lots of positives for this move which grows momentum by the day. have faith in the footy dept

Pretty sure GC is a long shot.

Hale wants to stay in Melb, even though he's from up there, and the fact he's already had a medical with the dees indicates to me that he is open to coming to us.

To be honest, I don't see him having many suitors anyway.

Ideally, 3rd round pick at most.

I'm very keen to fill the fwd-ruck role with a mature player. I'll trust the FD on who - they know 100x more than me about it. If it's Hale then fine - he appears to have good attributes as a long target, good kick and can definitely ruck - as I've said my worry about him is his defensive ability.

Now on trade cost - I think you need to look at what you'd want for Matthew Warnock - they're in a similar situation - in-demand position KPB, held just out of the best 22 by two better players, in contract. I see people talking a 3rd rounder - would you take that for Warnock - I don't think so. Personally I'd prefer to retain our draft position and trade a player - not necessarily Warnock, I'm just using him as equal value, because I think it'd take at least our second rounder and then some.

I like Laycock from Essendon as a worthwhile punt.

In the words of John McEnroe "You cannot be serious!"

Laycock is one of the softest, most injury-prone and incompetent spuds in the AFL. I don't even know a single Essendon supporter that rates him.

I'm very keen to fill the fwd-ruck role with a mature player. I'll trust the FD on who - they know 100x more than me about it. If it's Hale then fine - he appears to have good attributes as a long target, good kick and can definitely ruck - as I've said my worry about him is his defensive ability.

Now on trade cost - I think you need to look at what you'd want for Matthew Warnock - they're in a similar situation - in-demand position KPB, held just out of the best 22 by two better players, in contract. I see people talking a 3rd rounder - would you take that for Warnock - I don't think so. Personally I'd prefer to retain our draft position and trade a player - not necessarily Warnock, I'm just using him as equal value, because I think it'd take at least our second rounder and then some.

Tend to agree with this logic - especially as Hale had his best game of the year with Warnock as his direct opponent. Pretty sure Warnock only played one more game this year than Hale so the comparison is fair.

Personally, I would prefer a third rounder for Hale and a second rounder for Warnock but not sure of the likelihood.

Tend to agree with this logic - especially as Hale had his best game of the year with Warnock as his direct opponent. Pretty sure Warnock only played one more game this year than Hale so the comparison is fair.

Personally, I would prefer a third rounder for Hale and a second rounder for Warnock but not sure of the likelihood.

That's exactly how I'd rate them.

Warnock has much more worth than Hale at this point in time.

2nd rate ruckmen are a dime a dozen and we could always keep PJ if need be;

KPB are at a premium, with Carlton and Hawthorn both desperate to get one, and few on the market.

I have asked this question before and no one has ever replied so here goes again.

If my memory is correct Warnock was originally drafted as a forward.

He has size,is tough, is a good mark and a reasonable kick inside 50 metres.

other than one quarter vs the tigers( when we were trying to lose ) I have never seen him played as a forward.

Why ?

Seems to me he has what we need!

Does he dislike playing as a forward?

Do the coaches think he is backman period?

I have been amazed that he is never tried in the forward line.

We played him as a forward against the tiges in 2009 iirc and we were accused of tanking because of it.

I find it hard to believe he has been typecast as a backman and it never occurred to play him forward.

Pace is probably an issue. If he could ruck for short periods and was a tiny bit taller, he'd probably remove the need to get someone like Hale.

We played him as a forward against the tiges in 2009 iirc and we were accused of tanking because of it.

I find it hard to believe he has been typecast as a backman and it never occurred to play him forward.

Pace is probably an issue. If he could ruck for short periods and was a tiny bit taller, he'd probably remove the need to get someone like Hale.

He only played the last quarter that day and from memory the ball came to him once

as we were desperately trying to keep it out of the scoring zone.

With no other evidence it is difficult to believe that he has not been typecast!

That's exactly how I'd rate them.

Warnock has much more worth than Hale at this point in time.

2nd rate ruckmen are a dime a dozen and we could always keep PJ if need be;

KPB are at a premium, with Carlton and Hawthorn both desperate to get one, and few on the market.

I don't want a "2nd rate ruckman", I want a fwd-ruck who presents a threat in the forward line and who is a capable ruckman. I don't expect our FD to pursue a "2nd rate ruckman" so I expect the trade price to be comensurate. You need to think it thru - you get what you pay for.

I don't want a "2nd rate ruckman", I want a fwd-ruck who presents a threat in the forward line and who is a capable ruckman. I don't expect our FD to pursue a "2nd rate ruckman" so I expect the trade price to be comensurate. You need to think it thru - you get what you pay for.

[/quote

I agree a good one or not at all

Two weeks ago Dean Bailey said on SEN the the MFC might surprise a few people by using a high draft pick this year or next on this type of player.

I think the brains trust at the Dees fully understand that "you get what you pay for"

Or another way if you pay peanuts you get monkeys.

Would not surprise me if we used our second round pick and a player or even the first round pick for the right guy.

We traded Johnson to the Lions!

Edited September 28, 201014 yr by old dee

I like Laycock from Essendon as a worthwhile punt.

That bloke could barely fill out a ruck role let alone go forward or do both!

I don't want a "2nd rate ruckman", I want a fwd-ruck who presents a threat in the forward line and who is a capable ruckman. I don't expect our FD to pursue a "2nd rate ruckman" so I expect the trade price to be comensurate. You need to think it thru - you get what you pay for.

Exactly a "2nd rate ruckman" should attract a "second rate price" especially one with a "huge" caveat/contract hanging over his head (allegedly $375K). Few ours clubs could or would want to fit him into their salary cap & I would suggest North with improvement to come in their young kids might be one of them.

Exactly a "2nd rate ruckman" should attract a "second rate price" especially one with a "huge" caveat/contract hanging over his head (allegedly $375K). Few ours clubs could or would want to fit him into their salary cap & I would suggest North with improvement to come in their young kids might be one of them.

Don't misunderstand me - I'm not saying Hale is "a 2nd rate ruckman" - I'll leave that up to the FD to judge. I am saying that if we like him then he must be good enough to pay a decent price for. There's two prices - waht we pay North for the trade and what we pay Hale. There's usually a balance between the 2 - if we take on the whole big contract the trade prices is less, if North pay part the trade price is higher. The key point is - we want flag quality players and we'll need to pay fair price to get them.

I don't want a "2nd rate ruckman", I want a fwd-ruck who presents a threat in the forward line and who is a capable ruckman. I don't expect our FD to pursue a "2nd rate ruckman" so I expect the trade price to be comensurate. You need to think it thru - you get what you pay for.

I don't particularly care what you want, we NEED a ruckman to tide us over and fill a spot for a couple of years.

A 2nd-rate ruckman will foot the bill.

Exactly a "2nd rate ruckman" should attract a "second rate price" especially one with a "huge" caveat/contract hanging over his head (allegedly $375K). Few ours clubs could or would want to fit him into their salary cap & I would suggest North with improvement to come in their young kids might be one of them.

I'm expecting plenty of oppostion to this suggestion, but throwing out a left field possibility....

How would people feel about the MFC paying "over the odds" ie our 1st round draft pick for Hale (or a swap of our 1st round for their 2nd round), with North then paying a significant portion of his contract as part of a deal ie. if he's got 2 years to run on $375K they pay $150K a year of his contract for the next 2 years.

With this years draft being signifcantly shallow due to the GC picks, how confident will the MFC be in getting their ideal targets in the draft.

Talked to a mate at work today who's a huge North Melbourne fan and goes to watch them play every week (must be the only one). And he reckons he'd be more then happy for a 3rd or 4th round pick for Hale.

Says he's decent but wont be a world beater & that North are in no position to demand anymore as he only played about 7 games in 2010 and is behing McIntosh, Goldstein, Petrie & Tarrant. Also reckons North will want to clear him out in order to help speed up Majak Daw's development.

So on the sounds of that if we can get Hale for a 3rd or even a 4th round pick I'd have to be happy with that deal.

I'm expecting plenty of oppostion to this suggestion, but throwing out a left field possibility....

How would people feel about the MFC paying "over the odds" ie our 1st round draft pick for Hale (or a swap of our 1st round for their 2nd round), with North then paying a significant portion of his contract as part of a deal ie. if he's got 2 years to run on $375K they pay $150K a year of his contract for the next 2 years.

With this years draft being signifcantly shallow due to the GC picks, how confident will the MFC be in getting their ideal targets in the draft.

This draft is not significantly shallow.

Quite the opposite. GC17 picks withstanding.

I don't particularly care what you want, we NEED a ruckman to tide us over and fill a spot for a couple of years.

A 2nd-rate ruckman will foot the bill.

What you have prescribed there is Paul Johnson - he is a second rate ruckman, why couldn't he fill the spot for a couple of years?

Answer: Because he's useless as a forward.

I agree with old that we need a second ruck, but the most important factor is that he offers something as a forward (i.e. a ruck/forward). "Not completely incompetent" is my only requirement for him when he's in the ruck.

What you have prescribed there is Paul Johnson - he is a second rate ruckman, why couldn't he fill the spot for a couple of years?

Answer: Because he's useless as a forward.

I agree with old that we need a second ruck, but the most important factor is that he offers something as a forward (i.e. a ruck/forward). "Not completely incompetent" is my only requirement for him when he's in the ruck.

Ok, that's a good point that I've often overlooked.

Is Hale that guy though?

I do recall him kicking 8 against Geelong 2 years ago, but recently his form up forward has been unspectacular.

Really, we just need someone that will throw their weight around and burst open packs, so our crumbers can do their job more effectively.

Ok, that's a good point that I've often overlooked.

Is Hale that guy though?

I do recall him kicking 8 against Geelong 2 years ago, but recently his form up forward has been unspectacular.

Really, we just need someone that will throw their weight around and burst open packs, so our crumbers can do their job more effectively.

Have a read my friend.

http://www.kangaroos.com.au/latestnews/news/blogarticle/tabid/9795/newsid/103022/default.aspx

Agreed, Nasher. We are looking for someone who is able to play as a full time forward but can also give relief in the ruck for short periods.

If we wanted a specialist ruckman to play as our second ruck then we would just play Spencer, who is a very capable tap ruckman. But we're looking for something different. It's not about having a ruckman to tide us over, it's about having a forward that can create a contest when the play builds up very slowly (rather than just beating teams on the counterattack like we currently do). The fact that they can provide ruck relief for short periods is a bonus.

Darren Jolly was interviewed last night on One Week at a Time and was asked how much time he would usually ruck. He said that it was generally 75-80%. So we are looking for someone to hold their spot as a key forward first and foremost, since we have a gap there and they would only be used for rucking for about 20-25% of the game. Hale is a competent ruckman, but he would be a structurally significant forward that we currently don't have. Newton was playing this role late in the year. Fitzpatrick will hopefully play this role in 5 years time, but he has a lot of development to go.

Also, E25, Warnock's pace is not a problem. It's actually a strength of his and was one of the main reasons that he was even drafted as a mature player in the first place.

Agreed, Nasher. We are looking for someone who is able to play as a full time forward but can also give relief in the ruck for short periods.

If we wanted a specialist ruckman to play as our second ruck then we would just play Spencer, who is a very capable tap ruckman. But we're looking for something different. It's not about having a ruckman to tide us over, it's about having a forward that can create a contest when the play builds up very slowly (rather than just beating teams on the counterattack like we currently do). The fact that they can provide ruck relief for short periods is a bonus.

Darren Jolly was interviewed last night on One Week at a Time and was asked how much time he would usually ruck. He said that it was generally 75-80%. So we are looking for someone to hold their spot as a key forward first and foremost, since we have a gap there and they would only be used for rucking for about 20-25% of the game. Hale is a competent ruckman, but he would be a structurally significant forward that we currently don't have. Newton was playing this role late in the year. Fitzpatrick will hopefully play this role in 5 years time, but he has a lot of development to go.

Also, E25, Warnock's pace is not a problem. It's actually a strength of his and was one of the main reasons that he was even drafted as a mature player in the first place.

I'm unfair on Warnock because I always compare him to Frawley.

But I thought the concern on Warnock with other clubs wanting a KPD was his pace off the mark?

I might be wrong.

Agreed, Nasher. We are looking for someone who is able to play as a full time forward but can also give relief in the ruck for short periods.

If we wanted a specialist ruckman to play as our second ruck then we would just play Spencer, who is a very capable tap ruckman. But we're looking for something different. It's not about having a ruckman to tide us over, it's about having a forward that can create a contest when the play builds up very slowly (rather than just beating teams on the counterattack like we currently do). The fact that they can provide ruck relief for short periods is a bonus.

Darren Jolly was interviewed last night on One Week at a Time and was asked how much time he would usually ruck. He said that it was generally 75-80%. So we are looking for someone to hold their spot as a key forward first and foremost, since we have a gap there and they would only be used for rucking for about 20-25% of the game. Hale is a competent ruckman, but he would be a structurally significant forward that we currently don't have. Newton was playing this role late in the year. Fitzpatrick will hopefully play this role in 5 years time, but he has a lot of development to go.

Also, E25, Warnock's pace is not a problem. It's actually a strength of his and was one of the main reasons that he was even drafted as a mature player in the first place.

Agree and if Hale or whoever else is worth having for that role they're going to cost more than a 3rd rounder in a compromised draft. By definition a player that costs that much is probably not going to be worth having in that role (altho Brown is the exception because he was delisted by North I believe).

1st ruck depth for Jamar and Spencer is another question - rookie-ing the best state league player we can is probably the right price. One advantage of Hale is that he could play 1st ruck if required, compared with say Leigh Brown who is really just relief. With Hale we may get both requiremenst covered.

Talked to a mate at work today who's a huge North Melbourne fan and goes to watch them play every week (must be the only one). And he reckons he'd be more then happy for a 3rd or 4th round pick for Hale.

Says he's decent but wont be a world beater & that North are in no position to demand anymore as he only played about 7 games in 2010 and is behing McIntosh, Goldstein, Petrie & Tarrant. Also reckons North will want to clear him out in order to help speed up Majak Daw's development.

So on the sounds of that if we can get Hale for a 3rd or even a 4th round pick I'd have to be happy with that deal.

Interesting so North sound motivated as well ... I wonder why? Yet people round here are talking 1st rounders!!!

So they have "McIntosh, Goldstein, Petrie & Tarrant & Majak Daw" and they are paying Hale 375K ... I'm almost tipping he is the highest paid.