The silly season is around the corner and and silly as this may sound i feel that there is one guy who we have not considered or yet discussed his future.

Rivers has not played for a long time (regurlarly anyway), he is on a big wage, and is a quality player yes!

Since he has been out we have found three quality young defenders, Warnock,Martin, and Garland!

Rivers has plenty of value and dont get me wrong i rate him highly. But he is always injured and with the Gold Coast team around the corner could we get another very low pick for him??

Just a thought and will be interested to hear your thoughts!!! (hopefully not completely crushing the idea)

The silly season is around the corner and and silly as this may sound i feel that there is one guy who we have not considered or yet discussed his future.

Rivers has not played for a long time (regurlarly anyway), he is on a big wage, and is a quality player yes!

Since he has been out we have found three quality young defenders, Warnock,Martin, and Garland!

Rivers has plenty of value and dont get me wrong i rate him highly. But he is always injured and with the Gold Coast team around the corner could we get another very low pick for him??

Just a thought and will be interested to hear your thoughts!!! (hopefully not completely crushing the idea)

keep him, he is an integral part of what could be a really good backline for the next 6-7 years, plus wouldn't get anything for him as he hasn't been on the park much for 2 years

exactly my point he hasnt been on the park for 2 years

and i disagree i think we could get plenty for him

He's still young and unless we have some inside knowledge that his injury woes will continue we should keep him. Warnock, Garland and Martin are indeed good prospects but they are still only prospects - they all have a long way to go to establish themselves as key defenders. We need Rivers in our backline and if we cleared him and he gained full fitness and starred for another team this site will will be full of criticism about our lack of forsight.

Rivers has plenty of value

Trade value? I'd doubt that.

with the Gold Coast team around the corner could we get another very low pick for him

Thats exactly why we will struggle to get a decent pick for anybody we'd be willing to trade, least of all a very low pick.

The silly season is around the corner and and silly as this may sound i feel that there is one guy who we have not considered or yet discussed his future.

He's been discussed on here in recent times.

i think we could get plenty for him

he hasnt been on the park for 2 years

I'm sure other Clubs are jumping over themselves to offer us top picks for a third tall defender who hasn't been on the park for two years.

PS. Trading/draft board.

You would get almost nothing for him. If he has another year of injury his career is over, no club is prepared to trade away decent picks for such a risk.

Plus we need his leasdership and commitment over the next few years, if all our players played with the commitment Rivers does we woul have a very strong team.

That said if someone came looking I would trade him for a pick in the top 20.

No freaking way.

Can't wait to seem him back in the team.

With the rise of Warnock, Garland and Martin it will allow Rivers to play on a player of lesser abillity providing run out of the backline as well as zoning off. Trust we will not get rid of this guy

Rivers value would be below his worth due to injury.

The one we may actually get something for is Frawley....young key defender still with upside....it would have to be a good pick though...

I would hate to let him go as he has potential, but has been overtaken by the likes of Warnock, Martin and Garland...with Rivers coming back next year he may just be surplus and of some decent value to another team....remember you have to give up something good to get something good...

When Rivers returns to the team, it may provide Bailey with the option to move Garland up forward.

Keep him. No trade value. Great player when fit.

The silly season is around the corner and and silly as this may sound i feel that there is one guy who we have not considered or yet discussed his future.

Rivers has not played for a long time (regurlarly anyway), he is on a big wage, and is a quality player yes!

Since he has been out we have found three quality young defenders, Warnock,Martin, and Garland!

Rivers has plenty of value and dont get me wrong i rate him highly. But he is always injured and with the Gold Coast team around the corner could we get another very low pick for him??

Just a thought and will be interested to hear your thoughts!!! (hopefully not completely crushing the idea)

You must think the other Clubs particularly GC are gimps if they were to expend a top pick on a defender that lacks body size and speed and who has been crippled with OP for the past two years.

With the emergence of Garland, Martin, Warnock, Frawley our backline stocks have never been brighter for a long time and critical position of Rivers to the list has diminished somewhat.

So he is neither indispensable, nor does he have any viable market value in a trade. However it would be nice to get him on the park each week next year. Failing that, his football career is on the line.

Rivers

Daylight

Even more daylight

Ridiculous amounts of daylight

Garland and Martin

Daylight

Warnock

Daylight

Frawley

I hate this time of year <_< !!!

Should we make an ongoing list of players we are willing to auction off to teams that are extremely unlikely to give us what we think they are worth?

I would trade hom for the right price. It would have to be a top 10 pick.

But all we will get for him is pick 40 or thereabouts.

hasnt been on the park in 2 years.

Keep him, get his body right. Lets just remember how amazing he is when up and running.

Rivers, Garland and Martin will be awesome together.

Rivers

Daylight

Even more daylight

Ridiculous amounts of daylight

Garland and Martin

Daylight

Warnock

Daylight

Frawley

I was going to figure out whether I agreed or not and respond, but then realised that it's been so long since I've seen Rivers play with any continuity that I just can't remember.

Is he really that good that he's that far ahead of Garland and Martin, or does absence just make the heart grow fonder?

I was going to figure out whether I agreed or not and respond, but then realised that it's been so long since I've seen Rivers play with any continuity that I just can't remember.

Is he really that good that he's that far ahead of Garland and Martin, or does absence just make the heart grow fonder?

I think the later....

However there is no doubting his ability.

I was going to figure out whether I agreed or not and respond, but then realised that it's been so long since I've seen Rivers play with any continuity that I just can't remember.

Is he really that good that he's that far ahead of Garland and Martin, or does absence just make the heart grow fonder?

Garland, Martin and co. have the potential to be good, but Rivers is something else. It's not often that a defender wins the Rising Star as convincingly as he did. Bizzell taught him well.

EDIT: I would consider Rivers to be Melbourne's "best player" (comparing positions: apples, oranges etc.).

If Garland and co. kick on then I would love to see Rivers or Martin have a run up forward.

Should we make an ongoing list of players we are willing to auction off to teams that are extremely unlikely to give us what we think they are worth?

Sure - list every player, along with the minimum value we'd want to make a trade.

Virtually everyone is trade-able, it's just that for many we won't get the price that we think is right (whether that be importance to our structure/list, intangibles like leadership, etc)

If Garland and co. kick on then I would love to see Rivers or Martin have a run up forward.

Garland would be better suited to the forward line than Martin IMO. Probably better suited than Rivers, too.

Is he really that good that he's that far ahead of Garland and Martin, or does absence just make the heart grow fonder?

To some extent, the latter. He's a very good footballer when fit, but he generally plays 'third tall'.

To some extent, the latter. He's a very good footballer when fit, but he generally plays 'third tall'.

He plays the "third tall" role because so often he is good enough to leave his own man and help out in another contest. That is, the title of being a "third tall" should be a compliment and not a drawback.

He plays the "third tall" role because so often he is good enough to leave his own man and help out in another contest. That is, the title of being a "third tall" should be a compliment and not a drawback.

He can leave his own man so often because they're the third tall in the forward line, not the 'go-to' opposition forwards that need containing.

Having a 'third tall' is great if you've got a first and second tall that can do a decent job on the power forwards, but it's an icing on the cake position.