If Christensen is valued at pick 21, and I'd say is far more accomplished than Trengove, it doesn't surprise me it's 12 and 23 for the latter.

For a five season player, especially one drafted so early, he's achieved very little in comparison to his peers. Apart from perhaps Scully!

  On 11/10/2014 at 07:29, Pennant St Dee said:

Right we'll agree to disagree but I aint clutching at straws, I'll back my footy knowledge and understanding of what components/players it takes to make up a side against yours any day of the week

are you taking into account that he cannot play the style of game Roos needs going forward??

  On 11/10/2014 at 07:34, why you little said:

are you taking into account that he cannot play the style of game Roos needs going forward??

what two way running is that what you are talking about, just quit now WYL.

  On 11/10/2014 at 07:25, hogans_heroes said:

im sure this has been posted already but just in case

more Jacks on the way out?

it has ( been posted ) but its one of the most curious things to find daylight during the trade period so far

Its intriguing and odd at the same time.

The phrase "hear about" could mean lots of things but I deduce ( or at least assume ) the context is trade.

Is this AFL hack a conduit privy to our cause and used to disseminate or is he mucking around?

  On 11/10/2014 at 07:38, beelzebub said:

Is this AFL hack a conduit privy to our cause and used to disseminate or is he mucking around?

Hes a diehard MFC supporter, i know that much

  On 11/10/2014 at 04:41, beelzebub said:

O50

I dont barrack for a business either, but I appreciate they are one.

I also follow young men who wear the Rd and Blue, the difference between us possibly is I dont care who they are. The assembly of players is called Melbourne and I barrack for Melbourne.

I want to see good , competitive and ideally successful games played by the club and maybe, just maybe a Cup. Thats why I sit in the rain and cold etc

Those players we speak of play for money. In the old days they had jobs and footy was their passion . Today they are essentially all mercenaries. How many actually get to play for a team they prefer ?? Few id suggest.

If its not jack playing its Fred or Jimmy or Harry or Bluey or Red or someone. My allegiance is to the Club ive followed since I knew what footy was. That wont change. The list does...constantly...Should I stop barracking for Melbourne ??

Bit harsh to assume Trengove just plays for the money.

For mine the issue is that he has shown great loyalty to the club through some terrible years. If we don't return that loyalty and allow him to honour his contract then how can the club ever ask players to show loyalty to it. Reality is that by just not saying no to the Tigers but instead putting the offer to him we've effectively said we want you to accept the trade.Of course thats if you accept that the trade is a Tigers suggestion...

  On 11/10/2014 at 07:56, demoniac said:

Bit harsh to assume Trengove just plays for the money.

For mine the issue is that he has shown great loyalty to the club through some terrible years. If we don't return that loyalty and allow him to honour his contract then how can the club ever ask players to show loyalty to it. Reality is that by just not saying no to the Tigers but instead putting the offer to him we've effectively said we want you to accept the trade.Of course thats if you accept that the trade is a Tigers suggestion...

I'm with you. Its a bit hard to argue its a tigers suggestion. The club having said: '...all players are tradeable! pick 2 and 3 are on the table! bring us your offers...!' we can't then turnaround and say...'we haven't shopped x player around, its just that y club made us an offer'. Making all players and picks tradeable is effectively putting them up for sale!

  On 11/10/2014 at 07:17, Pennant St Dee said:

read it again, as I said above he dominated in the game against Essendon when he came back from his suspension, it was either his first or second week back. You have a computer you check it, but trust me he dominated. In fact get yourself stupefyinly drunk and sit through a replay of 186 turn the sound down and just watch Trengove.

and WYL you do realise there is more to Trengove than being a dominant player don't you. Nick Maxwell when did he ever dominate a game, Darren Glass, Richie Vanden Burg, Gary O'Donnell do you understand the roles each player plays in a side and kicking goals, breaking out of packs is not the only form of leadership

That Essendon game is a poor game to give as an example. Essendon were absolutely putrid that day - Gysberts ran amok and Jordie McKenzie got 3 Brownlow votes. The problem for Trengove in my opinion is that he is a solid player but he doesn't have a role. He isn't proven as an inside mid and as an outside mid he doesn't cause headaches for the opposition by breaking the game open, running the lines et cetera. He does seem to go both ways which is to his credit but it seems the end result is that he mostly plays 5 out of 10 games as if he hasn't played - doesn't do anything wrong but doesn't achieve much. Probably why he was dropped this year. As a forward he's probably going to take the odd mark, neutralise a half back and have 15 possession, 1 goal games. His character is terrific but is he going to get a game and what role will play, remembering Salem, Garlett, Kent, JKH are going to be in the mix as forwards and our midfield will be bolstered one way or another.

Of your captain examples, Vandenberg maybe the closest to the mark and he like Trengove was a good ordinary footballer. The other examples are not the same - Glass, champion full-back, O'Donnell, excellent small back, and Maxwell had a few terrific seasons as a third back - they were very good footballers. Maxwell not all the time.

So the question what role does Trengove play and if he isn't getting a game, what then?

I don't want him to go either to be honest but there is nothing to suggest that he is going to be a quality footballer that will be missed on the park if he goes.

  On 11/10/2014 at 07:38, Pennant St Dee said:

what two way running is that what you are talking about, just quit now WYL.

4 Quarter running actually & to excert pressure on opponents rather than be always under pressure.

Why is his name up?

It's on the club website...

  On 11/10/2014 at 07:56, demoniac said:

Bit harsh to assume Trengove just plays for the money.

For mine the issue is that he has shown great loyalty to the club through some terrible years. If we don't return that loyalty and allow him to honour his contract then how can the club ever ask players to show loyalty to it. Reality is that by just not saying no to the Tigers but instead putting the offer to him we've effectively said we want you to accept the trade.Of course thats if you accept that the trade is a Tigers suggestion...

I didnt say JUST but the reality is in the main they all do..Its their job.

My gut is he wont go to the Toiges, but they have certainly put a cat amongst the pigeons

Loyalty goes two ways and theres a pragmatism to it all. Players will know that there are parameters and limits and thats the lot of an AFL player...sign here or find another career.

harsh ?? lifes not a cakewalk you realise

Trengove has had a debilitating foot injury for "probably" 3 full seasons. That's why he hasn't produced - some here are trying to make it sound like he's had opportunities and failed without taking into account his injury issues. He's mostly played under duress (in my opinion) His foot injury was almost certainly misdiagnosed so who's to blame?

He's had 2 full seasons to prove himself - his first 2 years. Most here were in agreement that he had a bright future after 2011. Having a crook foot in footy is a bit like having a crook AC joint or stress fractures for a fast bowler. Both types of injury can render a sportsperson close enough to useless.

Also, some here are glossing over his injury concerns and only want to talk about his "form". He actually had major surgery earlier this year on a foot issue that he probably had for at least 18 months prior (probably more like 2+ years) That surgery kept him out for the whole season so we can assume it wasn't a "minor concern"

Hogan has just missed a whole season with stress fractures - it's certainly not a form issue with him. By the way, Hogan still needs to find his feet ... if he plays a dozen games next season and has an impact in 3 or 4 of those games, we should be quite satisfied.

Could be about clearing up cap space as well as the pick 12

Macca, nobody knows for sure whether he had the foot injury for two weeks or two years, neither Jack nor the club have ever really said. Your post is based entirely on the premise that it's been the foot all along and he'll be cured; whereas others such as Baghdad Bob are based on the premise that how he's looked for the last two years is how he just is. At the end of the day, nobody really knows so we all just default to the position that suits our argument the best.

  On 11/10/2014 at 08:15, olisik said:

Could be about clearing up cap space as well as the pick 12

Ummm, doubtful.

Happy to trade if the end result makes us a better team. Though some on here are being disrepectful to a 'very' loyal young player. How the hell does anybody know how good he will be when/if he gets over his injuries?

Risk vs Reward on both sides of the coin. Only time and a trade or lack thereof will tell.

  On 11/10/2014 at 08:08, why you little said:

4 Quarter running actually & to excert pressure on opponents rather than be always under pressure.

Why is his name up?

It's on the club website...

It's up because we and obviously Richmond and Adelaide think he is more valuable than you do.

Gotta give to get.

BTW 'that' tackle was on the fastest player in the game. By a long shot.

Plus in reality we can't really take his performances in 2012/13 into account too readily as Neeld made him play as a purely defensive player. His natural game is actually as an attacking inside mid and marking high half forward. Other teams know this and are pricing him accordingly.

  On 11/10/2014 at 08:17, Nasher said:

Macca, nobody knows for sure whether he had the foot injury for two weeks or two years, neither Jack nor the club have ever really said. Your post is based entirely on the premise that it's been the foot all along and he'll be cured; whereas others such as Baghdad Bob are based on the premise that how he's looked for the last two years is how he just is. At the end of the day, nobody really knows so we all just default to the position that suits our argument the best.

Yep, mine is an opinion only but I believe I'm right. I've felt this way about Jack's issues all along - read the Trengove threads from 2012/13 if you can find them, Nash.

I had a very similar opinion back then and haven't changed my stance. The events of the last day or so have just reaffirmed my view. Many here felt there was something wrong with him physically and it took until earlier this year to find out the extent of his problems.

Also, I'm not actually trying to win an argument ... just offering my point of view. I can appreciate the other side of the argument and the other side of the argument might be right - I'll back my view though.

Melbourne midfielder Jack Trengove will miss remainder of 2014 season with foot injury to navicular bone

From Jack ...

  Quote

“When you get a phone call to say there’s a crack in there it’s shattering,” he said.

“There was an element of relief there because I’ve been battling away... thinking ‘why can’t I move the way I’ve moved in the past?’

“It was doing my head in.”

  Quote

“I’d love to be able to get back to the footy that I was playing back in the first year, free of any burden and just enjoying myself.”

  On 11/10/2014 at 08:23, DeeMfc said:

BTW 'that' tackle was on the fastest player in the game. By a long shot.

Plus in reality we can't really take his performances in 2012/13 into account too readily as Neeld made him play as a purely defensive player. His natural game is actually as an attacking inside mid and marking high half forward. Other teams know this and are pricing him accordingly.

Yes one real highlight in 5 years to hold onto! Not quite enough for me!

  On 11/10/2014 at 08:15, olisik said:

Could be about clearing up cap space as well as the pick 12

The only thing we need to clear in our cap space is the cobwebs.

  On 11/10/2014 at 08:33, Macca said:

Yep, mine is an opinion only but I believe I'm right. I've felt this way about Jack's issues all along - read the Trengove threads from 2012/13 if you can find them, Nash.

I had a very similar opinion back then and haven't changed my stance. The events of the last day or so have just reaffirmed my view. Many here felt there was something wrong with him physically and it took until earlier this year to find out the extent of his problems.

Also, I'm not actually trying to win an argument ... just offering my point of view. I can appreciate the other side of the argument and the other side of the argument might be right - I'll back my view though.

Melbourne midfielder Jack Trengove will miss remainder of 2014 season with foot injury to navicular bone

From Jack ...

Macca, every fibre in my being hopes you are spot on.

'Those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it.' Ten years ago was the last time Melbourne traded an up and coming midfielder for pick 12. Scott Thompson went on to become one of the elite midfielders of the last decade winning All Australian selection, club best and fairest and playing over 220 games for Adelaide so far. I find the way Trengove plays is very similar in style to a young Scott Thompson except that Jack is more skilful and his initial games for Melbourne were far more impressive. He also has far better leadership qualities and would have a far more positive impact on other players at the club. It is interesting that Thompsons last year at Melbourne was ended by a foot injury

Melbourne did at least get Brent Moloney out of the deal by trading pick12 to Geelong.

Geelong then traded it to Richmond gaining a former number 2 pick Brad Ottens who played a major part in them subsequently winning 3 premierships, while Richmond drafted Danny Meyer with pick 12 who played 17 very ordinary games before being delisted.

Richmond appears to have learnt from the past while if Melbourne goes ahead with this trade it may be remembered as one of the worst trades of all time.

  On 11/10/2014 at 08:53, demon1954 said:

'Those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it.' Ten years ago was the last time Melbourne traded an up and coming midfielder for pick 12. Scott Thompson went on to become one of the elite midfielders of the last decade winning All Australian selection, club best and fairest and playing over 220 games for Adelaide so far. I find the way Trengove plays is very similar in style to a young Scott Thompson except that Jack is more skilful and his initial games for Melbourne were far more impressive. He also has far better leadership qualities and would have a far more positive impact on other players at the club. It is interesting that Thompsons last year at Melbourne was ended by a foot injury

Melbourne did at least get Brent Moloney out of the deal by trading pick12 to Geelong.

Geelong then traded it to Richmond gaining a former number 2 pick Brad Ottens who played a major part in them subsequently winning 3 premierships, while Richmond drafted Danny Meyer with pick 12 who played 17 very ordinary games before being delisted.

Richmond appears to have learnt from the past while if Melbourne goes ahead with this trade it may be remembered as one of the worst trades of all time.

Thompson wanted to go home and was pretty much fit as a fiddle iirc !!

Without knowledge of the details of Trengove's foot it is hard to give a strong view on the trade. IMO it is a reasonable trade if we don't think he can get his zip back.

In making the decision we also need to take into account our midfield mix, which will be slow as it is likely to include N Jones, Tyson, Viney, Cross and probably Brayshaw.

We also need to consider the value of #23 and #12.

2013 #12 Lennon, #23 Crouch
2012 #12 Jaksch, #23 Paparone
2011 #12 Docherty, #23 Newman
2010 #12 Cook, #23 Guthrie
2009 #12 Lucas, #23 Stevens
2008 #12 Johnson, #23 Zaharakis
2007 #12 Rioli, #23 Pears
2006 #12 Frawley, #23 Stewart
2005 #12 Jones, #23 Cook

If we're going to look at the form of Trengove in 2012/13 then it's only fair that we look at the form of all our players in those 2 years - at least Trengove had a reason for not playing well - he had a "probable" busted foot (many here previously thought it must have been OP)

Only Jones, Grimes, Clark & McDonald can hold their heads up high from the 2012 season and in 2013, only Jones (again) Garland, Terlich & Matt Jones had good seasons.

As others have stated, this trade could come back to bite us unless ... the club knows a lot more than we know. There was talk that Jack was going to resume training towards the end of season but did he? And if he did, does anyone know how he fared?

  On 11/10/2014 at 08:40, Demoneyes said:

Yes one real highlight in 5 years to hold onto! Not quite enough for me!

Did you read the rest of the post or are you going to blame the red wine for your lack of brain matter again?