Rumour Thread

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Wood and pick 48 to port for their pick 31 would be great

Only a minor upgrade in picks to lose the only legitimate alternative to Jolly that we have?

Pass.

It must be remembered that apart from Wood, our only other first ruck options have a total games experience of zero games.

 

[Breakthelines]

Only a minor upgrade in picks to lose the only legitimate alternative to Jolly that we have?

Pass.

It must be remembered that apart from Wood, our only other first ruck options have a total games experience of zero games.

Does anyone else think the new ruck rule we help Wood?
He seems to struggle when he has had to wrestle other ruckman.

 

[Scodog10]

As I said, I believed we would get Young....seems a lot of people ruled him out as soon as this comment way made. Different interpretations. When they said the Gillette AFL Trade Period, i don't think they were implying that we were going to trade for Young.

Personally I think your trying to read way too much into some pretty straight up and down comments. Yeah he isn't always straight up with us, but there isn't anything glaring that stands out to me from 2012....

For anyone else that decided to put their own spin on a possible Young move falling through off the back of those comments, more fool them IMO

 

[Breakthelines]

Personally I think your trying to read way too much into some pretty straight up and down comments. Yeah he isn't always straight up with us, but there isn't anything glaring that stands out to me from 2012....

For anyone else that decided to put their own spin on a possible Young move falling through off the back of those comments, more fool them IMO

Typical of me (Teacher)....over analysing. All good. Glad we got him.

Do you see any interest in bringing in anymore FA/Trades?

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Does anyone else think the new ruck rule we help Wood?
He seems to struggle when he has had to wrestle other ruckman.

Good point.

You may be right.

More to the point, will the new rule adversely affect Jolly? He already gives away a lot of frees.

 

[Breakthelines]

Good point.

You may be right.

More to the point, will the new rule adversely affect Jolly? He already gives away a lot of frees.

Quite possibly. Maybe even Keeffe becomes a better option.....

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Quite possibly. Maybe even Keeffe becomes a better option.....

I dont count Keefe as a "first ruck" option.

 

[Scodog10]

Typical of me (Teacher)....over analysing. All good. Glad we got him.

Do you see any interest in bringing in anymore FA/Trades?

Well I'd be all for landing Patrick Dangerfield for 18, 19 and 21 if we could somehow wrangle it

But on a serious note I think it's a no on bringing in any more players because all it means from here is that we have to cut one more from our list and after 16 list changes in the past two years we need to pull up IMO. Geelong have a great list management model with limited turnover each year so I would like to go down that path this year.

Added to that is the fact that there isn't anyone left out there as a FA that fits a need and IMO you only sign a FA if they fit a genuine need.

I could maybe see a trade of 42 and 48 for a pick in the 30's happening leaving us with 4 in the draft and only needing to cut a further 3 players. However considering we pushed for the upgrade on 58 in the Dawes deal and Walshe's comments I'd say that (with the Young deal done) we're happy with our position and we'll go to the draft as is.

 

[Bonuspoints]

I also think we'll be looking to upgrade in the 1st round. I've been looking closely at the draft order and I think we'll have to part with at least 2 first rounders to upgrade with perhaps a swap of later round picks, no way will someone give us a higher pick if we just offer a first rounder and 42. The clubs who look most likely are those with multiple picks in the top 30

Bulldogs- 5, 6, 22
GWS- 1, 2, 3, 12, 14
St.kilda- 13, 25
Port- 7, 29, 30, 31
Brisbane- 8, 24, 33

eg. Bulldogs Pick 6+22 for our 18+19+21
eg. GWS Pick 12+14 for our 18+19+21
or Pick 3 for 18+19+21
eg. St.kilda Pick 13+24 for our 18+19+42
eg. Port Pick 7 for our 18+19
eg. Lions Pick 8+24+33 for 18+19+21

Just a few examples of deals that other teams might be interested in. Personally i'd prefer the highlighted trades as I believe the quality between 5 and 15 to be very even. However this is all in the case of Collingwood wanting to upgrade our picks, i'd be very happy just to keep 18, 19 and 21

Of your list I could only see St Kilda as possibly giving us the upgrade trade as I would expect the Dogs, Port, Lions and Tigers to hold onto their top 10 picks to grab potential stars. For Port and Bris I imagine they'll be hoping for a Selwood slider and the Dogs should get a couple of young stars for picks 5 & 6 so they won't be trading them unless they're getting a superstar in kind. GWS should be shopping around their picks, but it won't be parting with picks 1 or 2. They'll be expecting a superstar for pick 3 and a quality player for 12 &/or 14, which we don't have to part with. Given the list reductions and that their lists are predominantly kids I would think the two new clubs would be looking to either upgrade picks (i.e. 12 & 14 for say pick 5) or more likely want to add some experienced players in the early to mid 20s, which we can't really help with.

What we need is a club that has traded out a draft picks and now needs to get to three draft picks that aren't 50+. These are the clubs that might downgrade a pick to improve two others. I think its the second round pick that we'd be getting off the other club as I can't see a club trading away its first round pick unless they can use the picks they get from us in a trade (i.e. Suns want a top 20 pick for Hickey so Saints are willing to downgrade 13 to 19 in a deal knowing that 19 is enough to satisfy the Suns).

Going off the current draft order here's a few clubs that we might be able to arrange an exchange of picks to upgrade one of ours.

Blues 11, 36 & 56 - No way Blues would give us 11 and at best we'd get an exchange of picks 42 & 48 for 36 & 56. I doubt we'd get a deal with the blues.

Ess 35, 52 & 55 - having used 10 on Daniher we might be able to exchange 42 & 48 for 35. This might appeal to the Bombers given its expected they will lose a couple more senior players to squeeze Goddard in.

Geelong 16 & 59 - having traded for Macintosh their 2nd pick is 59 so may be willing to drop pack a few places in the first round by exchanging 16 for 21 & 42/48. They'd gain a pick for the loss of 5 places in round 1.

Hawks 28, 65 & 66 - only possible deal would be picks 42 & 48 for 28, which I doubt they'd take.

North 15, 38, 39 & 58 - supposedly in the hunt for Jacobs from Port who want a top 20 pick. North think its overs so it could be a case of us exchanging picks 19/21 & 42/48 for 15.

Port 7, 29, 30, 31 - you would think they'll be a bit like us and looking to upgrade pick 29 at the cost of 30 &/or 31, but given the amount of players that have left Port and are likely to go they may be willing to turn pick 31 into 42 & 48 given their next pick after 31 is 72.


So yeah I'm thinking the Saints are our best shot at moving up the order in the first round. I've read they want Hickey and that the Suns want a top 20 pick. The Saints think pick 13 is overs and the Suns won't take 25. So there's an opportunity there whether we exchange picks 18 & 19 to the Saints to get picks 13 & 25 or trade pick 19 & 42/48 for pick 13. The North & Port trade over Jacobs may also open up an opportunity too.

 

[Hardas]

Well I'd be all for landing Patrick Dangerfield for 18, 19 and 21 if we could somehow wrangle it

But on a serious note I think it's a no on bringing in any more players because all it means from here is that we have to cut one more from our list and after 16 list changes in the past two years we need to pull up IMO. Geelong have a great list management model with limited turnover each year so I would like to go down that path this year.

Added to that is the fact that there isn't anyone left out there as a FA that fits a need and IMO you only sign a FA if they fit a genuine need.

I could maybe see a trade of 42 and 48 for a pick in the 30's happening leaving us with 4 in the draft and only needing to cut a further 3 players. However considering we pushed for the upgrade on 58 in the Dawes deal and Walshe's comments I'd say that (with the Young deal done) we're happy with our position and we'll go to the draft as is.

Good post, SD.

Can I ask what you think our top 3 needs were at season's end, and whether they are still the same now?

 

[Scodog10]

Good post, SD.

Can I ask what you think our top 3 needs were at season's end, and whether they are still the same now?

I think we had quite a few personally, but my top 3 were (remember this is all subjective lol):

1. A marking KPD (someone like Chad Cornes or Brian Lake at their best). Too often in 2012 we allowed the ball to get to ground or to the back of a contest where opposition smalls and mediums cut us up. It was highlighted most against Hawthorn and Carlton. Every time the ball went to ground in their forward halve's against us this year they scored....

2. A second ruck with some mongrel. Dawes was actually OK in the ruck this year. Where he fell down though was his lack of output up forward and his complete lack of aggressiveness.

3. Skills and speed on the outside both in the midfield and off half back. With Daisy having a down year and Johnson out injured for the majority and not quite right on return we lacked zip on the outside.

Reid had a down year there's no doubt about that and with Keeffe back as well (who I think is very strong overhead) I think we can cover what I feel is our most pressing need internally. The recruitment of Lynch stiffens up that second ruck role until Gault is ready to take the next step. I'm very much of the same mindset as KM that he is an ideal 2nd ruck going forward, especially with the new rule change. Finally we went some way towards addressing the third need with the addition of Young, but drafting Garlett, Simpson or Towers would round things off nicely.

Two other areas to keep an eye on are a forward wizard to replace Didak and a mid age ruckman to replace Wood. I'm personally doing all sorts of draft dances to get Menzel to slide to us in order to fill that forward need, but at this stage it unfortunately may have to wait until next year to be looked after unless we can trade up in the first round.....

As for the mid age ruckman to replace Wood I'd pretty much be happy with anyone that doesn't cost too much, I'm just over spending first round picks on ruckman. Personally with the rule changes I like Steph Martin because he's the athletic type who likes to jump at the ball. With Dawes and Hogan coming on board and the return of Gawn from injury his long term future at the Dees might be sketchy. Therefore IMO he could be even more gettable in the 2013 off-season when he comes out of contract as an insurance policy for Witts and Ceglar (that's if the Saints don't snap him up first).

 

[Hardas]

I think we had quite a few personally, but my top 3 were (remember this is all subjective lol):

1. A marking KPD (someone like Chad Cornes or Brian Lake at their best). Too often in 2012 we allowed the ball to get to ground or to the back of a contest where opposition smalls and mediums cut us up. It was highlighted most against Hawthorn and Carlton. Every time the ball went to ground in their forward halve's against us this year they scored....

2. A second ruck with some mongrel. Dawes was actually OK in the ruck this year. Where he fell down though was his lack of output up forward and his complete lack of aggressiveness.

3. Skills and speed on the outside both in the midfield and off half back. With Daisy having a down year and Johnson out injured for the majority and not quite right on return we lacked zip on the outside.

Reid had a down year there's no doubt about that and with Keeffe back as well (who I think is very strong overhead) I think we can cover what I feel is our most pressing need internally. The recruitment of Lynch stiffens up that second ruck role until Gault is ready to take the next step. I'm very much of the same mindset as KM that he is an ideal 2nd ruck going forward, especially with the new rule change. Finally we went some way towards addressing the third need with the addition of Young, but drafting Garlett, Simpson or Towers would round things off nicely.

Two other areas to keep an eye on are a forward wizard to replace Didak and a mid age ruckman to replace Wood. I'm personally doing all sorts of draft dances to get Menzel to slide to us in order to fill that forward need, but at this stage it unfortunately may have to wait until next year to be looked after unless we can trade up in the first round.....

As for the mid age ruckman to replace Wood I'd pretty much be happy with anyone that doesn't cost too much, I'm just over spending first round picks on ruckman. Personally with the rule changes I like Steph Martin because he's the athletic type who likes to jump at the ball. With Dawes and Hogan coming on board and the return of Gawn from injury his long term future at the Dees might be sketchy. Therefore IMO he could be even more gettable in the 2013 off-season when he comes out of contract as an insurance policy for Witts and Ceglar (that's if the Saints don't snap him up first).

Interesting on the backline. What do you think Brown's long-term role might be? Do you think with a better injury run, he might grow into the role and be able to take more marks down back too, or is he destined to be a back up?
Thanks, mate.
I don't even get to watch that many games on tv where I live, so I'm relying on people that regularly get to games live to see what's really going on there.

 

[Scodog10]

Interesting on the backline. What do you think Brown's long-term role might be? Do you think with a better injury run, he might grow into the role and be able to take more marks down back too, or is he destined to be a back up?
Thanks, mate.
I don't even get to watch that many games on tv where I live, so I'm relying on people that regularly get to games live to see what's really going on there.

Personally I think the only option for Brown is see ball punch ball, but that's ok because there's always room for that shutdown KPD and Lonergan at Geelong is a perfect example. How the structure works long term though will depend a lot on how much longer Maxwell intends to go on for.

If Maxwell pulls the pin sooner rather than later there would be room for all 3 in the one line up with Keeffe and Brown being the main go to men and Reid playing that free wheeling Maxwell role. The other thing though is that Keeffe may not return as well as hoped after his knee because that first year back is never easy. Considering Maxwell is obviously going on next season it will be interesting to see how it all plays out because again for me that D50 marking is a major area of concern.

Ultimately with Hartley coming through as well its an enviable position to be in because clubs will always pay a high premium for big KPD which all of Brown, Reid, Keeffe and Hartley are.

 

[Hardas]

Yep, saw Hartley as a 17 yo. I think some underestimate his potential too, so we are really well-placed at tall back [I think Keefe and Reid will mark almost everything in sight WHEN Keefe recovers and IF our midfield puts reasonable pressure on the opposition's forward entries].

BTW, won't start looking more closely at draft prospects until after the trade period, but I think it's going to be a fascinating draft year with Hine, Rendell etc having all these higher picks.

 

[tazzawazza]

H

Yep, saw Hartley as a 17 yo. I think some underestimate his potential too, so we are really well-placed at tall back [I think Keefe and Reid will mark almost everything in sight WHEN Keefe recovers and IF our midfield puts reasonable pressure on the opposition's forward entries].

BTW, won't start looking more closely at draft prospects until after the trade period, but I think it's going to be a fascinating draft year with Hine, Rendell etc having all these higher picks.

Who would you take out for Keefe?

Maxwell Brown Toovey

Shaw Reid O'brien

Int - Johnson

 

[Hardas]

H
Who would you take out for Keefe?

Maxwell Brown Toovey

Shaw Reid O'brien

Int - Johnson

Well, it's not always going to be such a simple question as "Who is best 22?", with injuries and match ups etc, but it could also be time to talk about using Maxy as a tagger, for example. As others have suggested, Reid could play third/roving tall as he has good judgement, mobility and skills (basically a more damaging version of Maxy, but he probably can't play on the same range of players as the captain can).
It may sound like I'm trying to avoid a clear answer, but 'Best 27' is more realistic than 'Best 22' anyway.
[And there's a whole summer to waste on that after our list is finalized. ]

 

[loki04]

Well, it's not always going to be such a simple question as "Who is best 22?", with injuries and match ups etc, but it could also be time to talk about using Maxy as a tagger, for example. As others have suggested, Reid could play third/roving tall as he has good judgement, mobility and skills (basically a more damaging version of Maxy, but he probably can't play on the same range of players as the captain can).
It may sound like I'm trying to avoid a clear answer, but 'Best 27' is more realistic than 'Best 22' anyway.
[And there's a whole summer to waste on that after our list is finalized. ]

Yeah playing on no one can be hard I see your point.

 

[Hardas]

Yeah playing on no one can be hard I see your point.

Assuming this is a serious comment, Loki?
Are you saying Maxy never mans up or is never manned up? I know he's rarely allowed the luxury of roaming free anymore, and like many other backmen now has to come off his man to be third man up etc these days. No?

 

[loki04]

Assuming this is a serious comment, Loki?
Are you saying Maxy never mans up or is never manned up? I know he's rarely allowed the luxury of roaming free anymore, and like many other backmen now has to come off his man to be third man up etc these days. No?

I was being some what facetious with my comment but he doesn't man anyone of note and is no where near the defender, rebounder or in versatility of a Reid .

 

[Hardas]

I was being some what facetious with my comment but he doesn't man anyone of note and is no where near the defender, rebounder or in versatility of a Reid .

Oh, sorry, mate - should've managed to figure that out
If it wasn't clear, I meant that Reid could play Maxy's role [and bloody well, by the way], and Keefe and Brown could take the main marking options, allowing Reid to maximize his attacking talents and gamble off his man etc.

 

[TradeDraft]

Trade Rumors from Facebook Page:

COLLINGWOOD;
Jordan Russel could be obtained for free given he successfully completed a fitness test at the Westpac centre on Friday afternoon. The pies will select him as a delisted free agent in early November.

It's been rumoured that several teams have come to Collingwood, asking what it would take for them to part ways with one of their 3 first round picks. At this stage Collingwood won't trade any of them, but that could change if the right deal were to come along.

The pies aren't interested in Tom Hickey as it had been reported, and have enough faith in Witts, Ceglar and Paine as the future big men.

 

[Hardas]

Cheers, Dave - no facebook, twitter or youtube here so I really appreciate the updates...

 

[TradeDraft]

Cheers, Dave - no facebook, twitter or youtube here so I really appreciate the updates...

My Pleasure - Where are you?

 

[Shade]

Cheers, Dave - no facebook, twitter or youtube here so I really appreciate the updates...

good for you then

the facebook rumours page is hot garbage.

 

[TradeDraft]

good for you then

the facebook rumours page is hot garbage.

Not it's not. Most Stuff come from the Papers and Good to have 1 Place to see the Rumors