Trapper on the outer at the Lions

[Red Sox 2]

Gee I love/loved Trav for the player he could be. Even for all his faults I loved the guy in red & blue. The 02 Season and finals were his best for us but unfortunately that season was a long time coming and it never really eventuated again.

The swap as suggested above was a KOTD moment for us and I would say his replacement in # 16 has already shown much better application and consistency to his football.

For all that, I will still remember him fondly but understanding how by letting himself down he also let the club down.

[#MYHEARTBEATSTRUE 27]

Lets recruit him, mature age rookie?

[Guest hangon007]

Lets recruit him, mature age rookie?

Is he eligible to go onto our Veterans list? or Does anybody know?

[old dee 23,792]

Is he eligible to go onto our Veterans list? or Does anybody know?

You would need to give him a contract and I do not see that happening!

At the very best you might make him a mature age rookie.

but I cannot see that happening either.

MFC seems firmly fixed on youth!

So where does a 30 year old fit? we do not seem to want to give Bruce two years

And he is still playing well.

why would we give a spot to Travis?

[Guest hangon007]

You would need to give him a contract and I do not see that happening!

At the very best you might make him a mature age rookie.

but I cannot see that happening either.

MFC seems firmly fixed on youth!

So where does a 30 year old fit? we do not seem to want to give Bruce two years

And he is still playing well.

why would we give a spot to Travis?

Yeah but if he sits outside your senior list ... he costs you next to nothing.

If you had the choice of Trapper or a 5th round rookie selection it would be a no brainer. Baring in mind

a/ ND = 90 spots (approx)

b/ Pre Season draft = 10spots (approx)

c/ GWS Rookie draft concessions = First 8 picks

d/ Rookie Drafts Round 1-4 = 70 spots

So in effect he would be pick 179ish in the drafting process. I'm sure you could also give him a year-year contract, again assuming he sits on your veteran list.

If he goes onto your Veterans list its just a "cheap" player that you dont have to upgrade via a rookie list up-grade.

Edited October 26, 2010 by hangon007

[ox_5 163]

Judds grandmother will be on our list before TJ

[old dee 23,792]

Yeah but if he sits outside your senior list ... he costs you next to nothing.

If you had the choice of Trapper or a 5th round rookie selection it would be a no brainer. Baring in mind

a/ ND = 90 spots (approx)

b/ Pre Season draft = 10spots (approx)

c/ GWS Rookie draft concessions = First 8 picks

d/ Rookie Drafts Round 1-4 = 70 spots

So in effect he would be pick 179ish in the drafting process. I'm sure you could also give him a year-year contract, again assuming he sits on your veteran list.

If he goes onto your Veterans list its just a "cheap" player that you dont have to upgrade via a rookie list up-grade.

All of the above is fine but what does he give the MFC?

to play him we have to leave out one of the many midfielders we have at present.

I would prefer to find out if Maric / Bennel can play at AFL level than use Travis next year.

Don't get me wrong I am an admirer but I just do not see a spot for him.

As someone said earlier a one year deal at St Kilda might be a good move for them.

But we are not in danger of winning a flag next year. 2013-14 is hopefully our time.

TJ will be long gone by then.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Fondness? Ambivalence. He was rated dangerous and at times he was but it was too few in delivery. At best he was white hot but he was a frustration with what he delivered below that.

Which is what makes the price we got for him a steal. I rate Matthews as a coach... perhaps not as highly as some, but certainly up there... and he said of Trav that he was the first player you looked at when it came to playing Melbourne, where you said "what are we going to do about stopping this guy?" Obviously you could argue that our lack of good midfielders in the last 10 years (or ever?) contributes to the fact that Trav was considered our most "dangerous."

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Which is what makes the price we got for him a steal. I rate Matthews as a coach... perhaps not as highly as some, but certainly up there... and he said of Trav that he was the first player you looked at when it came to playing Melbourne, where you said "what are we going to do about stopping this guy?" Obviously you could argue that our lack of good midfielders in the last 10 years (or ever?) contributes to the fact that Trav was considered our most "dangerous."

The trade to Brisbane was a god send for MFC and I am glad Matthews felt that way. I think Lethal was trying to top up his list with Brown, Black and Power still around. I think he chose poorly.

I dont doubt the danger tag but he was a down hill skier that did not deliver on his talent. The answer to Matthews question about stopping is put a tag on him and make him accountable and run him around. Work a treat while TJ was at MFC.

[Roost It 1,434]

The embodiment of the Daniher era. I loved him when on song but he went missing way to often. Probably could have done with some better guidance. Club failing as well. Great decision of Bailey's to cut him on arrival. I would have loved it had we had another captain leading from the middle back then. Say a 26 year old Scully to keep the troops in order. As much as I loved Neita I think his best footy would have been played at CHB without being captain.

I am in no way blaming Neitz for Johnstone's failings so relax.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Yeah but if he sits outside your senior list ... he costs you next to nothing.

If you had the choice of Trapper or a 5th round rookie selection it would be a no brainer.

No brainer is right. B)

If you dont select him he costs you nothing also.

Has Judd's grandmother nominated for...

[Guest hangon007]

No brainer is right. B)

If you dont select him he costs you nothing also.

Or you take a 4-5th round rookie selection that still costs you the same ... yet statistically has about a .00000001% of a return. B)

Now dont get me wrong I'm not saying we do it. But it must be an option worth considering. But again, only if its possible.

Interesting nobody has confirmed if its possible.

Edited October 26, 2010 by hangon007

[Nasher 33,616]

Or you take a 4-5th round rookie selection that still costs you the same ... yet statistically has about a .00000001% of a return. B)

Now dont get me wrong I'm not saying we do it. But it must be an option worth considering. But again, only if its possible.

Interesting nobody has confirmed if its possible.

Assuming that he'll pull his finger out and give it 100%, right?

Nobody has confirmed it because it's a crazy idea.

[Guest hangon007]

On the assumption that he'll pull his finger out and give it 100%, right?

Nobody has confirmed it because it's a crazy idea.

Nobody has confirmed, because they probably dont know.

But I wouldn't be surprised if Brisbane dont in fact want "the option" of him on their rookie list. He does qualify for that with the 3 year residency rule. So it would instantaneously relieve salary cap pressure without losing a player. Sounds like a "low risk" strategy for Lions ... the only "genuine" threat to the plan would be us assuming we where pre-pared to Veterans list him, if thats possible.

Edited October 26, 2010 by hangon007

[Nasher 33,616]

Nobody has confirmed, because they probably dont know.

But I wouldn't be surprised if Brisbane dont in fact want him on their rookie list. He does qualify for that with the 3 year residency rule. So it would instantaneously relieve salary cap pressure without losing a player.

Regardless of whether it's possible or not, it's still a dumb idea. Low cost or not, you're still using up one spot on your list for a guy who has spent the last 11 years demonstrating that he has no desire to do what it takes to be the best he can. With his form over the last few years, he would not fit in our best 22, and you can taken it as a given that he won't go the extra mile to fulfill his potential, because if he hasn't done it in 10 years, he never will.

Ability alone is not sufficient for making it in the AFL, yet you seem to want to pick up every talented but broken player on the market - first Peterson, now TJ. The generic rookie listed kid who doesn't show much talent early but gives it his best shot might not have a high probability of making it, but he has a higher probability of making it than the talented guy who clearly doesn't have the appetite for it. I know which way I'd go.

[ox_5 163]

Nobody has confirmed, because they probably dont know.

If you want to know so bad why don't you look it up yourself and confirm it? Why expect us to do your leg work.

It's a terrible suggestion, and even if possible would be insane.

[Guest hangon007]

Regardless of whether it's possible or not, it's still a dumb idea. Low cost or not, you're still using up one spot on your list for a guy who has spent the last 11 years demonstrating that he has no desire to do what it takes to be the best he can. With his form over the last few years, he would not fit in our best 22, and you can taken it as a given that he won't go the extra mile to fulfill his potential, because if he hasn't done it in 10 years, he never will.

Ok. All I'm suggesting is that this "might" be a "low risk option by Brisbane." I'm not convinced his career is finished just yet. However, until its proven that the alternative is better we should at least consider the option.

Ability alone is not sufficient for making it in the AFL, yet you seem to want to pick up every talented but broken player on the market - first Peterson, now TJ. The generic rookie listed kid who doesn't show much talent early but gives it his best shot might not have a high probability of making it, but he has a higher probability of making it than the talented guy who clearly doesn't have the appetite for it. I know which way I'd go.

No I want us to "look" at players that have a chance to improve our squad. Simple logic. No good taking draft picks if they will never play for you - waste of time & money. However, I do accept thats not something commonly understood around here at least.

Both the players mentioned played 15+ AFL games last year & would be miles ahead of any 4/5th round rookie draft pick in this up-coming draft. I'm not saying we should take them all ... but you must consider them as an "option".

Edited October 26, 2010 by hangon007

[Guest hangon007]

If you want to know so bad why don't you look it up yourself and confirm it? Why expect us to do your leg work.

It's a terrible suggestion, and even if possible would be insane.

Ok so you dont know either.

[ox_5 163]

Ok so you dont know either.

Yeah you're right, I don't know. And I don't want to know, hence why I wouldn't waste my time looking for it.

Feel free to look it up, Google will lead you in the right direction.

[Guest hangon007]

Yeah you're right, I don't know. And I don't want to know, hence why I wouldn't waste my time looking for it.

Feel free to look it up, Google will lead you in the right direction.

"A" typical viewpoint held by many around here.

[JJJ 1,302]

We should get him back at the club but not in playing capacity.

Maybe as a social assistant for past players and members. Had a few beers with him from time to time in his younger days and he was a great guy to have around. He always ensured everyone was having a great time up until the point where would get so blind he needed to be lifted into a cab. Sort of like Chris Connolly without the rapier sharp wit and perhaps the cab charges.

He is a top bloke but a frustrating player whom was loved by most, even though his short comings were regularly on display.

[Nasher 33,616]

He always ensured everyone was having a great time up until the point where would get so blind he needed to be lifted into a cab.

Sounds like the perfect role model.

[ox_5 163]

"A" typical viewpoint held by many around here.

Yeah I know, it's bloody terrible that there are so many realists on here. This is the internet for crying out loud, everybody should be in fantasy land.

[rpfc 28,521]

"A" typical viewpoint held by many around here.

Well, you did bring up the option.

So you were the first to tacitly say "look it up yourself, wankas!!"

Paraphrasing.

We loved TJ but we moved on and we want him to be happy but we didn't like ouselves when we were with him. We're better off without him.

[JJJ 1,302]

Sounds like the perfect role model.

Hey, you can't say you wouldn't have a good time. The sponsors and current players should be kept away though......