from the highlights of his debut you'd draft him on his tackling and aggression at the footy alone. Love that he wraps the arms up and doesn't look to sling but watches the footy spill loose and goes again and knocks it to advantage. That is far more valuable than slinging a bloke and putting yourself out of the contest at the same time.

If he loses the hair he might start to look like a footy player.

Needs to find himself a tattooist also.

Too early to tell if he is a seriously good AFL player, but he was at TAC level.

He is a hard nut as well.

It is just another little thing to keep us interested this year, beside watching the Dees.

Who knows if the recruiting guys are really interested?

Just nice to look at possibly getting a player all year, instead of losing one.

I am absolutely certain that the recruiting guys are interested, as they will be for dozens of other talents coming out of contract.

I must say the highlights from his first game were impressive. Some have commented on his tackling, which was intense and effective. I also loved his disposal hitting targets both when free and more so his strength and accuracy when tackled. I know highlights are highlights, but looked to do nothing wrong and a lot right.

One can only wait and see however - right price, right timing, right role.........???????

I am not that excited, I rather most players stay loyal, don't like seeing 2 3 year players being poached, players in their first 5 years have not earned the right to dictate where they want to go, unless their club don't want them anymore, that's why there is a delisted free agents, if the AFL players want more free agent rules for 6 years to have the right to become free agents, then the clubs need to be able to trade players for their highest offer without the player having to agree with the trade.

I am not that excited, I rather most players stay loyal, don't like seeing 2 3 year players being poached, players in their first 5 years have not earned the right to dictate where they want to go, unless their club don't want them anymore, that's why there is a delisted free agents, if the AFL players want more free agent rules for 6 years to have the right to become free agents, then the clubs need to be able to trade players for their highest offer without the player having to agree with the trade.

I agree with some points you make NAA, but I think whether a club wants a player is often directly related to how much they can get in a trade for them. Tyson is a good example of this. Once he stated he was prepared to leave and Melbourne offered what GWS wanted for the trade, the deal was done. Sure they would have liked him to stay, but in a nutshell, they considered the price good enough to let him go. If Dom and other young trades were only loyal to their club of origin, we wouldn't have him, Frost, Newton, Michie or Riley..... and we'd still probably have HWFUA on our list. If it works for both clubs and the player concerned, then IMO loyalty would be a hinderence rather than honourable.

I agree with some points you make NAA, but I think whether a club wants a player is often directly related to how much they can get in a trade for them. Tyson is a good example of this. Once he stated he was prepared to leave and Melbourne offered what GWS wanted for the trade, the deal was done. Sure they would have liked him to stay, but in a nutshell, they considered the price good enough to let him go. If Dom and other young trades were only loyal to their club of origin, we wouldn't have him, Frost, Newton, Michie or Riley..... and we'd still probably have HWFUA on our list. If it works for both clubs and the player concerned, then IMO loyalty would be a hinderence rather than honourable.

The new climate of players having an increased abilty to [censored] themselves out wherever they please is terrible for the game. Who wants to see their favourite player at another club? Absolutely nobody in the entire country, that's who. We should be minimising this as much as possible, not catalysing it. It's also awful news for the minnow clubs such as ours on the basis that we are less attractive re-settlement options on the market.

The new climate of players having an increased abilty to [censored] themselves out wherever they please is terrible for the game. Who wants to see their favourite player at another club? Absolutely nobody in the entire country, that's who. We should be minimising this as much as possible, not catalysing it. It's also awful news for the minnow clubs such as ours on the basis that we are less attractive re-settlement options on the market.

I agree that no one wants to see their favourite player leave and young players should not dictate where they want to go, but if we didn't trade in Tyson, Dawes, Vince, Cross, maybe Michie, Pedo and Riley, and this year Lumumba, Frost maybe Newton, we'd be stuffed. Sure Frawley and Rivers are a loss, but given how poor we've been on and off the field, it's not unexpected. What is terrible is the Boyd trade from GWS to WB as it was controlled by the player and not the clubs

Anyway, my point is that player trades are an increasing part of the AFL landscape. There needs to be a compromise between player freedom and responsibility towards the club that has invested in their initial AFL development

Players seek to move clubs for many reasons.

For instance, I don't expect we'd have Cross, Vince, Gartlett, Michie, Riley or Newton if their former clubs wanted them enough. Cross and Gartlett were effectively delisted, Vince wasn't loved sufficiently by the Crows (bizarre I know!), and the latter three weren't getting regular games in the seniors.

Lumumba seems to have had a blow up with Buckley. He never thought he'd leave the Pies, nor did Cross or Vince think they'd ever play for another club.

Mitch Clark - well, who really knows what happened there. I wish he was still on the list, even though he appears not to have sufficiently respected the club.

Rivers - no one can blame him for leaving. Struck me as the loyal type, only to have become a victim of the Mark Neeld period.

Frawley seems to have been a bit of a bounty hunter and seemingly searched for the best deal for himself. He got that.

Jones, on the other hand, wants to be a one club player, MFC club leader and, ultimately, an MFC club legend. He wishes to influence the future direction of the club, and, importantly, he believes he can.

It's also why I like players such as Watts and Howe. Fundamentally, I think they wish to stay at the club that first recruited them - that's not to say they necessarily will for their entire careers, but it strikes that they would like to. Successful clubs need players with that mindset.

What if Frawley's circumstances was closer to Vince's?

What if we didn't chase his signature that hard?

We don't know and can only go on conjecture in the future.

But calling him a 'bounty hunter' is a bit much, we stole GWS' groomed CHB in Frost who left a club that wanted to keep him and was playing regularly.

I just think if we have to consider the various way players might leave a club, then we have to embrace the complexity of that disengagement, and I don't think it is as simple as James Frawley = Boba Fett...

He had plenty of opportunities to re-sign. He was absolutely a required player. It's actually that simple.

That is not to say though that the club did not eventually get sick of him dragging his feet, set their sights on Frost, and became satisfied with pick 3 as compensation for him.

And therefore that the club didn't ultimately try to move heaven and earth to re-sign him.

Vince and Frawley's situations are not comparable IMO. Not even remotely.

What if Frawley's circumstances was closer to Vince's?

What if we didn't chase his signature that hard?

We don't know and can only go on conjecture in the future.

But calling him a 'bounty hunter' is a bit much, we stole GWS' groomed CHB in Frost who left a club that wanted to keep him and was playing regularly.

I just think if we have to consider the various way players might leave a club, then we have to embrace the complexity of that disengagement, and I don't think it is as simple as James Frawley = Boba Fett...

Chip was not like Vince at all, there was always a contract on offer to chip, as Jackson said chip never even wanted to look at it, have u ever wanted to meet a girl, if see refuse to even talk to you, wouldn't u start looking for something better. Chip was gone, also I believe we would have gotten a pp if he did stay, that was one of the reasons mark evens gave for us not getting it, because we would get good compo for chip leaving.

He had plenty of opportunities to re-sign. He was absolutely a required player. It's actually that simple.

That is not to say though that the club did not eventually get sick of him dragging his feet, set their sights on Frost, and became satisfied with pick 3 as compensation for him.

And therefore that the club didn't ultimately try to move heaven and earth to re-sign him.

Vince and Frawley's situations are not comparable IMO. Not even remotely.

Well then, please define Frost's character after his decision to leave GWS?

A wanted young player who played the first 15 games of 2014 up and leaves - what kind of person does that?

Frawley searched for the best deal....not privy to any details but if speculation is to be believed Freo offered the better financial deal, Hawks offered less cash but a chance at the ultimate.

Well then, please define Frost's character after his decision to leave GWS?

A wanted young player who played the first 15 games of 2014 up and leaves - what kind of person does that?

A home sick kid... Nothing more.

Well then, please define Frost's character after his decision to leave GWS?

A wanted young player who played the first 15 games of 2014 up and leaves - what kind of person does that?

Don't know much about his character to be honest. 15 games for another club. 15 seconds at this one.

He had hardly established/built a career at GWS yet. Was originally a rookie on a list of first round draft picks, who was then given a great opportunity to be a mainstay of another club's defence over the long term. Add to that the 'go home' factor. Doesn't seem altogether evil to me.

Frawley was a club leader at the MFC. Melbourne is essentially his home.

Frawley shopped around for the best deal. Nathan Jones had a different list of priorities and his deal reflects that. As did Frost seemingly, albeit his circumstances are very different to those two - he's just starting out. Different players. Different priorities. Differing levels of importance to this club.

But you seem to have so much confirmation bias on this issue that you seem absolutely unwilling to see a different perspective on Frawley, despite much evidence to support the contrary view.

So let's just agree to disagree. In short, I get your perspective - I just don't agree with it and I find your continual pebble throwing on the issue to be quite tedious.

Confirmation bias? Of what? What is my argument?

You have alluded to Frawley's gun-for-hire nature for months across any thread loosely related to it - here we are in Zak Jones' thread.

I don't think it is 'pebble throwing' to remind people that there is nothing but conjecture and subjective analysis when it comes to Frawley's character and the circumstances of his exit.

A massive part of why frawley turned down freos offer despite them offering more money is he hates flying.

Confirmation bias? Of what? What is my argument?

You have alluded to Frawley's gun-for-hire nature for months across any thread loosely related to it - here we are in Zak Jones' thread.

I don't think it is 'pebble throwing' to remind people that there is nothing but conjecture and subjective analysis when it comes to Frawley's character and the circumstances of his exit.

How is it conjecture when as Ron has stated rightly that there is absolutely evidence supporting the argument that Frawley's display of character is/was poor for a senior leader of our club?

It's you that has started speculating that toward the end of the year/beginning of the FA period it could have been the club that 'pushed' Frawley out the door. That's the conjecture right there.

Go back and look at any media interview he did and listen closely to the reasons he used as to why he put talks on hold. The evidence is there.

I liked hearing about the club putting in a long-term effort to recruit Sam Frost.

If the whispers are true then I'm very happy to see the same happening with Zak. I don't know a lot about him but I've liked what I've seen of him at AFL level and with the Sydney trading restrictions it certainly provides the potential for a generous trade.

There is nothing wrong with chip's character, many a player has chased glory, some players stay and say I am good enough to make my team better, and some say I want to go and hope others can make me look better. Everyone hates losing their guns but everyone is happy to steal other teams guns, happiness is hard to find.

I have spoke of this young man before, played for mount eliza, a good but unremarkable type at junior level ie better players than him at that stage, must have excelled in higher league

Brian Stynes

Jay Viney

Steven Febey

Matthew Febey

Anthony McDonald

James McDonald

Chris Johnson

Jack Viney*

Dylan Grimes*

Zak Jones*

Oscar McDonald*

Billy Stretch*

conclusion: Recruiting (or not recruiting) sons and brothers of former players is more often a negative rather than positive result (*so far)

Brian Stynes

Jay Viney

Steven Febey

Matthew Febey

Anthony McDonald

James McDonald

Chris Johnson

Jack Viney*

Dylan Grimes*

Zak Jones*

Oscar McDonald*

Billy Stretch*

conclusion: Recruiting (or not recruiting) sons and brothers of former players is more often a negative rather than positive result (*so far)

Then you could add names like cloke-the youngest of the sons is the best, selwood- same (think he is the youngest), jakovic- arguable. It's not always negative. Maybe neutral is a better word. It is a bit of a lottery though.

With this kind of ferocity shown at training (just like his brother), I'm sure he is just the same, and I hope we do someday pursue him:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10152438705176324

Brian Stynes

Jay Viney

Steven Febey

Matthew Febey

Anthony McDonald

James McDonald

Chris Johnson

Jack Viney*

Dylan Grimes*

Zak Jones*

Oscar McDonald*

Billy Stretch*

conclusion: Recruiting (or not recruiting) sons and brothers of former players is more often a negative rather than positive result (*so far)

Would have been happy with these picks if we had the chance:

Gary Ablett Jr. (father-son)

Stephen Silvagni (father-son)

Dustin Fletcher (father-son)

Kane Cornes (younger brother)

Shaun Burgoyne (younger brother)