what if we were able to ontrade that pick 11 for a good quality player? At the moment we've 1 and 2 which we don't want to give up, then 18. One in the middle could be handy trade bait.

Someone with a big nose or maybe trouble staying awake?

Considering I have a go at those with bad grammar...

Can't spell.

I'll fix it, so most are none the wiser...

Except for this post. Which I will later delete. Cunning.

what if we were able to ontrade that pick 11 for a good quality player? At the moment we've 1 and 2 which we don't want to give up, then 18. One in the middle could be handy trade bait.

Burgoyne??

I cannot see us trading picks for players unless we trade players for picks ourselves. We simply can't afford to trade picks when we are taking mids with one and two.

The only way we can pick up Burgoyne is with a scenario such as what you are suggesting.

What ?

Scully would have been top 3 this year.

Fair enough. I disagree. I think given that they're talls there were a whole bunch that would have gone ahead, like Hurley, Vickery... along with the obvious Nicnat and Watts. On reflection I think maybe where I had Trengove was unfair. But it's hardly important...

I think what you say about keeping two of the three in-and-unders only applies if: You're talking 22 only, and Valenti is out. I think you need at LEAST two in any given match, and in the wet you take them + Brock with you every time. Those that DON'T make it are depth. The issue is that Brock would be payed more than we should be paying for a potential depth player, hence the idea of trading him... These are the same things that governed the trades of Woey and TJ. High price + mediocre return + questionable future = trade.

I still would prefer to get more though. On one hand we have the talented player we traded for pick #14 that got Grimes. On the other hand we have the club champion brownlow medallist we traded for pick #14 that got Bell. It's aggressive, but if it doesn't pay off, look out...

Again. If true.

... Cunning.

No prefer Rohan, but haven't seen either live.

Considering I have a go at those with bad grammar...

Can't spell.

I'll fix it, so most are none the wiser...

Except for this post. Which I will later delete. Cunning.

Fair enough. I disagree. I think given that they're talls there were a whole bunch that would have gone ahead, like Hurley, Vickery... along with the obvious Nicnat and Watts. On reflection I think maybe where I had Trengove was unfair. But it's hardly important...

Nah, you're way off the mark. And you weren't unfair to Trengove, just wrong.

I don't see the need to trade away one of the Jones, Moloney or Mclean. ...

McLean might want to go. There was a comment in the paper (Age?) that he was being offered a contract for less $'s.

He might want ot move on to greener pastures.

McLean might want to go. There was a comment in the paper (Age?) that he was being offered a contract for less $'s.

He might want ot move on to greener pastures.

This is what I fear the most from this rumour, a player that bleeds for the colours now wanting out? If that's the case then we are in some trouble.

It seems many here though are keen to move him despite a deep and continuing passion for the club (for all we know), which IMHO is just a terrible move. Mclean is the poster boy for a new kind of Melbourne player, tough and loyal, and a leader.

I still would prefer to get more though. On one hand we have the talented player we traded for pick #14 that got Grimes. On the other hand we have the club champion brownlow medallist we traded for pick #14 that got Bell. It's aggressive, but if it doesn't pay off, look out...

And for me a 50/50 is just not enough for Mclean, and I suspect 50/50 is being generous for this pick 11.

I still would prefer to get more though. On one hand we have the talented player we traded for pick #14 that got Grimes. On the other hand we have the club champion brownlow medallist we traded for pick #14 that got Bell. It's aggressive, but if it doesn't pay off, look out...

Yes the Grimes/Johnstone trade looks like we may come out in front if his body stands up to AFL.

Yes Bell has been disappointing, but to assess the Woewodin trade you've got to look at what Woey did at Collingwood - 62 games, one really good year, we're in the red but not by much.

There's the Dunn/Jolly trade and we're in the red there.

But all these trades had legitimacy

- Johnstone, no comment required,

- Woey, it's about who we drafted - we didn't lose much

- Jolly behind White and would've left the year after for much less compensation any way.

We've been one of the most aggressive clubs trading for 1st rounders in a bid to improve our list and I think that's good.

Over their career to date McLean has been the better player. In 2009 Winderlich was the decidedly better player - faster and far more influential in games.

I'd trade McLean in a heart beat for Callan Ward, a former pick 19. It's folly to look at previous pick 11's and make an assessment on whether a trade is justified or not. It gets back to who the club believes is likely to be available at a given pick and where they see a player's future given an ever evolving list. Jones is the best clearance player at the club and markedly improved his decision making and kicking in the second half of the year. And right now Moloney is about equal with McLean, but had a better year than McLean. Who has more value in the market out of Moloney and McLean ? McLean. Who's harder at the contest out of the two ? Moloney.

Pick 11 for McLean ? Where do I sign.

This is my preferred 2012 side as we speak:

Bennell Warnock Garland

Strauss Frawley Green

Blease Moloney Morton

Sylvia Watts Trengove

Wonaeamiri Jurrah Bate

Ruck Grimes Scully

I/C Ruck Davey Maric Jones

Naturally there'll be a few changes along the way. But I can't fit in a slow mid like McLean, especially when he's not overly clean or damaging. The reason we're currently last is that we had a club that wouldn't make the very decisions that some are advocating now.

yea that looks like a good side..but i dont think green will still be playing by then...i hope he is but isnt he pretty old?

Yes the Grimes/Johnstone trade looks like we may come out in front if his body stands up to AFL.

Yes Bell has been disappointing, but to assess the Woewodin trade you've got to look at what Woey did at Collingwood - 62 games, one really good year, we're in the red but not by much.

There's the Dunn/Jolly trade and we're in the red there.

But all these trades had legitimacy

- Johnstone, no comment required,

- Woey, it's about who we drafted - we didn't lose much

- Jolly behind White and would've left the year after for much less compensation any way.

We've been one of the most aggressive clubs trading for 1st rounders in a bid to improve our list and I think that's good.

It is true that the Dunn/Jolly one was unavoidable but that doesn't affect the result, which was pretty bad for us, though I am still in the ever dwindling camp that believes Dunn could be a good player.

The cost of the Bell Woey trade was not so much in the loss of woey's form, but more so the time and number of games invested in Bell for largely nothing (he's not finished yet but he would be if he was out of contract).

And I don't think it is good at all that we have been aggressive in trading existing players for draft picks, I would much rather be a club that has a reputation for holding onto exiting players. That is assuming of course that results are the same. Which is not to say I don't advocate it in some circumstances, I just don't like the taste it leaves in your mouth.

It's folly to look at previous pick 11's and make an assessment on whether a trade is justified or not.

Next time i'll lighten up on the evidence and fill my posts with opinion and speculation instead.

Edited September 23, 200916 yr by JACKATTACK

And I don't think it is good at all that we have been aggressive in trading existing players for draft picks, I would much rather be a club that has a reputation for holding onto exiting players. That is assuming of course that results are the same. Which is not to say I don't advocate it in some circumstances, I just don't like the taste it leaves in your mouth.

That taste is sentimentality - the champagne in the premiership cup doesn't taste like that - ask Max Hudghton.

By the way - that 2nd quote is not mine - you need to be more careful with your cut and paste.

Edited September 23, 200916 yr by old55

That taste is sentimentality - the champagne in the premiership cup doesn't taste like that - ask Max Hudghton.

By the way - that 2nd quote is not mine - you need to be more careful with your cut and paste.

Ooops, that's changed, apologies.

We're a long way from tasting champagne like that, sentiment is all we got, and the kind of sentiment that seeking a trade of Mclean for pick 11 is the not so tasty kind.

Edited September 23, 200916 yr by JACKATTACK

Take this with a grain of salt if you like - but I hear the jungle drums are beating louder re: Pick #11 for Brock.

Firstly, right now we have no 'stars', dafacat.

Secondly, I'd happily trade McLean. There was mention in a paper recently that he was weighing up his future, so I'll not dismiss this 'rumour' as quickly as some. We don't have room for McLean, Moloney and Jones. McLean is never going to be a star. FFS, he's not as good as Luke Ball who's border line at the Saints. And I'm taking into account that he'll be better next year once he's over his troublesome ankle.

geez...you must have a sore head bashing that brickwall..lol. Yoiu and a fwe others ( humbly include muself ) seem a lil alone in a rational approach to appraisals.

Brocky is good...not great.. he is problematic with regard some injuries..and thats worrysome.

I too raised the spectre elsewhere of .."how do we fit the likes of all Jones, Beamer , Brocky etc ..into the new look "effective" midfield ? And its damn hard to filed a compelling argument for a few.. and that includes McLean.

Id be quite happy if the bluebaggers were dumb enough to offer us 11.

wonder if this really has legs ?? hmm

we'll see...somehow doubt it... but then..............

In a rebuilding program that is still basically in phase 1 you would always consider replacing a player who is 25 plus with a 17 year old kid

By the time you reach a grand final you better be ready to WIN

In a rebuilding program that is still basically in phase 1 you would always consider replacing a player who is 25 plus with a 17 year old kid

By the time you reach a grand final you better be ready to WIN

if your talking about Brock he's 23.

if this trade can land us Talia then i'm all for it

if your talking about Brock he's 23.

24 at the start of next season but i would want to keep him as i think he will get better

I'd hope our rebuilding phase ends after the Rookie draft and the building phase will begin.

This is what I fear the most from this rumour, a player that bleeds for the colours now wanting out? If that's the case then we are in some trouble.

It seems many here though are keen to move him despite a deep and continuing passion for the club (for all we know), which IMHO is just a terrible move. Mclean is the poster boy for a new kind of Melbourne player, tough and loyal, and a leader.

this is a tough call on brock.. i agree completely with you though..

Brock has almost been the new face of the dees.. he bleeds for the club, put his own money in, etc.. the dees are getting the reputation of screwing their players and not giving them much respect (which they admitted recently and said they would try to change.. eg bringing Woey and Farmer back for a club night not long ago)..

it is hard to judge Brocky on recent games because he has had so many injuries.. but he did play some good games this year.. just look at the 'demonland player of the year' thread where he rated fairly high!

having said that.. i agree with most on here that a mid field with Brock, Jones, Moloney might get a little crowded with similar players.. and getting pick 11 could get us someone like Talia, Tapscott, Jetta, Panos, etc

trade week will be very interesting!!

I've a huge amount of time for Brock and think he could be a very good player if he remains (sorry... can get) fit.

That said, I'd do this trade in a heartbeat if I could. It would be a win for Carlscum, they need a player like Brock, we have Jones and Brent, 2 very similar players (and I'd keep these 2 above Brock), we'll have Scully and Trengrove coming in so IMO it's pick 11 for someone who may well turn out to be a peripheral player for us.

This is no rumor, this is a fact. Brock will not be at the Dees next year. One more star player is about to walk out the door with him.

another star is going to leave? i hope your kidding!! we need some older stars to stick around and teach the kids!!

The deal that has been put forward is Pick #11 for Brock McLean + swap of 3rd rounders.

where are you getting all of this 'insider information'?

why would the dees swap our 3rd round pick for their 3rd round in the deal? shouldnt they give us pick 11 and their 3rd round pick for say our 4th round pick and brock? he was pick 5 in his year!

How have we screwed over our players?

Farmer/Thompson/Jolly/Johnson all wanted to leave.

Players like White/Yze/Holland received longer contracts than they probably deserved and if anything our club has been too nice to our players. The MFC has long been a bit of a boys club and only now is this starting to change.