List Mgmt. Trade & F.A. 2017 (if a scenario sounds wrong - read on before posting)

[Dead Eye Didak]

I would prefer to take Brander at 6 than use pick 6 to get Lever. Brander potentially addresses a real list need and gun key forwards are difficult to source with later picks. Lever is at top value and doesn't add anything more to us than Howe already does, until he can prove he can mark a gun key forward. There's risk in both decisions but Brander is the go I reckon.

Its going to be a tough decision, because if Lever wants to come to us than how can you pass that up and pick 6 you think will have to come into play.
If we do release pick 6 to the Crows, you think we could get Lever and their first pick. We would need to include a fringe player in the deal.
If we do get Lever, l think we will need to pursue Darling from WC.
But if we keep pick 6, definately take Brander.

 

[Quicky]

I'd take two Howes any day if the week! What are you on about?

That Lever doesn't offer us anything we don't already have and I wouldn't be paying through the teeth for him because of it. He'd only improve us marginally because we already have quality interceptors in Howe, Schaz, Langdon and Reid if he's back.

On top of that you need to consider the double edged sword that is the balance of the backline. If you go too tall or have too many guys that patrol the air there is no cover at ground level. Ground level small defenders is where our weakness is. We'd see a greater overall improvement in our backline by discovering a quality back pocket and it'd cost far less.

The caveat being can Lever play CHB and blanket a quality key forward? If he can it's a different discussion. However he hasn't demonstrated he can yet so the risk is too high to spend pick 6 on.

 

[Quicky]

Its going to be a tough decision, because if Lever wants to come to us than how can you pass that up and pick 6 you think will have to come into play.
If we do release pick 6 to the Crows, you think we could get Lever and their first pick. We would need to include a fringe player in the deal.
If we do get Lever, l think we will need to pursue Darling from WC.
But if we keep pick 6, definately take Brander.

You're right it'd be a tough decision. But i'd still go Brander and hope he's there. Fogarty being the fall back. See my reasons in my post above.

 

[Soups]

I'd be stoked with that. But I reckon Naughton is a stretch at 5 given his kicking worries. I'd be surprised if Fogarty is not in there.

Naughton's kicking isn't too bad, has an awkward kicking action but is effective. I just wonder whether they would take a defender when a key forward is in need. I think they will be looking at Fogarty and Brander.

 

[Snuggles]

I rather not have lever, the cost mite be to high

I agree - I'd say the cost will be too high for a position we have very good coverage in already. Take pick 6 to the draft.

 

[left at home]

Would involve players if Lever nominates us.

Do we need him though

 

[Snuggles]

I'd take two Howes any day if the week! What are you on about?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

As would I but only if our other list needs were covered - which sadly they are not.

 

[Apex36]

I'd take two Howes any day if the week! What are you on about?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

You recruit for your more pressing need, it's a pretty simple concept.

 

[Quicky]

Naughton's kicking isn't too bad, has an awkward kicking action but is effective. I just wonder whether they would take a defender when a key forward is in need. I think they will be looking at Fogarty and Brander.

He gives the ball too much air time. A lot too much airtime. It will come unstuck at AFL level I reckon.

 

[TradeDraft]

I would love the Draft to go that way

 

[neilk]

He gives the ball too much air time. A lot too much airtime. It will come unstuck at AFL level I reckon.

Sounds like a Nathan Brown-type.

 

[legendstatus]

You recruit for your more pressing need, it's a pretty simple concept.

So you would knock back two Dangerfields because you've got one already?

Hmmm not so simple.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Babylove]

So purely hypothetical question, regarding the keeping or trading of pick 6. Say Gold Coast came to us this year and said they wanted to trade Tom Lynch to us this year but wanted pick 6 in return would you do it, to avoid the uncertainty of restricted free agent next year, even though it would cost you someone like Brander?

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Any love for Mitch McGovern?

 

[soreplums]

So purely hypothetical question, regarding the keeping or trading of pick 6. Say Gold Coast came to us this year and said they wanted to trade Tom Lynch to us this year but wanted pick 6 in return would you do it, to avoid the uncertainty of restricted free agent next year, even though it would cost you someone like Brander?

Absolutely.

Except next year they'll finish bottom three again and will most likely get a top three pick compensation in a strong draft anyway.

 

[arsene wenger1]

You recruit for your more pressing need, it's a pretty simple concept.

But remember bucks has a bit of crazy vossy about him

 

[soreplums]

The

You're right it'd be a tough decision. But i'd still go Brander and hope he's there. Fogarty being the fall back. See my reasons in my post above.

If we were a chance to get Lynch next year, then I'd refer to go to the draft this year and put the $700k that we save on Lever towards an offer to Lynch.
Best outcome for the club would be for us to use 2017 and 2018 first rounders in the draft and get Lynch as a FA.

 

[Go Woods]

Do we need him though

I'm on the fence TBH, he would add more class in our back half.

 

[Apex36]

So you would knock back two Dangerfields because you've got one already?

Hmmm not so simple.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

We aren't talking about Dangerfield though. Please don't pretend like 2 Howes are the same as two Dangerfields.

 

[Apex36]

So purely hypothetical question, regarding the keeping or trading of pick 6. Say Gold Coast came to us this year and said they wanted to trade Tom Lynch to us this year but wanted pick 6 in return would you do it, to avoid the uncertainty of restricted free agent next year, even though it would cost you someone like Brander?

Of course, that's a no brainer.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Do we need him though

If he nominates Collingwood then presuambly its because the club has told him we need him.

We do need a kpp though. The question is whether he can play there to a high level with a high degree of certainty.

Otherwise why spend pick 6 on a fourth tall flanker.

 

[Go Woods]

Any love for Mitch McGovern?

Been reported it's either Freo or stays at Crows.

 

[Sasuke]

Lever is a good player no doubt, but we have Howe and Langdon who i think play similar roles. We need a bigger bodied key defender and forward. The other clear need is a small defensive back who can use the ball well.

 

[ksardog]

Moore to play CHB next year, stabalises backline. Can be our Alex Rance, takes best forward plus can control game with his marking. Plus can always be switched up forward if needed.

Takes from our forward line obviously but with an ever improving Cox, Grundy developing in a 60/40 role as ruck/forward and Reid there as well, we should be able to get by. Sidebottom spending more time there, Elliott back to his best, WHE , Fasolo ( if he stays) and youngsters in Daicos and Kirby, there are plenty of goals in that forward line.

Brander at pick 6 hopefully
Lynch free agent year after

 

[jackcass]

Still does nowhere near the damage that Dangerfield does.

On SM-T810 using BigFooty.com mobile app

Neither did Danger a few years into his career.