Mega Thread Possible trades in 2015 for the Crows

[Rory Walkerfield]

So what if we don't match the offer and take the compo pick. Then:

Geelong give up pick 9 and Murdoch for Mackay (his contract) and adelaides pick 50?

How can the AFL not approve a first rounder for a 150+ game star like Mackay?

 

[SA_Stazza]

Thank-you for proving my point (despite your attempts at the contrary). Crouch is an exception - he would have played far more games if it weren't for his ongoing injury problems. Lynch isn't a midfielder - and was a victim of Lyons' dislike of selecting anyone under the age of 30, during their respective times at St Kilda.

Now, looking at the list you provided, it's pretty much just duds like Butcher who played less than 30 games in 4 years.

Anything over 50 games in the first 4 years is an indicator that the player probably has a strong future ahead of them. Less than 30 and you're probably looking at a dud. That's for midfielders. It's a different story for KPPs, and a very different story for ruckmen.

The fact guys like Sloane, Douglas, Gray, Hartlett only played essentially a season more than 30 games after the same number of seasons (not to mention most of those players never had to worry about a ridiculous sub rule being in place in the first 4 years of their careers) does not say a whole lot.

Tell me with all honesty how many games do you think Lyons would have played if it weren't for the sub rule? It cannot be discounted as the players we mentioned - CEY, Grigg, Kerridge and Lyons - all spent the entirety of their careers with the sub rule already in place..

 

[SA_Stazza]

You do realise that there is a reason why they were starting as sub in the first place? They were the last player selected and lucky to get a game because of injuries to better players (with their opportunities drying up accordingly in the latter part of the season as our injury list got smaller).

Actually, I think there's a case to be made that Grigg in particular benefited from the sub rule, playing more games than he would have if the rule didn't exist. The coach & selectors preferred not to select the same player as sub two weeks running, so he alternated with Lyons at the start of the season. I suspect Lyons would have played more, and Grigg less, were that policy not in place (i.e. if the sub rule didn't exist).

But you've just contradicted yourself - IF we alternated the sub every 2 weeks how on earth does that benefit Grigg OR Lyons at all??

If their was no sub rule, players would have been picked purely on merit, and of corse for structural reasons. The fact the sub rule existed brought about clubs often playing guys who weren't even in their best 25-30, purely because they had pace to burn in the latter stages of games!

 

[SA_Stazza]

They really haven't shown much at all. I'm judging them on what they've shown, and the fact that they weren't good enough to play more than 30 games.

Good midfielders will almost always be established in the best 22 after 4 years on the list. Grigg, CEY and Kerridge have all failed to achieve that - not through a lack of opportunity, but because they're not good enough to displace anyone else from the team. Brad Crouch is a notable exception to that rule - but he would have played 60+ by now if it weren't for injury.

CEY 2015 averages:

16 disposals (11 effective)
9 contested disp
7 uncontested
4 clearances
5 tackles
2 marks
3 inside 50s
1 rebound 50

If those aren't promising numbers for a mid I will give up watching footy altogether..

Edit: Not to mention he was a sub in two games...

What more could he have possibly done? He showed more in 11 games this year than Mackay has in 9 years on our list and CEY is the one who should be delisted? Wow

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Our guys have played relatively few games because the club loves VB, D-Mac and Wright so much.

And they'll be all we're left with.

 

[SA_Stazza]

Our guys have played relatively few games because the club loves VB, D-Mac and Wright so much.

And they'll be all we're left with.

****ing BINGO

 

[Sanders]

If that's correct it says more about Beveridge than MT, surely he should at least listen to MT's explanation before forming an opinion.

Some things don't warrant explanations though

Sure he should see if it's true, and if it is all the explaining and rationalising don't matter

 

[Sanders]

So what if we don't match the offer and take the compo pick. Then:

Geelong give up pick 9 and Murdoch for Mackay (his contract) and adelaides pick 50?

How can the AFL not approve a first rounder for a 150+ game star like Mackay?

Oi Ken Wood, Look at the salary!!

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Oi Ken Wood, Look at the salary!!

He's one of our higher paid players! Must be worth a high pick!

 

[Sanders]

He's one of our higher paid players! Must be worth a high pick!

Look at the zeroes, all those years...

Admire the quality, and just feel the width

 

[SA_Stazza]

I certainly hope that's not the case. Brad Crouch's skill set is far too valuable to be used on being the primary extractor of the football in the clinches. As valuable as that role is, it's not where Brad belongs. Matt on the other hand.

I'd probably have to disagree but again, it all depends on who we bring in. Brad was excellent on the inside - averages of 10 contested possessions, 5 clearances, 5.5 tackles, above average pressure acts and the 2nd best tackling efficiency of anyone bar Josh Kennedy in his last season alone suggest he is just as useful (to put it lightly) on the inside as he is on the outside - 14 uncontested possessions, 7th at the club for effective metres gained, 2nd for assisted metres, elite for score assists per game and had the highest rate of the top 50 in the AFL for kicks inside 50 finding a mark.

And averaged 25 touches a game.

All that as a 20 year old.. He can play wherever the **** he wants

 

[Sanders]

Brad Crouch is a no.1 overall quality talent.

A good one, not a scully/watts variety.

 

[headache1]

I'd probably have to disagree but again, it all depends on who we bring in. Brad was excellent on the inside - averages of 10 contested possessions, 5 clearances, 5.5 tackles, above average pressure acts and the 2nd best tackling efficiency of anyone bar Josh Kennedy in his last season alone suggest he is just as useful (to put it lightly) on the inside as he is on the outside - 14 uncontested possessions, 7th at the club for effective metres gained, 2nd for assisted metres, elite for score assists per game and had the highest rate of the top 50 in the AFL for kicks inside 50 finding a mark.

And averaged 25 touches a game.

All that as a 20 year old.. He can play wherever the **** he wants

I'm not saying he can't play on the inside. I know he can. I'm saying using him as a majority inside player in the mold of Scott Thompson would be a waste of his abilities. His brother can do that. Brad has great burst pace, excellent vision and above average kicking skills (especially in our midfield group). I don't want him out on the wing or anything, but I'd just rather he wasn't the guy at the bottom of the pack feeding the ball out. I want him to be the guy receiving it from the guy extracting it out of the pack.

 

[SA_Stazza]

I'm not saying he can't play on the inside. I know he can. I'm saying using him as a majority inside player in the mold of Scott Thompson would be a waste of his abilities. His brother can do that. Brad has great burst pace, excellent vision and above average kicking skills (especially in our midfield group). I don't want him out on the wing or anything, but I'd just rather he wasn't the guy at the bottom of the pack feeding the ball out. I want him to be the guy receiving it from the guy extracting it out of the pack.

I know, I more meant I disagreed in terms of Matt Crouch not being nearly as clean or effective comparitively being that prime extractor - but obviously he's still developing and doing a great job of it, I still think his work in the stoppages (especially clean extraction to teammates) leaves a lot to be desired at times. At the current time, Brad just gives us so much more on the inside than his brother has been able to in terms of polish and a whole lot more, but again, that will come with time for Matt.

Obviously beyond Thommo, long-term I want to see the likes of CEY and Matt Crouch getting down and dirty dishing it out to Sloane, Douglas, Smith and co.

But again, if we were to bring in say, for example, Redden - I think Matt's role might be severely reduced in the next 12 months (perhaps why there's whispers), given Brad's impending return (we can only pray) and Thommo obviously still first-choice - if his form of this year continues into next and we're serious about contending, I don't think we can really afford to manage him tbh.

 

[ams4crows]

Can't believe we've gone from January where we were gonna potentially land a big fish in Cameron to now where we're certainly not landing Cameron and losing our own big fish Dangerfield for **** all

 

[lunacy]

Of the possible players being touted as possible targets who would they replace in the current 22 and where would they play?
- Redden - Takes Danger's spot
- Bennell - Okay could take almost anyone's spot such is his talent lol. IF Redden takes Danger's spot, then shuffle positions around to force VB out I suppose. Maybe he takes Hendo's position on the wing?
- Aish - DMac / Atkins
- Menzel - This is the one I struggle to place a bit. Sure he's talented but where do we play him? Do we play him in a similar role to Douglas as a HF/mid? Who makes way?

Menzel goes to high half forward role, Knight to interchange. or knight pushes onto wing, Hendo out (depending how Knight is tracking next year). Knight is an exciting young role player, but he's not a star and not guaranteed best 22.
He and Menzel could join the rotation with Douglas between forward, wing and short bursts onball. I believe we need more rotations onball. We have been boom or bust with Danger and Thommo and then not much more.

 

[Crouch#44]

Toumpas will come cheap....

Would love to do a strait swap trade with wright and a shuffle of picks

Yet to find his strings at AFL but if he does will be handy to say the least. Would already be better than DMac

 

[feenix67]

They really haven't shown much at all. I'm judging them on what they've shown, and the fact that they weren't good enough to play more than 30 games.

Good midfielders will almost always be established in the best 22 after 4 years on the list. Grigg, CEY and Kerridge have all failed to achieve that - not through a lack of opportunity, but because they're not good enough to displace anyone else from the team. Brad Crouch is a notable exception to that rule - but he would have played 60+ by now if it weren't for injury.

I agree with you on Grigg and Lyons. CEY though had an excellent first half of the season and has something to offer. The removal of Dangerfield and the diminishing role of Thommo provides him with an opportunity and I would be inclined to go again with him. Certainly a make or break year for him next year though.

Kedge is an interesting one. I'm not sure one way or the other. Seems a natural footballer and very fit. Where he fits (if at all) is the question. Certainly has some trade currency.

 

[Lawrst]

Our guys have played relatively few games because the club loves VB, D-Mac and Wright so much.

And they'll be all we're left with.

And not I'm depressed.

Thanks.

 

[Matman23]

I know that a lot of people are against picking up players delisted from other clubs. Especially Carlton. But I wouldn't mind having Cameron Giles on our list as a rookie.

He is a 195cm defender that can play forward. Has been on Carlton's list for 2 years and never had a chance to prove him self due to a reoccurring foot injury (now fully recovered).

In his draft year I remember that he was impressive in the U18 comp and went from a draft doubtful to 2nd round. He wouldn't be a ready made defender but could become a good option for the future.

 

[King Elvis]

You do realise that there is a reason why they were starting as sub in the first place? They were the last player selected and lucky to get a game because of injuries to better players (with their opportunities drying up accordingly in the latter part of the season as our injury list got smaller).

Because we chose to cripple our chances of success by playing duds like VB, Mackay and Wright ahead of them?

 

[Mismatched]

I know that a lot of people are against picking up players delisted from other clubs. Especially Carlton. But I wouldn't mind having Cameron Giles on our list as a rookie.

He is a 195cm defender that can play forward. Has been on Carlton's list for 2 years and never had a chance to prove him self due to a reoccurring foot injury (now fully recovered).

In his draft year I remember that he was impressive in the U18 comp and went from a draft doubtful to 2nd round. He wouldn't be a ready made defender but could become a good option for the future.

I'd certainly be interested, more so as a rookie, but I'd want to know his foot injury was actually better.

 

[Tex Support]

I know that a lot of people are against picking up players delisted from other clubs. Especially Carlton. But I wouldn't mind having Cameron Giles on our list as a rookie.

He is a 195cm defender that can play forward. Has been on Carlton's list for 2 years and never had a chance to prove him self due to a reoccurring foot injury (now fully recovered).

In his draft year I remember that he was impressive in the U18 comp and went from a draft doubtful to 2nd round. He wouldn't be a ready made defender but could become a good option for the future.

Poor bugger cannot get his body right. Still plenty of time for him obviously, but he's had massive trouble adjusting to the physicality of AFL...

 

[Crouch#44]

At this stage

Out-

Danger
Kerridge/CEY
Grigg

In-

Hampton
Redden
M.Talia

Keep high draft picks and upgrade the others

 

[I Lost My Keays]

At this stage

Out-

Danger
Kerridge/CEY
Grigg

In-

Hampton
Redden
M.Talia

Keep high draft picks and upgrade the others

That would be a disaster