Who should we target?

[Brave Sir Robin]

Well the current situation at the Lions looks pretty grim and not a whole lot of fun IMO.

Cap issues, loyalty issues, coaching / player relationship issues, the Fevola Coaster with it looks like a messy legal battle about to commence.

Doesn't sound like a fun work environment does it?

Black, Power, Brown and Fev with 1-2 years left in them?

Lions will be struggling bottom 4 for the next 2-3 years where the West Coast will be on the climb up the ladder.

All the more reason for the Lions to fight like dogs to keep him.

He's said a number of times that he wants to be a loyal player to the Lions, and he doesn't strike me as the kind of guy to mean that only in times of good.

 

[Prem87]

We don't need to chase him now but in a couple of years time when Kerr's finished up and we money to play with...go hard. We should be starting to peak at that time as well.

 

[tesseract]

Ninyette? I read somewhere he is 23 and is 76 kg. Hasn't really set the world on fire in the WAFL and seems unlikely to be strong enough or big enough for AFL given he is still a splinter at 23. There are better options.

For the position he plays, size and bulk aren't much required. Jeff Garlett goes alright despite being 2kg lighter.
Ninyette is not too old either. He's mature age, which is what WC may look for in 1 or 2 players. If he's good enough, he's young enough to be at the club for a long time.

WAFL form doesn't always give a clear picture on whether a player is good enough to cut it at AFL. Some players play better at AFL level than they do at state level due to the different structure or role. Hence why player trades are made with it said that an under performing player might turn things around in a new environment. Like Staker at Brisbane, and Wilson coming from SF to WC.

For what we could get Ninyette for, he'd be worth a punt. One can't expect much from a pick in the mid 40's, but Ninyette has been around long enough for us to know what to expect. I think he's good enough. If by chance he isn't, there's nothing lost because a pick in the mid 40's is very hit and miss. Players picked at this stage aren't going to be relied upon as players that will take the club forward. They're icing on the cake if they come good.

There may well be better options, I was choosing from the guys in the group that was presented in the post I responded to.
I'm all for taking the best option, so long as WC choose that option based on need, rather than best available with all positions in mind. A mature age FP/HFF is the right type for a pick in the 40's, like TDL was. If we want him that's where we'll have to take him; he's a likely late ND pick and WC won't have selections beyond this point, unless by some chance he's around for the PSD.

 

[tesseract]

Myers was pick 6 in the 2007 draft. 21 years old, has had soft tissue problems and lack of faith from Knights. 29 possies in round 22 playing last two games. A required player developing at the Bombers.

How he he a cast off?

And to the other poster, why don't you think we have pick 1 in the PSD?

We do?

WC do have the number#1 pick in the PSD, it's the many pre-PSD picks by GC which could possibly turn our pick#1 into something more like pick#11, depending on how many players are selected at this stage by the GC.

 

[Prem87]

From the D&T board

"Hill is gone - Bulldogs in discussions with WCE about a trade, likely to be a player swap."

Hill for McKinley would be a fair swap.

 

[maxrm]

From the D&T board

"Hill is gone - Bulldogs in discussions with WCE about a trade, likely to be a player swap."

Hill for McKinley would be a fair swap.

Agreed, Hill for Mckinley is very fair.

Already mentioned it on the drafts and trading board, but maybe Rosa + 28 for Hill + 22 could also be a possibility.

 

[tesseract]

From the D&T board

"Hill is gone - Bulldogs in discussions with WCE about a trade, likely to be a player swap."

Hill for McKinley would be a fair swap.

I can see WC coming out big losers in this trade. McKinley will kick stacks of goals for the Bulldog vagina's, while Hill looks good for WC 4 out of 22 games for us each year until his delisting. WC are going to get a figurative sodomizing from this deal.

There are better draft options amongst the kids and mature aged, who all come cheaper. We should be using McKinley for a pick upgrade. If true, WC are making a mistake.
Don't take other clubs rejects. Cutting corners will end up in failure. WC need to be methodical and patient in their rebuild, not looking for quick fixes like this.

 

[tesseract]

Agreed, Hill for Mckinley is very fair.

Already mentioned it on the drafts and trading board, but maybe Rosa + 28 for Hill + 22 could also be a possibility.

Bulldogs pick 23 and 41 are already off limits as they're to be used on F/S selections.

 

[Prem87]

Agreed, Hill for Mckinley is very fair.

Already mentioned it on the drafts and trading board, but maybe Rosa + 28 for Hill + 22 could also be a possibility.

Pick 22 will most likely be used as a F/S pick.

 

[dajesmac]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...rd-tambling-dice/story-e6frf9ox-1225925570773

He won't... They are already trying to puff him up. You'd think he was a star from this article, wanting a first rounder.

Former teammate Nathan Brown has no doubt Tambling will be in hot demand.
"I reckon he'd be a very good player at a top-four side where he got the game on his terms and his team had the ball a lot," Brown said yesterday.
"At this stage, he is maybe a bit of a frontrunner. He will be better at a better side.

It's an interesting and valid point, players of his type generally don't do well without inside support unless they're genuine superstars.

Too bad we won't be able to provide him this any time soon even if he became an Eagle but I think he'd be better with better players around him.

 

[RoJo Junior]

Pick 22 will most likely be used as a F/S pick.

If their first two picks are F/S selections why would it matter what number pick they have. Isn't the rule that they must use their next available pick if another club is willing to select said player.

Pick 22 or pick 28 would make no difference to them I would've thought

 

[Obeanie1]

I can see WC coming out big losers in this trade. McKinley will kick stacks of goals for the Bulldog vagina's, while Hill looks good for WC 4 out of 22 games for us each year until his delisting. WC are going to get a figurative sodomizing from this deal.

There are better draft options amongst the kids and mature aged, who all come cheaper. We should be using McKinley for a pick upgrade. If true, WC are making a mistake.
Don't take other clubs rejects. Cutting corners will end up in failure. WC need to be methodical and patient in their rebuild, not looking for quick fixes like this.

Disagree.

Hills best is miles ahead of McKinely's best. He is faster, chases and can tackle. Hill best was I think in his 2nd season where he showed an appetite to really chase and tackle. Hill needs to be allowed to play his natural game which involved playing with flair, taking a run at a pack mark etc.

I have no doubt whatsoever that Rodney Eades coaching style has not helped Hill's career. You don't get a nick name of Rocket for nothing and Akers article last week supported what I already thought.

Hill did not respond well to being singled out, yelled at and then demoted and forgotten. That style may work for Lake and others but some players it simply doesn't work.

Hill for McKinely is a pretty fair swap for both sides, especially when both players want to return to their home states.

 

[wceblog]

If their first two picks are F/S selections why would it matter what number pick they have. Isn't the rule that they must use their next available pick if another club is willing to select said player.

Pick 22 or pick 28 would make no difference to them I would've thought

Father son picks (via bidding system) are arranged before trade week commences - the picks that will be used to select the nominated players will be off the market.

 

[Doggy09]

Disagree.

Hills best is miles ahead of McKinely's best. He is faster, chases and can tackle. Hill best was I think in his 2nd season where he showed an appetite to really chase and tackle. Hill needs to be allowed to play his natural game which involved playing with flair, taking a run at a pack mark etc.

I have no doubt whatsoever that Rodney Eades coaching style has not helped Hill's career. You don't get a nick name of Rocket for nothing and Akers article last week supported what I already thought.

Hill did not respond well to being singled out, yelled at and then demoted and forgotten. That style may work for Lake and others but some players it simply doesn't work.

Hill for McKinely is a pretty fair swap for both sides, especially when both players want to return to their home states.

We need fast forwards, not big slow duds... Pass

 

[Marlin01]

We need fast forwards, not big slow duds... Pass

He's not big.

 

[Prem87]

Hill has the speed and Xfactor we so lack. And he is a better contested mark than McKinley.

I don't think forward pressure will be a problem next year with potentially Krakouer, Strijk, Neates, Hill & Hams in there.

 

[Doggy09]

Hill has the speed and Xfactor we so lack. And he is a better contested mark than McKinley.

I don't think forward pressure will be a problem next year with potentially Krakouer, Strijk, Neates, Hill & Hams in there.

Hill doesn't pressure much.. And he only chases when it suits him.

He is a better mark than McKinley and much faster.. The poster above is right, my mustake.. McKinley is only a medium sized forward. Don't need medium, slowish forwards. Pass

 

[Prem87]

Yah McKinley is very bulky for a Medium forward, tries to play bigger than he is. He definitely needs to lose the bulk.

 

[Doggy09]

don't think you have Anything else we would want/need.... Freo on the other hand...

 

[Prem87]

Spangher?

 

[Doggy09]

Spangher?

Even worse mate. McKinley is at least a LITTLE appealing, however not something we need.

In way of medium-tall forwards we have Jones and Grant coming through nicely, both very talented. Also have Hooper and Matt Panos who kicked 60 odd goals in the VFL this year in his first year.

 

[beatlesmith]

I can see WC coming out big losers in this trade. McKinley will kick stacks of goals for the Bulldog vagina's, while Hill looks good for WC 4 out of 22 games for us each year until his delisting. WC are going to get a figurative sodomizing from this deal.

There are better draft options amongst the kids and mature aged, who all come cheaper. We should be using McKinley for a pick upgrade. If true, WC are making a mistake.
Don't take other clubs rejects. Cutting corners will end up in failure. WC need to be methodical and patient in their rebuild, not looking for quick fixes like this.

Similar to the Dalziell-Staker trade.
Staker was never going to progress in our team, as Mckinley isn't going to now.
Hill could progress. It's the kind of trade that even if you 'lose', it's one you had to make.

 

[richy4]

don't think you have Anything else we would want/need.... Freo on the other hand...

Mcginnity?

 

[Doggy09]

No thanks... Small, fast, crumbing forwards only

 

[richy4]

He's a speedster.