So I don't know if this has been mentioned on a thread elsewhere here, however, I'm just wondering if it'd be worth making a play for Kerr. I instantly thought we'd have the money for that sort of player and most likely pick one or two so the Eagles would deal but then I thought a little deeper...

Carlton weren't even willing to put up pick one for Judd! Smart move...

Everyone is basically out of the draft for the next couple of years. Would Kerr make such a difference that we'd give up either Rich or Naitanui and then lose possible young quality in the future?

Let's be realistic here.

Stevens didn't want to come to us. Judd....

Kerr is at the mercy of who finishes down the bottom to some extent but what will we have?

We should not give our top 3 pick for Kerr. This could be debateable but our midfield is our strongest area; we need players who can hold down a KP or play ruck. And the best place to get your hands on a ruckman or KPP will be the draft.

Therefore, we have possibly two first round picks to give and I don't think they would take it.

BUT we may trade for picks and that might put us in the hunt but we would have to trade Green and Bruce to get our hands on enough credits to get Kerr.

And many are not too keen on letting either, let alone both go.

Is he out of contract at the end of the year?

Maybe pick 17 and another player

Maybe pick 17 and another player

err no... if West Coast do trade him at all it will be for Daniel Rich or Nicholas Naitanui. Either you seriously underestimate how good Kerr is or you're taking the [censored].

Half and half. He hasn't been top since the big two left, and i don't really want him anyway.

Kerr still has another year to run on his contract so no go for the psd even if he wanted to. I'd love to have Kerr, he's one of my favourite non melbourne player but he'd cost us too much to land him. Under no circumstances should we trade our first pick away.

Kerr still has another year to run on his contract so no go for the psd even if he wanted to. I'd love to have Kerr, he's one of my favourite non melbourne player but he'd cost us too much to land him. Under no circumstances should we trade our first pick away.

Carltank are the best option for Kerr. They might give up a 1st rnd pick for him; they already have heaps of youth, and Kerr would be with his great mate again.

Given he is still under contract, our chances are not great unless we give up a low 1st round pick. I rate him, but ..................

Half and half. He hasn't been top since the big two left, and i don't really want him anyway.

IMO Kerr is more value than Judd or Cousins, and he is still only around 23-24 l think

From a West Coast supporter on the ever reputable Big Footy:

According to Channel 9 over here, apparantly Essendon footy chiefs have been spreading a rumor that Kerr has refused to sign a good behaviour agreement and are sparking the debate of him leaving at years end and the Eagles are angry about it. Apparantly Essendon reckon we approached Gumbleton without their knowledge/consent (well derr) and werent happy about that and this is well payback.

make of that what you will.

But if he is on the market (which I think is highly doubtful) he is worth a top three draft pick.

IMO Kerr is more value than Judd or Cousins, and he is still only around 23-24 l think

I think that while Kerr is a good footballer he doesn't have the composure under extreme pressure to be the No1 mid.

I reckon this is the reason along with his questionable off field behaviours that have made West Coast load him into the ejector seat.

There is no way I would let West Coast get their hands on Daniel Rich as is widely rumoured to be the case, apparently willing to trade heavily to get him..Rich, the next GUN Midfielder.

Let West Coast get Daniel Rich, & put him together with Chris Masten & young Ebert, on top of their other mids & they'll have an unstopable midfield again in no time.

IMO Kerr is more value than Judd or Cousins, and he is still only around 23-24 l think

25. (1983-05-16)

Too old to waste any picks on IMHO.

Don't get me wrong he is a gun player, but he will be in serious decline when the rest of our team is flourishing.

Picking up Kerr would definitely make our team more competitive now, but in turn, stiffle the development of other players (given the game time he will get), which is nothing short of compromising the future. I would much prefer the club persist with the likes of Sylvia, Bode and Buckley for another couple of seasons, and perhaps recruit a couple of other similar types, to develop them into competent hard bodied midfielders like Kerr.

Let's not forget the club has chosen to take the youth road, and I don't see any sense in 'topping up' with an experienced player(s) this early in the journey.

On an aside it will be interesting to see what WC do this trading period. Will they trade experience for picks and gamble on youth? Or will they trade away picks for experience?

Go Dees - Building for the Future.

Kerr has at least 5 years left.

If your "younger" players take any longer than that to develop from now then when will they?

Kerr has at least 5 years left.

If your "younger" players take any longer than that to develop from now then when will they?

A couple equaled 2 last time I checked.

Go Dees

I haven't seen much of WCE this year, but hasn't Kerr struggled playing the leading man over there?

He'd cop the #1 tag here, so I imagine he'd face the same problems.

Regardless, I'm not sure he's worth - to us - what we'd need to give up.

I haven't seen much of WCE this year, but hasn't Kerr struggled playing the leading man over there?

He'd cop the #1 tag here, so I imagine he'd face the same problems.

Regardless, I'm not sure he's worth - to us - what we'd need to give up.

His problem this year is his inability to get on the park. He's had two very bad hamstrings... plus a silly suspension. I rate him right up there with Judd in terms of midfielders. There's no ifs or buts about his ability. Daniel Kerr is a double A plus midfielder

If West Coast do offer him up for trade then you'd have to think that Daniel Rich aside, there's certainly got to be some sort of cultural issue there as well. Two words: Due Diligence.

The other interesting aspect is the means West Coast would adopt to get Rich... at this stage they could go the Carlton route and assure themselves of getting him without having to worry about trading a player to get the pick... it appears some clubs see the danger to developing a winning culture by deliberately losing games.

Would you take this?

Assuming we finish last and WC finish bottom4

Kerr + WC's first pick

for

Our pick 1+ 17

Prefer Pavlich for not a heap more money.

Best case scenario:

We get pick 1, WCE get pick 2. We tell WCE we will draft Rich with Pick 1 unless they deal us Pick 2 and a quality player for pick 1.

They get Rich, we get Natanui and a quality Eagle (Kerr maybe a stretch but Embley/Hunter a possibility)

I haven't seen much of WCE this year, but hasn't Kerr struggled playing the leading man over there?

He'd cop the #1 tag here, so I imagine he'd face the same problems.

Regardless, I'm not sure he's worth - to us - what we'd need to give up.

He was very good in rounds 1-3, had a couple of poor games after that, then was good against the Bulldogs but was suspended.

Last year, playing as the no.1 WCE midfielder (with Judd on 1 leg and Cousins not there), he polled 22 Brownlow votes in a top 4 side.

Absolute star.

........ Two words: Due Diligence.

Absolutely!! Based on his off-field stuff (ups) over the last few years, I'd be really worried about him joining our list.

Don't want him - simple as that.

Let him be some other clubs worry.

Collingfilth would be a good choice, so him, 'The Ice Man' Cousins and Diduck could go off to the bikie clubs and get their 'nutrition'!

Moose

Prefer Pavlich for not a heap more money.

Agree here. Pavlich is the one marquee player I'd really go for.

err no... if West Coast do trade him at all it will be for Daniel Rich or Nicholas Naitanui. Either you seriously underestimate how good Kerr is or you're taking the [censored].

err... no.

No club would give up picks 1-3 for ANYONE. They didn't do it for Judd, they won't do it for an underperforming Kerr.

It's the player(s) we trade that will make the decision for them. The demons are not trading their earliest pick in a rebuilding phase. It completely defeats the purpose.

It would be something like our best young guy... I'm thinking Jones or Brock (already this takes on mythical proportions as neither will be moved on) and pick 17 for Kerr... OR Jones or Brock and picks 17 and 18 for Kerr and their first rounder which will be somewhere in the early twenties.

Agree here. Pavlich is the one marquee player I'd really go for.

Ther bloke is a freak, no doubt.

We will have a LOT of money to spend this summer. I would offer Pavlich a shitload of money. Ideally, we would get him for nothing in the PSD.

But thats a pipedream.

We wouldd have to trade with Freo, and they are absolute morons at the trading table. I think we could get away with keeping pick 1. it should be made clear to all other clubs that it is off-limits.

If the Demons play hardball, we could possibly get Pavlich for pick 17, pick 33 and a youngster like Lynden Dunn or Daniel Bell (just an example)

More likely we would have to give away picks 17 and 18 though (assuming we win less than 4.5 games and get the priority at the end of the 1st round)

Now, I give you this forward line as an example -

Davey Bate Green

Woneamirri Pavlich Natanui

BRING ON 2009