Trade rumours

[Ethan Tremblay 28,289]

25 minutes ago, Surfer Dee said:

Haha. I'm still rageful from his kickout against Collingwood...

I'd forgotten about that kick....until now.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

Massive lol at anyone who thinks Weed will be traded.

Was brought to the club with the knowledge that it'd take time to build his body.

Has been on the list for two years. TWO!

 

[Satyriconhome 9,982]

19 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Massive lol at anyone who thinks Weed will be traded.

Was brought to the club with the knowledge that it'd take time to build his body.

Has been on the list for two years. TWO!

 

You would only find that funny, you need to revisit your ignore list, there is comedy gold from some footy experts waiting to be read

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

Just now, Satyriconhome said:

You would only find that funny, you need to revisit your ignore list, there is comedy gold from some footy experts waiting to be read

We agree on something.

Let's be friends. 

[Satyriconhome 9,982]

1 minute ago, stevethemanjordan said:

We agree on something.

Let's be friends. 

I, occasionally, when on a slow night at work,  love revisiting the trade/delist/ recruit/ draft/wishlist posts from yesteryear   oh my!!

For me

Lever, yes him and Hibberd along with Omac, Nev good solid back 4

Gaff, no, doesn't get enough of his own ball for me, not sure if Goodwin looks for that in a player

[Demons11 6,404]

2 hours ago, jackaub said:

Another wasted pick 9 

He is a key forward 2 years down.  Give the kid sometime. 

Stupid and ridiculous comments on here

[Ethan Tremblay 28,289]

15 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

I, occasionally, when on a slow night at work,  love revisiting the trade/delist/ recruit/ draft/wishlist posts from yesteryear   oh my!!

For me

Lever, yes him and Hibberd along with Omac, Nev good solid back 4

Gaff, no, doesn't get enough of his own ball for me, not sure if Goodwin looks for that in a player

You've never asked him?! 

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

7 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Gaff, no, doesn't get enough of his own ball for me, not sure if Goodwin looks for that in a player

I hear why you're unsure, but if you look throughout the AFL you'll see that most teams who have running receiver types are players who aren't supposed to be sucked into the contest and win it at the coal face. It's not their role. 

Of course you want all players ideally to be able to win their own ball in one-on-one situations but Gaff's strengths are his overlap run and sheer gut running ability to provide both an attacking option and also be able to defend well.

Hill, Scully, Gaff, MaCrae, Smith are all players who are so well suited to the wing due to their running ability. We don't have anyone who provides that sort of two-way running. We've been playing an inside mid with ordinary footskills in that role which was hurting us a lot.

 

 

[mo64 5,208]

2 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

He is a key forward 2 years down.  Give the kid sometime. 

Stupid and ridiculous comments on here

That's a different argument. He's got currency now, so if we have to give up something good to address our deficiencies, then it's worth discussing.

 

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

6 minutes ago, mo64 said:

That's a different argument. He's got currency now, so if we have to give up something good to address our deficiencies, then it's worth discussing.

 

Given Weideman's injury history prior to the draft and all the talk about the fact that he'd take time to get his body ready for AFL as well as the need for us to find another quality forward, do you really believe the club would be thinking about the possibility of a trade?

Tom McDonald played a few good games as a forward and it seems people now believe that Weed should be moved on? If I have learnt anything from my time at demonland it's that posters put way too much weight on a few good performances from individuals.

What we're doing with Weed is setting him up so that when he plays regular seniors, he'll be in a position to contribute and play at the level. Exactly what we should have done with Watts and countless other young players over the years.

All key forwards have different traits. I would say that Weed is very similar to the Josh Kennedy mould of forward and posters should go and have a look at how long it took him to stamp his name. 4 years.

Not every forward can come in and play like Hipwood, Hogan or Daniher. They have all have different qualities and attributes and were much further advanced from a conditioning perspective than Weed in their first years.

Weideman is tracking just fine. At VFL level, you're not getting the same quality entries as you are at AFL level. You're not going to have the opportunity to kick bags every week because of this. But he's shown he can indeed kick bags when the ball is coming in efficiently. 

With another pre-season, some reshuffling and addressing of personnel further up the field, I can only see further improvement and contribution starting over the NAB challenge series. 

I still firmly believe that Hogan needs be played at CHF and needs a mini reprogramming in what it looks like to lead at the ball rather than calling for it long constantly. He needs to give the kicker the chance to kick to advantage more often. Weed is the perfect full forward type. Not blessed with the same running ability as Hogan but is a much more natural forward mind and leads to the right spots and flies hard at the ball.

It's going to click eventually with the two of them and when it does it's going be scary for opposition sides.

Tom needs to become the great defender that he was supposed to become. He needs to majorly simplify things and get back to playing consistent, hard defensive footy with his mind solely on beating his opponent. Lever will help Tom enormously in that regard and it allows one of Oscar or Frost to become depth and continue to develop at VFL level like they should have been during much of this year. 

 

 

[McQueen 17,862]

1 hour ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Massive lol at anyone who thinks Weed will be traded.

Was brought to the club with the knowledge that it'd take time to build his body.

Has been on the list for two years. TWO!

 

 

What has Weideman shown other than a little glimpse or two to suggest he's worth persisting with. He reminds me of an inebriated giraffe at times.

 

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

7 minutes ago, McQueen said:

 

What has Weideman shown other than a little glimpse or two to suggest he's worth persisting with. He reminds me of an inebriated giraffe at times.

 

As I said, the same could be asked about Kennedy during his first few seasons..

Some key forwards aren't flashy. Weed's is an old school big forward who flies hard for the ball and is generally pretty reliable in front of goal.

If his first half against Box Hill didn't show you why he was rated so highly then I can't help you.

 

[Wells 11 4,655]

16 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Given Weideman's injury history prior to the draft and all the talk about the fact that he'd take time to get his body ready for AFL as well as the need for us to find another quality forward, do you really believe the club would be thinking about the possibility of a trade?

Tom McDonald played a few good games as a forward and it seems people now believe that Weed should be moved on? If I have learnt anything from my time at demonland it's that posters put way too much weight on a few good performances from individuals.

What we're doing with Weed is setting him up so that when he plays regular seniors, he'll be in a position to contribute and play at the level. Exactly what we should have done with Watts and countless other young players over the years.

All key forwards have different traits. I would say that Weed is very similar to the Josh Kennedy mould of forward and posters should go and have a look at how long it took him to stamp his name. 4 years.

Not every forward can come in and play like Hipwood, Hogan or Daniher. They have all have different qualities and attributes and were much further advanced from a conditioning perspective than Weed in their first years.

Weideman is tracking just fine. At VFL level, you're not getting the same quality entries as you are at AFL level. You're not going to have the opportunity to kick bags every week because of this. But he's shown he can indeed kick bags when the ball is coming in efficiently. 

With another pre-season, some reshuffling and addressing of personnel further up the field, I can only see further improvement and contribution starting over the NAB challenge series. 

I still firmly believe that Hogan needs be played at CHF and needs a mini reprogramming in what it looks like to lead at the ball rather than calling for it long constantly. He needs to give the kicker the chance to kick to advantage more often. Weed is the perfect full forward type. Not blessed with the same running ability as Hogan but is a much more natural forward mind and leads to the right spots and flies hard at the ball.

It's going to click eventually with the two of them and when it does it's going be scary for opposition sides.

Tom needs to become the great defender that he was supposed to become. He needs to majorly simplify things and get back to playing consistent, hard defensive footy with his mind solely on beating his opponent. Lever will help Tom enormously in that regard and it allows one of Oscar or Frost to become depth and continue to develop at VFL level like they should have been during much of this year. 

 

 

 Im in 2 minds with Weids but I enjoyed your post and the sense in it. 

[old dee 22,811]

1 hour ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Massive lol at anyone who thinks Weed will be traded.

Was brought to the club with the knowledge that it'd take time to build his body.

Has been on the list for two years. TWO!

 

Weideman won't be traded.

To be traded you have to have a receiver.

At the end of 2017 there would be zero.

[markc 975]

2 hours ago, McQueen said:

Could the Dogs also be in the market for Goldy due to Tom Boyds situation?

Todd won't move interstate , he had a young family and already knocked back one the biggest offers to go to GWS last time 

dogs have shown interest yes 

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,150]

21 minutes ago, McQueen said:

 

What has Weideman shown other than a little glimpse or two to suggest he's worth persisting with. He reminds me of an inebriated giraffe at times.

 

I think you more or less answer your own questions; you look for the little glimpse or two when a player is young and raw.

While nothing's guaranteed, Weed has the right attitude to be a good power forward once his fitness and conditioning improve.  He hits the packs hard, seeks to meet the ball at its highest point, tackles well and isn't lost when the ball hits the ground - if anything, he looks to handball too often.  The problem being at the moment - he's not solid enough to move others off the ball and he's not fit enough to offer the repeat leads that a forward need at senior level.

[old dee 22,811]

4 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

I think you more or less answer your own questions; you look for the little glimpse or two when a player is young and raw.

While nothing's guaranteed, Weed has the right attitude to be a good power forward once his fitness and conditioning improve.  He hits the packs hard, seeks to meet the ball at its highest point, tackles well and isn't lost when the ball hits the ground - if anything, he looks to handball too often.  The problem being at the moment - he's not solid enough to move others off the ball and he's not fit enough to offer the repeat leads that a forward need at senior level.

Sorry to disagree tpf39 but he has no presence in the forward line. He constantly drops marks, is next to useless at ground level. He has played one good game at Casey in two years. Last weekend he had ten possessions and struggles most weeks to hit double figures.

I see nothing so far in his two years at the club that suggests he will be a good Casey player let alone at AFL level.

[McQueen 17,862]

23 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

As I said, the same could be asked about Kennedy during his first few seasons..

Some key forwards aren't flashy. Weed's is an old school big forward who flies hard for the ball and is generally pretty reliable in front of goal.

If his first half against Box Hill didn't show you why he was rated so highly then I can't help you.

 

One good game out of a season is a clear concern.

7 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

I think you more or less answer your own questions; you look for the little glimpse or two when a player is young and raw.

While nothing's guaranteed, Weed has the right attitude to be a good power forward once his fitness and conditioning improve.  He hits the packs hard, seeks to meet the ball at its highest point, tackles well and isn't lost when the ball hits the ground - if anything, he looks to handball too often.  The problem being at the moment - he's not solid enough to move others off the ball and he's not fit enough to offer the repeat leads that a forward need at senior level.

His lack of agility is his greatest weakness. Kennedy has great agility and showed that early on in his career. 

Anyway, the debate being put forward was not so much about Weideman himself but the concept that he may be dispensable with the view of getting extra trade value for that outside mid we need (assuming Lever in and Tmac KPF).

[old55 21,216]

If we're chasing quality like Lever and Gaff then for me there's a short list of untradeable players:

• Hogan, Jones, Petracca, Viney, Gawn, Oliver, Hibberd, T.McDonald, Hunt, Garlett, Jetta

There's a much longer list of players without meaningful trade value:

• Lewis, Trengove, Garland, Pedersen, VDB, Vince, JKH, Weid, Hulett, Bugg, Spencer, King, Kennedy, Johnstone, T.Smith, McKenna, White, Wagner, Harmes, J.Smith, Keilty, Filipovic, Maynard

Players that IMO have meaningful trade value are:

• Salem, Watts, Brayshaw, Tyson, Stretch, Kent, Frost, (Melksham), Hannan, O.McDonald, ANB

I know it would be painful for some but for example I'd do:

• Brayshaw for Gaff
• 10 and any of the others for Lever and 35

 

[Watts the matter 1,235]

36 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

As I said, the same could be asked about Kennedy during his first few seasons..

Some key forwards aren't flashy. Weed's is an old school big forward who flies hard for the ball and is generally pretty reliable in front of goal.

If his first half against Box Hill didn't show you why he was rated so highly then I can't help you.

 

In that game he was given a run and jump at every ball by a player who knows little about AFL football. Quite simply he isn't going to take those marks at AFL level and he needs to develop more strings to his bow.

You sum it up, he is an old school forward which we don't want or need in the team. We need a forward who can play football the way it is played in todays day and age.

[Ethan Tremblay 28,289]

We're clearly chasing Lever, but are we actually chasing Gaff or is he just a DL suggestion? 

Edited September 12, 2017 by Ethan Tremblay

[Red and Blue realist 2,026]

1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

If we're chasing quality like Lever and Gaff then for me there's a short list of untradeable players:

• Hogan, Jones, Petracca, Viney, Gawn, Oliver, Hibberd, T.McDonald, Hunt, Garlett, Jetta

There's a much longer list of players without meaningful trade value:

• Lewis, Trengove, Garland, Pedersen, VDB, Vince, JKH, Weid, Hulett, Bugg, Spencer, King, Kennedy, Johnstone, T.Smith, McKenna, White, Wagner, Harmes, J.Smith, Keilty, Filipovic, Maynard

Players that IMO have meaningful trade value are:

• Salem, Watts, Brayshaw, Tyson, Stretch, Kent, Frost, (Melksham), Hannan, O.McDonald, ANB

I know it would be painful for some but for example I'd do:

• Brayshaw for Gaff
• 10 and any of the others for Lever and 35

 

Like the logic, but doubt West Coast would swap Brayshaw for Gaff - just given the injury history with Gus, I'd say his value is higher to us than what other clubs would value him at, which isn't a bad thing and hopefully he'll reach his potential over the next few years. WC would want some instant replacement and those guys you listed won't give them that, for a player swap they'd want Tracc, Viney or Oliver but we know that's not happening. 

 

56 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

We're clearly chasing Lever, but are we actually chasing Gaff or is he just a DL suggestion? 

Came off the back of a twitter rumor from one of the 'throw it at the dart board' journo's I think. We've just taken it and ran. 

[McQueen 17,862]

1 hour ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

We're clearly chasing Lever, but are we actually chasing Gaff or is he just a DL suggestion? 

Jane02 heard it from her Doctor who is close/family friend (?) of the Gaffs and said he was keen to play for the team he grew up supporting. Pretty sure that's where it initially came from.

[binman 37,774]

Just now, McQueen said:

Jane02 heard it from her Doctor who is close/family friend (?) of the Gaffs and said he was keen to play for the team he grew up supporting. Pretty sure that's where it initially came from.

Dentist i believe 

[mo64 5,208]

30 minutes ago, McQueen said:

Jane02 heard it from her Doctor who is close/family friend (?) of the Gaffs and said he was keen to play for the team he grew up supporting. Pretty sure that's where it initially came from.

Wasn't Andrew Daff a doctor at the club? I reckon Jane02 might of been confused with what she heard.