So, the latest is that Pick 49 which we got as comp for Rivers is not enough to secure Pederson and that we will have to 'do better' as my teachers were always telling me.

How is it that Norf got rid of McIntosh for pick 39 and yet a player who can't get a game is more deserving of a better pick than 49? Trade week is mad.

  On 21/10/2012 at 19:43, monoccular said:

PS: at 193 cm is he seriously considered a back up ruck man as well? 193! Does he possess some incredible leap, that Norf and nobody but us recognize?

Jason Blake at St Kilda has been able to play the backup ruckman role, and for a few weeks this season even the number 1 ruck role at only 189cm!

As long as he's physical enough and has a good enough leap then there's no reason why he shouldn't be able to.

Don't forget, even Jeff White was only 195cm.

  On 21/10/2012 at 21:01, jnrmac said:

So, the latest is that Pick 49 which we go as comp for Rivers is not enough to secure Pederson and that we will have to 'do better' as my teachers were always telling me.

How is it that Norf got rid of McINtosh for pick 39 and yet a player who can't get a game is more deserving of a better pick than 49? Trade week is mad.

Week ain't over yet. Roos have a sense of humor I'll give them that.

I sense we (MFC) are playing the long game here. Nth really have nothing to leverage. We can walk away. They need picks ,we don't. In that vein I suppose there is some water held in the argument preferred that we just use our picks to get whom we want and dispense with normal thinking regarding the relevant values of remaining picks..I.e their real value to us is to get a job done. Their value is against OUR needs scale not anyone else's . I still want us to just hand over any pick though.

Some teams have made a better fist of things this trade period than others. I'd put us in the former and Nth in the latter. We've been quite the aggressor and can't see us needing to go soft now. As long as we get what we want I couldn't give a hoot for the others, that's their concern.

Still a bit of room for fun and games this week lol. Still these weeks are about stage one of the major makeover of the list,stage 2 is in 12 months time

As to rucking,the role of the 2nd up ruck us really more about providing a contest and keeping them honest, no easy pickings. Other than center bounces its more about core strength and position,position,position. Many will understand you don't actually need to win the tap to win the clearance. If you can block the oppositions preferred path and tap you have a contested ball situation, sometimes all the 2nd ruck has to do is provide that secondary contest and you then pay those to your strengths. Pedersen can probably do that sufficiently well.

The back up ruck will be in the ruck for about 20 mins a game.

How they play for the rest of the game is of greater importance.

The number of posters blind to this is quite staggering.

  On 21/10/2012 at 23:24, rpfc said:

The back up ruck will be in the ruck for about 20 mins a game.

How they play for the rest of the game is of greater importance.

The number of posters blind to this is quite staggering.

yep..just has to hold his ground really, not let the game swing the other way.

Rumours circulating of a 4 way trade to get Pederson to the Dees:

MELBOURNE

recieve Cam Pederson from North Melborne, lose Stef Martin to Brisbane.

BRISBANE

receieve Stef Martin from Melbourne, Lose pick 33 to North Melbourne.

NORTH MELBOURNE

Receive pick 33 from Brisbane and on trade that to Port Adelaide to Receive Ben Jacobs. North lose Cam Pederson to Melbourne.

PORT ADELAIDE

Recieve pick 33 from Brisbane, on traded by North Melbourne and lose Ben Jacobs.

Unless your second ruck is talented (i.e NicNat) and you are not just holding ground when they are on the ball, but opening up the opposition whose second ruck or tired first ruck struggles.

Clearances are critical, even for the 20 min period when the 2nd ruck is on.

lets not always equate clearances with the ruck. on the surface many just suppose one = the other. Not always the case. As put before, a decent 2nd ruck makes for a contested ball. That in itself is a small win as the game gets jammed up.

Collingwood did rather well for years without even a 1st ruck of note !!

Yes clearances are critical...all day. But theres ways and means

You expect a good 1st ruck like Russian to win his fair share and provide first possession to us and a clearance. The 2nd ruck will in all likely hood stymie theirs.

I thought several times early in the season that when Clark went into the ruck we gathered momentum as a team, cleared the ball and pressed forward.

Agree that clearances don't always start with the ruck, and there are other ways to clear the ball, but having a decent second ruck is one of them.

I'm assuming with the Pedersen trade (essentially for Martin it seems) that we believe him to be as good a second ruck and a better "resting ruck" or tall forward/back... To me it raises the stakes of us getting Gawn or Fitzy up to the level in the next year or so, as Jamar and a third string tall from North are not going to take us too far up the ladder in 2014+

  On 21/10/2012 at 23:34, belzebub59 said:

lets not always equate clearances with the ruck. on the surface many just suppose one = the other. Not always the case. As put before, a decent 2nd ruck makes for a contested ball. That in itself is a small win as the game gets jammed up.

Collingwood did rather well for years without even a 1st ruck of note !!

Yes clearances are critical...all day. But theres ways and means

You expect a good 1st ruck like Russian to win his fair share and provide first possession to us and a clearance. The 2nd ruck will in all likely hood stymie theirs.

I agree that hit outs does not in any way equate to clearances - look at our Russian for example: can dominate hit outs and yet we get killed in clearances. Jeff White did the same for a while. It is a reflection on our smaller on-ballers, a problem that has hopefully been or is being addressed.

Thinking about the overall ruck situation, IF Pedo comes our way, do we need either of Spencil and Martin? We still have Russian, Gawnius Maximus, Fitz and would add Pedo, Sellar, Clark and Dawes, the latter two not preferred but as back ups.

Does anyone know Spencil's contract status? Little has been said about him during this trade period, though much has been said of Martin (who I would rank ahead of JS) - I am sure someone would want him. He may struggle to get game time with us.

  On 21/10/2012 at 23:28, ben russell said:

Rumours circulating of a 4 way trade to get Pederson to the Dees:

MELBOURNE

recieve Cam Pederson from North Melborne, lose Stef Martin to Brisbane.

BRISBANE

receieve Stef Martin from Melbourne, Lose pick 33 to North Melbourne.

NORTH MELBOURNE

Receive pick 33 from Brisbane and on trade that to Port Adelaide to Receive Ben Jacobs. North lose Cam Pederson to Melbourne.

PORT ADELAIDE

Recieve pick 33 from Brisbane, on traded by North Melbourne and lose Ben Jacobs.

I'd be happy with pick 33 for martin from Brisbane but wouldn't be paying that for pederson surely he is Worth pick 49 max possibly even pick 63 (or what ever the pick we got from pies with Dawes trade) pick 33 should be either used in the draft or to pick up a mid? If it where a choice between Martin or pederson I'd have Martin

  On 21/10/2012 at 23:28, ben russell said:

Rumours circulating of a 4 way trade to get Pederson to the Dees:

MELBOURNE

recieve Cam Pederson from North Melborne, lose Stef Martin to Brisbane.

BRISBANE

receieve Stef Martin from Melbourne, Lose pick 33 to North Melbourne.

NORTH MELBOURNE

Receive pick 33 from Brisbane and on trade that to Port Adelaide to Receive Ben Jacobs. North lose Cam Pederson to Melbourne.

PORT ADELAIDE

Recieve pick 33 from Brisbane, on traded by North Melbourne and lose Ben Jacobs.

So we would lose our only ruck who can play the second ruck/forward role to get in a bloke who is playing less senior footy than James Sellar, is too small for ruck and must have serious questions marks on him.

if we did this i would seriously question the mental health of our recruitment staff.

This bloke is just not worthbending over backwards for. Martin is clearly a better 2nd ruck, and we have quite a few talls ahead of him at present at BOTH ends of the ground. He won't get a game ahead of Dawes, Clark, Frawley, Watts or even Tom McDonald.

get him as back up? sure fine, why not !! but pick 49 is all he is worth.

it comes down to roles.. what is the primary role Neeld would have Pedersen play ?.. Its not ruck., thats a bonus

The FD is fortunately way ahead of most posters on here. Big bodies for ruck contests won't be needed.

The rules for rucking have changed in 2013. No grappling and no bounces around the ground = talls and big leapers are the way to go. Gawn and Spencil will be safe even with limited football capabilities. Martin not, although as an athlete he can get to contests. Jamar will struggle because he doesn't jump and is not an athlete......but is signed up, so he stays.

NicNat will have a ball......

  On 21/10/2012 at 23:28, ben russell said:

Rumours circulating of a 4 way trade to get Pederson to the Dees:

MELBOURNE

recieve Cam Pederson from North Melborne, lose Stef Martin to Brisbane.

BRISBANE

receieve Stef Martin from Melbourne, Lose pick 33 to North Melbourne.

NORTH MELBOURNE

Receive pick 33 from Brisbane and on trade that to Port Adelaide to Receive Ben Jacobs. North lose Cam Pederson to Melbourne.

PORT ADELAIDE

Recieve pick 33 from Brisbane, on traded by North Melbourne and lose Ben Jacobs.

I'd be happy enough with this. My feeling is that over the journey we would get more value out of Pedersen than Martin. However, I'd prefer a deal that involves Ray or another mid. This one seems to restrict our opportunity to get Ray, unless the Saints are interested in someone like Petterd or Bate..

The trade of Pedersen for Martin, implies some of the following:

• there are issues with Stef that the FD don't see with Pedersen,
  
• that our 2nd ruck stocks (Jake "Betty" Spencer and Maximus Gawn) are coming along nicer than we realise.
  
• That Pedersen is a much better player than North realise, and better than some of our current mid-talls (i.e Dunn).
  
• That our structure front and back in 2013 will be big boned and beefy
  
• etc...
  

If the rumoured deal was accurate, would the Saints take 49 and 63/70 for Ray? I doubt we'll be using the later picks.

  On 21/10/2012 at 23:49, Bay Riffin said:

So we would lose our only ruck who can play the second ruck/forward role get him as back up? sure fine, why not !! but pick 49 is all he is worth.

Martin is hopeless fwd.

  On 21/10/2012 at 23:28, ben russell said:

Rumours circulating of a 4 way trade to get Pederson to the Dees:

MELBOURNE

recieve Cam Pederson from North Melborne, lose Stef Martin to Brisbane.

BRISBANE

receieve Stef Martin from Melbourne, Lose pick 33 to North Melbourne.

NORTH MELBOURNE

Receive pick 33 from Brisbane and on trade that to Port Adelaide to Receive Ben Jacobs. North lose Cam Pederson to Melbourne.

PORT ADELAIDE

Recieve pick 33 from Brisbane, on traded by North Melbourne and lose Ben Jacobs.

If that was the case why would we not cut North out and just take Jacobs for ourselves, first rounder from a couple of years ago who shows promise, as the week goes on North will take pick 49

  On 21/10/2012 at 23:24, rpfc said:

The back up ruck will be in the ruck for about 20 mins a game.

How they play for the rest of the game is of greater importance.

The number of posters blind to this is quite staggering.

So we are heading back to the Jeff White Jolly scenario where Jolly got 8mins game time each match??

Seriously though I do agree a better round the ground player is necessary. In part because Jamar is still so ineffective around the ground. That's really the big problem as I see it. I like Jamar but we need to get a lot more out of him.

Pederson at 193cm though is 1cm taller than Frawley, Morton, Dunn and Bate. Hardly ruck material....

I still prefer Martin but the real need is for Gawn to stand up...

  On 22/10/2012 at 00:17, Pennant St Dee said:

If that was the case why would we not cut North out and just take Jacobs for ourselves, first rounder from a couple of years ago who shows promise, as the week goes on North will take pick 49

From the limited footage I have seen of Jacobs he is a tweener mid with a terrible kick.

  On 21/10/2012 at 23:53, Deeoldfart said:

I'd be happy enough with this. My feeling is that over the journey we would get more value out of Pedersen than Martin. However, I'd prefer a deal that involves Ray or another mid. This one seems to restrict our opportunity to get Ray, unless the Saints are interested in someone like Petterd or Bate..

Agree.

I'd prefer just trading Martin for 33 to Brisbane and then using that to try and get Ray from the Saints.

Pedersen can be bought for 49 or 50 surely.

Getting Ray to the club would be more beneficial and worth securing with that pick.

  On 22/10/2012 at 00:17, jnrmac said:

So we are heading back to the Jeff White Jolly scenario where Jolly got 8mins game time each match??

Seriously though I do agree a better round the ground player is necessary. In part because Jamar is still so ineffective around the ground. That's really the big problem as I see it. I like Jamar but we need to get a lot more out of him.

Pederson at 193cm though is 1cm taller than Frawley, Morton, Dunn and Bate. Hardly ruck material....

I still prefer Martin but the real need is for Gawn to stand up...

Martin can't play forward.

How long do you want the 2nd ruck to play in the ruck?

To me, we have 4 1st rucks (Jamar, Martin, Spencer, and Gawn) with Fitzpatrick the only forward who can ruck (which is what we should be callingn the 2nd ruck with the interchange rules the way they are).

In 2014, there is likely to be 20 players with 2 subs and who here thinks that there will be room for 193cm forward who rucks?

(Hands up)

  On 22/10/2012 at 00:22, rpfc said:

Next year there is likely to be 20 players with 2 subs and who here thinks that there will be room for 193cm forward who rucks?

(Hands up)

Actually next year there is still going to be 21 players and 1 sub.

Didn't they forward you the memo?

  On 21/10/2012 at 23:52, george_on_the_outer said:

The FD is fortunately way ahead of most posters on here. Big bodies for ruck contests won't be needed.

The rules for rucking have changed in 2013. No grappling and no bounces around the ground = talls and big leapers are the way to go. Gawn and Spencil will be safe even with limited football capabilities. Martin not, although as an athlete he can get to contests. Jamar will struggle because he doesn't jump and is not an athlete......but is signed up, so he stays.

NicNat will have a ball......

Still tradeable, maybe, if anyone wants him.