Matthew Warnock wants out

[s-t-i-n-g-a 439]

What do you base that on Diablo?

Would be a great result! But I would he surprised...

Edited October 12, 2011 by s-t-i-n-g-a

[Diablo Deemon 220]

What do you base that on Diablo?

Would be a great result! But I would he surprised...

They now have picks 27, 31 and 32 contrary to popular belief I believe Warnock has currency

KPFB doesn't grow on trees yes he has his downsides and limitations but if we didn't have Frawley who is and AA

Warnock would get a game every week.

and BB makes a good point it might take our pick 54 so we might trade to upgrade our pick maybe even to 27.

[s-t-i-n-g-a 439]

Fair enough. It would be an outstanding result.

[old dee 23,256]

Except that we could pressure on GC to give us something by dealing with say Carlton, Hawks or who ever else may be interested. Warnock would have to want to go but we could get a little "competitive tension" into the process

The problem with this nutbean is you have to have muscle to flex it.

I think he was treated badly last season but

If he cannot get a game at a side that finishes 13th and gets beaten by 31 goals then he cannot be much good.

GC are not that silly.

They know there is not much interest elsewhere, unfortunately I think we will get a fourth round pick or an upgrade that we will probably not use.

Anyway I hope it all works for Warnock and he enjoys the GC.

[nutbean 8,837]

The problem with this nutbean is you have to have muscle to flex it.

I think he was treated badly last season but

If he cannot get a game at a side that finishes 13th and gets beaten by 31 goals then he cannot be much good.

GC are not that silly.

They know there is not much interest elsewhere, unfortunately I think we will get a fourth round pick or an upgrade that we will probably not use.

Anyway I hope it all works for Warnock and he enjoys the GC.

agreed - but i think we get something for him ( but not a whole lot)

[beelzebub 22,728]

My thinking is to clarify.. Warnock will go to the GC.. MFC and GCwillalso swap some picks.. how and to what extent im not really on the ball here, just that a straight out deal often isnt the end result with these things If a deal hs already been struck with North for Maric then our coffers provide some flexibility.

[old dee 23,256]

agreed - but i think we get something for him ( but not a whole lot)

Sad but true nutbean

[Dr. Mubutu 697]

They now have picks 27, 31 and 32 contrary to popular belief I believe Warnock has currency

KPFB doesn't grow on trees yes he has his downsides and limitations but if we didn't have Frawley who is and AA

Warnock would get a game every week.

and BB makes a good point it might take our pick 54 so we might trade to upgrade our pick maybe even to 27.

Exactly this. There would be at least 5 teams who would be rapt to have him, IMO, but it just so happens we have one of the best backlines in the league, led by Chip, who takes the spot that would otherwise be filled by Warnock.

[old dee 23,256]

Exactly this. There would be at least 5 teams who would be rapt to have him, IMO, but it just so happens we have one of the best backlines in the league, led by Chip, who takes the spot that would otherwise be filled by Warnock.

DM I think Warnock was better than the way he was treated this year.

But he has been universally bagged by most people on demonland and canned by the MFC FD.

So that indicates he has little currency.

Have not heard of 5 clubs busting down our doors to get him.

I am not being a smart arse but who do you think the five clubs are?

[Adzman 2,086]

Whatever we get is going to be better than nothing. Warnock has packed his bags and won't be playing for the MFC again.

Even if we upgrade a pick it is better than nothing. Here is hoping we could land an extra pick inside the top 40 that could be used in another deal.

[Dr. Mubutu 697]

DM I think Warnock was better than the way he was treated this year.

But he has been universally bagged by most people on demonland and canned by the MFC FD.

So that indicates he has little currency.

Have not heard of 5 clubs busting down our doors to get him.

I am not being a smart arse but who do you think the five clubs are?

GWS

GC

Adelaide

Carlton

Hawthorn

Brisbane (possibly)

Essendon (depending on what happens with Gumbleton)

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

Warnock and pick 12 to Adel for Patty D

[chipa 2]

What's the latest with Warnock, we've been pretty quiet on this front for a couple days. Hoping we can get a deal done

[old dee 23,256]

What is happening with MW?

Not even mentioned in the palyer movement report in todays HUN.

Anyone know anything?

[pantaloons 2,019]

What is happening with MW?

Not even mentioned in the palyer movement report in todays HUN.

Anyone know anything?

Now that the Clark deal is done, we have more time to focus on some of the lesser trades. We've got a little over a day to potentially clear 3 list spots and better our draft position. Or there could be some other surprises in the works!

[Mono 454]

I think the MFC have treated Warnock poorly.

He wanted a trade at the end of '10, wanting more opportunities.

We said: No, you're a required player.

We then gave him 1? game in '11.

His market/contract value must have suffered accordingly (let alone his trade value).

He has a right to be peeved IMO.

[titan_uranus 23,240]

Can't see him being on our list next year. It's either a trade or, more likely, a delisting. His value is low, whoever wants him would probably rate their chance in the ND or PSD, so we'd have to make do with a crap deal or no offer at all.

[The Red Fox 216]

I think the MFC have treated Warnock poorly.

He wanted a trade at the end of '10, wanting more opportunities.

We said: No, you're a required player.

We then gave him 1? game in '11.

His market/contract value must have suffered accordingly (let alone his trade value).

He has a right to be peeved IMO.

He was required, as cover for Frawley and the other KPD's. You say 'give' as if he's entitled to more games, reality is he is a good ordinary player, a reasonable stopper but a liability with the ball. He is not a top line player and with the personnel we have developed he no longer deserved a regular game on merit.

We took a punt on him when he was a raw, quick 20 yer old 'development player' on Sandy's list. I don't think too many other AFL clubs were looking at him when he was rookied by us so if his journey with the MFC finishes similarly (with little interest from other clubs) its hardly any fault of ours.

[boydie 653]

He was required, as cover for Frawley and the other KPD's. You say 'give' as if he's entitled to more games, reality is he is a good ordinary player, a reasonable stopper but a liability with the ball. He is not a top line player and with the personnel we have developed he no longer deserved a regular game on merit.

Funny how when Frawley was out for round 1 and that 5 - 6 stretch Garland missed they didn't use him for the role he was apparently on the list for.

[DirtyDees DDC 171]

Can't see him being on our list next year. It's either a trade or, more likely, a delisting. His value is low, whoever wants him would probably rate their chance in the ND or PSD, so we'd have to make do with a crap deal or no offer at all.

We have a new coach and a new footy department that may have a different view of Warnock than the previous coaching staff. We may try to keep him if we don't get a good offer from elsewhere.

Edited October 16, 2011 by DirtyDees DDC

[Lutz 76]

Yeah......... Nah.

[Redleg 38,612]

Yeah......... Nah.

A few have to go to make room and he is one of them.

[dee-luded 2,958]

Warnock and pick 12 to Adel for Patty D

OK.

[jumbo returns 6,619]

I think he'll end up at the Dogs for a low pick.

[Mono 454]

I think the MFC have treated Warnock poorly.

He wanted a trade at the end of '10, wanting more opportunities.

We said: No, you're a required player.

We then gave him 1? game in '11.

His market/contract value must have suffered accordingly (let alone his trade value).

He has a right to be peeved IMO.

He was required, as cover for Frawley and the other KPD's. You say 'give' as if he's entitled to more games, reality is he is a good ordinary player, a reasonable stopper but a liability with the ball. He is not a top line player and with the personnel we have developed he no longer deserved a regular game on merit.

We took a punt on him when he was a raw, quick 20 yer old 'development player' on Sandy's list. I don't think too many other AFL clubs were looking at him when he was rookied by us so if his journey with the MFC finishes similarly (with little interest from other clubs) its hardly any fault of ours.

Funny how when Frawley was out for round 1 and that 5 - 6 stretch Garland missed they didn't use him for the role he was apparently on the list for.

My point exactly.