Patrick Dangerfield

[InVINCEable 358]

Come on Danger!

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

Pick 12 should be enough. Isn't that what they gave us for Scott Thompson?

[Hal Anger 26]

Nothing is going to happen until Frawley finally makes his move. I wish the dick would hurry up. I really hate him now.

[Melb16 493]

You're a [censored] champ.

You 'hate' him? It's a game of footy. Get a grip.

[sue 9,233]

While there is an argument that we need a star to attract spectators/members/press etc, I am reminded of an old saying about eggs and baskets. Even bastketcases can't reply on one egg. If he gets injured for example, what then?

[What 18,810]

While there is an argument that we need a star to attract spectators/members/press etc, I am reminded of an old saying about eggs and baskets. Even bastketcases can't reply on one egg. If he gets injured for example, what then?

Ask every other team in the league what happens when their superstar gets iinjured

After all we are the only team that hasnt had one for 30 years

[sue 9,233]

Ask every other team in the league what happens when their superstar gets iinjured

After all we are the only team that hasnt had one for 30 years

Not sure what you mean, but I'd start by asking the Suns why Ablett didn't win the Brownlow.

[Moonshadow 17,678]

While there is an argument that we need a star to attract spectators/members/press etc, I am reminded of an old saying about eggs and baskets. Even bastketcases can't reply on one egg. If he gets injured for example, what then?

If....

We can only go on his recent injury history, which is that he's barely missed a handful of games in 5 yrs.

I'd be more than happy with that Sue.

[sue 9,233]

If....

We can only go on his recent injury history, which is that he's barely missed a handful of games in 5 yrs.

I'd be more than happy with that Sue.

I agree that in this specific case (Dangerfield) his record is good so it's better than relying on someone like Clark. But the principle remains - the past does not predict the future 100%. I'd rather a couple of guys who may step up to his level. The time for a 'star' recruit is when we are a little better and the risk is less.

[What 18,810]

Not sure what you mean, but I'd start by asking the Suns why Ablett didn't win the Brownlow.

what i mean is we need Dangerfield or any other superstar

Its a no brainer

[Lucifers Hero 40,563]

I agree that in this specific case (Dangerfield) his record is good so it's better than relying on someone like Clark. But the principle remains - the past does not predict the future 100%. I'd rather a couple of guys who may step up to his level. The time for a 'star' recruit is when we are a little better and the risk is less.

Yes, the desire for a 'star' recruit shows a strong need for a 'messiah' still. We need to shake that.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Yes, the desire for a 'star' recruit shows a strong need for a 'messiah' still. We need to shake that.

build the strong Culture, & stardom will grow from within.

[beelzebub 23,390]

build the strong Culture, & stardom will grow from within.

You cant always afford the time to grow from seedlings. Sometimes grafting is the way.

[dee-luded 2,959]

You cant always afford the time to grow from seedlings. Sometimes grafting is the way.

not suggesting that BB, we got it right last year with our trades.

using picks to trade for multiple options is the way to go.

I don't mind using One pick & a player to get a star... But I'm totally against using both our early picks to get one player... & I don't really want Danger that much in all honesty.

I did 4 Yrs ago or more. when he was struggling & hadn't made his name at that point. As I did want Boak as well, around that same time, again he hadn't made his name then.

We need to get both, a star, & kids as well.

You cant always afford the time to grow from seedlings. Sometimes grafting is the way.

tell that to the MCC of the 60's & 70's.

[BAMF 4,464]

Nothing is going to happen until Frawley finally makes his move. I wish the [censored] would hurry up. I really hate him now.

He cant do anything officially until trade week begins.

[Redleg 42,042]

I would still prefer 5-6 good players traded than 1 superstar. Maybe you can do both, I doubt it.

[SaberFang 7,151]

My theory is that Roos will bring in 6 or 7 classy, good players that aren't getting games elsewhere (perhaps even Sewell?), rocket us up the ladder with players who actually know and play their role, then become far more attractive a prospect for free agents.

The lure of Roosy as a coach really only lasts this trade period though. 2 years under him is worth the move, 1 year maybe not so much.

If the unrest around league is any indication, it wouldn't surprise me to see Adelaide, Bulldogs, Essendon, GWS and Gold Coast tread water next year.

[Moonshadow 17,678]

I agree that in this specific case (Dangerfield) his record is good so it's better than relying on someone like Clark. But the principle remains - the past does not predict the future 100%. I'd rather a couple of guys who may step up to his level. The time for a 'star' recruit is when we are a little better and the risk is less.

Correct Sue, the past does not predict the future 100%. Because if it did, we'd be far better trading for Danger than developing a couple of kids that "may" step up to his level. Our development has sucked big time. We need established players now, Roos has said this, and Danger delivers that in spades and rarely misses games. It's a no brainer, really. If he chose us to move to, we should move heaven and earth to get him.

Star player Dangerfield vs. a couple of players that may step up. I know which one if take!

[Yossarian 1,820]

At a grand final bbq today. Everyone thinks they're getting Dangerfield. Bad Photoshop jobs included.

[InVINCEable 358]

You're a [censored] champ.

You 'hate' him? It's a game of footy. Get a grip.

I hate Tom Scully, don't give two craps if it's footy.

[InVINCEable 358]

I would still prefer 5-6 good players traded than 1 superstar. Maybe you can do both, I doubt it.

If you mean 5-6 good players excluding the draft (Because imo you can't count them until they've played) you're absolutely dreaming.

[sue 9,233]

Correct Sue, the past does not predict the future 100%. Because if it did, we'd be far better trading for Danger than developing a couple of kids that "may" step up to his level. Our development has sucked big time. We need established players now, Roos has said this, and Danger delivers that in spades and rarely misses games. It's a no brainer, really. If he chose us to move to, we should move heaven and earth to get him.

Star player Dangerfield vs. a couple of players that may step up. I know which one if take!

And if he gets injured in round 1 and is out for the season we are stuffed. But if we take the route of getting a couple of good players for the same cost, then the risk is spread. Once we are better, then we can take the risk of putting all our money on a superstar, but right now it is too risky. Look at Mitch. Look at how the Suns went after Ablett was inured (and they are much better developed than we are).

Of course if we can get a superstar and good player(s) as well, that is another story. But that is dreaming.

[Moonshadow 17,678]

And if he gets injured in round 1 and is out for the season we are stuffed. But if we take the route of getting a couple of good players for the same cost, then the risk is spread. Once we are better, then we can take the risk of putting all our money on a superstar, but right now it is too risky. Look at Mitch. Look at how the Suns went after Ablett was inured (and they are much better developed than we are).

Of course if we can get a superstar and good player(s) as well, that is another story. But that is dreaming.

I can't believe my eyes... a Melbourne supporter saying that they don't want Danger because he might get injured, despite rarely missing a game in the last 5 yrs! Now I've read it all. So how about the 2 good players you mention don't perform to expectation and we missed out on a chance on a fit and firing Dangerfield? Basing recruitment upon 'what if he gets injured' is dumb recruitment. Clark had significant injuries at Brisbane before coming here, we knew that, took the risk and lost. But yeah, sure, GAJ was a big mistake for the Suns. Don't know why they went for him. Haha. Now that's a risk I'd love Melbourne to take: GAJ vs. possible injury. Hmmmmmm.......

[Demoneyes 562]

My mate is a crows supporter and his dogs name is Dangerfield, it farted today and I swear the fart sounded like it said 'Demons'

That's good enough for me and about the best sign yet.

No one has a clue, anyone who suggests otherwise are just feeding their ego.

Edit: last sentence.

Hmm my farts smell like beer but dont speak!

Latest rumour is that Dangerfiled is so confused that he will seek solace and comtemplate in a Tibetan or Greek monastery next season. All that remains to be decided is whether he'd rather eat yak or goat. And choose to shave his head or grow a beard.

You need to stop smoking weed!

[Moneider96 1,045]

I can't believe my eyes... a Melbourne supporter saying that they don't want Danger because he might get injured, despite rarely missing a game in the last 5 yrs! Now I've read it all. So how about the 2 good players you mention don't perform to expectation and we missed out on a chance on a fit and firing Dangerfield? Basing recruitment upon 'what if he gets injured' is dumb recruitment. Clark had significant injuries at Brisbane before coming here, we knew that, took the risk and lost. But yeah, sure, GAJ was a big mistake for the Suns. Don't know why they went for him. Haha. Now that's a risk I'd love Melbourne to take: GAJ vs. possible injury. Hmmmmmm.......

Eaxctly