Traded Luke Jackson [Traded with #44 and #67 to Fremantle for #13, F1 and F2]

Remove this Banner Ad

No one is claiming his hitout work was top 3, it was opinion’s of a few in the media (not mine) that had his overall game as a top 3 ruckman, this was first half of the year when he was in form. His 2nd half of the year wasn’t as good. View attachment 1518923
Can’t possibly have him at number 3 on the ruck list when he is a part timer ruck. It’s obviously going to skew his stats. So if I play half a game on a wing and pick up 15 touches and then pinch hit it’s ok to say I get more touches than any ruckman? It’s not the same thing. Riley O’Brien stats probably not far off Jackson and he isn’t hitting it to Oliver, Petracca and Viney against a second string ruck.
 
Last edited:
Can’t possibly have him at number 3 on the ruck list when he is a part timer ruck. It’s obviously going to skew his stats. So if I play half a game on a wing and pick up 15 touches and then pinch hit it’s ok to say I get more touches than any ruckman? It’s not the same thing. Riley O’Brien stats probably not far off Jackson and he isn’t hitting it to Oliver, Petracca and Viney against a second string ruck.
I’d say being in the centre square would get you more touches than playing the role Jackson plays. If he played as number one ruck he’d have better stats, more possessions, more clearances ect… the stats are currently skewed against him. You can judge a players ability and put them number 3, you can see the impact they have when they go into the ruck and say if he was a number one ruckman he’s top 3, you could say he’s better than Riley Obrien as an overall ruckman it’s just that he doesn’t get the amount of rucking opportunities as OBrien does.

Riley Obrien is a permanent ruckman, similar stats to Sean Darcy.
 
Oh yeah, big bad Belly sure did a number on us over Hogan and Langdon. We might end up with three first rounders for Luke based on his past efforts.
Your selling him too cheaply. Melbourne should be asking for Caleb Serong and two top ten picks.

Afterall, one of the justifications for Hill's high trade price was the size of the contract he was going to. Jackson not only has the big salary offer but is the rarest of commodities a young ruck/forward who is a former pick 2.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Your selling him too cheaply. Melbourne should be asking for Caleb Serong and two top ten picks.

Afterall, one of the justifications for Hill's high trade price was the size of the contract he was going to. Jackson not only has the big salary offer but is the rarest of commodities a young ruck/forward who is a former pick 2.
He's uncontracted dude!
 
Your selling him too cheaply. Melbourne should be asking for Caleb Serong and two top ten picks.

Afterall, one of the justifications for Hill's high trade price was the size of the contract he was going to. Jackson not only has the big salary offer but is the rarest of commodities a young ruck/forward who is a former pick 2.
I think the justifications for Hill's high trade price were the b&f he won, his 3rd place b&f in the year he requested a trade, and, you know, the two years left on his contract.
 
I think the justifications for Hill's high trade price were the b&f he won, his 3rd place b&f in the year he requested a trade, and, you know, the two years left on his contract.
He was a triple premiership player, that said he wanted to get back home and play with his older brother. Fremantle handed over pick 23, a pick they got via AFL charity.

What a joke.
 
But won't you saying that Meek's trade value won't be affected this time next year, when he will be coming off contract.

Go have a read of the Meek thread, I expect his value to fall off a cliff next year compared to what I would want in trade for him this offseason under contract.
 
He was a triple premiership player, that said he wanted to get back home and play with his older brother. Fremantle handed over pick 23, a pick they got via AFL charity.

What a joke.
Hawthorn CHOSE to accept that. No one made them. He'd already helped them win three flags so clearly they were happy to let him go home.

He was a much better player at freo than he was at hawthorn. He was in the AA squad with two years left on his contract. No one forced saints to pay what they did. They could've waited another year and got him for cheaper.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Hawthorn CHOSE to accept that. No one made them. He'd already helped them win three flags so clearly they were happy to let him go home.

He was a much better player at freo than he was at hawthorn. He was in the AA squad with two years left on his contract. No one forced saints to pay what they did. They could've waited another year and got him for cheaper.

Brad Hill came with significant baggage. He had an assault charge and another incident in the back of a car that disappeared in a Michael O'Lachlan sort of way. Hawthorn were content moving him on.
 
Isn't this you saying that Meek will attract the same trade value next season as he will get this season.
When I was talking about the sort of offers Hawthorn supporters are discussing now, I expect that same value end of next year.
This year I expect more.
 
Luke Jackson isn't even as good as Luke Jackson was a year ago.
2nd half of the year form definitely dropped, probably because he didn’t want to ruin the massive contract offer he had.
 
Luke Jackson isn't even as good as Luke Jackson was a year ago.
He has had a brief drop off in form but nothing dramatic for a third year player. He still projects really well a ruck/forward prospect.
Meek has played 13 games over five years, and will likely if he is not traded this off season spend the entirety of next season in the WAFL. His trade value is a marginal up-grade of a third or fourth round draft pick.
 
He wasn't setting the world on fire before his knee injury either.
You should be asking your recruiting department why they’ve offered him a godfather deal
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Traded Luke Jackson [Traded with #44 and #67 to Fremantle for #13, F1 and F2]

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top