Oppo Camp Max Lynch (Traded to Hawks 2021)

[JLC]

Lynch was fairly non selected. He was not the best available Ruck man and he cannot play effectively elsewhere.

So the recall of Mason Cox was based on fairness. Makes sense now.

 

[pugsville]

First thing Harvey did was bring back Cox. Huge error.
We should have tried a Grundy & Lynch ruck combination. There was nothing to lose in seeing if it could work.
Now we will lose a decent prospect for nothing.

Was Lynch the best ruck available? he was not. His non selection was fair.

 

[pugsville]

So the recall of Mason Cox was based on fairness. Makes sense now.

I have not argued that all other selections were fair. Entiurel;y different argument.

Merely the Lynch was not selected entirely on Merit.

 

[Scodog10]

So the recall of Mason Cox was based on fairness. Makes sense now.

If you’ll recall Cox was recalled as a forward.

 

[JLC]

If you’ll recall Cox was recalled as a forward.

Cox had done nothing to deserve a recall - as a ruck, forward or as a sub.

Now we have the situation where neither Cox or Lynch are worth a packet of chips.

Surely it would have made sense to play Lynch - sacrifice some of Grundys ruck time and allow Lynch the opportunity. Or just keep Cameron as a forward.

Murphy, Wilson playing or not playing would make zero, zilch difference to any outcome.

 

[Lockyer24]

Hope we can talk him into staying if a third rounder is the best we can get. Not worth it. His rate of improvement was huge

 

[TradeDraft]

Hope we can talk him into staying if a third rounder is the best we can get. Not worth it. His rate of improvement was huge

0% chance of Happening

 

[Scodog10]

Cox had done nothing to deserve a recall - as a ruck, forward or as a sub.

Now we have the situation where neither Cox or Lynch are worth a packet of chips.

Surely it would have made sense to play Lynch - sacrifice some of Grundys ruck time and allow Lynch the opportunity. Or just keep Cameron as a forward.

Murphy, Wilson playing or not playing would make zero, zilch difference to any outcome.

What I’ve learnt in this thread is that you’re over valuing Lynch on the basis of one match and I’m glad we don’t need to discuss it beyond 8pm tonight.

Using that as the reference point this particular discussion boils down to one decision, three talls forward v Fremantle. The club wanted a look at it, which I supported, and they made the only choice available to them because neither Grundy or Lynch are forwards. You’re suggesting though that playing Lynch and reducing the game time of our dual AA ruckman ultimately provides us more chance of winning (which is mad when it’s on the basis of one OK game v Gawn).

The rest is pointless discussing and to put it as simply as I can you need to get over Lynch not playing because it was the right call.

 

[BEEG]

Good luck to the young name, should be a 100-150 game player for Hawthorn.

 

[JLC]

What I’ve learnt in this thread is that you’re over valuing Lynch on the basis of one match and I’m glad we don’t need to discuss it beyond 8pm tonight.

Using that as the reference point this particular discussion boils down to one decision, three talls forward v Fremantle. The club wanted a look at it, which I supported, and they made the only choice available to them because neither Grundy or Lynch are forwards. You’re suggesting though that playing Lynch and reducing the game time of our dual AA ruckman ultimately provides us more chance of winning (which is mad when it’s on the basis of one OK game v Gawn).

The rest is pointless discussing and to put it as simply as I can you need to get over Lynch not playing because it was the right call.

The last 9 rounds were not about winning or losing. Our season was cooked and had no first round pick to tank for.

Just like the club wanted to look at three tall forwards, they should have looked at Lynch and Grundy playing in the same team. It was evident against Hawthorn, Geelong, StKilda that teams with two ruckman over the course of a match work "AA" Grundy over.

So we are still none the wiser as to what can be done to overcome teams that essentially double team Grundy.

 

[ClaytonM]

What I’ve learnt in this thread is that you’re over valuing Lynch on the basis of one match

I fully support players being valued based on one performance. Let’s value Cox based on a certain prelim and flog him off for a first round pick.

 

[JLC]

I fully support players being valued based on one performance. Let’s value Cox based on a certain prelim and flog him off for a first round pick.

That is exactly what Ned Guy did when he did his next contract.

 

[mwhop]

Had some great moments against the Dees.
But its not like he was ever dominating at VFL level.
Still very uproven.

 

[Buckley is my hero]

The last 9 rounds were not about winning or losing. Our season was cooked and had no first round pick to tank for.

Just like the club wanted to look at three tall forwards, they should have looked at Lynch and Grundy playing in the same team. It was evident against Hawthorn, Geelong, StKilda that teams with two ruckman over the course of a match work "AA" Grundy over.

So we are still none the wiser as to what can be done to overcome teams that essentially double team Grundy.

The problem as I recall it was, we were breaking down in the forward line and not scoring enough goals. Harvey brought Cox back to strengthen our forward line. It didn't work out. There was nothing wrong with the logic of doing it. The problem was Cox didn't come to the party and score the goals we needed from him. Now if you want to argue Lynch would have done a better job than Cox, you're on hollow ground as Lynch has no impact at hitting the scoreboard. So you switch the argument to playing Lynch instead of Cox to help out Grundy in the ruck how does that solve the issues in the forward line? Remember Harvey was coaching for his coaching career at Collingwood at the time. And does Grundy need any help in the ruck as he spends about 80% of his time in the ruck? Basically like Witts, Lynch is a full time ruckman.

 

[pablo disco bar]

Had some great moments against the Dees.
But its not like he was ever dominating at VFL level.
Still very uproven.

He was last few games tbh

 

[Collingwould]

 

[TradeDraft]

So is he Getting Trade or Not?

 

[Laurie Holden]

So is he Getting Trade or Not?

We need to keep the suspense up TD. Get people clicking to find out what happened! I get what the AFL is trying to do, but seriously it could be done in a 72 hour period.

 

[TradeDraft]

We need to keep the suspense up TD. Get people clicking to find out what happened! I get what the AFL is trying to do, but seriously it could be done in a 72 hour period.

Even Quicker I would of Thought

 

[TradeDraft]

 

[AusMC]

I posted this in the 'Drafts, Trading and Free Agency' thread:

So to crunch the numbers:
Lynch
+Freo future 3rd (assuming 9th?) = 331pts
+GCS future 4th (assuming 14th?) = 158pts

FOR
Hawks future 3rd (assuming 16th?) = 446pts
Brisbane future 3rd (assuming 4th?) = 259pts


Lynch and 489 pts for 705?
Lynch = 216pts = Pick 54 roughly?

Hopefully Brisbane fall off a cliff, and Hawks for the spoon XD

 

[danielnajdek]

Would've preferred to trade him for a packet of chocolate coated sultanas.

 

[TradeDraft]

 

[whiskeytown]

Good luck maxy... took 4.5 years to come good and then off to the dawks where you can fight it out with Reeves for the #1 ruck position

 

[TheGreatSwan]

Good luck Lynchy!