Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

[GVGjr]

Over the next few days some decisions will be made around which players will still be on the playing list heading into the 2012 season.

Retirements
Hall and Hudson are confirmed and even though he has a season to go on his contract I think Gilbee is weighing up if he can command enough senior games to make it worthwhile.
On a side note, Gilbee's spot could also allow for another player to be moved to the veterans list allowing some additional room in the salary cap.

So that is 2 confirmed and one possibility with a question on Hargrave as well. It's a hard one on Hargrave because he believes he can still play but must have some concerns about life after football if he gets another leg injury.

De-listings
To me the following players will need a bit of luck to still be on the list next season:
Mulligan (despite a lack of talls) Hooper, Reid (could be traded to GWS for something) and a big question mark on Stack. (Ive chopped and changed myself if he should be maintained on the list)

Trades
Hill still has some currency and we will be compensated for losing Ward but I don't think there will be a lot of interest in other players except a few questions around Lakes intentions.

We have to expect that we will lose both of these guys and hopefully we get something decent for Hill.

Rookie list
Hahn has retired. Prato won't be given another year. Panos could very well be promoted. Dahlhaus is a lock. Barlow has probably done enough to be promoted. Johanssien should be offered another year as a rookie.

So in summary something like this might occur:

Gone
Hall, Hudson, Gilbee, Mulligan, Hooper, Reid, Stack, Ward, Hill, Hahn and Prato
Upgraded
Dahlhaus, Panos and Barlow

Unlucky? Probably Stack
Lucky? There is probably 3 guys who's contracts might save them

[chef]

a big question mark on Stack. (Ive chopped and changed myself if he should be maintained on the list)

Wasn't he offered a new contract?

[1eyedog]

If Stack stays I can't see a role for Gilbee in the back half even though he has a year to run on his contract.

[gohardorgohome]

The question that must be asked for each player is that they must now fall into two categories.

A. Will this guy be develop to be good enough to be top 28 on a premiership list by 2015?
B. Does the guy show the leadership traits to develop others to get to that level.

It's time to say good bye and trade if they do not fit into these categories.

I can't see Addison Stack or Barlow fitting into these categories.

[The Underdog]

I would have thought if Addison is out of contract that he'd be close to a delisting. I think we've seen the full extent of what he can do and it's probably not enough to keep him on the list. Can't imagine there'd be any trade interest. Hill would be another that there might be limited trade interest in who probably has run his race.
I would have thought that Higgins might be available to trade if we can get something worthwhile for him.
Can't see too many others who other teams would be interested in who we'd be willing to part with.

Retirements:
Hudson
Hall
Gilbee and Hargrave are under contract so assume they'll stay on.

Delisting:
Reid
Mulligan (ideally, there's a VFL level replacement we can pick up to take his spot)
Hill (or for trade)
Addison

Trade:
Higgins, if we can get someone to pay over
Hill, if anyone's interested

My understanding is that Moles and Hooper are under contract next year which is the only reason I'd hold onto them, although Moles probably deserves one more chance to show what he can do.

Dahl is a definite upgrade. Barlow is borderline but I'd only give him a one year contract if he's upgraded. I'd like Panos to be given a year on the senior list under a new coach.
I'd give Stack one more year, I thought his last 2 or 3 games this year were alright.

One question. If Lake decides he wants to go and only on that proviso, do we trade him to GWS for one of the 17 yo's they can trade, plus another good pick this year?

A lot depends on what the new coach thinks about the players available

[Go_Dogs]

So in summary something like this might occur:

Gone
Hall, Hudson, Gilbee, Mulligan, Hooper, Reid, Stack, Ward, Hill, Hahn and Prato
Upgraded
Dahlhaus, Panos and Barlow

Unlucky? Probably Stack
Lucky? There is probably 3 guys who's contracts might save them

Great post GVGjr.

Hooper is on a 2 year contract from what I recall, so not sure if that might be enough to save him as well.

I'm very much line ball on Stack also. It seems as though the current staff had made their minds up on him given he didn't play the last couple of games, but I thought he'd been continuing to improve. I wouldn't be against giving him another year.

Addison could be another who goes. If Hooper and/or Stack get retained I think he might need to be moved on just to continue to turn the list over.

Agree with your assessment of the rookie list. Barlow has probably done just enough now, and I'm keen on Panos getting a promotion as I think he's done just about everything we could have asked of him and looks to have the right attitude and application to continue to develop his game.

[GVGjr]

Addison is a hard one to gauge. I don't think he would command anything at the trade table but given I had projected 11 departures and 3 upgrades leading into another compromised draft he could very well be a lucky survivor for another season. If he is out of contract then he might be in trouble.

There are a number of players that would be lucky to be maintained. Moles, Skinner and Addison are certainly 3 of them.

If Hoppers contract can't be paid out then maybe one of the other guys comes into the mix. Given what Veszpremi and Tutt have shown I think Hooper will struggle to get more than a few games in the seniors so we might have to make the hard call.
We should have some room in the salary cap to do so.

[GVGjr]

If Stack stays I can't see a role for Gilbee in the back half even though he has a year to run on his contract.

If Hargrave stays then there probably isn't a spot for either of them.
Hargrave, Picken, Schofield, Wood, Howard and of course Murphy pretty much cover all the back pocket and back flank options we need to cover. If Hargrave goes then Stack would probably be maintained.

[GVGjr]

Would GWS have any interest in Reid (a good mate of Wards) Hill and Addison?
They will need some depth and have a bigger list to accommodate it.

[The Doctor]

I think we need to cut deep as well and would make the following changes. Some may be contracted but this is what I would do if we could;

Retirements

Hall
Hudson
Gilbee
Hargrave (would need to pass a medical to be retained)

I'm 50/50 on Hargrave. He would have to prove his fitness conclusively.

Delistings

Mulligan
Hooper
Skinner
Ward (GWS)
Hahn
Prato

Trade

Hill
Lake

* if they don't want to be here let them go

Rookies

Dahlaus (upgrade to main list)
Panos (upgrade to main list)
Barlow (upgrade to main list)
Johannisen (retain on rookie list)

One more year

Addison, Stack, Reid

[Dancin' Douggy]

Addison is a hard one to gauge. I don't think he would command anything at the trade table but given I had projected 11 departures and 3 upgrades leading into another compromised draft he could very well be a lucky survivor for another season. If he is out of contract then he might be in trouble.

There are a number of players that would be lucky to be maintained. Moles, Skinner and Addison are certainly 3 of them.

If Hoppers contract can't be paid out then maybe one of the other guys comes into the mix. Given what Veszpremi and Tutt have shown I think Hooper will struggle to get more than a few games in the seniors so we might have to make the hard call.
We should have some room in the salary cap to do so.

I see Addison as a ready made senior body for GWS.

[GVGjr]

Doc, I think a lot of people would be surprised that we both have Skinner as either being delisted (you) or lucky to be maintained (me) especially given the hype that surrounded him early in the season.

Whats your thoughts on his chances of becoming a senior player?

[Dancin' Douggy]

Doc, I think a lot of people would be surprised that we both have Skinner as either being delisted (you) or lucky to be maintained (me) especially given the hype that surrounded him early in the season.

Whats your thoughts on his chances of becoming a senior player?

Surely we'd give Skinner another year, What a huge leap (pardon the pun) for him culturally and professionally to come to Melbourne and train with an AFL team.
Would take you a year just to find your feet.

[GVGjr]

I think we need to cut deep as well and would make the following changes. Some may be contracted but this is what I would do if we could;

Retirements

Hall
Hudson
Gilbee
Hargrave (would need to pass a medical to be retained)

I'm 50/50 on Hargrave. He would have to prove his fitness conclusively.


What is the situation about paying out veterans? I think their full contracted salary goes against the salary cap if you pay them out early which I don't think is worth doing. Different if they retire though.

I suspect that Gilbee might pull the pin and Hargrave might stick it out for another 12 months.
This allows us to move Lakes contract to the veterans list. If Hargrave goes then we could also add Murphy.

[GVGjr]

Surely we'd give Skinner another year, What a huge leap (pardon the pun) for him culturally and professionally to come to Melbourne and train with an AFL team.
Would take you a year just to find your feet.

We didn't with Thorne. I tend to think he will have another season but if he has found life in Melbourne a difficult adjustment he might ask to be released.

[The Doctor]

Doc, I think a lot of people would be surprised that we both have Skinner as either being delisted (you) or lucky to be maintained (me) especially given the hype that surrounded him early in the season.

Whats your thoughts on his chances of becoming a senior player?

none

I never understood the hype. Just because he can jump very high and do backflips doesn't make you a good footballer. I've seen enough of him to be convinced he just hasn't got the ability. 2 weeks ago he played in the Willi 2nd's v Box Hill and was plain awful. He flew for his usual batch of speculative marks and got nowhere near them. He fell off tackles and the 3 kicks he did get went straight to the opposition. Now if that was Hill or Stack he would have lynched by now.

[GVGjr]

none

I never understood the hype. Just because he can jump very high and do backflips doesn't make you a good footballer. I've seen enough of him to be convinced he just hasn't got the ability. 2 weeks ago he played in the Willi 2nd's v Box Hill and was plain awful. He flew for his usual batch of speculative marks and got nowhere near them. He fell off tackles and the 3 kicks he did get went straight to the opposition. Now if that was Hill or Stack he would have lynched by now.

It makes you wonder the reasons why he was gifted a senior game this year.
I do like his athleticism and his willingness to chase after the opposition but you're spot on about his kicking and his decision making.

[Mofra]

So that is 2 confirmed and one possibility with a question on Hargrave as well. It's a hard one on Hargrave because he believes he can still play but must have some concerns about life after football if he gets another leg injury.
Shaggy is one of three partners in a boxing gym with Hall & Hahn - I don't think he has worries with life after football, and given the two partners will be involved full time at the gym Shaggy may well also decide to pull the pin, despite being contracted for 2012.

[GVGjr]

Shaggy is one of three partners in a boxing gym with Hall & Hahn - I don't think he has worries with life after football, and given the two partners will be involved full time at the gym Shaggy may well also decide to pull the pin, despite being contracted for 2012.

I meant more about getting another leg injury rather than any financial implications.
He talked to the player sponsors a couple of months back and mentioned that having a fused ankle and a couple of other injuries could be an issue for him after his footy days are over. I think he realised that another injury could really limit him.

[ledge]

We didn't with Thorne. I tend to think he will have another season but if he has found life in Melbourne a difficult adjustment he might ask to be released.

IF i remember correctly Thorne got a major injury and that just gave him no chance, Skinner from what I have seen and have talked to him says he loves it here and still is hungry.

[LostDoggy]

I see Addison as a ready made senior body for GWS.

My thoughts exactly.

Also.. Barlow isn't a star but looks a very versatile gap filler.

Hargy and Gilbs should go hopefully they see it that way too.

[LostDoggy]

IF i remember correctly Thorne got a major injury and that just gave him no chance, Skinner from what I have seen and have talked to him says he loves it here and still is hungry.

I live in Darwin and I know first hand how hard it is for the indigenous boys to make the transition from here to the AFL. I was recently speaking with someone who knows Zephi and they mentioned that he loves it at the dogs. You simply cannot expect a young guy from the Kimberley to arrive at the club and be an instant superstar. Anyway, wouldn't he have been given a two year contract?

[SlimPickens]

Trade:
Higgins, if we can get someone to pay over
Hill, if anyone's interested


100% agree with this, Higgins has been disappointing again this year and his defensive efforts once again extremely poor. He will still hold some currency with a number of clubs and should be traded if possible.

[LostDoggy]

100% agree with this, Higgins has been disappointing again this year and his defensive efforts once again extremely poor. He will still hold some currency with a number of club and should be traded if possible.

Agree. I think we always look for excuses to explain why Higgins isn't reaching the lofty heights that everyone expects him to. Maybe a move would be a win win for both parties???

[Maddog37]

Skinner looked ok to me. Give him more time.

Gilbee and Shaggy need to be able to get absolutely rock hard it. If they can't then they probably need to consider their future.

Higgins is the biggest tease ever but somehow I feel we should hang on to him an give him a summer of repeat sprint training.

Hill lacks courage at times and if we can trade we should.

We really need to sit down with GWS and see what we can do.

[divvydan]

What is the situation about paying out veterans? I think their full contracted salary goes against the salary cap if you pay them out early which I don't think is worth doing. Different if they retire though.

I suspect that Gilbee might pull the pin and Hargrave might stick it out for another 12 months.
This allows us to move Lakes contract to the veterans list. If Hargrave goes then we could also add Murphy.

You're right that if we force out a veteran that we'd have to pay his full salary against the cap.

Even if both Gilbee and Hargrave run around against next year, we can move 1/3 of Lake's salary to the veteran's cap (Lake himself would stay inside the main list). This would then mean that 1/3 of Gilbee and 1/3 of Hargrave's are outside the cap. Given Lake's contract, that would still save a reasonable amount of money.

In that same line, we could do the same with Murphy and have 4 lots of 1/4 salaries not being counted against the cap but without knowing hos much each player is on, it's difficult to know when this stops helping. In short, the new player (Lake, Murphy) would have to be on more money than those already on the Veterans list.

[mjp]

It makes you wonder the reasons why he was gifted a senior game this year.


No wondering here. The club were selling hope after the season had gone pear shaped and hoped that he might take mark of the year.

No doubt that game should have been given to Dalhaus who was in terrific form (or even Veszpremi if no chance to do a rookie upgrade)...much of this was discussed on this forum at the time though and Skinner had a lot of defenders.

[1eyedog]

If Hargrave stays then there probably isn't a spot for either of them.
Hargrave, Picken, Schofield, Wood, Howard and of course Murphy pretty much cover all the back pocket and back flank options we need to cover. If Hargrave goes then Stack would probably be maintained.

Agreed in theory, but even if Hargrave stays Stack will be good insurance down back. Shaggy is injury prone and must only have a year left. We have persisted with Stack this year and I think that will continue. We did see glimpses toward the end of the season.

I know Hargrave can play much taller than Stack, but I think Stack can fill other roles in the future rather than just as a back flanker. I think his perceived flexibility and well as a required depth player will help him to hold his stop and maybe even provide him with the opportunity to prove his detractors wrong.

[LostDoggy]

You would hope that the new coach starts with a new game plan and new attitude towards fitness, speed, and defensive skills. Watching the Geelong game, I couldn't help but think how they play so well as a team, and part of that has to do with being so well drilled as to what each player's role is and the skill to execute it. We have too many players who let us down in both areas, players who don't subscribe to the game plan or whose skills aren't up to it in normal situations, let alone pressure cooker situations. And until we sort out who is completely capable of subscribing to and executing that game plan, we really are stabbing in the dark as to who to keep and who not to.

[The Underdog]

100% agree with this, Higgins has been disappointing again this year and his defensive efforts once again extremely poor. He will still hold some currency with a number of clubs and should be traded if possible.

I'm just concerned that his lack of pace and ability to seperate is causing him to rush his kicking and miss targets. When he plays back and gets some space his kicking is quite good but as you say his defensive efforts aren't spectacular.
Even with this I'd only do it if we got a particularly good offer. He is one of the few players who we might be willing to trade who might have some currency. He's still only 23 after all.

[kruder]

Gee if we elevate Barlow you know not to expect much next year. He is slow and has teribble hands IMO and along with Hooper not up to AFL standard.

It's great to see Panos step up in a final and we need more players who are elite kicks.
I didn't mind him playing down back either so I'd like to see him elevated.

Gilbee lacks the intensity and speed to play AFL anymore and I think if he was truthful to himself he would retire. He has been a great servant for the dogs.

I still have hopes for Stack and Hill but I'd be suprised if either were on the list next year.

With our first round selection I think we need to add some genuine class to the midfield group and if there was a Luke Shuey clone out there Id take him!

[BulldogBelle]

I cant see the point in playing Gilbee at all next season - hopefully he will retire with a small settlement from the club.

Between Wood, Schofield, Murphy, Higgins, Howard, Morris, Picken and perhaps Wallis we have covered the small backline positions.

Hargrave is also going to be hard pressed to get a game unless his skills are pristine given the above names.

[Mofra]

Gee if we elevate Barlow you know not to expect much next year. He is slow and has teribble hands IMO and along with Hooper not up to AFL standard.
His hands weren't too bad until he broke a finger - he can at least run all day and provide a contest.

[Greystache]

Retirements

Hall
Hudson
Hahn
Gilbee

Delistings

Reid
Stack
Addison
Mulligan
Hooper

Trade/Leaving

Ward
Hill
Higgins

Rookie list

Dahlhaus- upgrade
Panos- upgrade
Barlow- retain
Johanissen- retain

[Ghost Dog]

How much time does Hooper have on his contract?

Credit to Barlow. Raise your hand if you rated him as spud material when we decided to draft him?

[1eyedog]

How much time does Hooper have on his contract?

Credit to Barlow. Raise your hand if you rated him as spud material when we decided to draft him?

I still think he is making up the numbers because we have no one superior to come in for him. Maybe with a full list to pick from that will change.

I think his versatility is the only think working for him. He is a jack of all trades master at none and is not a viable long-term option for us.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Retirements

Hall
Hudson
Hahn
Gilbee

Delistings

Reid
Stack
Addison
Mulligan
Hooper

Trade/Leaving

Ward
Hill
Higgins

Rookie list

Dahlhaus- upgrade
Panos- upgrade
Barlow- retain
Johanissen- retain

So we're using 9 draft picks?

[GVGjr]

So we're using 9 draft picks?

There might be a player for player trade or two.

[westdog54]

How much time does Hooper have on his contract?

Credit to Barlow. Raise your hand if you rated him as spud material when we decided to draft him?

*Raises Hand*

Has exceeded expectations, notwithstanding that they weren't that high to begin with. Has added value and should be retained on the Rookie List.

Retirements

The 3 H's.
Gilbee - The rest of the body isn't keeping up with his left boot

Delist

Reid - Has run out of chances, isn't up to it.
Addison - if GWS take him for some depth it would be a bonus.
Mulligan - Hasn't repaid the faith shown when he was promoted to the senior list.
Hooper - Not fast enough or fit enough. Like Mulligan Should never have been promoted.
Prato(R)

Promote
Dahlhaus
Panos

Retain
Barlow
Johannisen

Offer for trade
Hill
Higgins

Ward will go to GWS. I'm resigned to that fact.

By my count that's 9 players (if we strike trade deals) plus one veteran and a rookie off the list, two Rookies promoted, leaves 7 spots on the senior list. Even assuming the trades don't get done would we be wary of going into the draft with too many spots to fill. Another option may be to upgrade Barlow. I think a few more decisions will be made after trade week. Hooper and Addison may end up being lucky. The flexibility to move Lake to the Vets list would be nice.

[westdog54]

I still think he is making up the numbers because we have no one superior to come in for him. Maybe with a full list to pick from that will change.

I think his versatility is the only think working for him. He is a jack of all trades master at none and is not a viable long-term option for us.

Thats not necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes you need a 'quick fix' floating around and while he's not best 22 material he's proven he can fill a role as a depth player. Not a long term option but would still consider him a required player given our current plight.

[bulldogsman]

Retirements

Hall
Hudson
Hahn
Gilbee

Delistings

Reid
Mulligan
Skinner???? - reports don't sound good, shift to rookie list maybe?

Trade/Leaving

Ward
Hill
Addison

Rookie list

Dahlhaus- upgrade
Panos- upgrade
Barlow- retain
Johanissen- retain
Prato - gone

I want Hooper delisted, but I think he will be retained as he would have another year left on his contract.

[westdog54]

Skinner???? - reports don't sound good, shift to rookie list maybe?


That would be the ultimate attitude test. It was done with Michael West a few years ago after he turned up for pre-season in a far from satisfactory state. Unfortunately he did his knee that year and that was it.

[Dancin' Douggy]

We didn't with Thorne. I tend to think he will have another season but if he has found life in Melbourne a difficult adjustment he might ask to be released.

I think Skinner is coming from a much more remote background than Thorne.
Might be worth persevering for one more year.

[LostDoggy]

Barlow is what he is - Mr Silicon. Offer him a year contract. He's realistically going to be on bugger all.

On the subject of the younger guys who the jury may still be out on I don't see the point of delisting them and paying out all/part of their contract (if they still have a year left). If you can trade them, then fine, but with where the club’s at I’d keep them for insurance and see if they improve, esp. with a compromised draft.

[LostDoggy]

How much time does Hooper have on his contract?

Credit to Barlow. Raise your hand if you rated him as spud material when we decided to draft him?

I did and still do. Hasn't shown much yet really. Best game was vs gc where he played on the first gamer who Sherman vilified.
He has made John Butcher the hotest trade property there is.

[1eyedog]

Thats not necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes you need a 'quick fix' floating around and while he's not best 22 material he's proven he can fill a role as a depth player. Not a long term option but would still consider him a required player given our current plight.

I drew up a proposed 2012 team last night and struggled to fit him into it.

At best he is a required depth player.

[stefoid]

Gilbs and Hargrave are contracted and I think we owe it to them to show what they can to fight their way back into the best 22.

This year, I think it depends more on who we think we can get into the club than who we want out of it. Like, how many players have we got our eyes on to draft onto the list or as rookies? Because in a thin draft, it may not be all that many.

This strikes me as a conservative list management year.

2012, however, with a good deep draft and at least one extra first round draft pick strikes me as the year to prune back harder and bring more fresh talent into the club. Plus the new coach might like to have a look at the list first.

So for mine:

OUT:
hall
huddo
hahn
ward
mulligan

UPGRADE:
Panos
Dalhaus

IN:
minimum three draft picks
two rookies

[Sockeye Salmon]

Gilbs and Hargrave are contracted and I think we owe it to them to show what they can to fight their way back into the best 22.

This year, I think it depends more on who we think we can get into the club than who we want out of it. Like, how many players have we got our eyes on to draft onto the list or as rookies? Because in a thin draft, it may not be all that many.

This strikes me as a conservative list management year.

2012, however, with a good deep draft and at least one extra first round draft pick strikes me as the year to prune back harder and bring more fresh talent into the club. Plus the new coach might like to have a look at the list first.

So for mine:

OUT:
hall
huddo
hahn
ward
mulligan

UPGRADE:
Panos
Dalhaus

IN:
minimum three draft picks
two rookies

For 3 draft picks you're one delisting short.

I assume you meant to include Reid there somewhere?

[Hot_Doggies]

Gilbs and Hargrave are contracted and I think we owe it to them to show what they can to fight their way back into the best 22.

This year, I think it depends more on who we think we can get into the club than who we want out of it. Like, how many players have we got our eyes on to draft onto the list or as rookies? Because in a thin draft, it may not be all that many.

This strikes me as a conservative list management year.

2012, however, with a good deep draft and at least one extra first round draft pick strikes me as the year to prune back harder and bring more fresh talent into the club. Plus the new coach might like to have a look at the list first.

So for mine:

OUT:
hall
huddo
hahn
ward
mulligan

UPGRADE:
Panos
Dalhaus

IN:
minimum three draft picks
two rookies

Stack? Josh Hill? Addison???

[Swoop]

Gilbs and Hargrave are contracted and I think we owe it to them to show what they can to fight their way back into the best 22.

Didn't we allow Gilbee to show he could fight his way back in our best 22 this year? From my recollection he was on the decline last year and we all put it down to a bad season and as a club we allowed him to play on this year on the basis he was not a guranteed starter and would have to earn his spot in the side. His form has been on the decline for two seasons now, his main asset which is his kicking isn't what it used to be and I struggle to find where he sits in our plans for the future. Despite a strong preseason he still wasn't able to consolidate his spot in our team and ended the year in our reserves, what I don't understand is why he would still have another year on his contract when his decline wasn't unexpected in fact this has been on the cards for the past 24 months.

[BulldogBelle]

I did and still do. Hasn't shown much yet really. Best game was vs gc where he played on the first gamer who Sherman vilified.
He has made John Butcher the hotest trade property there is.



A spare parts man like Barlow isnt too bad to have around the club, and given the amount of injuries we had in 2011 we appreciated his services

The game vs Port showed he isnt a key defender, as he was being butchered (excuse the pun) by a 2nd game player

[Ghost Dog]

r
Didn't we allow Gilbee to show he could fight his way back in our best 22 this year? From my recollection he was on the decline last year and we all put it down to a bad season and as a club we allowed him to play on this year on the basis he was not a guranteed starter and would have to earn his spot in the side. His form has been on the decline for two seasons now, his main asset which is his kicking isn't what it used to be and I struggle to find where he sits in our plans for the future. Despite a strong preseason he still wasn't able to consolidate his spot in our team and ended the year in our reserves, what I don't understand is why he would still have another year on his contract when his decline wasn't unexpected in fact this has been on the cards for the past 24 months.

really good points. could become a a killer kicking coach but.

[LostDoggy]

A spare parts man like Barlow isnt too bad to have around the club, and given the amount of injuries we had in 2011 we appreciated his services

The game vs Port showed he isnt a key defender, as he was being butchered (excuse the pun) by a 2nd game player

Some can say Spare parts man, I say Jack of all trades, master of none. What's his position? We have better options in every area. Keep him on the rookie list.

[stefoid]

For 3 draft picks you're one delisting short.

I assume you meant to include Reid there somewhere?

Oh right, hahn was a rookie.

Addison or Reid then.

So thats 3 draftees and 3 rookies.

The point Im making is dont approach list management arse backwards. The club will be looking at the likely number of players it thinks are worth bringing into the club, and then seeing who they need to boot to make way for them, rather than making a shitlist of every player who probably wont be at the club in 2 years time.

I dont see the point in paying gilbee out -- lindsay gilbee, man! -- unless there is someone we really want at the club and we need that spot on the list to get them.

I could be wrong, but I expect about 6-7 new players into the club this year and more like 9 or 10 next year.

[chef]

Stack? Josh Hill? Addison???

I would hang onto them as they could become decent players under a different coach.

[LostDoggy]

I would hang onto them as they could become decent players under a different coach.

Good luck with that.

[Mofra]

Some can say Spare parts man, I say Jack of all trades, master of none. What's his position? We have better options in every area. Keep him on the rookie list.
He's basically Everitt, except an inch or two taller and with better endurance.

[Maddog37]

He's basically Everitt, except an inch or two taller and with better endurance.


Except he tries all the time.

[Mofra]

Except he tries all the time.
True - Barlow actually gets to the contest.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

True - Barlow actually gets to the contest.

exactly. Barlow is involved in a lot of plays. Whether people like him or not for his skills or abilities he gets involved. Something that cant be said for the likes of Grant and Hill.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Except he tries all the time.

But has about 1/10th the ability

[azabob]

But has about 1/10th the ability

That is the issue, isn't it? In twenty years time Barlow will be content in knowing he gave it the best shot he could, whereas Everitt, Hill perhaps will wonder what if.....
Granted Barlow may not be good enough to make it but he won't die wondering.

[westdog54]

But has about 1/10th the ability

Which is why I can't stand it when players like Hill and Everitt fail to perform to a consistent basis.

[Happy Days]

Seriously, Barlow is an absolute spud. We don't have to upgrade him, his depth will still be provided on the rookie list. Lets leave him there.

[soupman]

Seriously, Barlow is an absolute spud. We don't have to upgrade him, his depth will still be provided on the rookie list. Lets leave him there.

I agree. I believe that the only time you should promote someone off the rookie list is when:

a) They are clearly in you best 25 the coming year (ie. Dahlhaus)

or

b) You have run out of years to keep them on the rookie list (max 3) and while they still do not fall in the best 25 category, they are better than the player you expect to get with the draft pick their spot is currently allocated to, and they have the potential to be in that 25 ("b" as an option should hardly ever be used). This player should be on a one year contract, so they are effectively a rookie on the senior list.

Under this theory Mulligan and Hooper wouldn't have been promoted, but kept as rookies. If their form was good enough this year they would have been promoted, if not then we just don't retain them, which if they weren't signed up for 2012 would probably be what would happen anyway.

[ledge]

When do the clubs announce the delistings?

[azabob]

When do the clubs announce the delistings?

Some like to do it now- like gold coast have already started. If your club was smart you would wait till after the trade window as sometimes one mans trash is another treasure.

[ledge]

Some like to do it now- like gold coast have already started. If your club was smart you would wait till after the trade window as sometimes one mans trash is another treasure.

Nathan Dj says hello.

[LostDoggy]

Nathan Dj says hello.
Did anyone hear the commentator on the radio broadcast of Willy's game say hw good DJ was at that an AfL club should have a look at him !

[ledge]

Did anyone hear the commentator on the radio broadcast of Willy's game say hw good DJ was at that an AfL club should have a look at him !

Haha what a jerk or should I say what a Thomas.(as in John or Grant)

[LostDoggy]

OUTS
Mulligan
Stack
Prato
Hahn
Hall
Hooper
Moles
Addison
Hargrave
Gilbee
Hudson
Ward

TRADES
J.Hill
Reid

[bornadog]

OUTS
Mulligan
Stack
Prato
Hahn
Hall
Hooper
Moles
Addison
Hargrave
Gilbee
Hudson
Ward

TRADES
J.Hill
Reid

Do we even get 12 picks?

[LostDoggy]

OUTS
Mulligan
Stack
Prato
Hahn
Hall
Hooper
Moles
Addison
Hargrave
Gilbee
Hudson
Ward

TRADES
J.Hill
Reid
That's at least 3 players that are contracted. We aren't exactly rolling in it.

[westdog54]

OUTS
Mulligan
Stack
Prato
Hahn
Hall
Hooper
Moles
Addison
Hargrave
Gilbee
Hudson
Ward

TRADES
J.Hill
Reid

We want to rebuild. Not Demolish.

We still need 38 to form a list.

[LostDoggy]

Didn't we allow Gilbee to show he could fight his way back in our best 22 this year? From my recollection he was on the decline last year and we all put it down to a bad season and as a club we allowed him to play on this year on the basis he was not a guranteed starter and would have to earn his spot in the side. His form has been on the decline for two seasons now, his main asset which is his kicking isn't what it used to be and I struggle to find where he sits in our plans for the future. Despite a strong preseason he still wasn't able to consolidate his spot in our team and ended the year in our reserves, what I don't understand is why he would still have another year on his contract when his decline wasn't unexpected in fact this has been on the cards for the past 24 months.

I don't know why we didn't continue with Gilbee in the FP.
IIRC he was dropped 2 weeks after kicking a bag of goals...:confused:

Might be a spot to try him back in next year where his exceptional kicking might slot some handy goals?

[Ghost Dog]

OUTS
Mulligan
Stack
Prato
Hahn
Hall
Hooper
Moles
Addison
Hargrave
Gilbee
Hudson
Ward

TRADES
J.Hill
Reid


If Shaggy can get himself right, I think he can be of some use.

Moles I have not seen much of at Willy. how's he been going?

the kinds of errors he has made on game day are not things you couldn't correct, IMO. Does some good things.
Remember one particular running goal in Canberra. Just needs a bit more game time I reckon. He's not slow.

Stack will still give us some reasonable service as well IMO.

[Bulldog4life]

I don't know why we didn't continue with Gilbee in the FP.
IIRC he was dropped 2 weeks after kicking a bag of goals...:confused:

Might be a spot to try him back in next year where his exceptional kicking might slot some handy goals?

Thought the same thing myself.

[LostDoggy]

If Shaggy can get himself right, I think he can be of some use.

Moles I have not seen much of at Willy. how's he been going?

the kinds of errors he has made on game day are not things you couldn't correct, IMO. Does some good things.
Remember one particular running goal in Canberra. Just needs a bit more game time I reckon. He's not slow.

Stack will still give us some reasonable service as well IMO.

Stack is completely worth keeping IMO
Moles did his shoulder in training while he was still playing for the dogs, they carried him until round 17 when they LTI'd him for Dalhouse, so he never went back down to Willy. He looked good before he got injured and should stay on

[LostDoggy]

Do we even get 12 picks?

You will have to spread these cuts over two years but in reality these guys are gone, going, or pushing shit up hill to get a game.

[immortalmike]

I don't know why we didn't continue with Gilbee in the FP.
IIRC he was dropped 2 weeks after kicking a bag of goals...:confused:

Might be a spot to try him back in next year where his exceptional kicking might slot some handy goals?

Most likely because you can't play Gia, Hall, Higgins, Grant, and Gilbee in the same forward line.

[Remi Moses]

I don't know why we didn't continue with Gilbee in the FP.
IIRC he was dropped 2 weeks after kicking a bag of goals...:confused:

Might be a spot to try him back in next year where his exceptional kicking might slot some handy goals?

Thought the same thing myself.

Thinking the same thing!
Does anyone think Gilbee could reinvent himself ala Mark Nickoski

[1eyedog]

Not really. His bag was against a Richmond team that paid him no respect. The week after he did absolutely nothing and was dropped.

He needs to ask himself a few questions about attacking the contest and what he can do in terms of forward pressure before I would move him into a forward line consisting of Grant, Gia and potentially Higgins.

Nickoski is fit and works his arse off.

[anfo27]

Can't see us making wholesale changes to the list when realistically its a very shallow draft and the new coach might want to see what he can get out of some of those players. Also I can't see us paying players out to delist them for an extra pick in this draft when we can just let them see their contract out and then delist them and load up on the stacked draft the year after. I reckon we will go with 5 picks max in this draft.
The new coach could look at Gilbee and think he is someone that he can still get something out of and Lindsay would think this would be his last chance at a good paying contract so i can't see him giving that up. Hopefully the new coach can do something with him cause the last 18 months he has been dreadful.
Can't understand the calls for Barlow to be promoted when he has done exactly what we wanted him to do as a mature age rookie. He deserves another year as a rookie and no more.
Higgins can be shopped around and can't remember a player thats diappointed me so much. Another year like his last 2 and he will have no value left. Maybe send Higgins & Lake to GWS for that gun O'Mera kid of whatever his name is.

Retire/gone: Hall, Hudson, Hahn, Ward and maybe Hargrave if his body isn't up for it
Delist: Mulligan, Stack, Prato & maybe Addison
Trade: Reid, maybe Higgins maybe Lake and maybe anyone else who has some real currency that we could get a deal too good to refuse.
Upgrade the Dollhouse; keep Panos, Barlow & Johannissen on the rookie list for another year.

[GVGjr]

Can't see us making wholesale changes to the list when realistically its a very shallow draft and the new coach might want to see what he can get out of some of those players. Also I can't see us paying players out to delist them for an extra pick in this draft when we can just let them see their contract out and then delist them and load up on the stacked draft the year after.

The only problem with this though is that leading into the compromised drafts we weren't active enough with changing our list

2008 - Cordy (FS) Roughead and Jones
2009 - Howard, Tutt, Markovic and Thorne
2010* - Wallis (FS) Libertore (FS), Schofield, Skinner and T Hill.

Granted we did OK getting in 2010 by also getting Dahlhaus and but we have hardly mapped this out correctly and I don't think we can keep waiting.

I think we have to back our ability at the draft table and add some pace and height to the list.

[anfo27]

The only problem with this though is that leading into the compromised drafts we weren't active enough with changing our list

2008 - Cordy (FS) Roughead and Jones
2009 - Howard, Tutt, Markovic and Thorne
2010* - Wallis (FS) Libertore (FS), Schofield, Skinner and T Hill.

Granted we did OK getting in 2010 by also getting Dahlhaus and but we have hardly mapped this out correctly and I don't think we can keep waiting.

I think we have to back our ability at the draft table and add some pace and height to the list.

I agree that we definately should have made some more cuts to the list the last 2-3 years.
I would also like to make some big cuts this year but we have made some errors with contracts that will cost us money and will those kids be there in the draft if we go in there with 6,7 or 8 picks?
By the sounds of things we won't even get a top quality kid with our first pick this year.

[BulldogBelle]

The only problem with this though is that leading into the compromised drafts we weren't active enough with changing our list

2008 - Cordy (FS) Roughead and Jones
2009 - Howard, Tutt, Markovic and Thorne
2010* - Wallis (FS) Libertore (FS), Schofield, Skinner and T Hill.

Granted we did OK getting in 2010 by also getting Dahlhaus and but we have hardly mapped this out correctly and I don't think we can keep waiting.

I think we have to back our ability at the draft table and add some pace and height to the list.





If I look at the above names (2008 to 2010) we have had more hits than misses...Thorne at this stage has been the only major miss

I think we have to back our ability at the draft table and add some pace and height to the list.

We have to make some hard decisions NOW on some players who probably wont be there (or probably wont make a difference) when we are going to be bona fide finals contenders from 2014 to 2017 - and try for some potential quality with later draft picks - similar to what we have done with Tutt + Schofield

Providing they have the tank, some young + quick + skillful outside mids that we recruit now should be able to play games in 2012 - to play an outside role they dont need to be superstrong 100kg monsters

Our FF, FB and CHB (given the problems that Williams has staying on the field) are the positions that will be the most challenging to fill in this off season




All up, 132 players have made their debut this season, just 10 fewer than in 1987. The Suns, Brisbane Lions (11), Western Bulldogs (10) and St Kilda (eight) head the list.

Given the above, there will be sunshine after the storm

[The Doctor]

The only problem with this though is that leading into the compromised drafts we weren't active enough with changing our list

2008 - Cordy (FS) Roughead and Jones
2009 - Howard, Tutt, Markovic and Thorne


I couldn't agree more.

We should have recruited more in both drafts. 2008 was a strong draft & we only took 3 picks all inside the first 2 rounds. We were fed the spin at the time that there wasn't much left later on.

Going into the 2009 draft we went in knowing Aker and Eagle would be retained when the whole world, except our football dept, knew they were finished. I also argued at the time that Brad Johnson should have been retired.

Another say 3 picks out of these 2 draft which might have netted us some decent players like Alex Silvagni or Michael Barlow et al and we would be in a stronger position to rebound.

[ledge]

Easy in hindsight isnt it.

[Dancin' Douggy]

Can't see us making wholesale changes to the list when realistically its a very shallow draft and the new coach might want to see what he can get out of some of those players. Also I can't see us paying players out to delist them for an extra pick in this draft when we can just let them see their contract out and then delist them and load up on the stacked draft the year after. I reckon we will go with 5 picks max in this draft.
The new coach could look at Gilbee and think he is someone that he can still get something out of and Lindsay would think this would be his last chance at a good paying contract so i can't see him giving that up. Hopefully the new coach can do something with him cause the last 18 months he has been dreadful.
Can't understand the calls for Barlow to be promoted when he has done exactly what we wanted him to do as a mature age rookie. He deserves another year as a rookie and no more.
Higgins can be shopped around and can't remember a player thats diappointed me so much. Another year like his last 2 and he will have no value left. Maybe send Higgins & Lake to GWS for that gun O'Mera kid of whatever his name is.

Retire/gone: Hall, Hudson, Hahn, Ward and maybe Hargrave if his body isn't up for it
Delist: Mulligan, Stack, Prato & maybe Addison
Trade: Reid, maybe Higgins maybe Lake and maybe anyone else who has some real currency that we could get a deal too good to refuse.
Upgrade the Dollhouse; keep Panos, Barlow & Johannissen on the rookie list for another year.

I would do almost anything to get a genuine homegrown superstar at the club.
Someone who's going to have the commentators drooling like buddy Franklin does.
God knows we need some genuine excitement and electricity.

[The Doctor]

Easy in hindsight isnt it.

some of us were making these calls at the time. Nothing to do with hindsight

[GVGjr]

Easy in hindsight isnt it.

It isn't a case of hindsight. I could direct you towards some discussion back in 2008 where some of us challenged why the club wasn't active enough leading into the compromised drafts and our likely commitments to father son selections.

[ledge]

It isn't a case of hindsight. I could direct you towards some discussion back in 2008 where some of us challenged why the club wasn't active enough leading into the compromised drafts and our likely commitments to father son selections.

Foresight then:D

Just had a look at GCs delistings 8 players not even worth trying to trade, doesnt look good for the recruiters does it?
Only 2 years in these boys must have been well over rated.
I wonder if any of them will be rookied anywhere.

[Greystache]

Foresight then:D

Just had a look at GCs delistings 8 players not even worth trying to trade, doesnt look good for the recruiters does it?
Only 2 years in these boys must have been well over rated.
I wonder if any of them will be rookied anywhere.

GC had a bigger list than the rest of the comp, they had to trim it by 8 at the end of their first season.

[Mantis]

Just had a look at GCs delistings 8 players not even worth trying to trade, doesnt look good for the recruiters does it?
Only 2 years in these boys must have been well over rated.
I wonder if any of them will be rookied anywhere.

Who's recruiters?

[ledge]

Who's recruiters?

Gold Coasts

[ledge]

GC had a bigger list than the rest of the comp, they had to trim it by 8 at the end of their first season.

Oh okay that explains it, but I would have thought you might have tried to trade a few in two in one deals with other players as sweeteners.
Refer DJ.

[stefoid]

Higgins can be shopped around and can't remember a player thats diappointed me so much. Another year like his last 2 and he will have no value left. Maybe send Higgins & Lake to GWS for that gun O'Mera kid of whatever his name is.


Higgins AND Lake? jeesus!

[stefoid]

It isn't a case of hindsight. I could direct you towards some discussion back in 2008 where some of us challenged why the club wasn't active enough leading into the compromised drafts and our likely commitments to father son selections.

We were having a crack at a premiership, thats why Johno, Acker and Eagleton were retained.

Thats why we drafted Hall. Were any of the players drafted from pick 47 (Hall) to our next pick (marcovic at 63) any good?

As for 2008, the Ray trade moved our pick 48 to pick 31 to enable us to select both Roughhead and Jones.

Our next pick was at 64 and then 80 - who should we have picked up?

[Remi Moses]

The club did the right thing in 08. We're trying to win a flag for Christ sake!
Just would have been nice to get Hall in 08.

[ledge]

The club did the right thing in 08. We're trying to win a flag for Christ sake!
Just would have been nice to get Hall in 08.

We tried and Bazza tried but Roos wouldnt have a bar of it.
Bit him on the bum later though.

[Topdog]

We were having a crack at a premiership, thats why Johno, Acker and Eagleton were retained.

Thats why we drafted Hall. Were any of the players drafted from pick 47 (Hall) to our next pick (marcovic at 63) any good?

As for 2008, the Ray trade moved our pick 48 to pick 31 to enable us to select both Roughhead and Jones.

Our next pick was at 64 and then 80 - who should we have picked up?

Are you suggesting that we didn't have list cloggers in 2008???

[stefoid]

Are you suggesting that we didn't have list cloggers in 2008???

Youre putting the horse before the cart by concentrating on who shouldnt be on the list - you target a player to bring onto the list, then you make way for them by dropping someone off it.

So who were the players available at the picks we had that we should have brought onto the list? Because the MC obviously thought there werent any worthy at our 4th pick in 08.

People are saying drop this one, that one and the other one, and pay these guys out... Thats fine if the MC has identified a truckload of players they want to bring onto the list this year.

But hearsay says this is a thin draft and the talent is not likely to run deep. So my guess is that we wont see the sweeping changes that some are suggesting - this year. Rather than take on a bunch of late pick nuff-nuffs this year on 2 year contracts, I am guessing that we will wait until the next draft, prune much harder and take on a big load of draftees from a bumper draft.

[bornadog]

Youre putting the horse before the cart by concentrating on who shouldnt be on the list - you target a player to bring onto the list, then you make way for them by dropping someone off it.

So who were the players available at the picks we had that we should have brought onto the list? Because the MC obviously thought there werent any worthy at our 4th pick in 08.

People are saying drop this one, that one and the other one, and pay these guys out... Thats fine if the MC has identified a truckload of players they want to bring onto the list this year.

But hearsay says this is a thin draft and the talent is not likely to run deep. So my guess is that we wont see the sweeping changes that some are suggesting - this year. Rather than take on a bunch of late pick nuff-nuffs this year on 2 year contracts, I am guessing that we will wait until the next draft, prune much harder and take on a big load of draftees from a bumper draft.

Spot on Stefoid, and the pruning will be needed at the end of 2012 as the last of the class of 1999 disappear.

We have already lost three players and most likely we will delist at least another two and maybe trade one as well, so thats 6 changes already.

[LostDoggy]

Why do people keep throwing Lake up as a potential trade? The guy had three big operations in the pre-season and possibly wasn't managed well. A lot of players struggle after one operation let alone three. Ok, if he has another stinker of a year I'll stand corrected but I fail to believe that the premier defender in the comp would drop off that badly and never come good again.

[1eyedog]

Why do people keep throwing Lake up as a potential trade? The guy had three big operations in the pre-season and possibly wasn't managed well. A lot of players struggle after one operation let alone three. Ok, if he has another stinker of a year I'll stand corrected but I fail to believe that the premier defender in the comp would drop off that badly and never come good again.

I think the bandying about Lake potentially moving on has been driven more by a dubious relationship with Rocket and one or two players.

I know I'm probably dreaming but I don't think we are out of a good shot at the finals next year when I write our best 22 down on paper. It all depends on the game plan and how we adapt to other teams game plan. Lake has a big role in our ability to do this.

He is a required player until he decides to hang them up as far as I am concerned.

[bornadog]

I think the bandying about Lake potentially moving on has been driven more by a dubious relationship with Rocket and one or two players.

I know I'm probably dreaming but I don't think we are out of a good shot at the finals next year when I write our best 22 down on paper. It all depends on the game plan and how we adapt to other teams game plan. Lake has a big role in our ability to do this.

He is a required player until he decides to hang them up as far as I am concerned.

Rocket said last week he and Lake get along well and what you read is a load of rubbish.

On this forum, we have about 600 posts bagging Ward for leaving us, not being loyal etc etc, yet some posters want to move Lake on. Lake has been an AA Fullback for the last two years and because he was injured we all want to get rid of him.

[AndrewP6]

Rocket said last week he and Lake get along well and what you read is a load of rubbish.

On this forum, we have about 600 posts bagging Ward for leaving us, not being loyal etc etc, yet some posters want to move Lake on. Lake has been an AA Fullback for the last two years and because he was injured we all want to get rid of him.

Not all of us

[1eyedog]

Rocket said last week he and Lake get along well and what you read is a load of rubbish.

On this forum, we have about 600 posts bagging Ward for leaving us, not being loyal etc etc, yet some posters want to move Lake on. Lake has been an AA Fullback for the last two years and because he was injured we all want to get rid of him.

The statement below was posted on another thread by a WOOFER two months ago and it is straight from Ricky O's mouth.

Now I'm confused because either Rocket, Lake or Ricky O are telling Porkies.


Did anyone hear Ricky interviewed by Watson on SEN this morning?

Asked whether the Lake situation is a) Injury b) personal issue or c) issue with the coach, Ricky replied 'probably a combo there Tim'

[Sedat]

On this forum, we have about 600 posts bagging Ward for leaving us, not being loyal etc etc, yet some posters want to move Lake on. Lake has been an AA Fullback for the last two years and because he was injured we all want to get rid of him.Many factors to be considered with Lake, such as how career threatening are his injuries, and where is his head space at. No doubts that a fit, in form and mentally happy Lake is a prodigious talent. Also no doubts that an underdone and unhappy Lake is a liability as an AFL footballer. Which one will turn up in 2012? Will be be motivated knowing that a premiership is beyond his remaining career, to which we should seriously look at cashing in while his worth remains high (which it still will be for several clubs in need of defensive bolstering)

[anfo27]

Why do people keep throwing Lake up as a potential trade? The guy had three big operations in the pre-season and possibly wasn't managed well. A lot of players struggle after one operation let alone three. Ok, if he has another stinker of a year I'll stand corrected but I fail to believe that the premier defender in the comp would drop off that badly and never come good again.

Its more about where we are right now as a club. Some posters out there believe we should be looking to rebuild as our window seems to be now closed. If that is the case then the club needs to at least consider trading away a Lake. We need to look at what will make the club better down the road and if thats getting some very nice pieces from a GWS or Gold Coast for Lake then we need to seriously consider it. But from what Smorgan said about needing a refresh it sounds like they believe we're not that far away and in that case Lake won't be going anywhere.

If Lake has another stiner next year then his value would have more than halved.

I remember havng a conversation with a Carlton supporter the year Whitnal won the B&F and Fevola won the Coleman and they also finished dead last. I said 'would you consider trading both players and loading up on first round draft picks', he said 'they were their best 2 players and i was crazy', I replied with 'well both players would be at their highest value now and even with those 2 players you guys are still last now'. A year later Whitnal retired and we all know what happened to Fev. A vast majority of people would still think thats stupid but deals like this get done at every trade deadline in the US.

[GVGjr]

Its more about where we are right now as a club. Some posters out there believe we should be looking to rebuild as our window seems to be now closed. If that is the case then the club needs to at least consider trading away a Lake. We need to look at what will make the club better down the road and if thats getting some very nice pieces from a GWS or Gold Coast for Lake then we need to seriously consider it. But from what Smorgan said about needing a refresh it sounds like they believe we're not that far away and in that case Lake won't be going anywhere.
.

There is some merit in having that line of thought but we are only 2 years into a 4 year deal we signed with Lake and I'm not sure that we should be backing out of it so quickly based on one injury ridden season.
If I was the new coach I would ask every player including Brian if they want to be at the club or if they want to be traded. If Brian says his heart isn't in then I would explore a fair trade for him

I can't imagine any new coach wanting to lose a player of his ability so any suggestion that we should trade him is highly speculative from my way of thinking. He has a contract and if he really wants to stay then I'd keep him.

[anfo27]

There is some merit in having that line of thought but we are only 2 years into a 4 year deal we signed with Lake and I'm not sure that we should be backing out of it so quickly based on one injury ridden season.
If I was the new coach I would ask every player including Brian if they want to be at the club or if they want to be traded. If Brian says his heart isn't in then I would explore a fair trade for him

I can't imagine any new coach wanting to lose a player of his ability so any suggestion that we should trade him is highly speculative from my way of thinking. He has a contract and if he really wants to stay then I'd keep him.

Its got nothing to do with Brian being injured this year. Again its more the position of where our club is at.

[GVGjr]

Its got nothing to do with Brian being injured this year. Again its more the position of where our club is at.

As you would be aware there needs to be 3 parties agreement before a player can be traded assuming the club wants to trade a player.
The player has to agree, a new club has to be found and the compensation needs to be accepted.

I think your view on this is simplistic to say the least. All Brian has to do is say no thanks to the suggestion that he be traded and the position of where the club is at is rendered irrelevant.

[LongWait]

Rocket said last week he and Lake get along well and what you read is a load of rubbish.
On this forum, we have about 600 posts bagging Ward for leaving us, not being loyal etc etc, yet some posters want to move Lake on. Lake has been an AA Fullback for the last two years and because he was injured we all want to get rid of him.

What did you expect that Rocket would say? "Lake is a gun but struggled with his injuries this season and was sick to death of me humiliating him, so he spat the dummy and chose to opt out this year. My bad .... sorry!"

Lake's manager was talking about a trade a few months ago. If Lake wants out and we can get good value in a trade it's bye bye Brian as far as I'm concerned.

[ledge]

Does Lake want out?

[bornadog]

What did you expect that Rocket would say? "Lake is a gun but struggled with his injuries this season and was sick to death of me humiliating him, so he spat the dummy and chose to opt out this year. My bad .... sorry!"

Lake's manager was talking about a trade a few months ago. If Lake wants out and we can get good value in a trade it's bye bye Brian as far as I'm concerned.

It was a personal conversation at a private dinner and he was being frank and honest. It was not a media thing.

[1eyedog]

It was a personal conversation at a private dinner and he was being frank and honest. It was not a media thing.

Regardless, what did you think he was going to say when questioned about this? Tell me something then, how many people did Rocket actually rat on that night? One, two? None?

[NoParkingOnMatchDays]

Does Lake want out?

I think you will find that it is the club that wants Lake out.

[stefoid]

I just enjoy watching him play. I hope he stays.

[bornadog]

Regardless, what did you think he was going to say when questioned about this? Tell me something then, how many people did Rocket actually rat on that night? One, two? None?

As I said, he was honest and frank and we will leave it at that.

[Swoop]

I can't help but to laugh, when a club or fans choose to move on a player whether by trade or delisting for whatever reason they call it list management but essentially their looking after they're own long term future yet when a player makes the same decision they're called every name under the sun. Loyalty is a two way street, don't expect it in return if you're not prepared to offer it in the first place.

We don't really have anything to gain by moving on Lake as we will not receive adequate compensation due to his poor season, doubts on whether he can return to his best and his inflated salary. The only way we would entertain the thought of moving him on is if Lake himself demanded a trade and even then a new coach would most likely attempt to change his mind aka Eade with Gilbee when he took over.

The club seems to be in a position where they don't see a need to completely re-build the list so I don't see why they would want to trade one of our few match winners away for under market value. Likewise a new coach coming in would prefer to back himself in and try to rejuvenate a former All Australian than try his hand in a compromised draft.

The only other reason would be long term injury which if that is the case other clubs would also have access to his medical files and place him further on the nose as a prospective recruit.

By the same logic of some that are prepared to ship out Lake for a set of steak knives why aren't those same people throwing Cooney's name out, he has admitted he will have to continually manage his knee, regularly miss games and his manager has declared he will most likely never be the same player he once was. What is the difference in their situations?

[Topdog]

The statement below was posted on another thread by a WOOFER two months ago and it is straight from Ricky O's mouth.

Now I'm confused because either Rocket, Lake or Ricky O are telling Porkies.

Combo of the first 2, not all 3.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I can't help but to laugh, when a club or fans choose to move on a player whether by trade or delisting for whatever reason they call it list management but essentially their looking after they're own long term future yet when a player makes the same decision they're called every name under the sun. Loyalty is a two way street, don't expect it in return if you're not prepared to offer it in the first place.


I don't agree at all

It's not being disloyal if someone is deemed not good enough to play. AFL rules say you can only have 38 blokes on your list.

Players must and will be delisted, that's not being disloyal, that's the reality of professional sport.


I also have no problems saying to Lindsay Gilbee or Sam Reid, for example, we think you are done and you'll probably spend 2012 at Willi. If you want to try your luck somewhere else we'll help you get there with our blessing.


It is disloyal to ship off someone clearly in your best 22 just because you got offered a good deal.

[GVGjr]

It's not being disloyal if someone is deemed not good enough to play. AFL rules say you can only have 38 blokes on your list.

Players must and will be delisted, that's not being disloyal, that's the reality of professional sport.

I also have no problems saying to Lindsay Gilbee or Sam Reid, for example, we think you are done and you'll probably spend 2012 at Willi. If you want to try your luck somewhere else we'll help you get there with our blessing.

It is disloyal to ship off someone clearly in your best 22 just because you got offered a good deal.

Pretty much agree with all of that.

[chef]

I don't agree at all

It's not being disloyal if someone is deemed not good enough to play. AFL rules say you can only have 38 blokes on your list.

Players must and will be delisted, that's not being disloyal, that's the reality of professional sport.


I also have no problems saying to Lindsay Gilbee or Sam Reid, for example, we think you are done and you'll probably spend 2012 at Willi. If you want to try your luck somewhere else we'll help you get there with our blessing.


It is disloyal to ship off someone clearly in your best 22 just because you got offered a good deal.

This.

[1eyedog]

As I said, he was honest and frank and we will leave it at that.

Okay fair enough

[Swoop]

I don't agree at all

It's not being disloyal if someone is deemed not good enough to play. AFL rules say you can only have 38 blokes on your list.

Players must and will be delisted, that's not being disloyal, that's the reality of professional sport.


I also have no problems saying to Lindsay Gilbee or Sam Reid, for example, we think you are done and you'll probably spend 2012 at Willi. If you want to try your luck somewhere else we'll help you get there with our blessing.


It is disloyal to ship off someone clearly in your best 22 just because you got offered a good deal.
My reference was to those that wanted to ship off Lake at the first sign of trouble.

[LostDoggy]

My reference was to those that wanted to ship off Lake at the first sign of trouble.

I feel like I kicked off the latest Lake discussions so I'll cut and paste part of my original post:

I know Lakey is an AA fullback, and would never trade him against his wishes, but if he wanted out, he's at least worth 1 first rounder + something (either a second round pick, or maybe a young mid-tier player).
---

This year has not been 'normal' for Brian by any (even injury) standards, the possibility of him leaving was floated by HIS manager, not the club etc.

If we have even half a brain we should be managing the risk of him leaving, which is clearly a possibility. Or should we just get caught by surprise and be reactive again as we always are? Yeah, let's get shafted in a trade that we didn't plan for or see coming.

[stefoid]

Obviously if he wants out and cant be persuaded otherwise, then yeah, but thats a non-choice situation for the club, so what is there to discuss, except possible renumeration?

Someone on his salary and contract length would be a perfect fit for GWS. One of those 17yo access picks things would be fine, just so we can absolutely suck the 2012 draft for all its worth.

one top-5 pick 17yo, one top 10 first rounder, another top 10 first rounder compo for ward, and a f/s gun with our second rounder. Set the club up for its next flag tilt.

[NoParkingOnMatchDays]

The club will get rid of you all Australian or not if you are a sook, disruptive and a bad influence on younger teammates. They will be thinking of cutting their losses and thinking of the wider group come trade time.

[Sedat]

I know Lakey is an AA fullback, and would never trade him against his wishes, but if he wanted out, he's at least worth 1 first rounder + something (either a second round pick, or maybe a young mid-tier player).
Sums up the situation in a nutshell. If Lake is committed to redemption and is desperate to stay and assist the club, he is a keeper. But if there is a wavering commitment or he feels as though he needs a fresh start elsewhere, I would not stand in the way at all.

Went to the MCG last night and if ever there was a club that is desperate for the services of a Lake type, it is Hawthorn.

[The Coon Dog]

Went to the MCG last night and if ever there was a club that is desperate for the services of a Lake type, it is Hawthorn.

Sedat, I know you know a little of the Glenferrie goings on, if say Lake went there, what do you believe to be a fair & reasonable trade?

[Sedat]

Sedat, I know you know a little of the Glenferrie goings on, if say Lake went there, what do you believe to be a fair & reasonable trade?
Used to know ;)

Hawks first round pick and a Xavier Ellis/Clinton Young type would be a fair trade IMO.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Used to know ;)

Hawks first round pick and a Xavier Ellis/Clinton Young type would be a fair trade IMO.

Surely one of (if not both) of Ellis/Young will be traded anyway. Both haven't been given a lot of opportunity in a year where they've suffered quite a few injuries.

Smith has gone past Young and Ellis reminds me of a younger Cross.

[chef]

Used to know ;)

Hawks first round pick and a Xavier Ellis/Clinton Young type would be a fair trade IMO.

1st round and Lisle would be better.

[Desipura]

Surely one of (if not both) of Ellis/Young will be traded anyway. Both haven't been given a lot of opportunity in a year where they've suffered quite a few injuries.

Smith has gone past Young and Ellis reminds me of a younger Cross.

Gone are the days where you trade an All Australian for 2 fringe players and a pick, this won't happen nor should it.

[kruder]

I noticed Savage from Hawthorn wasn't in the team last night, does anyone know if he is contracted?

[G-Mo77]

I noticed Savage from Hawthorn wasn't in the team last night, does anyone know if he is contracted?

I'd love to have Savage!

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I'd love to have Savage!

Agreed.

I really rate him.

His kicking is superb.

[kruder]

He wouldn't want to leave Hawthorn with their prospects being bright but If Lake wanted out he'd be the player along with a draft pic I'd look at.

Lake is probably my all time favourite Bulldog but if he dosent want to be their plus the fact we are in a rebuild, then Id let him go if the price is right.

[anfo27]

He wouldn't want to leave Hawthorn with their prospects being bright but If Lake wanted out he'd be the player along with a draft pic I'd look at.

Lake is probably my all time favourite Bulldog but if he dosent want to be their plus the fact we are in a rebuild, then Id let him go if the price is right.

The hawks don't have any picks that we want. their first round pick is nowhere near enough. Lake is under contract so we hold all the cards so there is no way the hawks will bend us over for a crap first round pick in the mid 20's.
I agree the hawks would love a Lake in their ordinary back 6 but they would have to get a 3rd team involved to get anywhere near what we should be after.

[1eyedog]

The hawks don't have any picks that we want. their first round pick is nowhere near enough. Lake is under contract so we hold all the cards so there is no way the hawks will bend us over for a crap first round pick in the mid 20's.
I agree the hawks would love a Lake in their ordinary back 6 but they would have to get a 3rd team involved to get anywhere near what we should be after.

They've got some good young players.

[ledge]

Baker, Gardiner and Mc Qualter retired tonight from the saints.

[LostDoggy]

Geelong showed the other night that the pack marker / contested marker is back in town. Provided you have runners all over the field to give supply, then putting the ball up high to forwards who can get away just enough to jump high in a contested situation is an effective strategy.

This involves having big strong bodies at the contest who can actually take a grab. Pods, Hawkins, West, Ottens, Menzel.

Otten's forward work and ruckwork was superb.

Punching the ball from packs is also in vogue. Hawthorn did it to effect in the first quarter with a number of releases coming via a player on the end of a punch from the pack. Geelong chose to get their fist in there first thereafter.

By losing Hudson, Hall and Lake we would be losing our bigger, more capable bodies. Lake is our best pack marker in a side that is dangerously short of big strong bodies that can mark the ball or effect a contest to advantage.

I can't remember which coach said it (Scott think), but he said the idea is to introduce youngsters into your team gradually, while keeping the structure and experience in place. We want Lake to take the best opposition forward, and not have a youngster or a Marcovic have to do that. If we go for all out youth, we may be setting some of them up for failure . A wholesale destruction of experience will kill the kids.

I think we have to hope like hell that Lake gets back to his best.

[bornadog]

. If we go for all out youth, we may be setting some of them up for failure . A wholesale destruction of experience will kill the kids..

A bit like what Melbourne did and to a lesser extent Richmond.

[ledge]

Like the 2000 baby bombers.

[azabob]

Like the 2000 baby bombers.

93 baby bombers I think you mean

[ledge]

93 baby bombers I think you mean

or 84?

[LostDoggy]

Or Hawthorn when Clarkson arrived.

[LostDoggy]

Will there be any Bombers after today? I wouldn't let Welsh hand out the oranges. Clear Eker.

[Ghost Dog]

Funny to see, Saints with egg all over their halos - Lyon announced Baker and some other guy would retire, only for them to come out the next day and deny it. The other guy, forget who, is just 23.

[AndrewP6]

Funny to see, Saints with egg all over their halos - Lyon announced Baker and some other guy would retire, only for them to come out the next day and deny it. The other guy, forget who, is just 23.

Robert Eddy (along with Steven Baker). They 'clarified' by saying that the players would not be at the Saints next year.:eek:

[Ghost Dog]

Robert Eddy (along with Steven Baker). They 'clarified' by saying that the players would not be at the Saints next year.:eek:


Baker - Will probably get picked up by a nightclub in Frankston as a bouncer.
Eddy worth a look? Can't form an image of him.

For some reason I can never remember who is who for the saints. They seem to all meld into a big pile of mashed 'spud-ness'.

[anfo27]

A bit like what Melbourne did and to a lesser extent Richmond.

Not sure how that can be compared to us when Melbourne & Richmond have pretty much no experience and we have loads of it and Lake be traded won't change that.

[bornadog]

Not sure how that can be compared to us when Melbourne & Richmond have pretty much no experience and we have loads of it and Lake be traded won't change that.

I was answering a post about getting rid of all the ageing players and having a completely young team, which is basically what Melbourne did. I believe getting rid of their Captain for example was a huge mistake. We have to balance and manage the list.

[anfo27]

I was answering a post about getting rid of all the ageing players and having a completely young team, which is basically what Melbourne did. I believe getting rid of their Captain for example was a huge mistake. We have to balance and manage the list.

I agree that that Melbourne have gone way overboard on youth and have nowhere near a balanced list in terms of experience.

[macca]

is eddy or mcqualter only 23 worth looking at?

[Remi Moses]

is eddy or mcqualter only 23 worth looking at?

Another Definitive NO!

[Desipura]

Ben Ross fro North was very good on the weekend very nice skills on both sides of the body. Has had an injury riddled few years which is probably why he was delisted.
O'Dwyer (ex Sydney) of plays a Harbrow type role, a neat left foot.
Has reportedly had a good season at Werribee.

[anfo27]

Ben Ross fro North was very good on the weekend very nice skills on both sides of the body. Has had an injury riddled few years which is probably why he was delisted.
O'Dwyer (ex Sydney) of plays a Harbrow type role, a neat left foot.
Has reportedly had a good season at Werribee.

I remember watching a North game 2 maybe 3 years ago and saw this kid play. Never heard of him before that but i thought this kid could really play but has barely played a senior game since. I haven't seen him play since but if he could get his body right he might be something.

[anfo27]

is eddy or mcqualter only 23 worth looking at?

absolutely not macca, these guys are spuds of the highest order.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

O'Dwyer (ex Sydney) of plays a Harbrow type role, a neat left foot.
Has reportedly had a good season at Werribee.

Every time I've seen O'Dwyer play, he looks good.

Surprised he never cut it at AFL level.

I'd consider him.

[soupman]

I see the players who make up our side next year being the following:

Group A: Players who will regularly feature in our best 22 (I expect 18+ games):

1. J. Grant, 2. R Murphy, 4. D. Cross, 5. M. Boyd, 7. S. Higgins, 10. J. Sherman, 12. T. Williams, 13. D. Giansiracusa, 16. R. Griffen, 17. A. Cooney, 19. L. Jones, 21. T. Liberatore, 27. W. Minson, 29. E. Wood, 36. B. Lake, 38. D. Morris, 40. L. Dahlhaus, 42. L. Picken,

Group B: Player's who are young and we should expect to be in the above group in 2013 (Basically players who we believe might actually develop enough to take us forward and have only been on the list for 2 or less years (tall's excluded)):

3. M. Wallis, 23. J. Roughead, 24. J. Schofield, 30. C. Howard, 34. J. Tutt, 35. T. Hill, 39. J. Johannissen, 48. M. Panos, 49. A. Cordy

Players that fit in neither of the above groups. These are the player's in danger. These are split into two groups; Group C: those who still have the untapped potential to make it:

18. B. Stack, 20. J. Hill, 26. Z. Skinner, 32. P. Veszpremi, 33. N. Djerrkurra, 37. L. Markovic, 44. B. Moles

And Group D: those that are either on the decline or are just potential ekers:

9. L. Gilbee, 11. S. Reid, 22. D. Addison, 31. J. Mulligan, 41. A. Hooper, 43. E. Barlow

NonGroup E: I have one uncatogorised player, based on an injury riddled year making his status unassessible:

25. R. Hargrave

Group F: Already Gone:

14. C. Ward, 15. B. Hudson, 28. B. Hall, 45. E. Prato

So obviously I suggest groups A and B are retained, Groups C and D are the ones ith question marks, Group E is unknown and Group F is already gone.

Of Groups C and D the latter will be looked at first as they are players deemed to not have the potential that group C has.

Of that lot anybody who isn't going to feature in multiple games should be cut (Reid and Mulligan), and anybody who isn't likely to give any more than players mentioned in groups A or B will also be cut (Addison and Hooper). This leaves Gilbee (who is contracted and must jump himself) and Barlow. Barlow is a difficult predicament as it could be argued he might feature in either groups A or C, but he doesn't quite. However his versatility keeps him as a rookie for me.

As to who is retained from Group C it comes down to who the club believes it can still extract that potential from. Markovic is already pretty close I think, and has shown that he is capable. The big question marks are over Stack, Hill, Skinner and Moles. If the coaching staff believe that they can get them to perform at AFL level, and are prepared to give them the necessary opportunities to do that, they stay. I personally think both Stack and Skinner are worth retaining, and so is Hill provided we don't get a half decent offer for him from another club. As for Moles, I am unsure. Not sure he add's anything other kids who've come through recently don't, and I don't think his ceiling is as high as the others in this group. I'd de list him.

So my changes are:

Retired:
Hall, Hudson

GWS:
Ward

De-listed:
Moles, Hooper (I realise he is contracted, but if at all possible I'd cut him), Mulligan, Addison, Reid.

Unretained rookies:
Prato

Promoted rookies:
Dahlhaus, Panos

[LostDoggy]

We have worse players than Moles.

[LostDoggy]

Nice work Supa, but you've got Zeph as a B and a C.

[Mitcha]

Ben Ross fro North was very good on the weekend very nice skills on both sides of the body. Has had an injury riddled few years which is probably why he was delisted.
O'Dwyer (ex Sydney) of plays a Harbrow type role, a neat left foot.
Has reportedly had a good season at Werribee.
Would be happy with Ross, looks good enough if he can get his body right, O'Dwyer has good pace but doesn't kick it well and you could not trust him finding targets upfield. He also has a strange Jordan McMahon look about him!

[Desipura]

Would be happy with Ross, looks good enough if he can get his body right, O'Dwyer has good pace but doesn't kick it well and you could not trust him finding targets upfield. He also has a strange Jordan McMahon look about him!

Totally agree about O'Dwyer having a MacMahon look about him

[Mofra]

We have worse players than Moles.
His year was decimated by injury - as a true running type, I'd give him another year as he hasn't played under the new rules that benefit gut-runners.

[macca]

shane valenti wn liston medal, ahmed saad won. best young player in vfl are they worth a look?

[Mofra]

shane valenti wn liston medal, ahmed saad won. best young player in vfl are they worth a look?
Valenti has been linked with GWS, looks certain to end up somewhere in the AFL next year.

[G-Mo77]

I've seen Saad a few times and every time I have see him he as been really good.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

For 3 draft picks you're one delisting short.

I assume you meant to include Reid there somewhere?

I would have thought that Reid, Addison and Josh Hill could all face being delisted. They have been around long enough without making the necessary improvement to rebuild the team. We are in need of a clean out to refresh the list with younger more talented recruits.
The three mentioned above could be possibilities for GWS although it would be debateable if they would entertain all three.

[The Coon Dog]

Does anyone know whether the player list numbers for clubs reduce by 2 next year? I had heard something a while back but can't find anything to confirm it.

[Mofra]

Does anyone know whether the player list numbers for clubs reduce by 2 next year? I had heard something a while back but can't find anything to confirm it.
Freo would have struggled to field a team this year if that was the case :eek:
Haven't heard anythign about it TBH

[G-Mo77]

Does anyone know whether the player list numbers for clubs reduce by 2 next year? I had heard something a while back but can't find anything to confirm it.

I read 38 somewhere, does that ring a bell?

[Sockeye Salmon]

GCS list reduces from 46 to 44

[Rocco Jones]

I had another look at the Brennan trade last year. The Lions agreed to GC signing a 2nd player. The Lions received a 2nd compo pick as well as trading picks with GC. So in effect GC and Brisbane did a trade and exploited the compo system to get something for free.

We can use this loop hole for Sam Reid. GWS give us whatever and then we get the AFL compo on top of that (doesn't really take anything away from GWS).

[Mofra]

I had another look at the Brennan trade last year. The Lions agreed to GC signing a 2nd player. The Lions received a 2nd compo pick as well as trading picks with GC. So in effect GC and Brisbane did a trade and exploited the compo system to get something for free.

We can use this loop hole for Sam Reid. GWS give us whatever and then we get the AFL compo on top of that (doesn't really take anything away from GWS).
That would be fantastic for us if true - I'm not sure how much faith I have in the AFL to adequately compensate us though

[Rocco Jones]

That would be fantastic for us if true - I'm not sure how much faith I have in the AFL to adequately compensate us though

The thing is, whatever they give us is a bonus.

We are not forced to do anything here. GWS trade a pick to us for Reid and then we get the compo pick on top of it. No skin off GWS' nose as they won't be paying for it.

[LostDoggy]

Lake on the footy show, didn't say anything comprehensive. Said he didn't know if he would be at the dogs next year, but he implied as long as we don't want to move him, he'll be there.
Didn't sound like he was too happy with Monty's comments around the middle of the year, and apparently, other than his outward comments, so there was no discussion with Lake before of after.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I thought Lake looked terribly unhappy.

The new coach may have to convince him to stay based on what I saw/interpreted.

[Sedat]

The new coach may have to convince him to stay based on what I saw/interpreted.
That's how I saw it, and Lake pretty much admitted this. Pretty hard for him to be definitive about his future when there will be a brand new coach in charge next year.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

That's how I saw it, and Lake pretty much admitted this. Pretty hard for him to be definitive about his future when there will be a brand new coach in charge next year.

It also reinforces the fact that we need to make more changes.

Monty shouldn't be at the club.

[kruder]

It also reinforces the fact that we need to make more changes.

Monty shouldn't be at the club.

Yep, Montys comments were a disgrace!

[bornadog]

Yep, Montys comments were a disgrace!

and they are not the only things he has said. He undermined Eade when discussing the game plan in public, and he has clashed about his opinion on certain other players as well.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

and they are not the only things he has said. He undermined Eade when discussing the game plan in public, and he has clashed about his opinion on certain other players as well.

It's just another 'shake of the head' moment, isn't it?

Why are these blokes (Monty, Fantasia) STILL at the club after their incredible mistakes? It's just amazing to think they've still got their jobs - and probably will for next year.

I hope to god a new coach brings his own assistants.

[comrade]

It's just another 'shake of the head' moment, isn't it?

Why are these blokes (Monty, Fantasia) STILL at the club after their incredible mistakes? It's just amazing to think they've still got their jobs - and probably will for next year.

I hope to god a new coach brings his own assistants.

Did Monty and Garlick play together?

[Rocket Science]

Did Monty and Garlick play together?

Yep, laced them up as team mates during the '99 season.

The Footy 'Industry' is unavoidably nepotistic by it's very nature, but the same things that shit me about the lazy, inbred, self-satisfied culture of the footy media and the AFL more broadly are beginning to shit me more and more about the club I support. By extension I suppose that should come as scant surprise.

Maybe success helps to encourage overlooking such qualms, and lack thereof the opposite, but Dogs fans have had a gutful, so habitually in fact we've normalised the concept, and are watching their club go to relative shit yet again. Footy's a cyclical beast, but when supporters feel like they're being let down by the league, and their club, and increasingly mercenary-like behaviour of certain players, something's going to give in terms of their, nay our, devotion to the game.

Heaven help wider footy goodwill if there's a player strike.

Pardon the catch-all rant. I'm mostly annoyed at the Dogs' dipping predicament and our inability, both onfield and off, to negotiate this challenging new frontier with integrity, professionalism and ruthless ambition.

As you were.

[LostDoggy]

Monty shouldn't be at the club.




I agree.

I'd have forgiven his bizarre pot shot at our full back if I thought he could coach at all.

Our new coach should be allowed to pick one or two of his own assistants and our forward line needs serious attention.

I also wasn't crazy about Paul Williams suggesting that some of our fans were 'UN-Australian'. Bloody stupid thing to think; even stupider thing to say.

[G-Mo77]

Maybe the truth hurts. ;)

Prima donna is our Lake. I'm really not fussed if he is there or not next year.

[Mantis]

Monty shouldn't be at the club.

Monty is contracted next year.

[chef]

Maybe the truth hurts. ;)

Prima donna is our Lake. I'm really not fussed if he is there or not next year.

Suppositories 3x4 times a week just to train.

[Jasper]

Brian has never appeared to be the most bubbly personality in the AFL, but even for Brian his performance on the Footy Show was flat, and basically said 'I am for sale, offers welcome'

Now I wonder which team was recently monstered by shite big fwds in a final.......? Hmmmm

I agree that Monty's comments were rubbish about Lake and Eade, interesting that neither may be at the club, while Monty looks set to remain...Hmmm

[bornadog]

It's just another 'shake of the head' moment, isn't it?

Why are these blokes (Monty, Fantasia) STILL at the club after their incredible mistakes? It's just amazing to think they've still got their jobs - and probably will for next year.

I hope to god a new coach brings his own assistants.

Monty and Williams are contracted for next year, however, Dean's contract is up.

[The Underdog]

That's how I saw it, and Lake pretty much admitted this. Pretty hard for him to be definitive about his future when there will be a brand new coach in charge next year.

It seemed he was using the new coach as a way to be pretty undefinitive about his future.
It felt to me like he'd be gone if he had the choice.
I really hope he does stay and gets back to where he was but that interview left me unconvinced about both.

[w3design]

Maybe the truth hurts. ;)

Prima donna is our Lake. I'm really not fussed if he is there or not next year.

Lake wants out that's fine .We are not going to win the flag in the next 2 years lets get the most we can for him cya Brian. Have fun at the Bombers or the Hawks.

[LostDoggy]

Plus what pain he must have gone through the 2010 finals series, played through a number of serious issues. I thought it was a poor act to insinuate he was soft. Even if you think it don't air it in the media - amateur pr for a club that was struggling at that point of the season

[Maddog37]

My take from that interview was that Brian wants to stay but is not sure if the club wants him.

He looks like someone that needs a bit of TLC from the new coach after being knocked around a bit too much on several levels. That is my preferred outcome too but if he does want to be shopped then we need to only accept top shelf compensation.

Monty can take a walk for that horribly misguided effort in the media. Who gets on TV for two seconds and denegrates a club champion?????????????? Shameful.

[The Underdog]

He looks like someone that needs a bit of TLC from the new coach after being knocked around a bit too much on several levels. That is my preferred outcome too but if he does want to be shopped then we need to only accept top shelf compensation.

Monty can take a walk for that horribly misguided effort in the media. Who gets on TV for two seconds and denegrates a club champion?????????????? Shameful.

I don't think Monty needs to be fired for it but there definitely needs to be an apology and the lines of communication need to be opened up. The fact that Monty hasn't spoken directly to Brian about it isn't good. Brian's relationship with the coaching staff seems to have been pretty poor. Hopefully a new coach can fix that.

[G-Mo77]

Monty should not have came out and said anything public, he made a mistake. The thing I don't understand is a player has virtually said that he doesn't want to be here next year and wants to be moved. Now a player out of contact who takes more money is public enemy No. 1 but someone else who we have shown faith in and given a large contract wants to do the same thing and everyone wants to move coaches around just to appease him. If that is his attitude he can take the next train out as far as I'm concerned.

[Maddog37]

Fair point G but he has been treated a little more harshly than Ward was(contract aside). Seems he was medically mishandled.

[BulldogBelle]

If Lake doesnt want to be at the club then organise a trade for him - simple as that

Start talking to GWS

They wont baulk at his contract $$$s

Between Williams, Morris, Markovic, Cordy and a hopefully we can recruit another half decent tall key defender we should be able to cover him in 2012

[The Coon Dog]

If Lake doesnt want to be at the club then organise a trade for him - simple as that

Start talking to GWS

They wont baulk at his contract $$$s

Between Williams, Morris, Markovic, Cordy and a hopefully we can recruit another half decent tall key defender we should be able to cover him in 2012

As I understand it Brian is keen to remain in Melbourne, so forget any notion of GWS.

[LongWait]

Lake has been on the receiving end of some very public criticism from Eade and Montgomery. Not surprising he might be a bit ambivalent about where he stands with the club.

If Lake wants out, or if the new coach wants him out, I really hope that Lake is traded. Don't need a disgruntled senior player who might begin a cancerous negative vibe in the playing group.

[Mantis]

If Lake wants out, or if the new coach wants him out, I really hope that Lake is traded. Don't need a disgruntled senior player who might begin a cancerous negative vibe in the playing group.

Perhaps it's already begun.

[bornadog]

For those who missed the Lake interview:

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/afl/footyshow/?videoid=a71f5c5b-1a96-4381-bf6f-cd0f6c8b289a

[Greystache]

Monty should not have came out and said anything public, he made a mistake. The thing I don't understand is a player has virtually said that he doesn't want to be here next year and wants to be moved. Now a player out of contact who takes more money is public enemy No. 1 but someone else who we have shown faith in and given a large contract wants to do the same thing and everyone wants to move coaches around just to appease him. If that is his attitude he can take the next train out as far as I'm concerned.

I can see your point G, for me the difference is Lake is a player who is nearing the end of his career and who has provided the club with oustanding service. IMO opinion Lake was our best player between 2007-2010 when we were in premiership building mode, as opposed to Ward or Harbrow who showed some potential, played some good games, and then took the cash the second their market value increased. These two should have been the cornerstones of our next premiership tilt. If Lake is unhappy and wants to be traded I'll be disappointed, but I'll accept it, because he's offered everything he could have during his peak years, and now if he wants to play his final couple of years at another club in with a chance of winning a flag and we benefit long term out of the move I'd call it a win-win.

[Hotdog60]

I just watched the interview and finished on a downer, this whole season has been a drain from word go.
I got the impression from Brian that he wants to remain but because of the footy department personnel he has the uncertain feeling if he is wanted. I could see things change dramatically with a new coach, either way if the coach wants him and engages with Brain with that belief he will no doubt get back, if the new coach buys in with the current feeling to-wards Brian he might be gone come trade time.
I hope he stays.

[strebla]

For those who missed the Lake interview:

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/afl/footyshow/?videoid=a71f5c5b-1a96-4381-bf6f-cd0f6c8b289a

Thanks for posting that BAD what i got from it is he is still very hurt bu his treatment I still think we can turn him around though and hope to see him up and about next year.

[LostDoggy]

As I mentioned earlier I hope he stays. I just have this sinking feeling he will be in yellow and brown next year, perhaps with Hill.

[Remi Moses]

Think He'll stay, new coach fresh start.
I'm sure if he goes we'll talk tough then wimper off and take anything.
I thought that stuff from Montgomery should have been kept in-house, summed up the season in a nutshell

[LostDoggy]

Let's not be naive here -- that was a 'come and get me' call to potential suitors out there.

None of these guys go on shows and talk candidly; he would have had a chat to his manager about how to orchestrate the outcome he wants. Of COURSE he has to show that he's still a Dogs player, but no one who respects the club and still wants to stay will put on a performance like that.

He (and his manager) knows that there are at least 2 or 3 clubs out there close to a flag that could really do with a gun key defender, it's his last contract and a bidding war will drive up what he can snag. He was never completely happy with the contract he got from us a couple of years ago, and with the inflationary pressures on salaries, from GC, GWS and the new TV deal, he knows that there's a big chance clubs will take a punt and pay him top dollar.

[The Underdog]

As I mentioned earlier I hope he stays. I just have this sinking feeling he will be in yellow and brown next year, perhaps with Hill.

I can't see how he'd get there, what could they possibly give us in return that they'd be willing to part with?

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Monty is contracted next year.


Monty and Williams are contracted for next year, however, Dean's contract is up.

It's worrying that we have a number of personnel contracted for next year who otherwise would be shown the door.

Monty, Fantasia?, Williams?, Gilbee, Hargrave?

* Williams/Hargrave for different circumstances. Hargrave's is purely injured related.

As for Lake and a trade, I can't see a club satisfying us. Hawthorn and Carlton would need more than their first pick to get the deal done, and with Lake's big contract, it seems all too much.

[LostDoggy]

It's worrying that we have a number of personnel contracted for next year who otherwise would be shown the door.

Monty, Fantasia?, Williams?, Gilbee, Hargrave?

* Williams/Hargrave for different circumstances. Hargrave's is purely injured related.

As for Lake and a trade, I can't see a club satisfying us. Hawthorn and Carlton would need more than their first pick to get the deal done, and with Lake's big contract, it seems all too much.

If Lake says he wants out, and a club offers a first round pick, I am almost 100% certain we'll take it.

[The Underdog]

If Lake says he wants out, and a club offers a first round pick, I am almost 100% certain we'll take it.

Hawthorn's first round pick this year is a mid 2nd round pick most other years. If we gave Lake up for that I'd be gutted.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Hawthorn's first round pick this year is a mid 2nd round pick most other years. If we gave Lake up for that I'd be gutted.

This.

[LostDoggy]

Hawthorn's first round pick this year is a mid 2nd round pick most other years. If we gave Lake up for that I'd be gutted.

Would we take the risk of having another year like this with Brian? Would we overcompensate after trying to play hardball with the Hill trade last year? Would we risk having an underperforming, unhappy, aging player on our list when we are looking to 'refresh' with some youth? What confidence do you have in our trading team to hold their nerve?

As for a contract, Lake knows that his body doesn't have long to go and will probably be happy to accept two years on top dollar, and clubs who feel close to a premiership will probably be happy to take the punt -- it's not a massive risk as it's only two years, and will pay for itself if it comes off.

Brian and his management know that they hold most of the aces here.

[G-Mo77]

Hawthorn's first round pick this year is a mid 2nd round pick most other years. If we gave Lake up for that I'd be gutted.

What if we got a decent young player packaged with the pick?

[LostDoggy]

What if we got a decent young player packaged with the pick?

Who would we want?

[stefoid]

I dont want Lake to go, but the hawks did get rid of their aging, injured tall timber and replaced them with roughhead, Buddy and a premiership. Just saying.

The trouble is, this particular draft is pretty crap.

If we could get a compo pick from a shit team for Lake...somehow... that we could use in 2012, that might be the way to go, if forced to trade.

[chef]

Who would we want?

From Hawthorn, Lisle would be nice.

[mjp]

If we could get a compo pick from a shit team for Lake...somehow... that we could use in 2012, that might be the way to go, if forced to trade.

Have the rules changed to allow you to trade future draft picks? I didn't think you could do that?

If we wanted to trade Lake (which I hope we don't - he is our best player) then our only choice would be to somehow include GWS to get one of the eligible 17year olds. No idea how this could be orchestrated, but given he wants to stay in Melbourne it would have to be a three team deal.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

From Hawthorn, Lisle would be nice.

I really don't rate Lisle at all. Seems to lack conviction and is a terrible kick from what I've seen. Whilst it's limited (what I've seen), I've seen a tall, skinny spud.

What do you like about him?

[chef]

I really don't rate Lisle at all. Seems to lack conviction and is a terrible kick from what I've seen. Whilst it's limited (what I've seen), I've seen a tall, skinny spud.

What do you like about him?

Terrific mark and could hold down FF for us next season IMO, his kicking lacks a bit but that's no different to nearly all the other KF's in the league. He's at the right age for us and won't cost to much. He and Jones could be our KF's for the next 10 years.

Lake for Hawks first round and Lisle would be good for us IMO. But I would rather Lake stay and finish his career as a Bulldog great, whether that be at the end of next year or in 4 years time.

[azabob]

Perhaps it's already begun.

What have you heard and or seen?

[anfo27]

Have the rules changed to allow you to trade future draft picks? I didn't think you could do that?

If we wanted to trade Lake (which I hope we don't - he is our best player) then our only choice would be to somehow include GWS to get one of the eligible 17year olds. No idea how this could be orchestrated, but given he wants to stay in Melbourne it would have to be a three team deal.

Exactly what i was thinking. There would be no Melbourne club that could satisfy us with draft picks that Brian would want to go to, with the exception of Melbourne who have 2 nice compo picks.
If it was at all possible to trade Lake to GWS and get them to take some of Brians wage that would bring all the teams with not much cap space into the picture and GWS could get some very handy pick ups. We can then get a pick of the 17 year old's. Pie in the sky stuff.

[azabob]

It's worrying that we have a number of personnel contracted for next year who otherwise would be shown the door.

Monty, Fantasia?, Williams?, Gilbee, Hargrave?

* Williams/Hargrave for different circumstances. Hargrave's is purely injured related.
.

RE Fantasia - Is it only the "internet forums" who don't believe Fantasia should be at the club?

It appears the people who count in Garlick and Smorgon want him otherwise I can't see them letting him head up such important tasks as list management, contract management and looking for our next coach.

I get the feeling he will be re appointed fairly early next year.

[anfo27]

Terrific mark and could hold down FF for us next season IMO, his kicking lacks a bit but that's no different to nearly all the other KF's in the league. He's at the right age for us and won't cost to much. He and Jones could be our KF's for the next 10 years.

Lake for Hawks first round and Lisle would be good for us IMO. But I would rather Lake stay and finish his career as a Bulldog great, whether that be at the end of next year or in 4 years time.

That would be giving him away IMO. The hawks pick is a crap pick in a crap draft and packaged with a player thats played 5 games this year for 1 goal. I would rather keep him than get that.

[LostDoggy]

I would rather keep him than get that.

May not really have a choice. I know he's contracted and all that, but I don't know what value there is in keeping a player against his wishes.

[LostDoggy]

Lisle and Shoenmakers?

[LostDoggy]

Lisle and Shoenmakers?

I would be disappointed if we were involved in any trade involving Shoenmakers. Do not rate at all

[comrade]

1st round pick + Shane Savage would be adequate. No chance of happening.

[G-Mo77]

Why does everyone just assume Hawthorn want him? When they are healthy they'll have a pretty solid backline.

[NoParkingOnMatchDays]

What have you heard and or seen?

The club want him gone.

[LostDoggy]

Why does everyone just assume Hawthorn want him? When they are healthy they'll have a pretty solid backline.

I reckon there is a bigger chance that Carlton would want him. There premiership window is beginning to open up and they could do with a bloke like Brian in the next couple of years.

[LostDoggy]

I reckon there is a bigger chance that Carlton would want him. There premiership window is beginning to open up and they could do with a bloke like Brian in the next couple of years.

Then we'll take their first pick and Andrew Walker and say thank you very much.

[bulldogsman]

Terrific mark and could hold down FF for us next season IMO, his kicking lacks a bit but that's no different to nearly all the other KF's in the league. He's at the right age for us and won't cost to much. He and Jones could be our KF's for the next 10 years.

Lake for Hawks first round and Lisle would be good for us IMO. But I would rather Lake stay and finish his career as a Bulldog great, whether that be at the end of next year or in 4 years time.

Lisle looks a bit slow chef, i'm not as confident as you are.

[chef]

The club want him gone.

Pleaese go on.

[chef]

Why does everyone just assume Hawthorn want him? When they are healthy they'll have a pretty solid backline.

Because a fit Lake would make them a top 2 side and a premiership contender. They would go from a very good side to a great one IMO.

[GVGjr]

Because a fit Lake would make them a top 2 side and a premiership contender. They would go from a very good side to a great one IMO.

Spot on. The Hawks aren't scared to go to the trade table either to address their needs.

[The Underdog]

Would we take the risk of having another year like this with Brian? Would we overcompensate after trying to play hardball with the Hill trade last year? Would we risk having an underperforming, unhappy, aging player on our list when we are looking to 'refresh' with some youth? What confidence do you have in our trading team to hold their nerve?

As for a contract, Lake knows that his body doesn't have long to go and will probably be happy to accept two years on top dollar, and clubs who feel close to a premiership will probably be happy to take the punt -- it's not a massive risk as it's only two years, and will pay for itself if it comes off.

Brian and his management know that they hold most of the aces here.

I have about as much confidence in our trading team to hold their nerve as our I do in our recruiting team to pick a decent player in the mid-20's. Close to none.
We can't complain on other threads about the club being weak and needing to take a stand on other issues and then want them to walk up to the trade table and present.

[G-Mo77]

Because a fit Lake would make them a top 2 side and a premiership contender. They would go from a very good side to a great one IMO.

I think they would be regardless. They've been decimated by injuries and are still top 4. Healthy players and player development and they'll be right there next year.

[chef]

I think they would be regardless. They've been decimated by injuries and are still top 4. Healthy players and player development and they'll be right there next year.

What are there KPD stocks like?

[G-Mo77]

What are there KPD stocks like?

Light, doesn't mean you can't get buy with having a larger defender. Gibson does the job, Gilham back next year as well as a good group of smart defenders they'll be fine without paying overs for a shell of an AA defender.

[anfo27]

Light, doesn't mean you can't get buy with having a larger defender. Gibson does the job, Gilham back next year as well as a good group of smart defenders they'll be fine without paying overs for a shell of an AA defender.

Even at full strength that backline is not good enough to take them all the way. Gilham ain't much chop, Murphy is ordinary, Gibson tries hard but is too small to play on the big big boys, Stretton & Schoenmakers are young and need time to develop. You put a fit Lake in that backline and all of a sudden they are a legitimate contender.

[lemmon]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/123549/default.aspx
Mckenna apparently talking about trading pick four to lure some experience. Any chance of pick 4 for Brian as a straight swap or am I being delusional?

[Rocco Jones]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/123549/default.aspx
Mckenna apparently talking about trading pick four to lure some experience. Any chance of pick 4 for Brian as a straight swap or am I being delusional?

I think they will be looking in the 24-26 yo experienced bracket. Old enough to add experience now and young enough to still be around when they are playing finals.

[ledge]

I dont know what value Brian has now due to all the injury problems he has.
Lets reverse the situation would any of us want our club chasing Brian after all thats happened this year?
And would we be prepared to fork out the money he is being paid now with all this in mind?
I actually doubt it, I think he will stay but it depends on the coach.

[G-Mo77]

I dont know what value Brian has now due to all the injury problems he has.
Lets reverse the situation would any of us want our club chasing Brian after all thats happened this year?
And would we be prepared to fork out the money he is being paid now with all this in mind?
I actually doubt it, I think he will stay but it depends on the coach.

Absolutely not, the only way I would chase him if it came at a bargain price. Giving up very little and paying part salary.

Hawthorn will not touch him.