I'm not sure why ppl don't understand the theory behind trading Fitzy, or one of our KPF. We have a 3rd world midfield and excess tall forwards. For the right player (midfielder), Fitzy is expendable. It's simple math really. List balance I'd call it.

On another point, over the past few decades our club has had list deficiencies. We once had a weak back line. We drafted to fix this problem then ended up with a weak forward line. We traded and drafted to fix this and now we have a weak midfield. It's time the club fixes the midfield problem without creating holes elsewhere.

Sorry I'm still not understanding why we would want to trade fitz, seeing as he keeps getting better and better which each game

So we let another club benefit from this continual improvement?

Now I know I'm not a smart man but can someone please explain in a logical fashion?

And I know we need midfielders. Should be a few around with pick 1 in the draft, second round pick and free agency.

I guess were we able to get a top A grade mid then we would have to seriously consider the trade: otherwise he is a keeper.

I'm not sure why ppl don't understand the theory behind trading Fitzy, or one of our KPF. We have a 3rd world midfield and excess tall forwards. For the right player (midfielder), Fitzy is expendable. It's simple math really. List balance I'd call it.

On another point, over the past few decades our club has had list deficiencies. We once had a weak back line. We drafted to fix this problem then ended up with a weak forward line. We traded and drafted to fix this and now we have a weak midfield. It's time the club fixes the midfield problem without creating holes elsewhere.

So wouldn't trading Fitzy or other key forward to fix the midfield potentially leave us open for a weak midfield?

Geelong trading for Ottens was a very good example of trading an excess (Moloney) for a deficiency. But where else has it been done?

I'd rather go down the Essendon route. We know we've got some good talls. We hope we are developing some decent flankers. We have Jones, Trengove, Viney, Toumpas, Evans, Matt Jones, Sylvia, McKenzie, Grimes as a starting point for the midfield. That's a bad midfield but it's also a young midfield with some potential to be decent. Let's hit the draft again this year and reassess in 12 months time. Then we might have a half capable midfield and could sign a free agent down the track similar to Essendon with Goddard.

You only need to look at the GWS and GC. Gary Ablett has done wonders for O Meara and co. Fitzgerald won't get us an Ablett, but he will give us bargaining power for a very good midfielder who is an AFL standard player. Add in a fee agent and the possibility of getting a Cross for free too, The midfield is way better. This takes the pressure off Viney, Kent, Toumpas, Jones Grimes Trengove etc etc.

This also takes the pressure off the recruiting team to recruit the likes of Pederson and Brynes. Fringe players who add little.

It's easier to develop a midfield if there is competition for spots. ATM we barely have a midfield and they select themselves.

I'm up for trading if a great deal presents however, just for something different, maybe we keep fitz and Hogan goes to CHB.

He played there a bit during the u/18 and he will be gold wherever we play him.

Thoughts?

So wouldn't trading Fitzy or other key forward to fix the midfield potentially leave us open for a weak midfield?

Geelong trading for Ottens was a very good example of trading an excess (Moloney) for a deficiency. But where else has it been done?

I'd rather go down the Essendon route. We know we've got some good talls. We hope we are developing some decent flankers. We have Jones, Trengove, Viney, Toumpas, Evans, Matt Jones, Sylvia, McKenzie, Grimes as a starting point for the midfield. That's a bad midfield but it's also a young midfield with some potential to be decent. Let's hit the draft again this year and reassess in 12 months time. Then we might have a half capable midfield and could sign a free agent down the track similar to Essendon with Goddard.

Agree. Fitzy's just beginning to make it happen is quick and is 200cm+. Big Keeper, while I'm at it so are Frawley, Watts and Gawn. Wonder when we might here some news on this? Re trading, there are better options and an opportunities for us to clear excess.

he has been really fantastic and i like the durability that we have with him as he is a glorified Ruck/Forward

But i rate Watts, Hogan and Clark higher

Chris Dawes actually adds some well needed grunt.

He may be a decent trade option, lets see how it pans out.

He has been amazing of late though

You only need to look at the GWS and GC. Gary Ablett has done wonders for O Meara and co. Fitzgerald won't get us an Ablett, but he will give us bargaining power for a very good midfielder who is an AFL standard player. Add in a fee agent and the possibility of getting a Cross for free too, The midfield is way better. This takes the pressure off Viney, Kent, Toumpas, Jones Grimes Trengove etc etc.

note the bolded word

please do not comment on the post if you cannot get the players name even remotely correct

FITZPATRICK

Thanx Grimsey! I think that was an IPad spell check mistake!! But thanx for the pettiness.

Did u not understand who I. Was talking about, but wait, u did.

Now lets see if my mistakes above annoys you.

lol

Hogan at CHb, come on man. He is a power forward and was born to play there.

Fitzy isnt going anywhere, and he is blossoming at the perfect time considering Mitch Clark may never play again.

I think Hogan will become a power player no matter what part of the ground he is.

Just trying to get the most value out of the team. Fitz up forward obviously isnt as good as Hogs, not saying that.

Trying to look at what is more valuable to the team, Hogs up forward with a fit Clark & Dawes (fitz then doesn't get a game). Or Fitz up there with Hogs in the backline with Chip & Tmac.

he has been really fantastic and i like the durability that we have with him as he is a glorified Ruck/Forward

But i rate Watts, Hogan and Clark higher

Chris Dawes actually adds some well needed grunt.

He may be a decent trade option, lets see how it pans out.

He has been amazing of late though

Can any of those you mentioned play ruck bearing in mind Clark (if fit at all) won't want to be risk and if the answer is no would that mean you'd have to include a dodgy second ruck like Pedersen?

I just think 12 months time we'll know so much more about Hogan, Clark and Watts. Dawes as a decent hard working without being a star at CHF is the certainty the rest are puzzle pieces.

Can any of those you mentioned play ruck bearing in mind Clark (if fit at all) won't want to be risk and if the answer is no would that mean you'd have to include a dodgy second ruck like Pedersen?

I just think 12 months time we'll know so much more about Hogan, Clark and Watts. Dawes as a decent hard working without being a star at CHF is the certainty the rest are puzzle pieces.

Well the thing is Gawn=number 1 ruckman (i think we all agree on that)

Mitch Clark could rotate through i reckon.

But the fact of the matter is it is going to be incredibly rare to get Watts, Hogan, Clark and Dawes all on the park at once.

so therefore Fitzy is likely to be playing also.

Im not sure if that makes sense

Until the club knows the future of Clark, I don't think they'll be trading any up and coming key forwards.

You can never have too many talls.

Jamar is at least another two weeks away according to our injury list.

Jamar will be on the trade table before he back playing seniors.

Jamar has little trade value. Collingwood maybe, but others would overtake the Russian

I think it would be worth trading a key forward provided Clark gets over his foot issue. We are a little top heavy. I would not want it to be Fitz though, and the others are all in contract (bar Watts who we should not even consider trading). Fitz is a perfect option for the second ruck role. We have three first ruck options in Jamar Spencer and Gawn, but none of them are well-suited to the backup position as they aren't much good outside the ruck. Fitz is more or less build to play that role. The only other option we have there is Clark who I would prefer to see playing as a permanent forward. By that logic, as I have said before, Dawes could well be playing a Casey next year simply for balance. The other option is to sacrifice a bit of mobility in the midfield and play with four tall forwards.

Try listening to what Neil Craig said at his presser at the weekend re rucks, this will give you an idea of the thinking at the moment

Also how many 'talls' have Geelong got, yet they traded for Hamish McIntosh

Seems to be quite a few posters with comprehension issues in this thread.
I never said I'd trade Fitzpatrick straight up for Cross.
I just think he'd be a valuable addition to our club if we were to trade with the dogs, so I'd like to see him included.
I've no knowledge of his FA status.

Do you want to explain why Cross would be a valuable addition?

Try listening to what Neil Craig said at his presser at the weekend re rucks, this will give you an idea of the thinking at the moment Also how many 'talls' have Geelong got, yet they traded for Hamish McIntosh Do you want to explain why Cross would be a valuable addition?

The problem with comparing Geelongs number of talls with our own is that they have a gazillion good quality midfielders. They can afford to have a number of talls, we however should be looking to improve an area on our list through surplus in another.

Try listening to what Neil Craig said at his presser at the weekend re rucks, this will give you an idea of the thinking at the moment

Also how many 'talls' have Geelong got, yet they traded for Hamish McIntosh

Do you want to explain why Cross would be a valuable addition?

Understand the desire to boost the midfield but we need someone better than Cross. His time is or is almost up. Not too much upside there. He also falls over a lot.

Yes we need to attempt to boost the midfield, but who is 'available', there are not too many A grade, will it cost us too much to prise one away from another Club, hence why I think we are trying to get as many games as possible into the likes of M Jones, Kent, Viney etc

Fitzy needs to stay, his upside is potentially enormous. Personally, I would trade the stiff-handed trier C. Dawes ahead of him any day of the week. But would far prefer neither were traded. We have so many list changes that need to be made already, I wouldn't be selling off any of the good players we actually have.

I don't understand why we would talk about trading a bloke who has only just now started to put it all together, especially when we're desperate for goal kickers.

IF, and it's a bloody big IF, IF we're considering trading a big key forward like Fitzy then it would have to be a bloody good deal.

All the speculation about trading Fitzy for a quality midfielder is a moot point until we find out who is available. Personally i wouldn't trade him, he is after all our best forward at the moment and his improvement is continuing at an impressive rate. I doubt very much he has reached anywhere near his true tradable value as Machiavelli suggests and if we were to trade we would be selling well short. The reality is there are to many intangibles with regards to Clark, Hogan ( hasn't played a game yet ) and Dawes. As for Cross, it's a no for me. Great player in his day ,but alas that day has come and gone.

Until the club knows the future of Clark, I don't think they'll be trading any up and coming key forwards.

You can never have too many talls.

Agree. Good talls are like hen's teeth, they only become available to clubs at the bottom of the ladder i.e Boyd or through father/son.

On TAC Future stars yesterday they said the Dogs and Saints are in need of KP players which are much harder to find. Whereas MFC can fix their midfield problem much quicker because the draft is loaded with midfielders.

Liked the look of Tassie ruckman Nankervis who was featured on the show. Strong contested mark and good leftfoot kick.

Agree. Good talls are like hen's teeth, they only become available to clubs at the bottom of the ladder i.e Boyd or through father/son.

On TAC Future stars yesterday they said the Dogs and Saints are in need of KP players which are much harder to find. Whereas MFC can fix their midfield problem much quicker because the draft is loaded with midfielders.

Liked the look of Tassie ruckman Nankervis who was featured on the show. Strong contested mark and good leftfoot kick.

You are right about Nankervis, but do we another Tall (ruckman) ?