I thought jacey reacted perfectly.

Exactly how I would have done it. :D

I thought jacey reacted perfectly.

Exactly how I would have done it. :D

The OP said writing pick #18 was a mistake, and pick #2 + Warnock isn't an unreasonable offer.

Pick #2 plus Frawley is probably more reasonable, but I'm not sure the Hawks would let Hodge go for anything less than a ridiculously over-the-odds offer.

Which is just what Hutchy said.

Weird. First time he's made sense.

So Garland goes forward?

Exactly.

Remeber guys, Lake is not just your average defender, he is perhaps the best around if not equal. He is attacking, strong and fits well

with DB's style of play. Garland would go forward as was the plan anyway, Lake takes the best tall forward, Warnock the 2nd, Rivers/Frawley CHB Martin back up ruck and forward.

Rivers may be used to obtain a forward, as we know, hawks, swans, cats, Lions, Tigers even, are looking for key defenders.

This also fits woth what HArrington said when he stated we had 3 key forwards developing: ie: Martin, Garland and Watts, who else could he mean?

But there is still room if we decide to keep him:

Warnock Lake Cheney

Grimes Frawley Rivers

Garland CHF

Martin FF

It works. We have made an offer, club doesnt deny it, so get behind it and hope, even though I think he'll stay, imagine, Lake for free, pick 1, pick 2, 18 & 34..

Watts (weve not really seen him yet as he will be), Blease, Strauss and Bail to come..

Sounds quite ok no?

PS:

Dont start listening to Hutchy now, he just disagrees cus it came from Caro, he's jealous he didnt get the story! thats what he always does, opposite view to any other journo's inside info, cmon guys!

I can't believe some of the crap coming out of guys on this forum... you don't get the chance to add a top ten player in the AFL to your list very often. Alot of people on here are calling to draft the best available but because our defence is okay (its going good but nothing like Geelongs) we say we shouldn't take him in PSD. We wouldn't have to give up any picks and could still target a foward or midfielder in the trade period.

(for mousey) The club has to pay a minimum of 92.5% of the salary cap. which for 2009 is 7.11. The max is 7,693,750. MFC has paid 92.5 the last couple of years and like you stated we will have three senior players retire this year. If the Bulldogs are offering 450K and stated take it or leave it why wouldn't the MFC ask how much he wants... If he wanted 700K (which I think he would be worth) we have the extra in the cap from the retired players and only paying 92.5%. We would front load his contract over three years and tell him if he went into the PSD with that contract we would agree... It would now be up to the Bulldogs, they could raise his contract or let him go or trade him... This is what being ruthless with the PSD1 is all about and we would be getting a gun player.

The football club has stated (I think it was in the Herald sun article) that the club has the cash to get a big name... this is nothing like Warnock who hasn't proved a thing but an AA player (how many has the MFC had in the past decade). I think his age is a disadvantage but not enough to stop you taking someone like that for free when all be have to give is cash (we will pay market value, the Bulldogs can't afford that) and we have that.

For those that think the age is a major problem he is only 2 years older than warnock and played 110 more games....

Beautifully said.

Some ppl dont get it!

Well done dees!

PS: apparently the offer is HUUUUGE!

This thread is a total waste of.........um... well..... internet space and time!

Why would our FD pick anyone up (no matter how good) that is not going to be around for our next tilt? Realistically this 2012 -2015 and I think 2012 is optimistic.

Melbourne will not be picking up any players that can’t play a minimum of 100 games. End of story.

If you’re going to waste your time talking rumours at least talk ones that are plausible. Just because someone said it on TV does not mean it’s real or plausible.

You are wrong my friend.

The club has made the offer, its not rumour at all!

He is a star, and well done dees for doing it!

He creates the spine solidarity we need! Our window will come with Lake playing the last line, hes got alot of footy left!

It is nice to actually read some constructive posts instead of the usual 'It's not true' or the annoying word 'NEXT!!'

If we can afford to get him why not? I think having Brian Lake will only do wonders for the likes of Frawley, Rivers, Garland and Warnock, it sets a very good bench mark. The game these days seems to be based around defence so why not spend big money on an attacking back men? It only makes sense. A nice amount of publicity would come with it not to mention added excitement for the fans in 2010....could add some real hope.

Edited September 8, 200915 yr by Mr Morton

The more I think about it, the more I like it.

So long as we dont overpay him, then I think it could be a great move by the club.

Sure, he's 28 next year. But he has missed just 2 of a possible 116 games since 2004.

I can see him playing for another 5 years.

I have my doubts as to whether it will actually happen. But if we get the chance to pinch him in the PSD, I can only see the upside.

if l am right the bulldogs said that they would not trade him !

they said that if he wanted to go then he would go into the trade like Port did with Nick Stevens.

if the dogs are true to there words then would,nt we get him cheap ?

Correct me if Im wrong, but I understand that the player must agree..

If it falls that he's available, and we want him, we give him around about what he wants or lose him. There is only so much margin there. Cash / good will.

Edit.

Edited September 8, 200915 yr by Trident

A few points about possibly recruiting Lake.

Could we do with him?

Look at Geelong's defence. Their best defender, Scarlett, doesn't play on the opposition's best forward but rather Harry Taylor does that. Scarlett plays as a defensive playmaker with his strength, run, disposal and marking ability being far more valuable. Tom Harley plays as a mid sized defender that is like a defensive organiser. We can very easily play with Warnock = Taylor, Lake = Scarlett and Frawley = Harley.

What is the cost?

Considering we are having to front load contracts now simply to get up to the minimum 92.5%, I don't think that money is too much of an issue. This is especially so considering the retirements of 3 senior players from a team that has won 7 games in 2 years. In terms of trading/draft, if we use PSD 1 then we effectively get him for nothing.

What if we don't get him?

Then the Bulldogs have had to overpay their players when they are close going over the salary cap. This is good for us as it means that it may push another player out the back and weaken an opponent. We should be doing this to several players.

Besides, it is sweet payback for screwing us on the Mission deal.

Ah yes, thanks 'Bob', interesting post.

There is NO way he will come to Melbourne IMO unfortunately. Players will take a pay-cut to keep him around and i'm sure he wouldn't want to leave a team just when they are starting to push towards premiership contention either.

no not rivers! I LOVE HIMM!

yeah warnock can gooo!

no not rivers! I LOVE HIMM!

yeah warnock can gooo!

You do realise that Warnock is better than Rivers, don't you?

I want to keep both, unless something ridiculous is offered, but Rivers can't play KPB - CHB or FB.

Rivers will stay because the PSD is after the trade period..... If we traded rivers then lake backflipped us and signed with bulldogs before the PSD we would of lost a key back.... 2010 draft we may look at releasing one of the key backs depending on the season (getting lake still has a long way to go especially since bulldogs only pay 450K odd of the 1 million allowance for marketing.... they might get the supporters to raise anoter 150K and pay him through the marketing allowance, but we have made an offer which will make him think)

no not rivers! I LOVE HIMM!

yeah warnock can gooo!

But both are crucial to our back line structure, so they're keepers IMO.

You are wrong my friend.

The club has made the offer, its not rumour at all!

He is a star, and well done dees for doing it!

He creates the spine solidarity we need! Our window will come with Lake playing the last line, hes got alot of footy left!

You make it sound as if he is about to sign.

We will be just fine without him, but a player of his calibre is always welcome.

Still hoping that a young fwd/mid is OOC around December...

Hmm. Big call this one.

Not sure why we're trying to get another key defender, unless one of Warnock or Rivers are to be traded.

Exactly - we might look to trade. Imagine picking up Lake for free at PSD 1 and getting value from say a Hawthorn or Carlton for a Rivers/Warnock. Very exciting prospect.

is it posible to trade PSD 1(Lake) for a first round ND pick?

Edited September 9, 200915 yr by tatu

There is NO way he will come to Melbourne IMO unfortunately. Players will take a pay-cut to keep him around and i'm sure he wouldn't want to leave a team just when they are starting to push towards premiership contention either.

Just starting....? He may also think they might have just about run their race. ie. B.Johnson, J.Akermanis

is it posible to trade PSD 1(Lake) for a first round ND pick?

no you cannot trade a PSD pick

Lake is an incredible player but he would be better suited to another club that is cashed up and likely to have a strong finals campaign as early as next year onwards. Both that and I am happy with the defenders we already have.

Lake ready to accept Dogs 1.8m deal

Seems Brian has successfully raised his worth and most likely staying put !!

From what I understand Lake had been accepting chickenfeed for years*. Given his age, this is probably his last opportunity to earn big bucks before hitting the slippery slope. I say good on him.

His signing at that price also works in every other club's favour, including ours. We may not have gained his services, but now WB are paying proper market rates for a very good player, in a year where they are probably going to have a salary cap squeeze. All in all, even though it didn't really affect our club at all in the end, it's a result I'm comfortable with.

*Edit: This quote from the article confirms it:

Hawthorn was understood to have indicated it would pay around $550,000 a year for Lake's services, an amount the Swans were not prepared to match. The player's current contract is worth half that amount.

So he was on approx $275,000. That seems incredibly low for one of their best players.

• Yr Games Kicks Hballs Disp Marks
• 2009 24 277 178 455 201
• 2008 25 272 171 443 175

• Yr Games Kicks Hballs Disp Marks
• 2009 24 11.5 7.4 19 8.4
• 2008 25 10.9 6.8 17.7 7

He has seemed to be a much better player through the 09 season yet he has not stepped up his "stats" as one would have thought. With such massive jump in pay scale I thought his stats might have refelected a visible jump in performance.

I think it has more to do with his steady play... I have always thought he has played too frantic to be a reliable defender, ie he has always been able to get enough of it and foil fwd thrusts but the number of times he would seem to have time but franticly hack the ball away for a turn over and a 50/50 situation always held him back. This season his ability to read the play, toning down the frantic play and his descision making have been his improvements over other seasons.

So he was on approx $275,000. That seems incredibly low for one of their best players.

Rodney Eade on One Week at a Time refuted this. He said that the media's speculation of Lake's contract worth was wrong, and that Hawthorn's offer was not that much larger than Lake's current contract.