Recruiting Trade/Draft Talk III - Zaharakis for a SIG BET?

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Battle reminds me a bit of Darcy Moore. Not sure at all if they play the same, maybe its just the whole "private school punchy face" look that they both have.

Having said that, I would love an undersized, arrogant 19 year old CHF that struts around like he owns the G and kicks bags of goals even though he's not the biggest, fastest, jumpiest. They're the sort of players that you love, and opposition supporters hate. Would love to snag him at 29!
 
Where does tonight leave X.Richards? We were all expecting him to be signed as a DFA but nothing.

Do we take the 5 picks to the draft (1, 20, 29, 41, 67) or leave one for the PSD or maybe sign X to the rookie list?
My guess, we are not using the PSD. I'd say we are waiting to see how the draft pans out. If we are hoping to pick Marshall or Battle at 20 and or another kpf at some other pick perhaps and it pans out that way, we use 68 on someone else. If the kpf(s) we were hoping for aren't available where we were hoping, then we call Richards name out at 68.
 
Pretty stoked by the opportunities in this draft.

Dream pick-ups if things all fall our way would be:
1: McGrath
20: Venables
29: Bid on Mutch (if matched by GWS, grab Clarke)
41: Begley
67: Junker

Suspect a few of those wont be available at our picks, but that would be a very happy haul.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Battle reminds me a bit of Darcy Moore. Not sure at all if they play the same, maybe its just the whole "private school punchy face" look that they both have.

Having said that, I would love an undersized, arrogant 19 year old CHF that struts around like he owns the G and kicks bags of goals even though he's not the biggest, fastest, jumpiest. They're the sort of players that you love, and opposition supporters hate. Would love to snag him at 29!
kinda like a brereton.....id love that...strut ya stuff.....just as long as u can back it up like brereton was able to
 
I know enough to know I have no idea what anyone is doing in five years.

But he is currently a forward, will enter 2017 as a forward, and if everything goes as planned, will remain a forward.


That isn't "not a midfielder" generally or for the purpose of the discussion.

All it means is that the club has decided that it needs Laverde, who was drafted as a wing/mid/forward, and looked at as someone who would start forward and progress to the midfield, as a forward for 2017.
 
That isn't "not a midfielder" generally or for the purpose of the discussion.

All it means is that the club has decided that it needs Laverde, who was drafted as a wing/mid/forward, and looked at as someone who would start forward and progress to the midfield, as a forward for 2017.

How would Laverde crack into the midfield in 2018 and beyond with Fyfe, Heppell, Zerrett, Parish, McGrath...
 
That isn't "not a midfielder" generally or for the purpose of the discussion.

All it means is that the club has decided that it needs Laverde, who was drafted as a wing/mid/forward, and looked at as someone who would start forward and progress to the midfield, as a forward for 2017.

That is EXACTLY 'not a midfielder', particularly in the context of the comment I responded to.

Laverde is not a midfielder. It is utterly irrelevant what he was viewed as when he was drafted. What he is, is a forward, or half-forward - whatever 'term' floats your boat.

He is a forward. He is being developed as a forward, the intention is to play him as a forward - end of story.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

What do we do in the rookie draft?

R1: Reece Piper? Nick Larkey? Darcy Cameron?
R2: Shaun McKernan
R3: Yestin Eades
R4: (Jake Long for another year)
Jeremy Goddard
 
That is EXACTLY 'not a midfielder', particularly in the context of the comment I responded to.

Laverde is not a midfielder. It is utterly irrelevant what he was viewed as when he was drafted. What he is, is a forward, or half-forward - whatever 'term' floats your boat.

He is a forward. He is being developed as a forward, the intention is to play him as a forward - end of story.
Unless plans change and he becomes a mid.
 
Sure.

And Daniher 'might' be switched to defense in the future.
Sure and Hurley might go from being CHF to AA CHB, oh wait he did.

Club can want him to play forward this year as much as they want, it doesn't meant any of us have to agree or believe he's a forward.

I firmly believe Laverde is a mid and the club is wasting time playing him forward, I might be wrong, but hell occasionally I'm right. Just because the club believes him to be something doesn't necessarily mean he is. Matthew Knights era believed NLM could ruck and Alwyn Davey was a CHF.

Doesn't meant they ever were.
 
Lav does want to be a midfielder though but coaches make the decisions so if he is wanted to play forward by the coaches then that's what he will do

Does he?

Spoke to the bloke face to face about 4 weeks ago.
 
Does he?

Spoke to the bloke face to face about 4 weeks ago.
Last time he was interviewed I think he did say he wanted to be a midfielder. Granted that was more than four weeks ago though.

edit: Twomey article from July: http://www.essendonfc.com.au/news/2016-07-15/happy-to-be-back

"Long-term, I hope I'm able to move into the midfield, and then go forward when we need to kick a few goals," Laverde said.

Same article where he said he definitely wanted to stay at the club though. Wonder if his father figure offered him midfield minutes. XD
 
but hell occasionally I'm right.
I-dont-believe-you.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top