Port's pick 8 on the table

[Guest delicious jurrah coffee]

Fair to say we won't see Jamar kick another bag of 5 any time soon.

Jamar has taken 6 years to come good? He was good in 2006 and got injured when we needed him most in the SF against Fremantle. That is the story of his career, injured when we need him. He's played 31 games in 3 seasons, and 7 in 2009. I'm not willing to back him to remain injury free (especially at 27 next year) for an entire season so we are better off using him to get pick 8 which could deliver us a Ben Cunnington or Dustin Martin.

well after 6 seasons hes finally manhandling the opposition,it would be a brave man to trade him, young spencers in the background but hes to young and raw at the moment,pick 8 just a number, why do you think other clubs want to trade first round picks?

[H_T 3,049]

Have you read HT's jokes?

Go back and re-read. Do a search. I'll wait...

You'll be waiting a while.... (still searching)

Maybe I've been mistaken for you.....

that's a worry....never mind.

Yeah I thought the same on Garland.

[Guest hangon007]

I thought it would be obvious to those taking part in the Tall v Mid debate regarding pick two. If we have another top 10 pick in a midfielders draft, it would leave the door open for us to take arguably the best tall in the draft at pick number 2 and grab a quality midfielder at 8. I am not blindly suggesting we "get it done" for the sake of drooling over the prospects...that is ludicrous. I genuinely think that PJ and Martin/Meesen could handle the brunt of the ruck duties and we would be fine. It is not a swipe at Jamar nor an oversight of the general consensus that our ruck division is a glaring weakness. It is just an outcry to may hay while the sun shines, or get the best young talent into the club in the last uncompromised draft. The cost in my opinion would be Jamar + Pick 18. Jamar is good when he is on the park. but in my opinion that isn't often enough and age isn't on his side either. You have to keep an eye on the future E25. If GC weren't entering the league and killing the draft then I would not feel the need to say "get it done", in fact I would probably laugh at the suggestion too. We need to be ruthless in our rebuild.

I'm with you in sentiment. However, do you think it will/has to be Port & Jamar.

Trying to read between the lines at Portland ... something just does not add up.

Call me a suspicious SOAB but that Williams bloke it up to playing funny little games.

[MadAsHell 4,215]

Fair to say we won't see Jamar kick another bag of 5 any time soon.

Jamar has taken 6 years to come good? He was good in 2006 and got injured when we needed him most in the SF against Fremantle. That is the story of his career, injured when we need him. He's played 31 games in 3 seasons, and 7 in 2009. I'm not willing to back him to remain injury free (especially at 27 next year) for an entire season so we are better off using him to get pick 8 which could deliver us a Ben Cunnington or Dustin Martin.

I'd be willing to trade Jamar and pick 18 for pick 8 as long as Melbourne can make sure that someone like Jamie Charman or Mark Seaby will be available in the PSD. That way we'll get the extra top 10 pick and also pick up an established ruckman for nothing who can give us 2 or 3 years while Meesen and Spencer develop their games in the VFL and will be ready to take over when needed.

[godees 873]

For what purpose? At what cost?

I think we need to introduce a 'Just Think' campaign for posting leading up to trade week...

You've hit the nail on the head there!

And I cannot understand people suggesting we trade Jamar - right now he is our ONLY AFL standard ruckman. No if buts maybes. Trading him would be incredibly stupid!

Trade period is so frustrating. So so many stupid suggestions showing how little people know about the game. I think im going to stop reading trade threads and stick to the draft.

[Mondê 525]

You've hit the nail on the head there!

And I cannot understand people suggesting we trade Jamar - right now he is our ONLY AFL standard ruckman. No if buts maybes. Trading him would be incredibly stupid!

Trade period is so frustrating. So so many stupid suggestions showing how little people know about the game. I think im going to stop reading trade threads and stick to the draft.

How is he AFL standard if he only manages to get on the park 31/66 times over a 3 year period? Surely I'm not the only one questioning his durability...? If anything his tendency to get injured during the home and away season suggest his body is not up to the demands of the AFL.

[MadAsHell 4,215]

How is he AFL standard if he only manages to get on the park 31/66 times over a 3 year period? Surely I'm not the only one questioning his durability...? If anything his tendency to get injured during the home and away season suggest his body is not up to the demands of the AFL.

That's a fair call, and if he wants to go back home also you have to at least entertain the idea of it. I certainly wouldn't trade him just for the sake of it.

[Demon16 69]

Who says Boak wants to move?

If he does then ...

Picks 2, 18 and 34 for Boak and Pick 8

Gives Port the SA boy Trengove and a decent pick at 18 and a filler at 34

Gives us a quality Victorian midfielder and a much earlier crack at a KP with 8.

The balance is probably still in our favour

The alternative might be:

Pick 2 for Pick 8 and Pearce

you know how you guys love to pick apart one sided trades of fellow posters........... you ever consider you might tip the scales too heavily in the other direction?

i don't know where to start, giving all our cards for Boak or our queen for a dud!

[old55 23,700]

Pick 2 in exchange for pick 8 and T.Boak. They get access to picking Trengove, Morabito or whoever. Melbourne gets pick 8 - perhaps access to a Butcher/Cunnington/Martin/Talia and Boak (former No.5 pick) as a mid.

Why would Port Adelaide do that - they're giving up a 1st round pick and a player picked in the 1st round for pick 2 - it's a shocking deal for them and would never happen.

If we had pick 8 would you give Cale Morton and pick 8 to Richmond for pick 3?

No I didn't think so. But that's what you're asking PA to do.

See my trade scenario:

Pick 2, 18 and 34 for Boak and pick 8

more realistic but still stacked in our favour.

Means we end up with Scully, Boak and our pick of KP at 8.

So we equate Boak with Trengove and lose pick 34 to get a improvement from 18 to 8 in a shot for KP.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

How is he AFL standard if he only manages to get on the park 31/66 times over a 3 year period? Surely I'm not the only one questioning his durability...? If anything his tendency to get injured during the home and away season suggest his body is not up to the demands of the AFL.

Nice misuse of the facts.

While he has been injured this year, in 2007 and 2008 there were a number of weeks where he was not selected in the MFC team. Also your complaint about him being injured for the Freo SF ignores the fact that he did play 22 games that year.

2010 will be his 7th year in the AFL which is due time for a ruckman to start showing his skills and you want to get rid of him. Brilliant.

So what great rucking alternatives have you got to realistically replace him with?

you know how you guys love to pick apart one sided trades of fellow posters........... you ever consider you might tip the scales too heavily in the other direction?

i don't know where to start, giving all our cards for Boak or our queen for a dud!

You gotta really love those guys that seek to berate those that challenge posters one side trades and then offer completely nothing in return.

[Demonland 73,140]

WOW.

Just think.

One more month of this and then another six weeks to the draft and another couple of weeks to the pre season and rookie drafts.

I'm already showing signs of fatigue!

[Demon16 69]

You gotta really love those guys that seek to berate those that challenge posters one side trades and then offer completely nothing in return.

2 peas in a pod we are

[titan_uranus 25,044]

WOW.

Just think.

One more month of this and then another six weeks to the draft and another couple of weeks to the pre season and rookie drafts.

I'm already showing signs of fatigue!

Sometimes I wish finals didn't exist, so that trade week and the draft would be over by now.

Then again, if it wasn't for this time of the year, where would I get my laughs from?

[Guest Digga]

Sometimes I wish finals didn't exist, so that trade week and the draft would be over by now.

Then again, if it wasn't for this time of the year, where would I get my laughs from?

Did that help your self-esteem saying that?

[DemonDan... 77]

Fair to say we won't see Jamar kick another bag of 5 any time soon.

That is the story of his career, injured when we need him. He's played 31 games in 3 seasons, and 7 in 2009. I'm not willing to back him to remain injury free (especially at 27 next year) for an entire season so we are better off using him to get pick 8 which could deliver us a Ben Cunnington or Dustin Martin.

After such a glowing assessment, why would Port want him??

[dee-luded 2,959]

Fair to say we won't see Jamar kick another bag of 5 any time soon.

Jamar has taken 6 years to come good? He was good in 2006 and got injured when we needed him most in the SF against Fremantle. That is the story of his career, injured when we need him. He's played 31 games in 3 seasons, and 7 in 2009. I'm not willing to back him to remain injury free (especially at 27 next year) for an entire season so we are better off using him to get pick 8 which could deliver us a Ben Cunnington or Dustin Martin.

Fair to say we won't see any AFL Rucks kick 5 goals any time soon.

Edited September 10, 2009 by dee-luded

[Mondê 525]

After such a glowing assessment, why would Port want him??

Look he's not a bad player it's just a question of durability for mine. He has strung some dominant games together towards the end of the year giving him some currency, so if Port buy into the hype then given their depleted ruck division I think they would jump at that trade for a short/mid term fix - albeit risky.

[DemonDan... 77]

Look he's not a bad player it's just a question of durability for mine. He has strung some dominant games together towards the end of the year giving him some currency, so if Port buy into the hype then given their depleted ruck division I think they would jump at that trade for a short/mid term fix - albeit risky.

They're a professional sporting team, in a nationwide comp - they wouldnt miss much.. certainly wouldnt buy into hype, or 'jump' at something 'risky'.

I dont think Port would go past:

Jamar for their Pick 24 (or is that 22?)

If we even 'seriously considered' giving up pick 2.. Id almost give up. Certainly would give up on BP and Co.

For me, Picks 1, 2 and 18.. untouchable! Id Work trades around that..

[H_T 3,049]

Why would Port Adelaide do that - they're giving up a 1st round pick and a player picked in the 1st round for pick 2 - it's a shocking deal for them and would never happen.

If we had pick 8 would you give Cale Morton and pick 8 to Richmond for pick 3?

No I didn't think so. But that's what you're asking PA to do.

See my trade scenario:

Pick 2, 18 and 34 for Boak and pick 8

more realistic but still stacked in our favour.

Means we end up with Scully, Boak and our pick of KP at 8.

So we equate Boak with Trengove and lose pick 34 to get a improvement from 18 to 8 in a shot for KP.

I see your point. I did say in my post I'd prefer to keep pick 2 (untouchable). But for the sake of speculating a little further, may I tip the scales back a tad. What about 2 and 18 for Boak and pick 8? Keep 34. 34 wouldn't mean that much, but it's still a pick.

So at draft time we're still left with 1,8,34,50 & PSD1. And obtain Boak.

I'm just not convinced about Boak being a top-liner. It's good to throw up scenario's - sometimes it helps clear the mind really.

Having said all that, I'm mindful of how important pick 2 will be, I'll stick with 1,2,18,34 & PSD#1. I understand the need for a KP. But I want a star midfield. Trengove or Morabito are excellent midfielders and both can push forward. Morabito is 193-194cm. I'll be happy with either. Along with T.Scully of course.