitive bull.

 

[Davey33]

That has nothing to do with what I said.

I said Williams isn’t a mid but a great rebound defender. As to you having plenty, well you silly buggers went a paid a fortune for him to get there.
Also said that Hopper is worth more than a top 10 pick as he isn’t an unknown and also a competitive bull.

True I was more whining about our lot than anything.
Re: Hopper, is he a consistent performer?