The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

[bulldogtragic]

Back by popular demand, for those who think it's disloyal to ever say out aloud about the possible outs, it's just a discussion and you don't have to partake if you don't want to.

What was interesting last year was some peoples rolling De-Listing and trading list changed frequently, mine included. For instance, Prudden looked gone, Ayce was in and out, Minson was in, out, in, out again. Grant was a certain re-signing... I found it an interesting moving conversation and thread throughout the year. I think I was as wrong as I was right last year.

Essentially, there's just two categories to nominate names to, being: 'certain gone' and 'possible gone'.

For me, only possible names at this time of the year who need to reach or exceed expectations:

De-Listing or Retiring Possibles:
Prudden. Needs a huge leap. Murphy, Boyd, Biggs, Webb, Dale, JJ are all ahead. Can he leap them? Big call to say he does.
Minson. Just his age, if he doesn't have a big year I can't see a long time future. Nothing scandalous about his name.
Matty Boyd. Champion of the club, if he keeps fitness and form he could go again. But if the other hbfs or even Hrovat can provide the same output as he could next year, it's a tough, tough call. I saw him in December, and he looked even fitter!!

Trade Possibles:
Hrovat. Saints & Melbourne showed interest to the contracted Rat. Hopefully he's best 22, if not, then what?
Roughead. He's a jack of all trades and master of none. Left out of the leadership group. If a trade offer came in, would we look at it? Again, hopefully he's best 22, if not, then what?
Honeychurch. Same as above. If Hrovat, Dunkley and Daniel step up, he'd have some currency in the market.

The conversation we don't want to have is Clay. I hope we go cautious, and get him back to fitness even if it's by year's end. One more knee and you'd have to think that it's over. But I'm on the positivity bus on this issue, he gets back,gets into the engine room and up forward and is another gun recruit this year with Libba.


The flip side of potential trades is can we get currency to trade on some names that are uncontracted at year's end, or free up a spot and cash to raid the Essendon players classed as delisted free agents or any other free agents. I think it presents as the crucial off season list management towards a flag, being a possible gun top end kid and a free agent or two of quality. My thoughts are 4 or 5 primary list changes. But for the year I'm expecting us to have (a very successful one) it's going to be interesting to chart every now and then the names of possibles and certainties along team form and personal form, or injury.

Again, we'd all like every single player to perform 100% and never leave but the reality is 3 or more will be going. It's just a rolling barometer type thread and discussion about who they might be, and why.

[stefoid]

Fro the VFL watchers, what is Pruddens main hurdle? Is it simply leg speed or what?

[boydogs]

Fro the VFL watchers, what is Pruddens main hurdle? Is it simply leg speed or what?

Watching him at AFL level, he plays like a deer in the headlights, like a first year player not sure what to do. For this reason, he lacks intensity and his decision making with and without the ball is poor. When he isn't given time to think, he's fine, but he doesn't display any real weapons.

He always seems to be injured or in the rehab group which has deprived him of the continuity he needs to build confidence and go into a game on the front foot

[Twodogs]

Watching him at AFL level, he plays like a deer in the headlights, like a first year player not sure what to do. For this reason, he lacks intensity and his decision making with and without the ball is poor. When he isn't given time to think, he's fine, but he doesn't display any real weapons.

He always seems to be injured or in the rehab group which has deprived him of the continuity he needs to build confidence and go into a game on the front foot


Good summation.

[LostDoggy]

I think a good place to start is to look at players who are not contracted beyond this year. In all probability, our delistings/traded players will most likely come from this group.

We have 18 players in total who fall into this category (as best as I can work out, not 100% certain though). I'd break them into 4 categories:

1. The 30somethings who are year to year propositions. All proven quality who should be back next year as long as the body or mind doesn't pack it in over the course of the year.

5 players; Bob Murphy, Dale Morris, Matthew Boyd, Will Minson, Jed Adcock.

I'd say Minson and Adcock have a little to prove to show that they are relevant to us in 2017 and beyond, the other 3 just need to stay keen and healthy and they are no brainers.

2. Required players who just need to sort out terms with the club.

7 players; Jack Redpath, Lachie Hunter, Koby Stevens, Tom Campbell, Tory Dickson, Joel Hamling, Shayne Biggs.

I'd say each of these clearly have long term roles with us, pending player and club coming to terms.

3. Yet to fully establish their positions as required players for 2017 and beyond who will need to show development in 2016 or be under real pressure/trade prospects come season's end.

4 players; Josh Prudden, Nathan Hrovat, Lin Jong, Declan Hamilton.

Some tough calls here, but a reflection of where our list is at. Looking at usual list development, it seems likely that at least 2 of these will need to be released come October.

4. Those coming back from serious injury.

2 players; Clay Smith and Roarke Smith.

Given their age both have shown enough to indicate they'll be kept on pending recovery. Should either not be back to full health come the end of the year, their position must also come under question.

[Cyberdoggie]

I can see why Jong is in your under pressure 4 but I think he will be in the required very quickly. He adds something we don't have a lot of and when injury free he showed remarkable improvement last year. I'm convinced after he broke his finger he was playing injured with a knee issue as well and it affected his confidence. Also hurt him after Stevens went down as we lacked inside mids, I think he's better suited being let off the chain more.

He's proven that he can play well in big games and make big plays at crucial times. Yes he can make some bad disposal errors but you have to admit they have come a long way from the year prior.

I'm expecting big improvement again in Jong and i'd almost have him as a lock in the 22 round 1.

[LostDoggy]

I can see why Jong is in your under pressure 4 but I think he will be in the required very quickly. He adds something we don't have a lot of and when injury free he showed remarkable improvement last year. I'm convinced after he broke his finger he was playing injured with a knee issue as well and it affected his confidence. Also hurt him after Stevens went down as we lacked inside mids, I think he's better suited being let off the chain more.

He's proven that he can play well in big games and make big plays at crucial times. Yes he can make some bad disposal errors but you have to admit they have come a long way from the year prior.

I'm expecting big improvement again in Jong and i'd almost have him as a lock in the 22 round 1.

Fair comment. I see Jong and Hrovat as 2 who are clearly good enough but have limitations they need to work on. As long as Lin can keep his body right and show more composure with the ball, I'm sure he'll be in our mix for 2017 and beyond - and may become an integral part of our team, but he still needs to do it.

[Mantis]

PP,

What's Redpath's contract situation? I thought he only re-signed a 1 year extension last year.

[bornadog]

PP,

What's Redpath's contract situation? I thought he only re-signed a 1 year extension last year.

Correct - see here (http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showthread.php?14779-Honeychurch-Redpath-sign-new-deals)

[Bulldog4life]

PP,

What's Redpath's contract situation? I thought he only re-signed a 1 year extension last year.

He did.

[LostDoggy]

PP,

What's Redpath's contract situation? I thought he only re-signed a 1 year extension last year.

Not sure now Mantis. I thought he was signed till 2017, but maybe not. He was upgraded from a Rookie in 2015 but the media release doesn't make it clear if it's a 1 year or 2 extension.

If he is up for renewal, I'd reckon he's required anyway given our lack of depth in key forwards/ruck and his seeming upside given a good pre-season and potential for improved mobility and endurance. Also seems a pretty good guy to have around the group.

[bornadog]

Not sure now Mantis. I thought he was signed till 2017, but maybe not. He was upgraded from a Rookie in 2015 but the media release doesn't make it clear if it's a 1 year or 2 extension.

If he is up for renewal, I'd reckon he's required anyway given our lack of depth in key forwards/ruck and his seeming upside given a good pre-season and potential for improved mobility and endurance. Also seems a pretty good guy to have around the group.

It was only a year so he is out of contract at the end of this year.

[LostDoggy]

Thanks BAD, B4L. Earlier post duly edited.

[F'scary]

How many do you have to reduce your list by draft night? It's 3 isn't it? I could see Prudden in the firing line if he has trouble breaking into the seniors in 2016. I could see Matt Boyd and Morris retiring at the end of the year, maybe.

Honeychurch could be good trade bait, given we have plenty of smaller players and we got him pick 60. If he gets around 6 games this year he might be attractive as a pick 35-40 trade. Mind you I like him, he's not a bad footballer at all.

[bulldogtragic]

How many do you have to reduce your list by draft night? It's 3 isn't it? I could see Prudden in the firing line if he has trouble breaking into the seniors in 2016. I could see Matt Boyd and Morris retiring at the end of the year, maybe.

Honeychurch could be good trade bait, given we have plenty of smaller players and we got him pick 60. If he gets around 6 games this year he might be attractive as a pick 35-40 trade. Mind you I like him, he's not a bad footballer at all.

3 is the minimum changes. But I think that's a little light on, especially if we can keep a first rounder, get a decent FA and leave open trade works. Of the older boys, I think Boyd is most likely, then Murphy or Morris. If we have another good year I'm not sure any will voluntarily walk short of winning a premiership. Morris said at a function he thinks if his body holds up from injury he's looking at another 1-2 more years after this season. The 3 older guys could be the tricky part, I don't include Minson as I think he needs to do a hell of a lot this year to be even considered past this year.

[LostDoggy]

How many do you have to reduce your list by draft night? It's 3 isn't it? I could see Prudden in the firing line if he has trouble breaking into the seniors in 2016. I could see Matt Boyd and Morris retiring at the end of the year, maybe.

Honeychurch could be good trade bait, given we have plenty of smaller players and we got him pick 60. If he gets around 6 games this year he might be attractive as a pick 35-40 trade. Mind you I like him, he's not a bad footballer at all.
That's the issue at it's core I reckon F'scary - we've got a really deep list and minimum 3 have to go at year's end.

I really can't see Morris going at year's end either - this thread will be real interesting to follow through the year.

No doubt guys like Honeychurch or Hrovat look like types who have market value but may be surplus to our requirements - harsh for them but they've got this year to state their case.

[Bulldog Joe]

If you had to make the decision now, you would certainly not recontract Minson.

A lot would need to go Will's way for him to extend beyond 2016 and that would include a proof that Roughy or Campbell would not last beyond their current deals.

Clay Smith would also need to get back and avoid any further serious injury to be any chance of extending his career.

Of the others, I would see Prudden most at risk, but we might also be willing to trade around some of the smalls with Honeychurch and Hrovat both vulnerable.

Further changes might depend on any injuries that might crop up and the ability of the older brigade to continue.

[F'scary]

Prudden did ok in his 4 games last year. I seem to recall that he went out of the team due to injury. He looked like a solid lockdown medium defender, a playing style we don't have a lot of imo.

[bornadog]

Prudden did ok in his 4 games last year. I seem to recall that he went out of the team due to injury. He looked like a solid lockdown medium defender, a playing style we don't have a lot of imo.

I agree, he was very impressive in his few games on the HBF. He has mainly played midfield at VFL level, but I think given the opportunity he can make it at AFL level.

[Ozza]

Prudden did ok in his 4 games last year. I seem to recall that he went out of the team due to injury. He looked like a solid lockdown medium defender, a playing style we don't have a lot of imo.

Agree with this. I was pretty impressed with Prudden. He was very shaky in the first half of his first game, but after that he certainly looked the part across half back.

[LostDoggy]

http://www.sen.com.au/news/afl/03-16/dogs-depth-could-be-plundered-by-rival-clubs-glenn-luff#5sWkqgVUr2G1xHEw.97

(http://www.sen.com.au/news/afl/03-16/dogs-depth-could-be-plundered-by-rival-clubs-glenn-luff#5sWkqgVUr2G1xHEw.97)This guy seems to nail our position pretty well.

[FrediKanoute]

Injuries, form and the development of players will all play a part. The usual suspects of Honeychurch, Hrovat, Prudden may well have played themselves into unassailable list positions come September and the pressure could be on some that we regard as more established players. Its nice to have competition for spots.

[jeemak]

As I've said previously, there's a very good reason why we've accumulated similar players with high to mid range draft picks these past few years. We can trade them for needs when we have to.

It's good to see the media finally catch up to what's been said around here for a long time.

[whythelongface]

http://www.sen.com.au/news/afl/03-16/dogs-depth-could-be-plundered-by-rival-clubs-glenn-luff#5sWkqgVUr2G1xHEw.97

(http://www.sen.com.au/news/afl/03-16/dogs-depth-could-be-plundered-by-rival-clubs-glenn-luff#5sWkqgVUr2G1xHEw.97)This guy seems to nail our position pretty well.

Whilst the premise of the article sums up our position well, the title is rather melodramatic.

[Murphy'sLore]

Had to get another shot at Tom Boyd in there too. Is that on the checklist whenever anyone mentions the Dogs this year?

[The Bulldogs Bite]

As I've said previously, there's a very good reason why we've accumulated similar players with high to mid range draft picks these past few years. We can trade them for needs when we have to.

Although I agree to an extent that it can be a bit of an advantage, will we really get much from players not regularly featuring in our side? I think Hrovat has the potential to be a good player but I sincerely doubt we'll get back what we spent on him (Pick 21ish?). I look at the likes of Kennedy and McGlynn, or even Menzel, and they all went relatively cheap.

Players like Prudden and Honeychurch would cost even less.

[LostDoggy]

Although I agree to an extent that it can be a bit of an advantage, will we really get much from players not regularly featuring in our side? I think Hrovat has the potential to be a good player but I sincerely doubt we'll get back what we spent on him (Pick 21ish?). I look at the likes of Kennedy and McGlynn, or even Menzel, and they all went relatively cheap.

Players like Prudden and Honeychurch would cost even less.

I don't think it's quite fair to say fair value or par for a Hrovat (for example) is what you paid for him initially (pick 21). That's a bit like buying a car, getting 3 years of use out of it and expecting the same price to sell it. If you pick a player at 21 or so and get 10 places or so lower 3 years down the track, that is a pretty fair reflecton that the player has held good value.

As an aside, some draft picks can have a fascinating trade history. One of my favourites is Jordan MacMahon, widely considered a bit of a poor first round selection in the 2000 draft, but after 114 games we traded him for a pick that gave us Callan Ward, who gave us 60 quality games but we then lost and gained a compensation pick that netted us Jackson Macrae, who has played 55 games.

So that original pick to date has netted us 229 games of value and we still have plenty to come from a 21 year old rising superstar.

[Axe Man]

Although I agree to an extent that it can be a bit of an advantage, will we really get much from players not regularly featuring in our side? I think Hrovat has the potential to be a good player but I sincerely doubt we'll get back what we spent on him (Pick 21ish?). I look at the likes of Kennedy and McGlynn, or even Menzel, and they all went relatively cheap.

Players like Prudden and Honeychurch would cost even less.

Have to agree with you. As supporters we tend to over estimate the trade value of our players. Look at Jarrad Grant last year, borderline best 22, played 19 games including the final - trade value = 0. As it stands Prudden has no trade value, Honeychurch maybe a little and Hrovat not a heap more.

Players not in a sides best 22 rarely fetch a high price on the trade table. Exceptions would be highly rated youngsters who want out before we have seen their best, or those that play an in demand position (key position or ruck). Small midfield types are a dime a dozen unfortunately.

The only way Hrovat for example fetches a decent pick is if he has a breakout year and establishes himself in our best 22. Then you have to evaluate whether the gain from the trade will outweigh the loss of Hrovat.

[Remi Moses]

We have a decent side players won't want to leave .
We'll lose a few, but plundered is a little dramatic .
Hawthorn and the like gather depth and get lauded, but we're getting plundered ?
Interesting

[Remi Moses]

Have to agree with you. As supporters we tend to over estimate the trade value of our players. Look at Jarrad Grant last year, borderline best 22, played 19 games including the final - trade value = 0. As it stands Prudden has no trade value, Honeychurch maybe a little and Hrovat not a heap more.

Players not in a sides best 22 rarely fetch a high price on the trade table. Exceptions would be highly rated youngsters who want out before we have seen their best, or those that play an in demand position (key position or ruck). Small midfield types are a dime a dozen unfortunately.

The only way Hrovat for example fetches a decent pick is if he has a breakout year and establishes himself in our best 22. Then you have to evaluate whether the gain from the trade will outweigh the loss of Hrovat.

Well said . Fringe players in a good side can get overvalued as well by other clubs .

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I don't think it's quite fair to say fair value or par for a Hrovat (for example) is what you paid for him initially (pick 21). That's a bit like buying a car, getting 3 years of use out of it and expecting the same price to sell it. If you pick a player at 21 or so and get 10 places or so lower 3 years down the track, that is a pretty fair reflecton that the player has held good value.

I'm not convinced that Hrovat would land us a pick in the 30s, should he have another yo-yo season with us. Therefore, using 21 on Hrovat and then losing him for a low pick (40+) is a poor outcome. The criticisms of our persistence in drafting similar players are warranted and it is a myth that we can just trade them out for needs. If we are able to hold onto them and maintain our depth it's fantastic, and I think a player like Hrovat can be good value, but it's generally unrealistic even for sides like Hawthorn and Sydney who have lost good players for basically nothing over the years (Kennedy, McGlynn, Dempster, Schneider and to lesser degrees Biggs, Everitt, Hallahan in recent years).

[Axe Man]

I'm not convinced that Hrovat would land us a pick in the 30s, should he have another yo-yo season with us. Therefore, using 21 on Hrovat and then losing him for a low pick (40+) is a poor outcome. The criticisms of our persistence in drafting similar players are warranted and it is a myth that we can just trade them out for needs. If we are able to hold onto them and maintain our depth it's fantastic, and I think a player like Hrovat can be good value, but it's generally unrealistic even for sides like Hawthorn and Sydney who have lost good players for basically nothing over the years (Kennedy, McGlynn, Dempster, Schneider and to lesser degrees Biggs, Everitt, Hallahan in recent years).

I reckon Koby Stevens is a good example of the current approximate worth of Hrovat. Drafted at #22, after 3 years at the Eagles we traded him in for pick #44. Granted Hrovat has played more games in his first 3 years than Stevens did, but I think it's a fair comparison.

[Greystache]

I'm not convinced that Hrovat would land us a pick in the 30s, should he have another yo-yo season with us. Therefore, using 21 on Hrovat and then losing him for a low pick (40+) is a poor outcome. The criticisms of our persistence in drafting similar players are warranted and it is a myth that we can just trade them out for needs. If we are able to hold onto them and maintain our depth it's fantastic, and I think a player like Hrovat can be good value, but it's generally unrealistic even for sides like Hawthorn and Sydney who have lost good players for basically nothing over the years (Kennedy, McGlynn, Dempster, Schneider and to lesser degrees Biggs, Everitt, Hallahan in recent years).

Totally agree. Players like that only appreciate in value if you win premierships. Geelong and Hawthorn showed that average fringe players can convince some clubs they just need opportunity, the rest go in a fire sale.

[bulldogtragic]

Ok, not naming anyone. I'm interested in Brian Lakes's comments that Hawthorn are staggering 2 retirements each year for 3 years. It seems quite a sensible thing to do. I wonder if we'd follow suit? We have Minson, Murphy, Morris & Matty (4M's). With what's being built I can't see anyone of them willingly walking away, much like Lake said he didn't want to walk away last year. Assuming injuries play no part, a) should we copy the plan 2 retirements each over the next two years b) if you said yes, which two in which year?

[bornadog]

Ok, not naming anyone. I'm interested in Brian Lakes's comments that Hawthorn are staggering 2 retirements each year for 3 years. It seems quite a sensible thing to do. I wonder if we'd follow suit? We have Minson, Murphy, Morris & Matty (4M's). With what's being built I can't see anyone of them willingly walking away, much like Lake said he didn't want to walk away last year. Assuming injuries play no part, a) should we copy the plan 2 retirements each over the next two years b) if you said yes, which two in which year?

YES
Minson and Morris, followed by Bob and MBoyd

[1eyedog]

I'd say Minson and Boyd. Morris is still killing it. He's still a gun.

[bornadog]

I'd say Minson and Boyd. Morris is still killing it. He's still a gun.

So is Boyd. :)

The reason I said Morris is we need to give an opportunity to another tall to develop, and Morris' role is the logical one.

[Mantis]

So is Boyd. :)

The reason I said Morris is we need to give an opportunity to another tall to develop, and Morris' role is the logical one.

There is the opportunity for a tall to develop now.. When they are playing well enough they will be picked.

[bornadog]

There is the opportunity for a tall to develop now.. When they are playing well enough they will be picked.

Yes that is true, however, we are discussing the future.

Put it this way, If Morris wasn't playing this week, who would take his spot? A tall or a small?

[Mofra]

I have been a huge supporter of Roberts but... is he in trouble? Hard to see him getting the nod over Cordy/Collins if they both have another pre-season, and Hamling must have been close to selection too.

[Mantis]

Yes that is true, however, we are discussing the future.

Put it this way, If Morris wasn't playing this week, who would take his spot? A tall or a small?

I would say a tall.

But if M.Boyd or Biggs weren't playing I would give the same answer.

[soupman]

Not sure aiming for two retirements per year is necessary for our club.

Hawthorn have a much older list profile than us and therefore need to address it more directly, we however have such a long list that we'll soon be delisting 29 year olds to meet our quota.

I think in our case we address retirements on a case by case basis, but have to beconscious not to keep anyone out of sentiment. If Morris or Murphy start dropping away we need to be prepared to pull the trigger, but only based on real things like form and not on an arbitrary number.

[1eyedog]

So is Boyd. :)

The reason I said Morris is we need to give an opportunity to another tall to develop, and Morris' role is the logical one.

Yeah but he still butchers the ball and his decision making at times on Sunday wasn't flash. His turnovers resulted in two Freo goals. I thought he was solid but I was thinking about how quickly Ponting declined on my way home. Boyd's position is transferable to Webb who I would prefer to actually start playing. There is enough experience down back without Boyd.

I'd keep Morris for the very reasons as discussed above. It doesn't matter how the opposition structure up he can play big or small.

[ledge]

I think all our rucks will stay next year but Goetz will run over the top of all Of them by the next year.

[bornadog]

Yeah but he still butchers the ball and his decision making at times on Sunday wasn't flash. His turnovers resulted in two Freo goals. I thought he was solid but I was thinking about how quickly Ponting declined on my way home. Boyd's position is transferable to Webb who I would prefer to actually start playing. There is enough experience down back without Boyd.

I'd keep Morris for the very reasons as discussed above. It doesn't matter how the opposition structure up he can play big or small.

Murphy, Morris and Boyd will turn 35 years old next year.

[Rocco Jones]

Not sure aiming for two retirements per year is necessary for our club.

Hawthorn have a much older list profile than us and therefore need to address it more directly, we however have such a long list that we'll soon be delisting 29 year olds to meet our quota.

I think in our case we address retirements on a case by case basis, but have to beconscious not to keep anyone out of sentiment. If Morris or Murphy start dropping away we need to be prepared to pull the trigger, but only based on real things like form and not on an arbitrary number.

Agreed. I am not into set rules/quotas. Silly to keep or dump a guy just to get to 2.

As you mention, the Hawks have an older list. What needs to be remembered is what we also drafted in Adcock. I see him as closer to the end to Bob, Morris and Boyd. If we need to let go of two older guys, Minson and Adcock are the ones.

[bornadog]

Hawthorn have a much older list profile than us


As you mention, the Hawks have an older list. .

If we are talking 30plus and you include Adcock, we have 5, Hawks have 4. Hawks of course have lots between 27 to 29

[1eyedog]

Murphy, Morris and Boyd will turn 35 years old next year.

I know and they'll all probably want to play on so do we need to make a decision on them? Murph could play on but there may be questions on the other two who have heavier bodies and have taken heavier hits over the years. If this is Boyd's and Morris' last year I salute them because they've been champions for the club, but we now have players who can come in and do their job.

[Maddog37]

Yeah but he still butchers the ball and his decision making at times on Sunday wasn't flash. His turnovers resulted in two Freo goals. I thought he was solid but I was thinking about how quickly Ponting declined on my way home. Boyd's position is transferable to Webb who I would prefer to actually start playing. There is enough experience down back without Boyd.

I'd keep Morris for the very reasons as discussed above. It doesn't matter how the opposition structure up he can play big or small.

Boyd is just a game or two short in his preparation. His mistakes were just a bit of rust.

[Bulldog4life]

Agreed. I am not into set rules/quotas. Silly to keep or dump a guy just to get to 2.

As you mention, the Hawks have an older list. What needs to be remembered is what we also drafted in Adcock. I see him as closer to the end to Bob, Morris and Boyd. If we need to let go of two older guys, Minson and Adcock are the ones.

Isn't Adcock only on Rookie list or have I missed that he has been upgraded?

[Bulldog4life]

Boyd is just a game or two short in his preparation. His mistakes were just a bit of rust.

Thinking the same. He didn't play a lot of minutes in the Nab matches.

[1eyedog]

Boyd is just a game or two short in his preparation. His mistakes were just a bit of rust.

Maybe you're right there.

[Rocco Jones]

Isn't Adcock only on Rookie list or have I missed that he has been upgraded?

Yeah he is on the rookie list but I wound't retire Boyd/Morris just to upgrade from first pick in rookie draft to last pick in national draft.

[LostDoggy]

If there form warrants them to be in our best 22 as Bevo sees fit,then what's the rush to push them off into the sunset?

[bulldogtragic]

If there form warrants them to be in our best 22 as Bevo sees fit,then what's the rush to push them off into the sunset?

I guess Hawthorn's view is to stagger retirements so you don't lose 1,000 games of experience in one year and radically change the best 22 in one off season. That's their plan anyway, even if Lake said he wanted another year to them.

[Rocco Jones]

If there form warrants them to be in our best 22 as Bevo sees fit,then what's the rush to push them off into the sunset?

I couldn't agree more with you. I like the Hawks system, who can argue with it? But 1- bad idea to copy something 100% 2- don't like rigid rules 3- they have a lot more guys 27-29.

We got Jed Adcock in to help the younger bodies. We are looking like a very good team short term and have a lot of talented young players. I wouldn't be making drastic changes.

[Bulldog4life]

I guess Hawthorn's view is to stagger retirements so you don't lose 1,000 games of experience in one year and radically change the best 22 in one off season. That's their plan anyway, even if Lake said he wanted another year to them.

Looking at the Hawk's list it doesn't appear to be as strong as they would like. I wouldn't be surprised if over the next couple of years they drop sharply down the ladder.

[Rocco Jones]

Looking at the Hawk's list it doesn't appear to be as strong as they would like. I wouldn't be surprised if over the next couple of years they drop sharply down the ladder.

They have won 3 premierships in a row and 4 over 8 years. Seriously if the Bulldogs give us that, they can suck for the rest of my life and the next 5 generations of Rocco Jones' (they will probably be massive jerks anyway).

[Mofra]

They have won 3 premierships in a row and 4 over 8 years. Seriously if the Bulldogs give us that, they can suck for the rest of my life and the next 5 generations of Rocco Jones' (they will probably be massive jerks anyway).
They'll probably name your great great grandson "Liam" to destroy your lineage.

[bulldogtragic]

If forced under torture, to name 4 to cut...

Minson, Prudden, Matt Boyd, Roberts or Clay if his run of shite luck continues. You can make cases that all of them could be on a list next year if not ours, and if not injuries that all could play for us next year. We've obviously gone hard at cutting the obvious dead wood. You'd imagine that would free up a chunk of change if those were the four.

For pick 18, 36, 54, 70 (Sydney's 4th rounder for Tahleeya) (leaving aside trades, free agents, rookie upgrades or any interest in Mick Romero)

[Twodogs]

The Kellet kid ain't this year?

[bulldogtragic]

The Kellet kid ain't this year?

Josh Kellett? Nah, he and Ollie Liberatore are under 15's.

[The Doctor]

This is a combined list of Uncontracted and Free Agents. I got this from another site so not sure of accuracy

Adelaide: Scott Thompson (UFA), Nathan van Berlo (UFA), Brad Crouch, Josh Jenkins, Kyle Cheney, Jarryd Lyons, Harrison Wigg, Harry Dear, Luke Lowden, Mitchell Grigg, Rory Atkins

Brisbane: Daniel Merrett (UFA), Josh Green, Rohan Bewick, Trent West, Josh Clayton, Josh Watts, Liam Dawson, Darcy Gardiner, Lewis Taylor, Sam Mayes, Ryan Lester, Cian Hanley, Jackson Paine, Matthew Hammelman, Josh McGuinness, Archie Smith, Billie Evans, Hugh Beasley, Reuben William

Carlton: Kade Simpson (UFA), Dennis Armfield (UFA), Dylan Buckley, Blaine Boekhorst, Dillon Viojo-Rainbow, Sam Rowe, Ciaran Sheehan, Jason Tutt?, Mark Whiley?, Clem Smith, Jayden Foster, Billie Gowers?, Matthew Dick?, Nicholas Graham, Andrejs Everitt, Cameron Wood, Levi Casboult, Zach Tuohy, Matthew Wright

Collingwood: Brent Macaffer (UFA), Dane Swan (UFA), Alan Toovey (UFA), Nathan Brown (UFA), Jarryd Blair (UFA), Alex Fasolo, Jarrod Witts, Lachlan Keefe, Josh Thomas, Marley Williams, Tim Broomhead, Matthew Goodyear, Corey Gault, Jack Frost, Mason Cox

Essendon: Jobe Watson (UFA), Brent Stanton (UFA, trigger clause), Tayte Pears (UFA), David Myers (UFA), Courtenay Dempsey (UFA), Cale Hooker (UFA), Patrick Ambrose, Jason Ashby, Adam Cooney, Shaun Edwards, Martin Gleeson, Brendan Goddard, James Gwilt, Ben Howlett, Nick Kommer, Kyle Langford, Jayden Laverde, Shaun McKernan, Will Hams, Jake Long, Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti, Conor McKenna, Gach Nyuon, Tom Wallis

Fremantle: Matthew Pavlich (UFA), Aaron Sandilands (UFA), Matthew De Boer (UFA), Clancee Pearce, Alex Silvagni, Lee Spurr, Jack Hannath, Tendai Mzungu, Michael Apeness, Zac Clarke, Michael Barlow, Danyle Pearce, Chris Mayne, Lachie Neale, Brady Grey, Ed Langdon

Geelong: Jimmy Bartel (UFA), Tom Lonergan (UFA), Corey Enright (UFA), Rhys Stanley, Lincoln McCarthy, Daniel Menzel, Josh Cowan, Mitch Clark, Nathan Vardy, Michael Luxford, Tom Read, Shane Kersten, Padraig Lucy, Zach Bates, Cameron Delaney, Jock Cornell, James Parsons, Tom Ruggles

Gold Coast: Jaeger O'Meara, Alex Sexton, Luke Russell, Dion Prestia, Sam Day, Daniel Currie, Jack Leslie, Tom Nicholls, Sean Lemmens, Clay Cameron, Keegan Brooksby, Mackenzie Willis, Jarrod Garlett, Adam Saad, Seb Tape, Danny Stanley, Jesse Joyce, Ryan Davis, Tom Keough, Darcy McPherson, Cameron Loersch

GWS: Lachie Whitfield, Joel Patfull, Caleb Marchbank, James Stewart, Jack Steele, Tim Mohr, Shane Mumford, Patrick McKenna, Jake Barrett, Tom Downie, Jeremy Finlayson, Dawson Simpson, Steve Johnson, Sam Reid, Daniel Lloyd

Hawthorn: Sam Mitchell (UFA), Luke Hodge (UFA), Josh Gibson, Shaun Burgoyne, Brendan Whitecross, Jack Gunston, Matt Spangher, Kaiden Brand, Kurt Heatherley

Melbourne: Jack Grimes (UFA), Chris Dawes, Jeff Garlett, James Harmes, Jayden Hunt, Neville Jetta, Matt Jones, Dean Kent, Max King, Viv Michie, Oscar McDonald, Tom McDonald, Cameron Pederson, Jake Spencer, Dean Terlich, Jack Trengove, Bernie Vince, Josh Wagner, Jack Watts, Mitchell White

North Melbourne: Brent Harvey (UFA), Drew Petrie (UFA), Michael Firrito (UFA), Daniel Wells (UFA), Lindsay Thomas (RFA), Nick Dal Santo, Jarrad Waite, Sam Gibson, Joel Tippett, Brad McKenzie, Mason Wood, Kayne Turner, Ed Vickers-Willis

Port Adelaide: Paul Stewart (UFA), Jake Neade, Angus Monfries, John Butcher, Cameron O'Shea, Matthew White, Logan Austin, Jay Schulz, Sam Colquhoun, Darcy Byrne-Jones, Billy Frampton, Aaron Young, Brendan Ah Chee, Tom Jonas, Nathan Krakouer

Richmond: Tyrone Vickery (UFA), Nick Vlaustin, Shaun Grigg, Jake Batchelor, David Astbury, Bachar Houli, Andrew Moore, Shaun Hampson, Ivan Maric, Kane Lambert, Ben Griffiths, Troy Chaplin, Reece Conca, Cory Ellis, Liam McBean, Callum Moore, Connor Menadue, Daniel Butler, Mabior Chol, Reece McKenzie, Adam Marcon, Jason Short, Jason Castagna, Ivan Soldo

St. Kilda: Nick Riewoldt (UFA), Sean Dempster (UFA), Sam Fisher (UFA), Billy Longer, Josh Bruce, Luke Delaney, Tom Lee, Nathan Wright, Brodie Murdoch, Eli Templeton, Tom Curran, Seb Ross, Cameron Shenton, Darren Minchington, Lewis Pearce, Tim Membrey, Brenton Payne, Nick O'Kearney, Nick Coughlan, Josh Saunders, Jason Holmes, Joseph Baker-Thomas, Giovani Mountain-Sibery

Sydney: Ted Richards (UFA), Aliir Aliir, Harry Cunningham, Abe Davis, Tom Derickx, Kyle Galloway, Jordan Foote, Isaac Heeney, George Hewett, Jack Hiscox, Kieran Jack, Alex Johnson, Jeremy Laidler, Jake Lloyd, Harrison Marsh, Lewis Melican, Tom Mitchell, Ben McGlynn, Sam Murray, Toby Nankervis, Nick Newman, Colin O'Riordan, Tom Papley, Xavier Richards, Daniel Robinson, Dean Towers

West Coast: Mitchell Brown (UFA), Andrew Gaff, Mark Hutchings, Jamie Bennell, Xavier Ellis, Josh Hill, Sam Butler, Patrick McGinnity, Tom Lamb, Fraser McInness

Western Bulldogs: Matthew Boyd (UFA), Dale Morris (UFA), Robert Murphy (UFA), Will Minson (UFA), Roarke Smith, Josh Prudden, Joel Hamling, Declan Hamilton, Lin Jong, Clay Smith, Tory Dickson, Koby Stevens, Nathan Hrovat, Tom Campbell

[1eyedog]

Depressing list generally speaking. GCS have some players but they would be difficult to budge.

[bulldogtragic]

Depressing list generally speaking. GCS have some players but they would be difficult to budge.

Lewis Taylor won the rising star, and ergo, is better than Bonts. He'd be an amazing get.

GCS would be the team to raid this year. Apeness or Clarke could be worth thinking about. The Essendon players are where some great things might happen.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Delete post

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Jaeger.

[comrade]

Haven't minded the look of Keegan Brooksby from GC as an athletic ruck. Jake Spencer is a ruck that has now been completely overshadowed by Gawn. Or just go the whole hog and throw the sink at Mummy.

Sam Mayes is another mid with some talent that is stagnating in a bad team.

[Twodogs]

How old is Mumford? It'd be a pretty big sink he's already on I would think.

[Axe Man]

Mummy will be 30 this year, is forever getting injured and would cost a packet. As good as he is, no thanks.

[1eyedog]

Jaeger.

Would be no.1 in the interest stakes I would have thought.

[Axe Man]

Josh Jenkins would be handy but no way are Adelaide letting him go.

[Twodogs]

As a crazy left field thought would Sydney entertain an offer for Kurt Tippet? He'd get a big salary of their books and allow them to maybe explore some options that wouldn't be available if he was still occupying a huge chunk of their TPP as well a decent pick. Or would a player like Tippet hold the development of Tom Boyd, who is coming along really well in that role albeit spending less time in the ruck than Tippet I guess.

They would probably laugh at us but it might be worth asking?

[Axe Man]

As a crazy left field thought would Sydney entertain an offer for Kurt Tippet? He'd get a big salary of their books and allow them to maybe explore some options that wouldn't be available if he was still occupying a huge chunk of their TPP as well a decent pick. Or would a player like Tippet hold the development of Tom Boyd, who is coming along really well in that role albeit spending less time in the ruck than Tippet I guess.

They would probably laugh at us but it might be worth asking?

Tippett is contracted until the end of 2018 (he met contact incentives that triggered a 2 year extension). I don't see why Sydney would entertain a trade, his contract would likely place massive pressure on our cap and I doubt pick 18 would be enough to get it done. ;)

[Twodogs]

Tippett is contracted until the end of 2018 (he met contact incentives that triggered a 2 year extension). I don't see why Sydney would entertain a trade, his contract would likely place massive pressure on our cap and I doubt pick 18 would be enough to get it done. ;)

Yeah, I know all that. Still think it can't hurt to ask. I am good at getting ideas that no one else seems to think is a good idea and getting pretty stubborn about them though.

[azabob]

Jaeger.

He cant even get on the park. Massive risk to take him.

[1eyedog]

He cant even get on the park. Massive risk to take him.

Massive reward beckons also. Absolute jet.

[ledge]

Another Scharenburg ?

[Twodogs]

Another Scharenburg ?


Could be. I wonder if there has always been the same amount of kids who didn't make it due to structural problems in their bodies, dodgy ankles, dicky knee etc. or do we hear a lot more about them now? Because clubs keep drafting kids who despite precocious talent never make it onto the park because if a degenerative hip or shoulder problems. Despite access to the most sophisticated medical systems.

[Sedat]

As a crazy left field thought would Sydney entertain an offer for Kurt Tippet? He'd get a big salary of their books and allow them to maybe explore some options that wouldn't be available if he was still occupying a huge chunk of their TPP as well a decent pick. Or would a player like Tippet hold the development of Tom Boyd, who is coming along really well in that role albeit spending less time in the ruck than Tippet I guess.

They would probably laugh at us but it might be worth asking?
Got it in one Twodogs. Boyd is virtually the same player as Tippett, albeit much younger and less talented (for now). Good KP forward/rucks are worth their weight in gold in the modern game with less rotations, and we've probably got the best one in the competition under 23yo.

[Bulldog4life]

This is a combined list of Uncontracted and Free Agents. I got this from another site so not sure of accuracy

Adelaide: Scott Thompson (UFA), Nathan van Berlo (UFA), Brad Crouch, Josh Jenkins, Kyle Cheney, Jarryd Lyons, Harrison Wigg, Harry Dear, Luke Lowden, Mitchell Grigg, Rory Atkins

Brisbane: Daniel Merrett (UFA), Josh Green, Rohan Bewick, Trent West, Josh Clayton, Josh Watts, Liam Dawson, Darcy Gardiner, Lewis Taylor, Sam Mayes, Ryan Lester, Cian Hanley, Jackson Paine, Matthew Hammelman, Josh McGuinness, Archie Smith, Billie Evans, Hugh Beasley, Reuben William

Carlton: Kade Simpson (UFA), Dennis Armfield (UFA), Dylan Buckley, Blaine Boekhorst, Dillon Viojo-Rainbow, Sam Rowe, Ciaran Sheehan, Jason Tutt?, Mark Whiley?, Clem Smith, Jayden Foster, Billie Gowers?, Matthew Dick?, Nicholas Graham, Andrejs Everitt, Cameron Wood, Levi Casboult, Zach Tuohy, Matthew Wright

Collingwood: Brent Macaffer (UFA), Dane Swan (UFA), Alan Toovey (UFA), Nathan Brown (UFA), Jarryd Blair (UFA), Alex Fasolo, Jarrod Witts, Lachlan Keefe, Josh Thomas, Marley Williams, Tim Broomhead, Matthew Goodyear, Corey Gault, Jack Frost, Mason Cox

Essendon: Jobe Watson (UFA), Brent Stanton (UFA, trigger clause), Tayte Pears (UFA), David Myers (UFA), Courtenay Dempsey (UFA), Cale Hooker (UFA), Patrick Ambrose, Jason Ashby, Adam Cooney, Shaun Edwards, Martin Gleeson, Brendan Goddard, James Gwilt, Ben Howlett, Nick Kommer, Kyle Langford, Jayden Laverde, Shaun McKernan, Will Hams, Jake Long, Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti, Conor McKenna, Gach Nyuon, Tom Wallis

Fremantle: Matthew Pavlich (UFA), Aaron Sandilands (UFA), Matthew De Boer (UFA), Clancee Pearce, Alex Silvagni, Lee Spurr, Jack Hannath, Tendai Mzungu, Michael Apeness, Zac Clarke, Michael Barlow, Danyle Pearce, Chris Mayne, Lachie Neale, Brady Grey, Ed Langdon

Geelong: Jimmy Bartel (UFA), Tom Lonergan (UFA), Corey Enright (UFA), Rhys Stanley, Lincoln McCarthy, Daniel Menzel, Josh Cowan, Mitch Clark, Nathan Vardy, Michael Luxford, Tom Read, Shane Kersten, Padraig Lucy, Zach Bates, Cameron Delaney, Jock Cornell, James Parsons, Tom Ruggles

Gold Coast: Jaeger O'Meara, Alex Sexton, Luke Russell, Dion Prestia, Sam Day, Daniel Currie, Jack Leslie, Tom Nicholls, Sean Lemmens, Clay Cameron, Keegan Brooksby, Mackenzie Willis, Jarrod Garlett, Adam Saad, Seb Tape, Danny Stanley, Jesse Joyce, Ryan Davis, Tom Keough, Darcy McPherson, Cameron Loersch

GWS: Lachie Whitfield, Joel Patfull, Caleb Marchbank, James Stewart, Jack Steele, Tim Mohr, Shane Mumford, Patrick McKenna, Jake Barrett, Tom Downie, Jeremy Finlayson, Dawson Simpson, Steve Johnson, Sam Reid, Daniel Lloyd

Hawthorn: Sam Mitchell (UFA), Luke Hodge (UFA), Josh Gibson, Shaun Burgoyne, Brendan Whitecross, Jack Gunston, Matt Spangher, Kaiden Brand, Kurt Heatherley

Melbourne: Jack Grimes (UFA), Chris Dawes, Jeff Garlett, James Harmes, Jayden Hunt, Neville Jetta, Matt Jones, Dean Kent, Max King, Viv Michie, Oscar McDonald, Tom McDonald, Cameron Pederson, Jake Spencer, Dean Terlich, Jack Trengove, Bernie Vince, Josh Wagner, Jack Watts, Mitchell White

North Melbourne: Brent Harvey (UFA), Drew Petrie (UFA), Michael Firrito (UFA), Daniel Wells (UFA), Lindsay Thomas (RFA), Nick Dal Santo, Jarrad Waite, Sam Gibson, Joel Tippett, Brad McKenzie, Mason Wood, Kayne Turner, Ed Vickers-Willis

Port Adelaide: Paul Stewart (UFA), Jake Neade, Angus Monfries, John Butcher, Cameron O'Shea, Matthew White, Logan Austin, Jay Schulz, Sam Colquhoun, Darcy Byrne-Jones, Billy Frampton, Aaron Young, Brendan Ah Chee, Tom Jonas, Nathan Krakouer

Richmond: Tyrone Vickery (UFA), Nick Vlaustin, Shaun Grigg, Jake Batchelor, David Astbury, Bachar Houli, Andrew Moore, Shaun Hampson, Ivan Maric, Kane Lambert, Ben Griffiths, Troy Chaplin, Reece Conca, Cory Ellis, Liam McBean, Callum Moore, Connor Menadue, Daniel Butler, Mabior Chol, Reece McKenzie, Adam Marcon, Jason Short, Jason Castagna, Ivan Soldo

St. Kilda: Nick Riewoldt (UFA), Sean Dempster (UFA), Sam Fisher (UFA), Billy Longer, Josh Bruce, Luke Delaney, Tom Lee, Nathan Wright, Brodie Murdoch, Eli Templeton, Tom Curran, Seb Ross, Cameron Shenton, Darren Minchington, Lewis Pearce, Tim Membrey, Brenton Payne, Nick O'Kearney, Nick Coughlan, Josh Saunders, Jason Holmes, Joseph Baker-Thomas, Giovani Mountain-Sibery

Sydney: Ted Richards (UFA), Aliir Aliir, Harry Cunningham, Abe Davis, Tom Derickx, Kyle Galloway, Jordan Foote, Isaac Heeney, George Hewett, Jack Hiscox, Kieran Jack, Alex Johnson, Jeremy Laidler, Jake Lloyd, Harrison Marsh, Lewis Melican, Tom Mitchell, Ben McGlynn, Sam Murray, Toby Nankervis, Nick Newman, Colin O'Riordan, Tom Papley, Xavier Richards, Daniel Robinson, Dean Towers

West Coast: Mitchell Brown (UFA), Andrew Gaff, Mark Hutchings, Jamie Bennell, Xavier Ellis, Josh Hill, Sam Butler, Patrick McGinnity, Tom Lamb, Fraser McInness

Western Bulldogs: Matthew Boyd (UFA), Dale Morris (UFA), Robert Murphy (UFA), Will Minson (UFA), Roarke Smith, Josh Prudden, Joel Hamling, Declan Hamilton, Lin Jong, Clay Smith, Tory Dickson, Koby Stevens, Nathan Hrovat, Tom Campbell

Got quite a few to sign up "if" we are wanting to keep them.

[Mantis]

Got quite a few to sign up "if" we are wanting to keep them.

How many of those are 'must signs'?

Being the harsh bastard that I am I would only have 3 or 4 of those players on a list that I would sign now.. Pretty happy to wait until the second half of the season to see how the rest are going before we put pen to paper.

[Bulldog4life]

How many of those are 'must signs'?

Being the harsh bastard that I am I would only have 3 or 4 of those players on a list that I would sign now.. Pretty happy to wait until the second half of the season to see how the rest are going before we put pen to paper.

Which 4 Mantis?

[Mantis]

Which 4 Mantis?

Morris, Dickson & Hamling are the 3.

Campbell would be the 4th, but I'm still no sold on him.

[Bulldog4life]

Morris, Dickson & Hamling are the 3.

Campbell would be the 4th, but I'm still no sold on him.

Fair enough. You're a hard man.:)

[Mantis]

Fair enough. You're a hard man.:)

How many would be on your list?

[chef]

Morris, Dickson & Hamling are the 3.

Campbell would be the 4th, but I'm still no sold on him.


I'd include Stevens

[Bulldog4life]

How many would be on your list?

Dale Morris (UFA), Robert Murphy (UFA), Roarke Smith, Joel Hamling, Declan Hamilton, Lin Jong, Clay Smith, Tory Dickson, Koby Stevens, Nathan Hrovat, Tom Campbell. After signing them on you can always trade with some leverage. Unsigned you are in their hands.

[Mantis]

I'd include Stevens

He is an almost.

I mark him hard, but I'm just wanting a bit more from him, especially against good teams. Was really under-whelmed by his game on Sunday.. Did some heavy lifting, but didn't offer much with the ball in hand and you can't carry these types against the best.

[1eyedog]

Stevens is tough and you need this type of player in you're team because they will give you a consistent performance even when not at their best. He is also good above his head as well but is nevertheless replaceable.

Morris, Dickson & Hamling are the ones I'd sign as well. Stevens would be next. Murph signs himself if he wants to play next year.

[jeemak]

Stevens, Hamling, Hrovat, Campbell and Dickson are the priority for me. Hrovat makes the list as I think he'll attract reasonable interest in the trade market and I'd prefer to have him contracted prior to then.

Our veterans won't be going anywhere, I don't think the others will be stolen from us.

[GVGjr]

Dale Morris (UFA), Robert Murphy (UFA), Roarke Smith, Joel Hamling, Declan Hamilton, Lin Jong, Clay Smith, Tory Dickson, Koby Stevens, Nathan Hrovat, Tom Campbell. After signing them on you can always trade with some leverage. Unsigned you are in their hands.

I could very well be wrong but I'm not sure you can sign and then trade.

[azabob]

I could very well be wrong but I'm not sure you can sign and then trade.

I think of both player and club agree then it can proceed.

[bulldogtragic]

I could very well be wrong but I'm not sure you can sign and then trade.

I think there's some fine print that says the default position is that you cannot trade in the year of resigning, unless the player agrees. Which if he doesn't agree means you can't trade him. Or that's the last I remember of the rule.

[GVGjr]

I think there's some fine print that says the default position is that you cannot trade in the year of resigning, unless the player agrees. Which if he doesn't agree means you can't trade him. Or that's the last I remember of the rule.

Thanks to both you and Aza for the clarification. I was under the impression it was the very reason why they stopped that sign and trade option.

Whats in it for the player to sign with one club and be traded to another? Is it a way for the player to make sure the old club is adequately compensated?

[bulldogtragic]

Thanks to both you and Aza for the clarification. I was under the impression it was the very reason why they stopped that sign and trade option.

Whats in it for the player to sign with one club and be traded to another? Is it a way for the player to make sure the old club is adequately compensated?

Ricky Nixon would get two commissions in 3 months. Outside of player agents, I don't think it serves any purpose to sign a player you're not 100% committed to.

[azabob]

Thanks to both you and Aza for the clarification. I was under the impression it was the very reason why they stopped that sign and trade option.

Whats in it for the player to sign with one club and be traded to another? Is it a way for the player to make sure the old club is adequately compensated?

GVGjr, you could well be right. To me if the rule is as i and BT say, it diesnt make sense.

I dont believe that when players leave clubs they care if the compensation is fair or not.

[GVGjr]

GVGjr, you could well be right. To me if the rule is as i and BT say, it diesnt make sense.

I dont believe that when players leave clubs they care if the compensation is fair or not.

To me it also sort of flies in the face of the whole restricted and unrestricted option and to me there is no upside for the player to sign and then be traded unless there is some loophole with the salary cap I'm not aware of.

I'm not convinced what I'm saying is right either but it would be interesting to get some clarification.

[bulldogtragic]

GVGjr, you could well be right. To me if the rule is as i and BT say, it diesnt make sense.

I dont believe that when players leave clubs they care if the compensation is fair or not.

I might be tired, but I think it makes sense. If you recontract a player, he can't be traded unless he voluntarily opts out. If you want to trade him and he says 'get stuffed' you cannot trade him. So the rule stops a club manipulating contract status. It seems unlikely a player would sign in round 12 with offers floating around (official and unofficial) and then 12 weeks later get a ludicrously better offer and ask for a trade while the ink is wet. So in reality you can't really trade a resigned player in that year, but if the player is happy to go then they can. But the risk is the player says 'no' and you've signed up a player you don't want to have, which serves as the strong deincentivisation to not engage in the practice.

[hujsh]

Don't all trade require player approval anyway. I don't see the difference

[Greystache]

Don't all trade require player approval anyway. I don't see the difference

That's right. AFL players can't be traded against their will while under contract. Given players seem to believe it's their right to be traded while under contract then I'm a supporter of the American model of being traded while the club owns your contract. As usual Australian players want the best of both worlds, guaranteed contracts with no trading rights.

[Twodogs]

The AFL recently tried to get the players to give up that right for a lesser FA qualification. I think it was tha FA qual anyway.

[jeemak]

That's right. AFL players can't be traded against their will while under contract. Given players seem to believe it's their right to be traded while under contract then I'm a supporter of the American model of being traded while the club owns your contract. As usual Australian players want the best of both worlds, guaranteed contracts with no trading rights.

Being in the banking industry you'd know how information asymmetry comes into play in this. The players have a safeguard within their CBA/EBA to protect themselves from being signed by clubs in different types of precarious situations without a reasonable level of disclosure.

[bulldogtragic]

Back to topic, I'm going to go brutal and say Prudden gets cut. For me hasn't shown enough to command a new contract with a year out. So he's locked in for me, especially as if their knees hold up Libba, Bob & Clay (& rookie Roarke) is enough risk of knee re-injury to carry over the list.

So Prudden & Matt Boyd (if Bob stays on next year) are my two of my four.
I want to see Clay back to his best.
Minson is up against it, and would be my third right now.
Possible trade in the 4th spot. Hrovat, Hamilton, Redders, Jong etc might get better offers and be tempted if they don't get a good run of seniors this year.

[GVGjr]

BT, I can see the need for rookie list promotions especially Lynch. I think there needs to be at least 5 subtractions

[bulldogtragic]

BT, I can see the need for rookie list promotions especially Lynch. I think there needs to be at least 5 subtractions

Need or want? If it's need to, then we'd have to entertain another trade potentially. Essendon will still be a basket case, so a young leader and potential very good player like Hrovat might attract interest. If a banned player picked us, Essendon paying some salary for them next year and getting a generous trade back might be win-win.

[soupman]

BT, I can see the need for rookie list promotions especially Lynch. I think there needs to be at least 5 subtractions

Why? In my view the only reason you promote a rookie permanently is because you have to due to them either receiving better offers otherwise or reaching the time limit (like Redpath), or because they are going to be best 25 for the majority of the season (see Dahlhaus).

I'll be surprised if Lynch meets any of that criteria by the end if the season (although very pleased).

[GVGjr]

Why? In my view the only reason you promote a rookie permanently is because you have to due to them either receiving better offers otherwise or reaching the time limit (like Redpath), or because they are going to be best 25 for the majority of the season (see Dahlhaus).

I'll be surprised if Lynch meets any of that criteria by the end if the season (although very pleased).

We are talking about at the end of the season. I think Lynch could be a real improver in the 2nd half of the season and might be in the mix for a promotion before 2017. I think there is a chance we might need to cut a bit deeper into the list.

[soupman]

We are talking about at the end of the season. I think Lynch could be a real improver in the 2nd half of the season and might be in the mix for a promotion before 2017. I think there is a chance we might need to cut a bit deeper into the list.

I agree with everything you've said about Lynch. I think he will improve greatly throughout the year, will definitely be in the mix for selection and debut at some point. However, I have no expectation that he will be promoted at the end of the year, because doing so would be bad list management unless he is already best 25.

The fact is if he stays as a rookie next year he can still be promoted easily (lets face it we always have a long term injury), but it allows us the flexibility to make one less change to the main list, or alternatively we fill that last spot on our list with pick 50 in the ND instead of pick 50 in the RD, which are vastly different options (Caleb Daniel vs Luke Goetz). It also means that if his form doesn't command a spot early next year then we could promote a different rookie instead.

I'm all for rewarding players for effort and promise, but I think there is a view by many that the rookie list is a group of players your club has first dibs on who can come in if needed. In reality it is just an extension of our main list with slight limitations on availability and on a much lower salary. As such neither club nor player should be upset by being kept on it for a long period until they have to be upgraded, either because they demand it with their form or because the rules stipulate you cannot be on it for more than 3 years.

We have in the past promoted prematurely, Mulligan, Panos and Hooper were all promoted on the back of limited/no form at AFL level and all would not have been disadvantaged by being left on the rookie list to develop. Instead they cost us valuable main list space and an opportunity to use a ND pick on someone. The JMac/Dalrymple regime seems more switched on in this area, Redpath, Jong, Goodes, Adcock, Campbell and Roarke Smith have all been denied promotion at seasons end despite showing promise and sometimes good form at AFL level. I expect the same to happen with Lynch, even if he does play multiple encouraging games at AFL level this year.

[bulldogtragic]

Assuming we play some finals, we are about 1/4 into the season.

I've now firmed my minimum 3: Prudden, Minson, Matty Boyd. Adcock too unless he's the designated mature age coverage.
Possible moving on: Roberts, Redpath
Listen and consider any decent trade offers on: Honeychurch, Hrovat, Roughead

So around 5 off the primary list. Crameri is essentially a new recruit. Romero is an active father/son. We have the pick from Sydney for Tahleeya. Obviously free agency and trading.

[azabob]

BT do we consider delisting C.Smith?

I would seriously consider keeping Prudden. If he wasn't injured I think he would be in our senior team.

[bulldogtragic]

BT do we consider delisting C.Smith?

I would seriously consider keeping Prudden. If he wasn't injured I think he would be in our senior team.

Clay stays if his knee holds up. But as a proven jinx I can't say more than that. As for Prudden, if we wanted to keep him in lieu of Advock on the rookie list then I can't see us having him 'stolen' before our rookie draft pick. It's just so hard if we we've got Libba, Roarke, Bob, Clay & Prudden on the list with some risk attached. MJP had some stats a while back about recurrence rates per ACL. Seems a big risk wouldn't you say?

[azabob]

Clay stays if his knee holds up. But as a proven jinx I can't say more than that. As for Prudden, if we wanted to keep him in lieu of Advock on the rookie list then I can't see us having him 'stolen' before our rookie draft pick. It's just so hard if we we've got Libba, Roarke, Bob, Clay & Prudden on the list with some risk attached. MJP had some stats a while back about recurrence rates per ACL. Seems a big risk wouldn't you say?

Not really a big risk. By end of 2017 out of the ones you mention I think only Liberatore is more than a 40% chance of remaining.

[ledge]

Not really a big risk. By end of 2017 out of the ones you mention I think only Liberatore is more than a 40% chance of remaining.

Not sure about that if Clay Smiths knee holds up he will still be there and Rourke will certainly be given another year if he doesn't get injured again. Plenty of upside in him.
Murphy will might also be their. A year off could be a godsend for him at his age. Rest the body and hunger comes back.

[bulldogtragic]

Not sure about that if Clay Smiths knee holds up he will still be there and Rourke will certainly be given another year if he doesn't get injured again. Plenty of upside in him.
Murphy will might also be their. A year off could be a godsend for him at his age. Rest the body and hunger comes back.

I think Clay's best footy is excellent. It might be one of those tough calls about whether we are ever going to see it again.

[bornadog]

I think Clay needs to show commitment and that he can still play, otherwise I would be saying goodbye to him.

[SonofScray]

I think Clay needs to show commitment and that he can still play, otherwise I would be saying goodbye to him.

BAD, can you comment further re: showing commitment? I heard someone at VUWO today suggest Clay wasn't showing a good attitude around the club and was in strife, just wondering if your comments reflect that?

On topic, I am thinking:

Minson, Hamilton, M Boyd, Redpath and Prudden are in the mix.

[jeemak]

Assuming we play some finals, we are about 1/4 into the season.

I've now firmed my minimum 3: Prudden, Minson, Matty Boyd. Adcock too unless he's the designated mature age coverage.
Possible moving on: Roberts, Redpath
Listen and consider any decent trade offers on: Honeychurch, Hrovat, Roughead

So around 5 off the primary list. Crameri is essentially a new recruit. Romero is an active father/son. We have the pick from Sydney for Tahleeya. Obviously free agency and trading.

I wouldn't be surprised if we have bigger trades than Honeychurch, Hrovat and Roughead on our minds.

It's abundantly clear, even if and when we are uninjured, we're going to need more KPF and KPD depth very soon (1-2 years). Apart from Dad I don't see that in any players that haven't been tried in those areas already.

That means we're going to have to part with something more significant than the three mentioned above, unless we part with high draft picks.

Get ready for it.

[bulldogtragic]

I wouldn't be surprised if we have bigger trades than Honeychurch, Hrovat and Roughead on our minds.

It's abundantly clear, even if and when we are uninjured, we're going to need more KPF and KPD depth very soon (1-2 years). Apart from Dad I don't see that in any players that haven't been tried in those areas already.

That means we're going to have to part with something more significant than the three mentioned above, unless we part with high draft picks.

Get ready for it.

Got to name names J-Man... :D

[bornadog]

BAD, can you comment further re: showing commitment? I heard someone at VUWO today suggest Clay wasn't showing a good attitude around the club and was in strife, just wondering if your comments reflect that?

On topic, I am thinking:

Minson, Hamilton, M Boyd, Redpath and Prudden are in the mix.

I was told something similar.

[1eyedog]

Stevens and Roughead. If Hrovat comes in and plays well it may lift his profile. Go...

[jeemak]

Got to name names J-Man... :D

I didn't frame that properly, as I think it's more likely we'll part with draft picks (including future picks) over players, which I know will annoy you.

But I wouldn't discount a Wallis, Picken or Stevens being offered up to get us something good.

[Murphy'sLore]

I've heard that an even bigger name than that has been discussed. Pure hearsay though.

[EasternWest]

I've heard that an even bigger name than that has been discussed. Pure hearsay though.

Go on.

[LostDoggy]

I wouldn't be surprised if we have bigger trades than Honeychurch, Hrovat and Roughead on our minds.

It's abundantly clear, even if and when we are uninjured, we're going to need more KPF and KPD depth very soon (1-2 years). Apart from Dad I don't see that in any players that haven't been tried in those areas already.

That means we're going to have to part with something more significant than the three mentioned above, unless we part with high draft picks.

Get ready for it.


I didn't frame that properly, as I think it's more likely we'll part with draft picks (including future picks) over players, which I know will annoy you.

But I wouldn't discount a Wallis, Picken or Stevens being offered up to get us something good.

Haven't posted here for a long while but I've got to say these comments intrigued me.

The advent of free agency means there are KP players available for no trade cost every year, so I'm not sure your premise that we have to trade for players holds up.

Furthermore, it surprises me to see anyone suggesting Wallis, Picken or Stevens being traded. Three of our best character players. Three of our better players. Its rare for these types of players to be traded at all IMO. And I'd consider it highly unlikely any of the players you've mentioned go anywhere - even if we did trade for a KP.

Just my opinion.

[jeemak]

In order to secure decent KPP via the free agent mechanism there has to be decent free agents in that category available. Which ones do you have in mind?

I'm not suggesting we trade those three, I'm suggesting I'm prepared for the advent of it happening.

[LostDoggy]

I didn't have anyone in mind specifically but Hurley (effectively), Watts, Mitch and Nathan Brown, and Vickery are all FAs this year. Any of them would make our list better IMO (some more than others :)).

[jeemak]

I'd be happy with any of the five you've mentioned.

[comrade]

Only Hurley and...god, I can't believe I'm saying this...Watts interest me from that group.

I think Bevo would utilise Watts correctly, and he's a ripping kick for goal.

[LostDoggy]

Vickery!?
A big HELL NO!!!

[Dancin' Douggy]

If we trade Wallis we are absolutely and truly insane. INSANE!!!!

[Dancin' Douggy]

Vickery!?
A big HELL NO!!!

Oh for gods sake vickery. Please refer to 'talls of shame file'

[1eyedog]

No to Vikery and the Browns. They won't improve us at all. Vikery is Jack Redpath in terms of output and the Browns are Michael Talia's.

[Remi Moses]

Definite no to Vickery . He's a nearly type, as is Griffiths at Richmond .
Mitch Brown is to injury prone, and Nathan Brown is now on the outer at Collingwood.
Watts will get re-signed at Melbourne I'd think .

[Murphy'sLore]

Go on.

Someone with undoubted gifts on-field, but allegedly a history and an off-field problem that the club hasn't been able to address to their satisfaction. I'm pretty sure you can figure out the player.

I don't know how reliable this source is, so approach with caution.

[1eyedog]

Someone with undoubted gifts on-field, but allegedly a history and an off-field problem that the club hasn't been able to address to their satisfaction. I'm pretty sure you can figure out the player.

I don't know how reliable this source is, so approach with caution.


That's unfortunate.

[EasternWest]

Someone with undoubted gifts on-field, but allegedly a history and an off-field problem that the club hasn't been able to address to their satisfaction. I'm pretty sure you can figure out the player.

I don't know how reliable this source is, so approach with caution.

I think if we trade Liberatore there will be blood.

[bulldogtragic]

I think if we trade Liberatore there will be blood.

Think?? Guaranteed!!

[bornadog]

I think if we trade Liberatore there will be blood.


Think?? Guaranteed!!

I am not normally a violent man - but this would make me one.:D

[Twodogs]

I think if we trade Liberatore there will be blood.


Think?? Guaranteed!!


I am not normally a violent man - but this would make me one.:D

Apart from anything there is Oliver to come.

[lemmon]

Bit of devil's advocate here but has Roughead and Campbell demonstrating they're capable first rucks gone some way to securing Minson another year, if he's happy to play the back up?

I think we've got a nice set up at the moment in terms of two guys who I'd be happy with as first ruck, the young kid for the future in Goetz and a more than handy replacement in Minson. If we chop Minson we have to bring another ready made guy in and I'm not sure there's a better back up out there. Unless we're eyeing a highly touted big kid at the draft and Minson was okay with it, it'd have to be considered

[bornadog]

Bit of devil's advocate here but has Roughead and Campbell demonstrating they're capable first rucks gone some way to securing Minson another year, if he's happy to play the back up?

I think we've got a nice set up at the moment in terms of two guys who I'd be happy with as first ruck, the young kid for the future in Goetz and a more than handy replacement in Minson. If we chop Minson we have to bring another ready made guy in and I'm not sure there's a better back up out there. Unless we're eyeing a highly touted big kid at the draft and Minson was okay with it, it'd have to be considered

I really like Minson's attitude. He has taken it on the chin and is mentoring the other ruckman.

[bulldogtragic]

Bit of devil's advocate here but has Roughead and Campbell demonstrating they're capable first rucks gone some way to securing Minson another year, if he's happy to play the back up?

I think we've got a nice set up at the moment in terms of two guys who I'd be happy with as first ruck, the young kid for the future in Goetz and a more than handy replacement in Minson. If we chop Minson we have to bring another ready made guy in and I'm not sure there's a better back up out there. Unless we're eyeing a highly touted big kid at the draft and Minson was okay with it, it'd have to be considered

If that's the case, why not rookie list him in place of Adcock? Keeping a player for depth only is a rookie list thing in my book (I.e. Farren Ray, Schneider, Adcock etc).

I have Minson, Prudden, Roberts and either Bob (retirement :( ) or Boyd (retirement). Adcock gone too. So 4 primary list, 1 rookie list. Clay Smith is still on my radar and maybe a trade out is requested by someone.

[Bulldog Joe]

If that's the case, why not rookie list him in place of Adcock? Keeping a player for depth only is a rookie list thing in my book (I.e. Farren Ray, Schneider, Adcock etc).

I have Minson, Prudden, Roberts and either Bob (retirement :( ) or Boyd (retirement). Adcock gone too. So 4 primary list, 1 rookie list. Clay Smith is still on my radar and maybe a trade out is requested by someone.

I agree that the only spot for Will at the Bulldogs for 2017 would be as a rookie.

That would require him to be delisted and overlooked by everyone else. There may be another club who also see him as a great back up.

[bulldogtragic]

I agree that the only spot for Will at the Bulldogs for 2017 would be as a rookie.

That would require him to be delisted and overlooked by everyone else. There may be another club who also see him as a great back up.

If the club thinks he's at best depth, that's a risk we should be willing to take. Campbell, Roughead, Boyd helping out and perhaps a free agent or trade ruck then we are ok.

[Bulldog Joe]

If the club thinks he's at best depth, that's a risk we should be willing to take. Campbell, Roughead, Boyd helping out and perhaps a free agent or trade ruck then we are ok.

Agree 100%. We also have Redpath, who can pinch hit and offers more to the list than Will.

[bulldogtragic]

Agree 100%. We also have Redpath, who can pinch hit and offers more to the list than Will.

I thought Jong is our pinch hitting ruckman who has more dimensions in their game than Will :D

For his sake, id love him to finish on 200 games to be in the club, but I can't see it happening.

[Bulldog Joe]

I thought Jong is our pinch hitting ruckman who has more dimensions in their game than Will :D

For his sake, id love him to finish on 200 games to be in the club, but I can't see it happening.

Will has been a great servant and clubman, but unfortunately there is no scope for sentiment in list management.

[bulldogtragic]

Will has been a great servant and clubman, but unfortunately there is no scope for sentiment in list management.

Agreed*


*unless you're Bob Murphy!!

[F'scary]

I agree that the only spot for Will at the Bulldogs for 2017 would be as a rookie.

That would require him to be delisted and overlooked by everyone else. There may be another club who also see him as a great back up.

I'm not sure Big Will would consider the pay worth his while given that rookies have to put in as much as senior players from what I understand. I think if we were to retire him, someone else would pick him up as a senior lister for insurance.

[ledge]

He is still a very good ruck man and would get games at other clubs no doubt .. I would love to keep him but I think Luke wants a ruck who can go forward and kick goals .we used to get ruck man and teach them to go forward now we are getting forwards and teaching them to ruck .. Different era

[F'scary]

He is still a very good ruck man and would get games at other clubs no doubt .. I would love to keep him but I think Luke wants a ruck who can go forward and kick goals .we used to get ruck man and teach them to go forward now we are getting forwards and teaching them to ruck .. Different era

Another reason for keeping Big Will is...do you want him, after he has been sacked and shown the door, lining up in another team's colours against...US!!!??? :eek:

[Daughter of the West]

Another reason for keeping Big Will is...do you want him, after he has been sacked and shown the door, lining up in another team's colours against...US!!!??? :eek:

The People's Beard did it, didn't he?

[bulldogtragic]

The People's Beard did it, didn't he?

Twice!

[F'scary]

The People's Beard did it, didn't he?

But the Beard of the Proletariat...he wasn't like, you know...err...very sort of uber-physical in a certain angry-pills way, if you get my gist...

[The Underdog]

Another reason for keeping Big Will is...do you want him, after he has been sacked and shown the door, lining up in another team's colours against...US!!!??? :eek:

I can't think why not.

[BulldogBelle]

Much in the same way that J.Grant played most games last season but was delisted, I have got a feeling that Jongy will find himself in a similar position at the end of this season. He looks to me as if he's getting to the edge of his potential, and it seems that it is serviceable, but seldom outstanding.

[Cyberdoggie]

Much in the same way that J.Grant played most games last season but was delisted, I have got a feeling that Jongy will find himself in a similar position at the end of this season. He looks to me as if he's getting to the edge of his potential, and it seems that it is serviceable, but seldom outstanding.

I can't agree with you there, yes he may yet get delisted/traded but I think we have seen a very average reflection of his ability this year. Early last year he showed us how good he is, unfortunately he seems to be someone who's form and confidence fluctuates greatly, and it may be his introverted personality.
Jongy seems to be a very nice guy who doesn't want to hurt anyone or step on anyones toes, and out on the footy field he seems to play like this a bit as well. The GWS game was another good example, was doing well early, had 7 or 8 touches, then was a bit clumsy with that bump that got him reported, and from that moment on, he barely had a touch. It didn't help that he again got pushed up forward when we have no decent forwards going around and we are butchering the ball.

The one area he really needs to improve on is his defensive work. He's simply not working hard enough when he doesn't have the ball. I don't see him chasing or working hard to apply pressure any more.

When you see him play at VFL level he is clearly better than everyone else, but throw him back into the AFL and he's second guessing himself, and quick to let others take over the work.

While I agree he is very frustrating and the difference between his best and worse is huge, i'm not giving up on him as yet.

[BulldogBelle]

I agree that you could see a marked difference in his performance after he got reported. He deflated instantly. My statements are made across a broader context than yesterday's performance.
I want him to do well,but I reckon his thing of going missing in games makes him a little unreliable, and you can't have those types in the battle of finals, because they don't give you certainty that they will perform.

[soupman]

I agree that you could see a marked difference in his performance after he got reported. He deflated instantly. My statements are made across a broader context than yesterday's performance.
I want him to do well,but I reckon his thing of going missing in games makes him a little unreliable, and you can't have those types in the battle of finals, because they don't give you certainty that they will perform.

Funnily enough Jong was one of our better players in the finals last year and has shown he stands up in finals at VFL level.

And FWIW I'm pretty sure he got reported before he kicked his two goals. He was actually pretty good in the 1st quarter, then disappeared completely for 2 quarters. Sure we can attribute some of his disappearance to the side not performing but he goes missing too often for mine. He isn't good enough with the ball to get away with just a handful of touches, so needs to start amassing possessions like he did early last year. He is certainly one where quantity>quality.

[bulldogtragic]

Half Way, 11 H&A games down and 11 H&A games to come. Interesting to see who needs to improve or go move.

Minson is still to see a call up despite dominating the VFL. Unfortunately, 0% chance of being around on the senior list next year.
Prudden. His knee injury came at the wrong time, but we need to make room so I have him 0% chance too.

Hamilton?? His draft mates have all dominated VFL &/or AFL so far. Do we need to make a hard call or let him go home?
Clay Smith?? It's been over 12 months and he's still listed as an indefinite LTI. Don't know what to make of it?

Trades: Jong, Honeychurch ??

Morris, Boyd & Morris look like they can all play on now. Perhaps they do.
If Hrovat has done his shoulder today then his trade value is way under worth trading.

4-5 moved on.

[bulldogtragic]

I think the only question on Minson is whether he gets a farewell game if Camhead stay fit before the finals.

[LostDoggy]

I wouldn't be shocked if Will still has something to offer. We all wrote him off late last year but he was really good in the Adelaide final. If Cam or Head go down or lose form, he can offer something.

[bulldogtragic]

I wouldn't be shocked if Will still has something to offer. We all wrote him off late last year but he was really good in the Adelaide final. If Cam or Head go down or lose form, he can offer something.

Next year on the senior list?

[LostDoggy]

Next year on the senior list?

Probably not likely. Not ruling it out though because competition hardened big men are valuable. There's a bit to play out yet.

[Bulldog Joe]

Can't see any scenario that keeps Minson on the list.
The one I am adding is Hamling. He seems way off and out of favour.

[bulldogtragic]

Can't see any scenario that keeps Minson on the list.
The one I am adding is Hamling. He seems way off and out of favour.

That's an interesting call. The thought crossed my mind but would he be the first 'Best First Year Player' winner to be dumped in his second year?

[Ozza]

Half Way, 11 H&A games down and 11 H&A games to come. Interesting to see who needs to improve or go move.

Minson is still to see a call up despite dominating the VFL. Unfortunately, 0% chance of being around on the senior list next year.
Prudden. His knee injury came at the wrong time, but we need to make room so I have him 0% chance too.

Hamilton?? His draft mates have all dominated VFL &/or AFL so far. Do we need to make a hard call or let him go home?
Clay Smith?? It's been over 12 months and he's still listed as an indefinite LTI. Don't know what to make of it?

Trades: Jong, Honeychurch ??

Morris, Boyd & Morris look like they can all play on now. Perhaps they do.
If Hrovat has done his shoulder today then his trade value is way under worth trading.

4-5 moved on.

Hard to argue with the logic there.

I think with Hamilton & Prudden - if we delisted them, I'd be hopeful that we could rookie both of them. We rookie'd Roarke Smith off a smaller body of work than these two, particularly Prudden, who showed some good signs in senior footy once he got a run at it.

Last year Bevo said that it was a shame that they had to delist players, because he'd like to keep all of them. I think it will be a shame to have to delist a few this year, but that's how it goes.

[ledge]

I suppose it depends if you see better players available.
No good delisting a player if you haven't got a better replacement.
Our list is quite deep now and the young ones will only get better.
Hamling could probably go as Zaine Cordy comes on.

[Mantis]

I suppose it depends if you see better players available.
No good delisting a player if you haven't got a better replacement.
Our list is quite deep now and the young ones will only get better.
Hamling could probably go as Zaine Cordy comes on.

But you need to drop off a mimimum of 3 regardless... Besides Minson there is a case to keep on everyone else.

[bulldogtragic]

But you need to drop off a mimimum of 3 regardless... Besides Minson there is a case to keep on everyone else.

This. It's a good problem to have, but it's a tough problem to have. I think 4 changes is what is needed in my view. A free agent or trade could make that possibly 5. Then that's harder again if all our oldies stay on next year which they could.

As for rookie-ing a player we delisted, has that really worked very well? I can think of Hahn, Goodes, Pearce off the top of my head.

[bornadog]

But you need to drop off a mimimum of 3 regardless... Besides Minson there is a case to keep on everyone else.

The three I would drop at this stage are:

1. Minson
2. Prudden (rookie him)
3. Hamilton (rookie him)

Other possibles:

Hrovat

[Mantis]

The three I would drop at this stage are:

1. Minson
2. Prudden (rookie him)
3. Hamilton (rookie him)

Other possibles:

Hrovat

So what do you do with our existing rookies?

Adcock is a likely out, but what of Lynch, Goetz & R.Smith?

[Twodogs]

I don't know the answer to Mantis' question. It's a bloody good question though. What are we going to do to keep Goetz and Lynch and Smith?

[bornadog]

So what do you do with our existing rookies?

Adcock is a likely out, but what of Lynch, Goetz & R.Smith?

Good question - drop Adcock and perhaps Goetz who hasn't impressed. Have to weight up between them all. Perhaps Prudden goes, but I am only looking from the outside, so I don't know how all these guys are rated.

[comrade]

I think there will be a few that will warrant some interest at the trade table (Hrovat & Honey) which will free up spots.

Minno is a definite, Prudden doesn't offer enough to warrant a spot after a reco, Clay Smith is another I'd move on regrettably (Dunkley is effectively a like for like).

Depending on the rest of the year, I'd look at keeping Lynch & Goetz on the rookie list and upgrading Rourke. I'd move Adcock on (possibly Prudden replaces him).

Our current list definitely has the least amount of dead set cloggers that I can recall.

[lemmon]

Not sure what Prudden has shown that deserves a rookie spot. Unfortunate that he did his knee but realistically Bailey Williams has shown more in one season as did Roarke playing off the back flank

[bulldogtragic]

If Minson & Goetz go, there's only Camhead on the list. One or worse, both, get injured and we are in strife.

[bornadog]

If Minson & Goetz go, there's only Camhead on the list. One or worse, both, get injured and we are in strife.

We can always draft.;)

[Rocco Jones]

It's going to be very hard.

Tried to trade but keep if we can't- Honeychurch, Hrovat
Delist from senior list- Minson
Move onto rookie list- C.Smith, Prudden (I would just delist him but I think we will 'do the right thing')
Delist from rookie list- Adcock, Goetz (if rumours about his work rate are true. I know ruckmen take awhile but I have found him very convincing).

I like Hamilton.

It means 3-5 national draft picks depending on if we can trade Hrovat and/or Honeychurch.
0 rookie picks but all good if we rate our list that much. Really the lists are becoming more and more just one (maybe soon see end of the rookie list). Rookie picks are just 100+ ND picks.

[bulldogtragic]

We can always draft.;)

We drafted Goetz last year?

[bornadog]

We drafted Goetz last year?

Yeah we did, but he is a rookie. I would like to see us Draft either a young ruckman to develop, or a 25 year old, mobile ruckman as back up.

I haven't heard good things about Goetz, but you never know he may come good.

[comrade]

If Minson goes, we need to bring in a back up ruckman that can play straight away which probably means trading one in.

[1eyedog]

Next year on the senior list?

He will want out if he doesn't get a run. No way will he play third fiddle for another season at 31.

There seemed to be a few back up ruckman floating about in last years draft. A few of them are on 1 year deals.

[Bulldog4life]

Hard to argue with the logic there.

I think with Hamilton & Prudden - if we delisted them, I'd be hopeful that we could rookie both of them. We rookie'd Roarke Smith off a smaller body of work than these two, particularly Prudden, who showed some good signs in senior footy once he got a run at it.

Last year Bevo said that it was a shame that they had to delist players, because he'd like to keep all of them. I think it will be a shame to have to delist a few this year, but that's how it goes.

Bevo is very loyal to all players as well as his coaching staff. I think he will spend sleepless nights deciding who to drop along. Lucky he has Jmac there to make the hard decisions.

[lemmon]

If Minson goes, we need to bring in a back up ruckman that can play straight away which probably means trading one in.

Which to me seems like a waste. I doubt we'll find a more ready to go ruck than Minson via trade or by drafting a mature age in a year we should be contending, I like the idea of trying to rookie him or even giving him another one year contract on the main list.

[comrade]

Which to me seems like a waste. I doubt we'll find a more ready to go ruck than Minson via trade or by drafting a mature age in a year we should be contending, I like the idea of trying to rookie him or even giving him another one year contract on the main list.

If Will wants to stay, of course. But he'll be taking a mighty hair cut.

Reality is we need to cut into the list. Putting him on the rookie list would be a great result but very unlikely.

[bulldogtragic]

If Will wants to stay, of course. But he'll be taking a mighty hair cut.

Reality is we need to cut into the list. Putting him on the rookie list would be a great result but very unlikely.

Yep, he's over 30. So North get first dibs.

[ledge]

If Will wants to stay, of course. But he'll be taking a mighty hair cut.

Reality is we need to cut into the list Putting him on the rookie list would be a great result but very unlikely.

3 players isn't really needing to cut into the list, that's the requirement by the AFL .
Don't think we need to CUT into the list at all It's a good list.

[Rocco Jones]

I would have Minson as a rookie if he was up for it. Going to be so hard.

[bulldogtragic]

I would have Minson as a rookie if he was up for it. Going to be so hard.

I agree. But several clubs could take him before us, that'd be the risk. But i just can't see him and our senior list being together next year so rookie or somewhere else seems the equation.

[Rocco Jones]

Minson would need both of Roughy and Campbell out injured to crack a game. At his age that means rookie list or nothing.

I really like what Dec Hamilton offers. Seems to have a bit of poise and good foot skills. Such valuable traits.

[bulldogtragic]

Minson would need both of Roughy and Campbell out injured to crack a game. At his age that means rookie list or nothing.

I really like what Dec Hamilton offers. Seems to have a bit of poise and good foot skills. Such valuable traits.

That only leaves Minson & Prudden gone. Adcock frees up a rookie spot though. Finding another 2 changes is getting harder and harder (assuming we may want a FA or possible trade or the possibility to do so). Which two would you pick today?

[comrade]

I wouldn't be moving on Hamilton yet. He's improved greatly this year. I know we've been spoilt by kids like Bont, Daniel, McLean etc coming in and performing but it's the exception not the rule.

He needs to build up his body before we should make a categorical call. I think he has something and hope he gets another year.

[bulldogtragic]

I wouldn't be moving on Hamilton yet. He's improved greatly this year. I know we've been spoilt by kids like Bont, Daniel, McLean etc coming in and performing but it's the exception not the rule.

He needs to build up his body before we should make a categorical call. I think he has something and hope he gets another year.

Same question as to Rocco. Who are the other two in addition to Minson & Prudden as of today?

[comrade]

Same question as to Rocco. Who are the other two in addition to Minson & Prudden as of today?

Clay Smith because Dunkley is essentially the same player with 2 good knees.

Unsure of the other one but I'm leaning towards trading out a player like Hrovat or HC.

[Rocco Jones]

Yep, Clay to rookie list unless he is decent on return.

[Mantis]

Yep, Clay to rookie list unless he is decent on return.

How big is your rookie list?

[Rocco Jones]

How big is your rookie list?

Haha well if Will accepts my rookie list offer we need to dump one! My plan...

Trade or keep- Hrovat, Honeychurch
Senior to rookie- Minson, C. Smith, Prudden
Rookie delist/retire- Goetz, Adcock
--------------------------------------------------
That means 1 too many rookies. As stated, I would only keep Prudden to do the right thing but might have to make a hard call. I do not except to see Minson on rookie list anyway.

If Clay has a good return it basically rules out a demotion, meaning we pretty much have to trade out Honeychurch and/or Hrovat. If nothings on offer for either, we will simply have to delist a guy we rate. I guess the down side of having a strong list! Bit like the Swans rating Shane Biggs but having to trade him out.

[bornadog]

Haha well if Will accepts my rookie list offer we need to dump one! My plan...

Trade or keep- Hrovat, Honeychurch
Senior to rookie- Minson, C. Smith, Prudden
Rookie delist/retire- Goetz, Adcock
--------------------------------------------------
That means 1 too many rookies. As stated, I would only keep Prudden to do the right thing but might have to make a hard call. I do not except to see Minson on rookie list anyway.

If Clay has a good return it basically rules out a demotion, meaning we pretty much have to trade out Honeychurch and/or Hrovat. If nothings on offer for either, we will simply have to delist a guy we rate. I guess the down side of having a strong list! Bit like the Swans rating Shane Biggs but having to trade him out.

You could upgrade Lynch from Rookie to senior if he is any good.

[Rocco Jones]

I have wanted Prudden delisted for a couple of years in a row now but Beveridge seems to rate him highly.

As a side note, I find the forced 3 delistings rule a bit silly. Surely sides want to enter the draft anyway and having a guy losing his job at a work place he is happy at just to get to 3.... Say we would like to keep Honeychurch, value him more than pick 50 or whatever comes our way last pick. What's the point of delisting him, having his future uncertain etc? I guess the kind of rule that never comes up so who cares.

[Rocco Jones]

You could upgrade Lynch from Rookie to senior if he is any good.

Another side note, I think having 2 different lists is very outdated. The rookie list started to give more kids a go with clubs paying less of a salary, kind of like taking on an apprentice. For awhile we didn't fill our list because we couldn't afford it. The game keeps on becoming more and more professional. The only way we should have a second tier list is in American Sports style with an injury list. This involves being able to pick up players outside of the AFL to replace players on the long term injury list.

[bulldogtragic]

You could upgrade Lynch from Rookie to senior if he is any good.

So I can keep track of the various ideas:

Upgrade Lynch using pick 54/82
Delist & rookie Smith, Minson & Prudden (cutting Goetz & Adcock) - Minson would have to be picked first and what happens is he goes?
Fourth spot cut is Hrovat/Honey

And if Romero is wanted and gets through to the rookie draft?

[Rocco Jones]

I didn't answer Lynch question. I don't see any reason to upgrade him yet. If there are too many rookies + we have made 3 changes, I would keep Clay on the senior list.

[bornadog]

Another side note, I think having 2 different lists is very outdated. The rookie list started to give more kids a go with clubs paying less of a salary, kind of like taking on an apprentice. For awhile we didn't fill our list because we couldn't afford it. The game keeps on becoming more and more professional. The only way we should have a second tier list is in American Sports style with an injury list. This involves being able to pick up players outside of the AFL to replace players on the long term injury list.

Is the rookie list set at 4?

[bulldogtragic]

I didn't answer Lynch question. I don't see any reason to upgrade him yet. If there are too many rookies + we have made 3 changes, I would keep Clay on the senior list.

Cool, I'm just trying to keep a track of things. So your 3 are Minson, Prudden (to rookie list for Adcock & Goetz) and Honey/Hrovat.

So if we like Romero he's on the main list irregardless?

[Rocco Jones]

Is the rookie list set at 4?

It's all a bit complicated with the veterans list which has two working subsets at the moment (those side before and after veterans list changes).

From what I know, if you have no veterans list players = 6 rookies and 1 vets list = 5 rookies. Not including internationals and guys we poach from other sports.

GWS get granted 216 rookies.

[LostDoggy]

Given we need to shed 3+ players every year, the main question is who does our list least need. For mine the 4 players we could shed would be Minson, Adcock, Hamilton and Prudden. No disrespect to these players (Minson will go down as a Bulldog great, no question) but they are the 4 that we can afford to lose coming into next season. All others have plenty to offer going forward in my opinion.

[FrediKanoute]

Minson - delist. No point rookieing - its effectively what we have done for the last 18 months.
Prudden - delist - heart says we should rookie, but head says he is not going to offer more than he has already offered during his time on the list. We have better players in his position.

Hamling - in the spotlight - not in favour with the coach is never a good thing. Adams has taken his spot and he has Dad and Cordy breathing down his neck as rookies
Hrovat - in the spotlight - injury plagued 2 years means he hasn't had the continuity. Is he a best 22 player or have others gone past him?
C Smith - in the spotlight - genuine case for a rookie spot, but 3 reco's in 3 years means that he needs some luck.
Jong - in the spotlight - with midfield spots filled and his struggling to grasp a spot as a defensive forward he has been underwhelming in 2016. A big 11 games ahead.
Hamilton - in the spotlight - his draft class have all debuted and shown talent. the draft class a year later have all debuted and showed signs. Would have to be in the gun, but may get a late reprieve if there are signs that he is 12-18 months away from turning it on.

[GVGjr]

Hamling - in the spotlight - not in favour with the coach is never a good thing. Adams has taken his spot and he has Dad and Cordy breathing down his neck as rookies


Where are you getting that information from?

[bornadog]

It's all a bit complicated with the veterans list which has two working subsets at the moment (those side before and after veterans list changes).

From what I know, if you have no veterans list players = 6 rookies and 1 vets list = 5 rookies. Not including internationals and guys we poach from other sports.

GWS get granted 216 rookies.

AFL looking at changing the rookie list rules. see here (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-considering-rookielist-revamp-20160606-gpcx35.html)

[FrediKanoute]

Where are you getting that information from?

I should probably have caveated and said "appears to not be". I don't have any information - but Bevo has persisted with playing Wood as a tall when Hamling could have come in for Adams. He favours Fletcher Roberts in the lock down role. He was dropped pretty quickly after his one game - all coming off a best first year player gig. You would have to presume/assume/suppose/guess that Bevo prefers others.

[Mantis]

I'm going to cut a bit deeper.. Whilst we are well positioned we need to add & improve our list in order to seperate ourselves from the challengers over the next 5-7 years.

Delisted - Minson, Smith & Prudden - fairly self explanatory.. Prudden survives if Bob calls it quits. I just don't see how Smith gets a game ahead of our mids/ flankers.

Traded - 2 or 3 of the following - Hrovat, Honeychurch, Stevens, Jong & Hamling - We need to be looking to position ourselves better in the draft. Something like our first pick + Stevens to a team like St.Kilda for their 1st pick is what I'm looking at... We need add a couple of players who can run & kick.

Happy to give Hamilton another year.. Has some polish and it's no shame that he is taking a little while to adjust.. Hopefully we can sneak him in for a couple of games later this year.

[bulldogtragic]

I'm going to cut a bit deeper.. Whilst we are well positioned we need to add & improve our list in order to seperate ourselves from the challengers over the next 5-7 years.

Delisted - Minson, Smith & Prudden - fairly self explanatory.. Prudden survives if Bob calls it quits. I just don't see how Smith gets a game ahead of our mids/ flankers.

Traded - 2 or 3 of the following - Hrovat, Honeychurch, Stevens, Jong & Hamling - We need to be looking to position ourselves better in the draft. Something like our first pick + Stevens to a team like St.Kilda for their 1st pick is what I'm looking at... We need add a couple of players who can run & kick.

Happy to give Hamilton another year.. Has some polish and it's no shame that he is taking a little while to adjust.. Hopefully we can sneak him in for a couple of games later this year.

Are you looking to draft a young gun with the foot skills (with pick 5 or so) or use it as currency to get a ready made?

[Mantis]

Are you looking to draft a young gun with the foot skills (with pick 5 or so) or use it as currency to get a ready made?

Draft.

Think we could get someone like S.Hill for less than that.

[Axe Man]

Is the rookie list set at 4?


It's all a bit complicated with the veterans list which has two working subsets at the moment (those side before and after veterans list changes).

From what I know, if you have no veterans list players = 6 rookies and 1 vets list = 5 rookies. Not including internationals and guys we poach from other sports.

GWS get granted 216 rookies.

That's not correct. The veterans list has nothing to do with the rookie list, it just provides some salary cap relief.

You can have 4, 5 or 6 rookies (ignoring internationals and players that haven't played for +3 years). If you have 5 or 6 rookies you have 1 or 2 less on your primary list.

[bulldogtragic]

Draft.

Think we could get someone like S.Hill for less than that.

Your cut is around what I think too (5) and I do like your suggestion as it opens up free agency and trade windows for us. I still think we should be using 3 live picks (I.e. Not just rookie upgrades). Plus we have pick 70 or so from Tahleeya so we could have 18, 36, 54, 70, 72 before the trading season commences and Romero possibly being in the mix. A FA takes the spot of pick 72 and Dalrymple is picking gems around 54. 70 could be a rookie upgrade is there's no one we are interested in.

Stevens probably has the most currency as a genuine trade, with the others do you think have a decent value or are they to free up some spots?

Also you'd probably have a better guess than me, Minson, Smith & Stevens combined salary would be pretty good. Would that free up enough cap to go shopping for a decent FA?

[Bulldog4life]

Minson - delist. No point rookieing - its effectively what we have done for the last 18 months.
Prudden - delist - heart says we should rookie, but head says he is not going to offer more than he has already offered during his time on the list. We have better players in his position.

Hamling - in the spotlight - not in favour with the coach is never a good thing. Adams has taken his spot and he has Dad and Cordy breathing down his neck as rookies
Hrovat - in the spotlight - injury plagued 2 years means he hasn't had the continuity. Is he a best 22 player or have others gone past him?
C Smith - in the spotlight - genuine case for a rookie spot, but 3 reco's in 3 years means that he needs some luck.
Jong - in the spotlight - with midfield spots filled and his struggling to grasp a spot as a defensive forward he has been underwhelming in 2016. A big 11 games ahead.
Hamilton - in the spotlight - his draft class have all debuted and shown talent. the draft class a year later have all debuted and showed signs. Would have to be in the gun, but may get a late reprieve if there are signs that he is 12-18 months away from turning it on.

All good points Fredi but half a season is a long time in football. By the end of the season one or more of the players you mentioned might have turned their chances around. Interesting times ahead and a great position for the Club to be in.

[Bulldog4life]

We also mustn't forget how good a player Clay was before he got injured. If he shows enough in the last half of the season he is a monty to stay. The Club has been very supportive of him through his rehab so they won't throw him out nor should they. Menzell had 4 recons and Geeong stuck with him so it is not uncommon.

[bulldogtragic]

All good points Fredi but half a season is a long time in football. By the end of the season one or more of the players you mentioned might have turned their chances around. Interesting times ahead and a great position for the Club to be in.

That's exactly why I like this thread, it's a really interesting and evolving discussion. Last year I had Grant gone, then staying. Then he was gone. Players who looked gone came back, players who looked like staying on were cut. Ayce Cordy was another player for a while that some suggested might stay on, at one point. Its interesting also to hear why some might let Hamilton go, or keep him. And why some would rookie multiple delisted players. There's no right or wrong, but I like the well reasoned opinions because with a good list it might just come down to competing well reasoned opinions on a few different players. As you say great position for the club to have, all be it tough choices to make.

[Bulldog Joe]

With the certainty of Minson being delisted and Goetz showing nothing to this point, we will need some ruck coverage.

If we were to rookie a mature ager, Minson would surely be an option. Would Meese at Willy be one to consider ?

[bulldogtragic]

With the certainty of Minson being delisted and Goetz showing nothing to this point, we will need some ruck coverage.

If we were to rookie a mature ager, Minson would surely be an option. Would Meese at Willy be one to consider ?

I agree, we are light on in that eventuality. Or look free agents. Zac Clarke & Tom Bellchambers might still be gettable.

[Mantis]

With the certainty of Minson being delisted and Goetz showing nothing to this point, we will need some ruck coverage.



Has Goetz had an opportunity to show anything?

In the bulk of the games I saw early on he was playing as pretty much a permanent tall forward due to Minson & BTC being the primary ruckman.

[Mantis]

Stevens probably has the most currency as a genuine trade, with the others do you think have a decent value or are they to free up some spots?

A bit of both.. And it's pretty hard to determine someones value, it just depends on how eager the 2 teams are to get rid of/ acquire.. Rhys Stanley was worth about pick 18 a few years back, Zac Smith 2 picks in the 50's.


Also you'd probably have a better guess than me, Minson, Smith & Stevens combined salary would be pretty good. Would that free up enough cap to go shopping for a decent FA?

Without exactly knowing I think it would be in the $900k to $1.1mil bracket.

[bulldogtragic]

A bit of both.. And it's pretty hard to determine someones value, it just depends on how eager the 2 teams are to get rid of/ acquire.. Rhys Stanley was worth about pick 18 a few years back, Zac Smith 2 picks in the 50's.



Without exactly knowing I think it would be in the $900k to $1.1mil bracket.

If we're in that ballpark, then we are going to have an opportunity to go hard at an FA's or trades for very good players. Can you imagine AFL House and their footy media if we go out and splash some cash on a/some decent players!

[comrade]

Hmmm, the more I think about it, the more Stevens does seem to be our most valuable trade asset that is also relatively surplus to our list needs. There are a few teams that could do with a tough, skilled mid like him (Saints, Richmond). If he could be turned into a first rounder, you'd have to have a very hard look at it.

[bulldogtragic]

Hmmm, the more I think about it, the more Stevens does seem to be our most valuable trade asset that is also relatively surplus to our list needs. There are a few teams that could do with a tough, skilled mid like him (Saints, Richmond). If he could be turned into a first rounder, you'd have to have a very hard look at it.

Pick 6 or 7 and the circa $1M salary savings in Mantis' last post that a wonderful position to be in. Jason McCartney would have sleepless nights about what he could do in such a situation.

[comrade]

If we're in that ballpark, then we are going to have an opportunity to go hard at an FA's or trades for very good players. Can you imagine AFL House and their footy media if we go out and splash some cash on a/some decent players!


Minno finishing up would certainly help our cap. Surely he's on 450-500K plus a year, given he signed back when he was in his prime and an AA.

[comrade]

Pick 6 or 7 and the circa $1M salary savings in Mantis' last post that a wonderful position to be in. Jason McCartney would have sleepless nights about what he could do in such a situation.


They say Fyfe is not exactly content over in the West...

[bulldogtragic]

They say Fyfe is not exactly content over in the West...

I'd do that in a heart beat, that's a premiership trade. Pick 6 & Jong/Hamling/Hrovat and Fyfe can have the $1M for 5 years.

Boyd, Bob & Dale if they retire next year free up a heap of cash too. Imagine the footy media if Fyffe came to us. "Irresponsible dogs throwing million dollar contracts around like confetti, and for a bloke with a double leg break"...

[Mantis]

Hmmm, the more I think about it, the more Stevens does seem to be our most valuable trade asset that is also relatively surplus to our list needs. There are a few teams that could do with a tough, skilled mid like him (Saints, Richmond). If he could be turned into a first rounder, you'd have to have a very hard look at it.

That's the key point.. We have an abundance of hard contested players, who have excellent endurance, but who aren't quick and don't have great kicking skills... Think Macrae, Hunter, Libba, Picken & Wallis.. On top of Dahl & Bont who are slightly different.. I guess I'm also banking on the likes of Dale, Webb & McLean continuing to improve.

To get what we are lacking you have to be willing to give up a bit and I think it's a risk worth taking.

[bulldogtragic]

Dear Nat Fyffe & AFL gun players:

745

[Mofra]

Boyd, Bob & Dale if they retire next year free up a heap of cash too. Imagine the footy media if Fyffe came to us. "Irresponsible dogs throwing million dollar contracts around like confetti, and for a bloke with a double leg break"...
Imagine opposition coaches trying to tag both Bonti and Fyfe leaving 190cm+ players like Macrae and Stringer to rotate through the midfield.

And some bloke called Libba.

[Mofra]

Truth is I love what Koby brings to the side and I'd prefer to keep him but in his best year his average TOG was a little below our other mids.

The other issue is player retention is generally cheaper than attracting a player on the open market.

And sorry, but I don't see it with Hamilton. It's not that he just has to get to AFL standard, he has to get to AFL standard and beat out a bunch of other guys to get to one of the top 30 or so players on our list to put real pressure on senior spots. He's a mile off that and if we can't fit in guys like Webb who are racking up BOGs at VFL level, Dale is fringe, Dunkley looks set to be best 22 sooner rather than later then there's HC, Hrovat and Jong who are kind of rated (but realistically) depth players at the minute then we should look at freeing up that spot. Our mid/forwards are young with the exception of Dickson and we rotate genuine mids through there quite heavily anyway with Wallis and Bonti regular fixtures there, Dunkley in the games he's played, and Clay Smith if the planets align and he ever gets back.

[1eyedog]

Who are they that said Fyfe is discontent?

The point of difference between Koby and many of our other mids are that he carries the ball. Sure he's tough and good above his head, but he runs when he has the ball. I guess that's why he has trade value as well.

Quite a few of our mids are get ball - handball.

[comrade]

Who are they that said Fyfe is discontent?

The point of difference between Koby and many of our other mids are that he carries the ball. Sure he's tough and good above his head, but he runs when he has the ball. I guess that's why he has trade value as well.

Quite a few of our mids are get ball - handball.

There are rumblings that he's at odds with some of the leadership group. Something to do with the captaincy vote over the pre-season.

Might be rubbish, might not be.

Imagine rotating Fyfe and Bont through CHF when the other goes in the midfield. Hehe

[The Doctor]

Stevens is non tradeable in my opinion

[chef]

No one gets traded unless its their idea imo. We've got a cracking group last thing we need is to be upsetting the apple cart like we did in the late 90's.

Dalrymple is doing great work where ever our picks lay so i hope we just keep building from the draft.

[Bulldog Joe]

No one gets traded unless its their idea imo. We've got a cracking group last thing we need is to be upsetting the apple cart like we did in the late 90's.

Dalrymple is doing great work where ever our picks lay so i hope we just keep building from the draft.

We still need to create a minimum of 3 spots. Trading would be preferable to delisting for anyone that must go!

[bulldogsthru&thru]

No one gets traded unless its their idea imo. We've got a cracking group last thing we need is to be upsetting the apple cart like we did in the late 90's.

Dalrymple is doing great work where ever our picks lay so i hope we just keep building from the draft.

agreed. With the talent on our list we are selling the geelong and hawthorn style "stick together, win together". If our players take pay cuts to stick together and win a flag, we can't upset that by trading a key part of the team against his will.

[chef]

We still need to create a minimum of 3 spots. Trading would be preferable to delisting for anyone that must go!

Agree we will have to create 3 spots (which shouldnt be to hard). Delisting players who arent in our plans (or good enough) would preferable to me than trying to force a trade. If a player wants out fair enough, but i dont like the idea of throwing around names in search of a super trade.

[chef]

Stevens is non tradeable in my opinion

Agree. Hes clearly best 22 and a coaches favourite going by him being rushed back a bit early. Weird seeing him put up for trade

[Mantis]

Agree. He's clearly best 22 and a coaches favourite going by him being rushed back a bit early. Weird seeing him put up for trade

I don't have him clearly best 22, and possibly even more so moving into next year... As a little exercise we are playing our first final this year at the MCG with only Murf & Crameri unavailable, what's our team? (I asked the Dr a similiar ? in the 'Sign up Koby now' thread, but he must have missed it)

[bulldogtragic]

agreed. With the talent on our list we are selling the geelong and hawthorn style "stick together, win together". If our players take pay cuts to stick together and win a flag, we can't upset that by trading a key part of the team against his will.

But that's not quite correct with respect, through 2005 onwards (Geelong 2007 & Hawks 2008 Premiers) have traded in and out astutely.

Hawks: Hay, Thompson, Lonie, Everitt, Williams (leading goal kicker), McGlynn, Josh Kennedy, Sierakowski, Lisle, Gilham, Young (didn't match FA), Anderson & many smaller trades.

Geelong: Moloney, Prismall, Mumford, Laidler, Playfair, West, Christensen & many smaller trades.

Trading astutely over the last decades as been the difference between nearly winning premierships and actually winning premierships in teams like Sydney, Geelong & Hawthorn who do espouse loyalty. That doesn't stop them from trading out players though where they think there's a big advantage.

[Bulldog4life]

We still need to create a minimum of 3 spots. Trading would be preferable to delisting for anyone that must go!

Trading one player for another doesn't reduce our list.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

But that's not quite correct with respect, through 2005 onwards (Geelong 2007 & Hawks 2008 Premiers) have traded in and out astutely.

Hawks: Hay, Thompson, Lonie, Everitt, Williams (leading goal kicker), McGlynn, Josh Kennedy, Sierakowski, Lisle, Gilham, Young (didn't match FA), Anderson & many smaller trades.

Geelong: Moloney, Prismall, Mumford, Laidler, Playfair, West, Christensen & many smaller trades.

Trading astutely over the last decades as been the difference between nearly winning premierships and actually winning premierships in teams like Sydney, Geelong & Hawthorn who do espouse loyalty. That doesn't stop them from trading out players though where they think there's a big advantage.

I hear you and i'm all for it if it helps our cause. Just don't want to execute a trade that rocks the boat internally with the players. If the players feel the club is being disloyal then they may start to think the same.

[bornadog]

But that's not quite correct with respect, through 2005 onwards (Geelong 2007 & Hawks 2008 Premiers) have traded in and out astutely.

Hawks: Hay, Thompson, Lonie, Everitt, Williams (leading goal kicker), McGlynn, Josh Kennedy, Sierakowski, Lisle, Gilham, Young (didn't match FA), Anderson & many smaller trades.

Geelong: Moloney, Prismall, Mumford, Laidler, Playfair, West, Christensen & many smaller trades.

Trading astutely over the last decades as been the difference between nearly winning premierships and actually winning premierships in teams like Sydney, Geelong & Hawthorn who do espouse loyalty. That doesn't stop them from trading out players though where they think there's a big advantage.

Those trades at the Hawks was a rebuild phase. They needed to get rid of players and pick up draft picks, which they did, and they stuck with the young group. The Hawks were heavily critised getting rid of Hay, Thompson, Croad, but look at the success that brought when they could draft, Roughie, Franklin, Hodge, Sewel, etc etc.

We may have to make the call and say goodbye to Murphy, Boyd and Minson. Let's face it Murphy will be 34 on Thursday, and Boyd 34 in a few months time. It is not my preference, but hard calls may have to be made.

Something to think about.

[Bulldog4life]

Those trades at the Hawks was a rebuild phase. They needed to get rid of players and pick up draft picks, which they did, and they stuck with the young group. The Hawks were heavily critised getting rid of Hay, Thompson, Croad, but look at the success that brought when they could draft, Roughie, Franklin, Hodge, Sewel, etc etc.

We may have to make the call and say goodbye to Murphy, Boyd and Minson. Let's face it next year Murphy will be 34 on Thursday, and Boyd 34 in a few months time. It is not my preference, but hard calls may have to be made.

Something to think about.

Only Minson in my opinion.

[bulldogtragic]

Those trades at the Hawks was a rebuild phase. They needed to get rid of players and pick up draft picks, which they did, and they stuck with the young group. The Hawks were heavily critised getting rid of Hay, Thompson, Croad, but look at the success that brought when they could draft, Roughie, Franklin, Hodge, Sewel, etc etc.

We may have to make the call and say goodbye to Murphy, Boyd and Minson. Let's face it Murphy will be 34 on Thursday, and Boyd 34 in a few months time. It is not my preference, but hard calls may have to be made.

Something to think about.

A lot to think about. God knows stuffing up by trading or not trading for another run of failed prelims will nearly kill me. Trading in the right trade is vital though.

Williams (leading goal kicker) was used to help secure Burgoyne.
Moloney (club & fan favourite) was used to help secure Ottens.

Both very influential premiership players at Hawthorn & Geelong.

[bornadog]

A lot to think about. God knows stuffing up by trading or not trading for another run of failed prelims will nearly kill me. Trading in the right trade is vital though.

Williams (leading goal kicker) was used to help secure Burgoyne.
Moloney (club & fan favourite) was used to help secure Ottens.

Both very influential premiership players at Hawthorn & Geelong.

Richmond is the club that needs to really have a cleanout, and get some early draft picks.

We are in a great position and I would really like to keep our first round pick, unless we can secure a superstar.