Arcassius
Team Chaplain
As they say - you can't argue with a fool.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 8 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Sheridan & Sutcliffe vs Clark & Davis
- Thread starter creamygoodness
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Well you can. They usually drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
- Thread starter
- #53
Have I won some converts yet? Clark with more goals than Cloke this year despite playing fewer games. We have no target up forward.
Melbourne have 1 target - Clark. Which is why he has goals to his name.
Anyway, our mids could not have gotten the ball to him to begin with so it doesn't matter.
Sheridan and Crozier @ 16 and 20 will give the better long-term results. Guaranteed.
Anyway, our mids could not have gotten the ball to him to begin with so it doesn't matter.
Sheridan and Crozier @ 16 and 20 will give the better long-term results. Guaranteed.
Guaranteed? 
- Thread starter
- #56
Guaranteed in the same way Pitt is guaranteed to be better than Darling.
Actually Pitt is worse than Darling, we should have picked him.
But you would rather have a ruckman who looks good as a forward in the worst team in the comp rather than a promising young mid and a promising young forward?
But you would rather have a ruckman who looks good as a forward in the worst team in the comp rather than a promising young mid and a promising young forward?
- Thread starter
- #58
I would rather an athletic 6'7 guy who can take a contested grab and kick goals yes. I believe the deal would have been done for less than pick 16 and 20 if Bond wasn't trying to be too cute anyway, but I'd still give both those guys up for Clark.
We've had promising mids in abundance the last 5 years and how has that gone? What's so special about these 2 guys that have been here all of 5 seconds that they're "guaranteed" when so many before them were also guaranteed long term players?
You're donning the rose-tinted glasses. Seeing potential as better than results.
You're donning the rose-tinted glasses. Seeing potential as better than results.
What results? Clark is hardly dominating, potential in sheridan/crozier > potential in Clark.
He's the only shining light in their team this year.
Seems like a weird time to bump your own thread. The last few weeks have shown that Sutcliffe is far more likely to contribute to a flag than Davis would've been and the jury is still out on Sheridan and Clark.
That was Schwab's philosophy too though and how did that work out?
We also haven't had much luck with our elite young mids the last 3 or 4 years.
Palmer - knee
Morabito - knee
Barlow - Leg
Fyfe - shoulder.
- Banned
- #65
A prelim and Freo's best ever season.
- Thread starter
- #67
It was Sydney's philosophy and how did that work out?
I freaking hate the fact that so many people here (it would seem even club decision makers) are so against trading purely because we had a few bad ones.
We've wasted plenty of good draft picks on useless players, why isn't drafting seen as a waste of time? A competent club should be able to find value in any avenue available to bring talent in. We had a huge opportunity to get a talented tall forward for an excellent price and we screwed it up. All because our club is terrified of making another trade blunder.
I freaking hate the fact that so many people here (it would seem even club decision makers) are so against trading purely because we had a few bad ones.
We've wasted plenty of good draft picks on useless players, why isn't drafting seen as a waste of time? A competent club should be able to find value in any avenue available to bring talent in. We had a huge opportunity to get a talented tall forward for an excellent price and we screwed it up. All because our club is terrified of making another trade blunder.
800k for Mitch Clark is not an excellent price. Talk it up all you want but that money for Mitch is a farce
- Banned
- #69
#shithouse_winning_record_for_the_past_four_years.
Different club, different city, different culture. They also had a bigger salary cap at the time due to the higher cost of living in Sydney which helped to throw money at players.
But the club were willing to trade, they just weren't happy with the asking price. The Eagles did the same with Tarrant and the Pies with Ball and those two clubs are the Premiership favourites in 2012.
How is 2 x first round picks and $800,000pa for a key forward who has played his best footy in the ruck "an excellent price"?
I am not against trading, but this must only occur at the right time for the right price.
Trading two first round draft picks when we are not near a premiership is not the right idea.
Finding value in players not being utilised in other teams e.g. Kennedy from Hawks where they had an abundance of Inside Mids or Hale from North where they had an abundance of Ruck\Forwards and trading a second\third round draft pick is great.
Sheridan and Sutcliffe will hopefully give us 10+ year service each, Clark at best would is 6-7 with Davis being 1-2.
Essendon have a number of forward and Gumbleton may be available for a late 3rd round pick.
Collingwood may have a young mid which isnt being played because of the better players in the side.
When we finish in the finals 2 years in a row, and finish top 4 then we can look to top up for the premiership.
You have to ask the question, will this trade get us closer to a premiership or further away. If the option is yes, then go for it.
- Thread starter
- #72
Any converts yet????
I don't think anyone is going to try and argue that Clark wouldn't have been a good get. The thing that goes missing in this argument is that Bond was working from the principle that Clark wasn't going to go anywhere else but here and so he played hard ball with our draft picks. After all that we still would have got Clark for the Crozier pick (Palmer compo) except for the fact that Mitch decided to jump ship at the last minute for the $. If Clark had of hung tough we would have got him at a bargain and he would have been worth it. BECAUSE Clark went for the big $ we pulled out because his price became prohibitive. We would have had to match the Schwabolly salary AND probably give up the first rounder and change to match Melbournes offer. Wisely we declined.
It's Clarks fault, we were only doing the right thing in trying to get the most for the least.
I would have loved Clark at the original price but not for what Melbourne paid.
Todays game made clear we made far bigger FUps in 2010 when we not only declined to draft Darling but also passed on Fasolo. These 2 alone would make us a top 8 team even without Clark. With Clark sky would have been the limit. **** Davis.
It's Clarks fault, we were only doing the right thing in trying to get the most for the least.
I would have loved Clark at the original price but not for what Melbourne paid.
Todays game made clear we made far bigger FUps in 2010 when we not only declined to draft Darling but also passed on Fasolo. These 2 alone would make us a top 8 team even without Clark. With Clark sky would have been the limit. **** Davis.
- Thread starter
- #74
If Bond was working from that principle then he's an idiot and he should be fired. He was too cute and it cost us.
Similar threads
