Review Trade Week 2010

Remove this Banner Ad

There are two parts of this discussion

1) Trading In

2) Trading Out/Delisting

I only wanted to trade in Mundy or Jones, so not disappointed on that side.

Thought we could tried to trade out ( may have tried ) fringe players - contracted or not, or look at delisting more players to free up picks on the Primary List. We are taking a chance keeping some players for another twelve months, considering that by all reports the 2011 draft is weaker than the 2010 draft.
 
2 ways to look at it Bombers fans.

1. Pretty bad that you are only taking 3 picks into this years draft...surely fresh talent was required. Obviously contract situations made life difficult...however you would've liked to have seen some list changes this year.


2. No team made a big trade. All that went down were a stack of fringe players looking for new opportunities. No team could say they landed a big fish. The biggest name was probably Tarrant...a 30 year old player full of injuries we already dumped 4 years ago.

So, why would you want to make trade for more list cloggers??? You already have plenty of them. Better to give James Hird a year to see if he can turn them around before making massive changes.






My theory....this trade week was hardly a success for Essendon. However, I don't think any team comes away with anything massive to add to the list. I suppose the real success for Essendon was re-signing the few uncontracted players that were required.
Neagle's the only one who was definitely gone.
They obviously don't rate the talent available at pick 45+ to be worthwhile moving on a stalwart like Welsh or NLM for, and I agree. Neagle saved only by a contract IMHO.

Those sorts of guys are worth a bit more than just kicks and goals.

Can't have an entire side of teenagers running out, as much as some muppets here want them to.
 
There are two parts of this discussion

1) Trading In

2) Trading Out/Delisting

I only wanted to trade in Mundy or Jones, so not disappointed on that side.

Thought we could tried to trade out ( may have tried ) fringe players - contracted or not, or look at delisting more players to free up picks on the Primary List. We are taking a chance keeping some players for another twelve months, considering that by all reports the 2011 draft is weaker than the 2010 draft.

Who would take our trash?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Thats not the point. The point is there IS potential and ability in the list, and Hird will soon sort out who he thinks will cut it. He can't make that judgement in a few weeks. And their was no BIG FISH. Anyone decent to help our cause was signed up safe and sound. Do you not think the club would have had a go at getting one if they were available and suited our needs?

So while collingwood (the premiers) rounded up a brilliant trade week, good old Essendon (14th) did absolutely **** all. I know there was no big names available, but as I said, to get good (fill a need) you have to give good (satisfy another). This is one way to land a big fish.
 
So while collingwood (the premiers) rounded up a brilliant trade week, good old Essendon (14th) did absolutely **** all. I know there was no big names available, but as I said, to get good (fill a need) you have to give good (satisfy another). This is one way to land a big fish.

Collingwood at this precise moment can afford to add older mature players as a top up for their young talented list. They have a few more shots for another flag. Essendon on the other hand are not in that position at all, we are trying to get there. Essendon have a young list which needs development and guidance. And as you said, no big names were available anyway.
 
So while collingwood (the premiers) rounded up a brilliant trade week, good old Essendon (14th) did absolutely **** all. I know there was no big names available, but as I said, to get good (fill a need) you have to give good (satisfy another). This is one way to land a big fish.
Umm.. Who were were supposed to trade for? Sherman? Vezspremi? Everitt?

You said it yourself, there was no 'big fish' available.

So why trade? For the sake for it? Oh, brilliant. :rolleyes:
 
Umm.. Who were were supposed to trade for? Sherman? Vezspremi? Everitt?

You said it yourself, there was no 'big fish' available.

So why trade? For the sake for it? Oh, brilliant. :rolleyes:
This.

Only have to look at our recent history to see why you don't trade for the sake of trading. What good did trading for Murphy, Allen, Alvey, Cole et al do?
 
Oh dear, to entice a club you have to be prepared to lose someone of quality, we are well placed for talls, our midfield is embarassing. Go to a club who are not so well off in the height dept and away you go. Last time I`ll say this, I know there were no big names freely available but to free up someone of value you have to cough up at your end. Is this too hard to understand ?
 
Oh dear, to entice a club you have to be prepared to lose someone of quality, we are well placed for talls, our midfield is embarassing. Go to a club who are not so well off in the height dept and away you go. Last time I`ll say this, I know there were no big names freely available but to free up someone of value you have to cough up at your end. Is this too hard to understand ?

No its not hard to understand. I know what you're saying. Hirdy wants to see what his got from within with a new gameplan first. Historically, we've never been to active in tradeweek anyway.
 
No its not hard to understand. I know what you're saying. Hirdy wants to see what his got from within with a new gameplan first. Historically, we've never been to active in tradeweek anyway.

That`s fair enough centurion, but he has watched plenty of Essendon games to know what we all know, we have by far the worst mid-field going around. We used to be very aggressive in trade week, one famous one was the salmon,jarman, wellman/barnard or the ridley,kickett,delaney for Lloyd/Lucas. There are more if I could be bothered racking my brain.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

cant see where it states they they offered Houli + 3rd rounder. Obviously they were trying to get a second round pick which it states.

okay, then here:
Bombers reject tigers' deal for Bachar Houli
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...for-bachar-houli/story-fn69a32t-1225937382775
Essendon recruiting manager Adrian Dodoro said the club was willing to give up Houli and a third-round pick for a second round selection.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...for-bachar-houli/story-fn69a32t-1225937382775

Not that hard to find this stuff champ, so I don't understand why you seem to be ignorantly suggesting that the club has acted incompetently.
 
Who would take our trash?

I was referring to delisting players - Trading players out for draft picks is a secondary option.

Hope that the 2011 draft is as strong as the 2010 draft.
 
Depends who for though. If its for a bunch of spuds then we would be in trouble. If its for genuine quality then by all means.
 
there was no point trading just for the sake of it. Gold Coast got all the best uncontracted players which meant there was less chance of nabbing an out of contract player. the draft pool is thin so they'll go with the minimum number of picks.
both the right decisions for mine - people forget essendon have one of the youngest lists in the competition. knights has done all the hard work copping the criticism whilst culling the dead wood in previous seasons.

hird gets to come in and reap the rewards of this - he has a very talented young player list. i'm very optimistic about where the club is going.
 
I was referring to delisting players - Trading players out for draft picks is a secondary option.

Hope that the 2011 draft is as strong as the 2010 draft.

Based on the fact clubs were happy to throw 3rd round picks around like nobody's business but hung on to 2nd rounders for dear life, I'd guess that the talent in 2010 thins out quite a bit by then?

Would that be a fair assumption?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Review Trade Week 2010

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top