Speaking of Strauss, does anyone see him playing in 2012?

The break was quite severe....

Without a doubt.

Will complete part of this coming preseason.

You are aware that he had a hip operation in his first season which robbed him of the chance of playing in the firsts?

Blease will probably play on the wing, Strauss still has to show he is the goods, he isn't an automatic selection yet, Garland is set, Grimes has to overcome injury and may play in the middle, Bartram and Joel Mac are going to struggle.

Well aware.

He was still able to get 2 preseasons into him before his debut.

Your appraisal of some of our HBFs is definitely open to debate.

That's your problem.

You're stuck in an era 20+ years ago.

Do you really think hardness cannot be developed in the players on the list now?

Size does matter - and while skinny players can bulk up, Tapscott will never get any taller.

All tall midfielders.

You compare Tapscott to Chapman? Well Chapman has a cm or 2 on him.

His hardness isn't underestimated - he's rated on that aspect the most.

But it is something that can be instilled within a playing group.

Otherwise you'd be coaching the team on a pittance while BP would be on a $2mil salary.

Once again - I wish to keep Tapscott, but open your eyes to the fact he isn't the most critical player on our list, and if we are to improve through trade, it will only be done incrementally through relatively equitable deals.

& Dangerfield is simply worth more than Tapscott.

Hardness instilled into a playing group? Not sure about that. The intrinsic desire to compete and seek out the contest can't always be coached. Tapscott loves the contest.

Well you're going to have to pay something.

We won't be able to just give up our 30th best player for one of their top 5 and expect them to accept it with a 2nd round pick.

Tapscott is hard and a great kick, but what else?

I think he's limited.

I don't wear the rose-coloured glasses some supporters do.

In the cold light of day I accept we overrated our own at times and need to give up something of roughly equal value.

No Rose Coloured Glasses going on here Lutzy Boy

This is purely opinion Versus opinion.

Tapscott is what 20? Has a massive upside & will more than likely tear the comp up in 2 - 3 years

Those suggesting he has nothing more than a huge kick in his kit bag our on a different planet.

Take Morton, Davey, Warnock & through a draft pick in, not Tapscott?

In his first season this kid has displayed huge physical presence, you don't trade that away ever.

That's your problem. You're stuck in an era 20+ years ago. Do you really think hardness cannot be developed in the players on the list now? Size does matter - and while skinny players can bulk up, Tapscott will never get any taller. All tall midfielders. You compare Tapscott to Chapman? Well Chapman has a cm or 2 on him. His hardness isn't underestimated - he's rated on that aspect the most. But it is something that can be instilled within a playing group. Otherwise you'd be coaching the team on a pittance while BP would be on a $2mil salary. Once again - I wish to keep Tapscott, but open your eyes to the fact he isn't the most critical player on our list, and if we are to improve through trade, it will only be done incrementally through relatively equitable deals. & Dangerfield is simply worth more than Tapscott.

Morton wants you to give him a call.

One another rumour before I rush off - was talking to a close relative of our former ruckman Paul Johnson last night, and although he was expecting to have to hang up his AFL boots, Hawthorn are in talks with him over a new contract.

Some might be interested to know that.

I was definitely surprised.

Well aware. He was still able to get 2 preseasons into him before his debut. Your appraisal of some of our HBFs is definitely open to debate.

Then you would also be aware that the club are working on his body shape to give him less bulk and more core strength which will give him more agility. Also you would be aware that his second pre season was interrupted by the injury and operation, two pre seasons; hardly.

Lutz has a point about Tapscott - he's hard and a nice kick but that's about it - not strong defensively, not strong overhead. There's no evidence to suggest he can play midfield and he doesn't have any tricks to play forward. He's a medium back who is a nice kick - a harder version of Josh Hunt. When James Strauss is back he's not in my back 6 and I don't see him anywhere else. Like Darren Glass? Spare me!

Tapscott for Dangerfield? Get outta my way!

I thought the same about Tapscott - as the season progressed his form regressed. I wasn't sure if it was the injury or just conking out after a first AFL season with limited preparation - or as you describe - about the extent of his ability.

You compare Tapscott to Chapman? Well Chapman has a cm or 2 on him.

Dont let the facts get in the way of a good story.

As per the Geelong website and the Dees website, the players are listed as follows:

Paul Chapman - 179cm & 88kgs

Luke Tapscott - 180cm & 87 kgs

It is actually a very, very good comparison of the player Luke should expect to become.

i love it how people keep throwing up our duds into this nice little package and expect the other club to take it, it never happens!

99% of these trades never get anywhere, we only ever get 2nd & 3rd rate trades,so forget Clark, Sewell etc

Morton wants you to give him a call.

David Buttifant spoke about this re: Cameron Wood on SEN a week or so ago.

He said simply that some tall blokes just take about 5 years.

Couple that with Morton's bad luck* causing him to lose weight...

The bloke hasn't had much of a chance.

*Nose operation and following illness causing him to lose ~6kg on the eve of the season, PCL injury, finger injury this last preseason which would've prevented him from lifting weights but not running. He's had a bad run.

I thought the same about Tapscott - as the season progressed his form regressed. I wasn't sure if it was the injury or just conking out after a first AFL season with limited preparation - or as you describe - about the extent of his ability.

just young and it was a long season with the last 2 months very depressing

Dangerfield is under contract and due to this will not be going anywhere. Next year may be a different story. Tapscott just played his first season of senior football where he looked very capable playing a role that he had not played previously. How about maybe we give the kid some time before people decide what he is and how good he'll be.

I agree. The hit on Rhyce Shaw was in his first AFL game. That is something worth acknowledging. Finals are won by hardness and skill, Tapscott has both. Also, I wouldn't underestimate the damage done to the fabric of the playing group if a second year player such as Tapscott was traded. It's not the same as trading serial disappointments such as Johnstone, or even tapping a 34 year old veteran on the shoulder. The fallout would be immense. The club wants these young players evolving together, much in the manner of Geelong early last decade.

It's not that long ago that James Frawley was made to look second rate by Corey Jones and Paul Medhurst - on more than one occasion. Now he serves up those types of players on a platter. So I think it's a bit early to be pigeon-holing Tapscott on his defensive capability, or questioning whether he'll be able to flourish in other parts of the ground. He did very well working between forward and defence as a junior. I think he'll surprise a few in his third year.

Edited October 8, 201113 yr by Ben-Hur

Then you would also be aware that the club are working on his body shape to give him less bulk and more core strength which will give him more agility. Also you would be aware that his second pre season was interrupted by the injury and operation, two pre seasons; hardly.

It was late in the preseason.

A player's 1st preseason is only partial anyway.

It's still 1 whole preseason more than Cook, for a small as opposed to a tall.

It's not negligible.

Dont let the facts get in the way of a good story.

As per the Geelong website and the Dees website, the players are listed as follows:

Paul Chapman - 179cm & 88kgs

Luke Tapscott - 180cm & 87 kgs

It is actually a very, very good comparison of the player Luke should expect to become.

Well something has obviously changed there because I was disappointed upon Tapscott's drafting that according to different sources, he was listed as either 1 or 2cm shorter than Chapman, from what I read.

Still, he's got a long way to go before coming close to Chapman.

Still, he's got a long way to go before coming close to Chapman.

You would expect that, considering he has been in the system only 2 years, his first ruined by injury.

Dangerfield is under contract and due to this will not be going anywhere. Next year may be a different story. Tapscott just played his first season of senior football where he looked very capable playing a role that he had not played previously. How about maybe we give the kid some time before people decide what he is and how good he'll be.

Agree. Courage personified. Brilliant attack on the ball. Can hurt the opposition. Booming kick. Needs a bit of work on pace. Looking forward to see him play in a well coached MFC side.

Ok, a lot of unrealistic people angry at the thought of losing Tapscott.

If they want Dangerfield, who would you give up then?

Come on.

REALISTIC suggestions.

It has to be someone you don't want to lose, but accept that you will have to in order to bring in a gun.

Bate, Dunn, Warnock, Maric suggestions are rubbish.

For this exercise, forget Morton.

Remember, other clubs generally aren't stupid, so you can't expect to pull the wool over their eyes by disguising sh*t as chocolate cake.

Anyone?

That's your problem.

You're stuck in an era 20+ years ago.

Do you really think hardness cannot be developed in the players on the list now?

Size does matter - and while skinny players can bulk up, Tapscott will never get any taller.

All tall midfielders.

You compare Tapscott to Chapman? Well Chapman has a cm or 2 on him.

His hardness isn't underestimated - he's rated on that aspect the most.

But it is something that can be instilled within a playing group.

Otherwise you'd be coaching the team on a pittance while BP would be on a $2mil salary.

Once again - I wish to keep Tapscott, but open your eyes to the fact he isn't the most critical player on our list, and if we are to improve through trade, it will only be done incrementally through relatively equitable deals.

& Dangerfield is simply worth more than Tapscott.

Here we go, a rover playing the man.

You don't even know anything about me other me saying things like I prefer the 1990's game to todays congestion. And I miss the Tapscott hits and the aggro.

Boys can be toughened, but Not usually made to be Hard, and Hurt factor, banging bodies with a smile isn't easily learnt, Lutz.

Our boys, No. We can toughen some of them, Wattsy will be OK, Morton will just persist but never hurt. Trenners is a beaut. Moloney is. Jones is Hard. Frawls is OK. Petterd attacks the ball Kamikhazi. Um, where to from there?

C Lutz, you gone off re Tappy without knowing anything about how he will turnout after we've seen him in one Part Year.

IMO, he'll be good, a fine MFC player.

So tell me, where do you see Aaron going forward ? And where do you see the Russian in 2014??? What about Dunn in 2013? Green 2013???

We desperately need to build our 23 Yr age bracket and should go hard Now in this poor Draft Year.

Agree. Courage personified. Brilliant attack on the ball. Can hurt the opposition. Booming kick. Needs a bit of work on pace. Looking forward to see him play in a well coached MFC side.

As do I.

But who would you prefer?

Tapscott or Dangerfield?

The talk about Tapscott is interesting. Given that he was drafted as a forward I would imagine his upside as a backman would be quite substantial.

We may also find that our new coach has different ideas. Maybe he'll play him forward. It's on this basis that I would say Tapscott is not yet trade worthy because we don't know what we are giving up...Is he an excess back or a much needed forward?

Dont let the facts get in the way of a good story.

As per the Geelong website and the Dees website, the players are listed as follows:

Paul Chapman - 179cm & 88kgs

Luke Tapscott - 180cm & 87 kgs

It is actually a very, very good comparison of the player Luke should expect to become.

You beat me to it, and I thought the Ox moves slow as the world turns about?

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pp-melbourne-demons--luke-tapscott

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pp-geelong-cats--paul-chapman

& http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pp-geelong-cats--joshua-hunt

Here we go, a rover playing the man.

You don't even know anything about me other me saying things like I prefer the 1990's game to todays congestion. And I miss the Tapscott hits and the aggro.

Boys can be toughened, but Not usually made to be Hard, and Hurt factor, banging bodies with a smile isn't easily learnt, Lutz.

Our boys, No. We can toughen some of them, Wattsy will be OK, Morton will just persist but never hurt. Trenners is a beaut. Moloney is. Jones is Hard. Frawls is OK. Petterd attacks the ball Kamikhazi. Um, where to from there?

C Lutz, you gone off re Tappy without knowing anything about how he will turnout after we've seen him in one Part Year.

IMO, he'll be good, a fine MFC player.

So tell me, where do you see Aaron going forward ? And where do you see the Russian in 2014??? What about Dunn in 2013? Green 2013???

We desperately need to build our 23 Yr age bracket and should go hard Now in this poor Draft Year.

I didn't go the man.

You brought up players from 20+ years ago.

They hold no relevance.

What I know about you or what you miss is also irrelevant.

Arguing semantics about "tough" and "hard" is meaningless.

I've not "gone off on Tappy", merely presented a realistic trade proposal involving a promising player that seems to have limitations.

It seems to have hit a raw nerve among quite a few.

Some don't like to face reality.

A bit like the difference between hard and soft players maybe?

Of course I don't know what he'll be like next year.

No one does. Ever. In any trade. Relevance, your honour?

Obviously few of those players will be there in 2013, and even fewer the year after that.

Since we'd be trading for Dangerfield in this scenario, again, relevance?

I don't understand what the hell you mean by we "should go hard now in this poor draft year."

We should use the picks?

Or draft aggressively? Do you know what that means?

It means being prepared to do deals like Tapscott for Dangerfield to get better.

And lastly - "Wattsy will be ok"?

Is that the same Watts derided during his first couple of years for being soft?

So you can teach a player to harden up..?

Or you can't? I can't decipher what you're trying to say there.

Edited October 8, 201113 yr by Lutz

Hardness instilled into a playing group? Not sure about that. The intrinsic desire to compete and seek out the contest can't always be coached. Tapscott loves the contest.

Does he?

Or is he a thug like Campbell Brown who just like to deviate off the line to hit blokes when they have their eyes on the footy?

I'm not saying he is, just asking a question.

I don't think that sort of "toughness" is especially brave or valuable.

Doesn't hurt though.

Tapscott will not be traded, it is as simple as that.

I like that you are offering up someone good to get someone good Lutz, but I dont think Tapscott will be the one.

He was drafted as a forward who can take a mark and was played in defense to assist with him running in straight lines once he had his hip injury.

There is a massive upside for Tapscott. He only had 1 pre season in reality and was playing very well early in the year, which some people may have forgotten, prior to his hamstring. When he returned he did not play as well, which is not unexcpected.

You need to think of what Adelaide would want in return, what type of player they need. I am not sure of what players they are needing though.