Port and Free Agency (2012)

[Schulzenfest]

Yep. I can handle letting Pearce go if we have a `2 year maximum' policy across the board, but the Monfries deal killed that.

The hypocrisy in our football department is staggering. It seems like all of the justifications for the dumb decisions they make can be cancelled out by pointing to those justifications being ignored when it comes to inferior players.

If we let Pearce go because we won't give out 4 year contracts, why did we give one to Angus Monfries?
If we let Pearce go because he wasn't 100% committed to the cause, why did we try so hard to get Ben Jacobs to stay?
If we delisted Surjan because of injury concerns, why are we trying to re-sign Salter and Hitchcock?
If we wouldn't give Mitch Banner a chance because of concerns about his defensive efforts, why did David Rodan get a month's worth of games at the end of the season?

Fact is they're just shit at identifying talent and pretty much all of the justifications people have tried to put on their shit decisions can be addressed like the above ones have been.

 

[SwampRat]

Yep. I can handle letting Pearce go if we have a `2 year maximum' policy across the board, but the Monfries deal killed that.

And today we saw someone go FA for a two year deal. So much for needing ridiculous deals to get players.

If we had a 2 year maximum policy, we'd be the stupidest club in the AFL.

We probably are anyway, but not by virtue of the above.

 

[Stewart2Austin Reborn]

Wonder if Rhode and Cripps had any say in having two picks rather than a net pick.

 

[SwampRat]

Wonder if Rhode and Cripps had any say in having two picks rather than a net pick.

I would doubt it. I don't think the clubs have any say in the compo.

 

[Portia]

If we had a 2 year maximum policy, we'd be the stupidest club in the AFL.

The only guy on our list I'd offer a 3 year deal to right now is Schulz, and he's too old & injury prone to offer a three year deal.

3 & 4 year deals are for high-performing 23/24 year olds IMO

 

[cj_09]

Some people on here really need to read between the lines ffs.

 

[Pedro59]

Ok enough of the gloom and doom
Things are stacked against us lets tighten up and show these p....s
What we are made of with backs to the wall
Lets concentrate on finding new talent preferentialy from SA in the rookie and other drafts
Dont forget how many on here eanted to get rid of Chappy and pierce after 5 lpsses in a row
The wheel turns
A good start is playing PSD with Jacobs
Lets develop our own and stuff em all

 

[Pedro59]

Ok enough of the gloom and doom
Things are stacked against us lets tighten up and show these p....s
What we are made of with backs to the wall
Lets concentrate on finding new talent preferentialy from SA in the rookie and other drafts
Dont forget how many on here eanted to get rid of Chappy and pierce after 5 lpsses in a row
The wheel turns
A good start is playing PSD with Jacobs
Lets develop our own and stuff em all

When the going gets tough lets work twice as hard stuff em all

 

[rumoursofwinter]

Glad we didn't give up pick 31 for Young. Lonie was a better player with less injuries. Young had surgery on his foot this week and will miss a lot of pre season. Hawthorn collected a pick they won't use in compensation for Young. If we trade pick 31 we will get more than Young.

I'm pretty sure a lot of the player movement was due to 'culture' and not just talent. Anyway, stick with status quo because it rocked.

 

[Hong-Kong Phooey]

Pfeiffer upgrade.

He was a free upgrade

 

[Peck]

If someone like Pearce wanted to stay at at the club, provided we paid him enough and for long enough, then I think we have botched this FA process. Absolutely stuffed it up.

If Collingwood can get rid of two players who are both outside or barely in their top 10 for picks 17 and 20, and we get 30 and 31 for Pearce and Chaplin, we have played our cards like amateurs. Moreso, because we should have ample leverage in our salary cap.

Pearce is 26 for crying out loud. He was virtually irreplaceable on our list by any recent draftees because of his pace, run and carry. I won't argue the toss about whether the compo is fair (although I fully agree with the AFL that Pearce was worth more than Young for a host of reasons), but I will argue that Rohde and Cripps stuffed this up big-time. And if you don't like it Lurkr8, bad luck.

Any trades from herein will be panic stations for us, and we will bring in amateur, bottom-end players to replace Chaplin, Pearce, Surjan, and Rodan. Whether they've been models of consistency and reliability or not, those four guys are looking a helluvalot better than the sum total of Monfries, pick 30 and 31. And if we lost Jacobs for pick 39 and Campbell, then we've really mucked it up.

Gee I don't seem like that much of a Rhode sympathiser do I? I personally don't know what to think concerning Rhode. There is the chance that he is useless and knows how to talk his way out of problems, but I like to hope that our club could have picked up on that in 8 years. People certainly do like to blame Peter Rhode for all our problems which can be ridiculous - which is why I defend him - and he certainly should have done better, but he is what we have got and everyone around him was fairly incompetent

With the money we didn't spend on Pearce and Chaplin we really should have been able to get a second free agent, from the sounds of it we threw money at Young but he went for Collingwood instead. Maybe there is someone else on our list of targets who could be good (via trade obviously) but I sure as hell don't know who it could be.

I was shattered when Pearce left, I can't say whether or not we should have kept him though. I mean he was probably our best player this year when he was firing, but from the sounds of it the contract was very big for a guy who was happy to leave the club for the greener pastures of Fremantle (ugh). Considering who we have thrown that money at, its hard to justify not signing him, that's for damn sure. Did we go for Maloney and lose? Did we go for Rivers and lose? I don't really know, but you certainly are right that the players we are trying to bring in are not as good as Pearce and Chaplin.

Monfries may be a great pick up, but unless we bring in someone rather good - and there are coals in the fire apparently - this trade period certainly hasn't gone well. How much of it was bad luck, and how much of it was incompetence is hard to say. I think we need to wait a week to make a full review of the situation in any case.

Still, if this is all that happens - even if we keep Jacobs - it was certainly a case of one step forward (with Hinkley) two steps backwards for this club.

Just as an aside I quickly looked over the trade periods from 2005 till now.

I'd say 05 was a loss, 06 was nothing, 07 was nothing, 08 was nothing, 09 was a win, 2010 was simon phillips for nothing, so I'd call that a nothing trade week. We also have last year in which I think we did well.

So we have kind of a mediocre performance but have had a couple of good trade periods lately. This year could be our worst trade period for a while IMO, but there is still a week left *crosses fingers*

 

[Portia]

Peter Rohde would be our longest serving current employee, wouldn't he?

 

[SwampRat]

The only guy on our list I'd offer a 3 year deal to right now is Schulz, and he's too old & injury prone to offer a three year deal.

3 & 4 year deals are for high-performing 23/24 year olds IMO

I'd give three years to Boak, Gray, Hartlett, Brad Ebert, Broadbent, Redden and Butcher in a heartbeat.

You can bet your arse other clubs would.

 

[PatientMental]

Peter Rohde would be our longest serving current employee, wouldn't he?

Jeez, shortchanging Dom and Cornes there.

 

[Portia]

I'd give three years to Boak, Gray, Hartlett, Brad Ebert, Broadbent, Redden and Butcher in a heartbeat.

You can bet your arse other clubs would.

They have big upside that they would want to be sure they get maximum pay for, which they probably wouldn't get right now; its unlikely they'd sign a three year deal without potential for it to go up a fair bit.

5 years with no finals, its hard for players to look good.

 

[Peck]

The thing that gets me to defend him (Rhode) is suggestions that delisting Surjan was a horrible decision, and other such build ups of marginal at best criticisms that leave people saying "Rhode has done 100 things wrong!!".

I mean are people seriously saying that delisting David Rodan was a bad idea? Seriously? The guy was ****ing useless this year. Useless.

 

[Portia]

Jeez, shortchanging Dom and Cornes there.

Oh yeah, they're still on the list. Way to wake me from my dream.

 

[rumoursofwinter]

Geelong are going to be pretty keen to trade some handy players. They have no space on their list. Pick 31 might come in handy.

If I was Levi Greenwood I would be very keen to be looking for better opportunities and a new contract. There is still a week to go.

Given Murphy and Knights got no compo I assume the same would have been the case for Surj and Sal.

 

[Schulzenfest]

The thing that gets me to defend him (Rhode) is suggestions that delisting Surjan was a horrible decision, and other such build ups of marginal at best criticisms that leave people saying "Rhode has done 100 things wrong!!".

Keeping Tom Logan and (reportedly) chasing Henry Slattery while delisting Jacob Surjan is not a 'marginal at best criticism'. That'd be like St. Kilda delisting Stephen Milne to chase Simon Phillips. Except worse, because Surjan is only 26.

 

[rumoursofwinter]

Last year we were reportedly chasing Ed Lower...

 

[Macca19]

The thing that gets me to defend him (Rhode) is suggestions that delisting Surjan was a horrible decision, and other such build ups of marginal at best criticisms that leave people saying "Rhode has done 100 things wrong!!".

I mean are people seriously saying that delisting David Rodan was a bad idea? Seriously? The guy was ******* useless this year. Useless.

Delisting is great on the proviso we replace them with talented kids or better FAs. Replacing surj wirh slattery and rodan with campbell is my worst nightmare. Just dumbfounded by it.

 

[Peck]

Campbell seems like a better option than Rodan.

Slattery I have no idea about, but he probably isn't as good as Surj. Either way we haven't got him yet and I hope it stays that way.

 

[Peck]

Keeping Tom Logan and (reportedly) chasing Henry Slattery while delisting Jacob Surjan is not a 'marginal at best criticism'. That'd be like St. Kilda delisting Stephen Milne to chase Simon Phillips. Except worse, because Surjan is only 26.

Okay, how on earth Surjan comparable to Stephen Milne?

 

[Oliver King]

Oh dear.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Because Surjan beats Stephen Milne every time they play on each other. Just like he beats Mark LeCras, Eddie Betts, Cyril Rioli, Jason Porplyzia and any other small forward you can think of. Both Surjan and Milne are among the very best at their position. Henry Slattery and Simon Phillips are among the very worst. And then there's Tom Logan, who had a combined 13 goals kicked on him by the might of Leroy Jetta, Tory Dickson and Paul Puopolo this year.