Taylor Adams

[Red Demon 67]

And Essendon would be keen to trade him on to potentially get an extra draft pick. That said, is Bellchambers a free agent?If I were GWS who would I prefer? Jamar or Bellchambers? You'd have to say Jamar is a better tap ruckman, but is getting old. Bellchambers is younger but isn't as good. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.We can only hope that our ability to bundle Jamar with a draft pick would give us an advantage over Essendon. They most certainly won't be trading picks, I wouldn't have thought.

Bellchambers shits all over Jamar. I know which one GWS would target.

Forget this farcical delusion that clubs are going to take our rubbish. Especially for a gun, young player.

GWS may have had a fleeting interest in Jamar last year but 1) he hasn't exactly improved his value going by his 2013, and 2) they certainly wouldn't give up anything of worth to get him across.

At least 6-8 clubs would be looking at Adams if he wants out. Lets stop kidding ourselves that we wouldn't have to give up serious quality to get him. And for those saying "just pay him a heavily front-ended contract", I don't think we would have much disposable with the $$$ Clark and Dawes are on.

[Fat Tony 4,409]

I don't think that our second rounder and Jamar is fanciful given our strong position in the PSD. We need Adams to nominate us as his club of preference, which would give us the whip hand. I would consider a deal including Tom McDonald and Dom Tyson.

[stuie 7,374]

Geez there's some sooky pants know it alls here.

GWS wanted Jamar last year, now Brogan has retired. It's not a crazy scenario at all.

[Red Demon 67]

I think the description you were looking for was "realists".

[Binmans PA 26,111]

Bellchambers shits all over Jamar. I know which one GWS would target.

Forget this farcical delusion that clubs are going to take our rubbish. Especially for a gun, young player.

GWS may have had a fleeting interest in Jamar last year but 1) he hasn't exactly improved his value going by his 2013, and 2) they certainly wouldn't give up anything of worth to get him across.

At least 6-8 clubs would be looking at Adams if he wants out. Lets stop kidding ourselves that we wouldn't have to give up serious quality to get him. And for those saying "just pay him a heavily front-ended contract", I don't think we would have much disposable with the $$$ Clark and Dawes are on.

The Clark and Dawes contracts are heavily front-loaded. We have so much cap room, we don't know what to do with it. Offer Adams $500,000 for four years, front load the hell out of it and see if he bites.

Edited September 3, 2013 by AdamFarr

[Machsy 2,858]

I'm thinking pick 1 to GWS for Adams plus pick 10.

[Binmans PA 26,111]

I'd trade our second pick (#3 I presume) for Adams, but not #1. I'd go Boyd with that. I'd then pick inside mids with our following two picks.

So that'd be Boyd, Adams and two young mids. That's a good start. I'd throw a stack of cash at Brad Sewell and someone like Josh Kennedy (Syd) and see what comes our way.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,415]

Geez there's some sooky pants know it alls here.

GWS wanted Jamar last year, now Brogan has retired. It's not a crazy scenario at all.

Did you see Jamar play this year? He couldn't jump more than a few centimetres off the ground. Not to mention he has had 1 good year in 10 and that was over 3 seasons ago. Sure see what bites but don't be surprised if other clubs scoff at you for wasting their time (look at Essendon's recent trading history to see how far overvaluing your players gets you).

A ruckman they may want is Gawn. Still young, plenty of potential but also a risk for us due to his injury history. Don't get me wrong I'd love to keep Maxy I love the guy but if Clark is able to ruck with either Spencer or Fitzpatrick and we can get another back up on the rookie list it's something worth considering especially if we can inject some hardness and quality into our sub-Saharan midfield.

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,200]

I'm thinking pick 1 to GWS for Adams plus pick 10.

When did we get pick 1?

Must have missed the news.

[DeeMfc 621]

I think the description you were looking for was "realists".

So would someone have been classified as a 'realist' if, when we were getting squashed like mushy peas at the start of the season said 'don't worry everyone we'll have Paul Roos coaching us next year'?

Edited September 3, 2013 by DeeMfc

[Red Demon 67]

So would someone have been classified as a 'realist' if, when we were getting squashed like mushy peas at the start of the season said 'don't worry everyone we'll have Paul Roos coaching us next year'?

Not sure what that has to do with overrating Mark Jamar's worth on the trade table.

At all.

[DeeMfc 621]

I'd trade our second pick (#3 I presume) for Adams, but not #1. I'd go Boyd with that. I'd then pick inside mids with our following two picks.

So that'd be Boyd, Adams and two young mids. That's a good start. I'd throw a stack of cash at Brad Sewell and someone like Josh Kennedy (Syd) and see what comes our way.

Would be over the moon if we got those 3 or 4 players. Although I'd still like to get Aish in there somewhere too...

[DeeMfc 621]

Not sure what that has to do with overrating Mark Jamar's worth on the trade table.

At all.

I was more referring to the scenario of getting Adams across with pick 19ish plus a player type of trade. Which I thought you were as well. More in line with the thread topic of Adams rather than Jamars worth on his own.

[Red Demon 67]

No, I have no idea what the prospects of getting Paul Roos has to do with Taylor Adams and potential trade scenarios. Or more to the point whether Jamar + our second pick would satisfy GWS.

My point is that if we want Adams (and he actually wants out- which is not confirmed yet btw) we have to offer something of equal worth. More to the point, we probably have to offer overs to satisfy a team with potential, nay, likely 5-6, competing suitors. Forget the threat of PSD, very few players ever use that and there is no evidence to suggest Adams is that sort of character.

When people talk trades they want to get something decent without giving anything up in return. Basically in this instance they have gone well our second pick is good but probably not good enough, so ill group it with a surplus to requirements.

Fact: by adding Mark Jamar to the trade it doesn't make it a more appealing notion-quite the opposite. Jamar is finished.

[Machsy 2,858]

When did we get pick 1?

Must have missed the news.

I simply expect it to come to us.

As for using pick 3 instead of 1, it might work better for us, but I don't think GWS will accept that.

[CatFishPig 434]

If we had picks 1 & 3.. I'd be happy to give pick 1 to GWS for pick 2 and Adams.. I wonder if that would make them happy?

We don't want Boyd, we need midfielders. The above trade would still give us the best 2 midfielders in the comp.

[rpfc 27,476]

If we had picks 1 & 3.. I'd be happy to give pick 1 to GWS for pick 2 and Adams.. I wonder if that would make them happy?

We don't want Boyd, we need midfielders. The above trade would still give us the best 2 midfielders in the comp.

It depends on whether they were going to use Pick 1 to trade for a star, and whether we could do the same thing...

We don't have pick 1 as it stands now anyway.

[Fat Tony 4,409]

We must not pay over Adams' worth in terms of draft picks. The MFC needs to be patient and get the best value out of our top picks, because we are not remotely close to a flag.

We won't get Adams unless we offer the best contract and he nominates us. If he does, we should ideally try to nab him through the PSD and even offer him a ‘bonus’ to come that way. If he is not keen on being disloyal and entering the PSD we should at least have him threaten it as a possibility so we don’t pay overs.

While Jamar and ~#20 or Jamar and McDonald may be ‘unders’ compared to what others will offer, GWS will probably take the trade rather than losing him in the PSD.

[Dwight Schrute 16,779]

I wouldn't be considering trading Mcdonald, has the potential to be a 10 year CHB for us, Paul Roos will sort out his kicking

[DeeMfc 621]

No, I have no idea what the prospects of getting Paul Roos has to do with Taylor Adams and potential trade scenarios. Or more to the point whether Jamar + our second pick would satisfy GWS.

My point is that if we want Adams (and he actually wants out- which is not confirmed yet btw) we have to offer something of equal worth. More to the point, we probably have to offer overs to satisfy a team with potential, nay, likely 5-6, competing suitors. Forget the threat of PSD, very few players ever use that and there is no evidence to suggest Adams is that sort of character.

When people talk trades they want to get something decent without giving anything up in return. Basically in this instance they have gone well our second pick is good but probably not good enough, so ill group it with a surplus to requirements.

Fact: by adding Mark Jamar to the trade it doesn't make it a more appealing notion-quite the opposite. Jamar is finished.

Firstly, I agree with much of what you are saying.

Now..... Let me explain myself a bit more clearly.

What I was referring to earlier was that most people at the start of the year would have thought it was pie in the sky thinking that we would have Paul Roos coaching us next year. Certainly not a realist but now we have at worst a 50/50 chance of it happening. So my reference to your realist statement is that yes it may be a long shot to get Adams with pick 19 plus a player but stranger things have happened. (The Roos scenario) and certainly not impossible with the lure of playing for a Roos coached team. Many factors could be at play. He may not get along with Leon Cameron etc.

Although an outstanding prospect I also think people are getting a bit excited about him. He is not a star of the game. Not yet anyway.

[jackaub 1,402]

This guy is my number 1 offseason target. Second round pick won't get it done though. Jamar, plus second round pick might....

I wish Stuie! That is a great scenario Mid fielder and some value for old Jamar Might even save some bucks!

[stuie 7,374]

Did you see Jamar play this year? He couldn't jump more than a few centimetres off the ground. Not to mention he has had 1 good year in 10 and that was over 3 seasons ago. Sure see what bites but don't be surprised if other clubs scoff at you for wasting their time (look at Essendon's recent trading history to see how far overvaluing your players gets you).

A ruckman they may want is Gawn. Still young, plenty of potential but also a risk for us due to his injury history. Don't get me wrong I'd love to keep Maxy I love the guy but if Clark is able to ruck with either Spencer or Fitzpatrick and we can get another back up on the rookie list it's something worth considering especially if we can inject some hardness and quality into our sub-Saharan midfield.

Please note that I did not say they WOULD take him, but that it's a possibility.

The rest of the comp still rates Jamar for some reason. I don't think they pay as much attention to MFC as we do, and the fact remains GWS tried to get him last year so I still think they MIGHT want him this year. Also, we just re-signed Gawn a few weeks ago.

Also, everyone please try and remember we're talking about pick 19 AND Jamar, not just Jamar.

Edited September 4, 2013 by stuie

[rjay 23,922]

If we had picks 1 & 3.. I'd be happy to give pick 1 to GWS for pick 2 and Adams.. I wonder if that would make them happy?

We don't want Boyd, we need midfielders. The above trade would still give us the best 2 midfielders in the comp.

So we don't want the player seen as once in a generation FF? not so sure about that.

[stuie 7,374]

So we don't want the player seen as once in a generation FF? not so sure about that.

Good enough tall forwards: Clark, Dawes, Fitzpatrick, Hogan, Gawn

Good enough mids: Jones, Viney

MFC haven't had a positive differential in inside 50s since 2006.

Maybe it's just me, but I think we need midfielders more than tall forwards, no matter how good they POSSIBLY will be.

[rjay 23,922]

Good enough tall forwards: Clark, Dawes, Fitzpatrick, Hogan, Gawn

Good enough mids: Jones, Viney

MFC haven't had a positive differential in inside 50s since 2006.

Maybe it's just me, but I think we need midfielders more than tall forwards, no matter how good they POSSIBLY will be.

I wouldn't put Fitz or Gawn in a good enough yet and I'm still not sold on Dawes. I understand the point on mids but a top key position player would be hard to turn down if he was available. Remember Wallace at Richmond recruited for mids and passed up Franklin, the lesson is best available.