The Wornock Trade Not Good

[refresh]

What ace would that be??

nominated club v psd

 

[Cruiser23]

Sure, but the point is NO clubs were giving up second rounders for anything other than goodplayers, or freaks with massive upside. We had neither on the table.
That was my point.
Bentick and the like......even Houlihan who I;m sure was put up was never going to get us another early pick.

True, but doesn't that show how much they rate this draft and the importance of it?

Sure, the Hawks strength is thier running midfield, but I think you underestimate how good their ruck division is.

I don't think i am underestimating the two ruckman, Campbell and Renouf are triers and put 110% in that are made to look better than what they are due to the quality of the midfielders and runners. You put Campbell or Renouf in our line-up and they would more than likely get a few lashings from our supporters. They are honest workers, i'd rather have honest players in the ruck than anywhere else on the ground, but as i said in my post on page 3, this is a 'chicken and the egg' argument.

Well I guess you could have said the same about Gibbs at the end of last year, or Kreuzer this year.
No huge number of "great" performance s on the board, but if you watch how he plays the game you can see he is a natural footballer.
Don't worry, I have led the chanrge on "Don't get carried away" with Warnock as he hasn't done heaps.....but this was more in reaction to not paying too much.
We paid about the right price IMO. Watch his game vs King earlier this year.
We have Warnock on that Friday vs Saints and we win that game. Simple.
Doesn't need to be the leagues best or anywhere near it......but he will get his hand to the ball a number of times.

Not doubting his ability to be a good footballer, but you read a few others comments, not pointing the finger at you by any means, they seem to think Warnock is such a lock to be our future ruckman from next year onwards. I'm just stating he isn't proven he much to suggest he is able to hold down a number 1 ruck spot.

Sure......and what if Judd keeps breaking down while Kennedy, Masten and Notte go on to be stars.

When is any trade a decalred "winner".

The point is clearly our list management decided we needed another ruck. If we take a quality ball user at 6 (Harts, Ziebell) then would you be happy to take Warnock, with some (albeit limited) proven senior AFL form at 24? Of course you would.

The other thing is, in past drafts, how many quality ball users are around in the second round? I would have though we would have looked at a tall with that pick anyway?

Again, i'm not pointing the finger at you but many people are declaring we have won in the trade and will be the winner out of it, i'm just states that's far from the truth in my mind.

Our list management decided we need another ruckman fair enough but does that mean i have to agree with them? Again, not directed at you, but people seem to change their tone to fit in, i don't want to be seen as a sheep and i think 'not taking Warnock' still has a fairly good argument behind it and i'm willing to stick my neck at and continue stating this side. Abuse me if i'm wrong, don't really care but imagine if everyone had the same opinion?

If we did have our second rounder, i would have taken best available, if it was a KF great but i wouldn't have liked to stretch 5 odd picks to get a KF. There are a few bottom-aged KF who show potential that would be available at pick 40, so i would have been inclined to look at pacy ball users if it was looking that way. This draft seems to run fairly deep to late in the second round. O'Keefe, Strauss, Broadbent, Smith all have a good shot at being around at pick 24, fit the bill perfectly, all would have been an asset to our team.

 

[Bluebear]

Fair enough C23.

I think we more or less agree on many points.

Warnock has a lot to prove, and I think he will.

How many "Is [player taken with pick 24] better than Warnock threads are we likely to see on the polls board in years to come.

 

[mediumsizered]

Look I hope Warnock becomes a great player at Carlton, but having 3 picks in the top 70 especially now with GC17 coming in is not good, we should of traded to get another top 40 pick.

To get another top 40 pick we would have had to trade a player from our best 22, to then allow us to draft a player who may never make our best 22. I'm not a big fan of those odds.

 

[Silvagnis]

Great trade.

CFC16 missed the fine print on the trade that handed Fremantle Barry "I think I can coach" Mitchell for pick 69.

I hope Mitchell has as much as success at Freo as he did at the Bullants.

 

[blues_future]

Time will tell how good a pick he is. I certainly don't think Freeo did badly. They reckon he can't play in the same side as Sandilands, and so they haven't lost anything in that regard unless Sandilands gets injured.

I hope Warnock is a great get and will wait and see, but if he's not heads should roll. We didn't consider him worth drafting ahead of Jake Edwards a few years ago when we were screaming out for rucks, now we reckon he is worth a 2nd and 4th rounder. We should be right. We have had a chance to see him play over three years and so there are no excuses. Just hope the guy who recommended Ackland wasn't the one assessing Warnock.

Personally I would always want to draft rather than trade. The exception would be a Judd once in a generation player deal.

There will be good players left in the draft at 24. Still if Warnock becomes a dominant ruckman he will be worth it.

But if the talk of $1.6 m for 4 years are anywhere near the mark then we are making a rod for our back. How much does Big K get? Nothing like that and I'd be betting he is much better than Warnock.

And if Warnock is getting anything like that then he needs to earn it. No honeymoon period. Sign on for the big bucks, earn them. I expect a guy on that much dough to be no 1 ruckman next year. I don't buy Ratts line of don't put too much pressure on him. he has accepted the pressure with the long term big money (for a guy who has played 20 games) contract. he needs to be judged not on potential but on performance. If he wants to be treated as an apprentice, maybe he should be on apprentice wages like Big K

 

[Blues_Man]

Can't voice a different opinion in here you get shot down.

Only when you act like a complete tool while doing so .