Just now, Peter Griffen said:

I think 2016 second rounder & 2017 first rounder for Prestia and a later pick would be a fair deal.

fine in theory, but i think they're going to want players who can come in and play immediately, not possibly now, or possible in two, or three, or more years.

 

the other option is to get a third club involved, but again it involves shipping something of value of ours out to get prestia in.

 

it's going to be a hard deal to pull off i think.

On 5/26/2016 at 0:33 AM, DemonAndrew said:

 

fine in theory, but i think they're going to want players who can come in and play immediately, not possibly now, or possible in two, or three, or more years.

 

the other option is to get a third club involved, but again it involves shipping something of value of ours out to get prestia in.

 

it's going to be a hard deal to pull off i think.

Yeah, if they demand a ready to go player that certainly makes it tougher to get a good deal done, unless they were willing to accept someone like Chris Dawes

I think Alex Neal-Bullen is probably the most expendable option with value of the mids though i rate him and would prefer to keep him.

On 25 May 2016 at 6:25 PM, hells bells said:

Personally if they were both fit I'd take Jaeger over Prestia as he suits our needs more.  We need outside speed and polish.  We have a lot of good strong inside mids.  

O'Meara 184cm. Prestia 175cm. I see Prestia as an in and under extractor. Hard to play as an outside wing nowadays at 175cm. O'Meara fit will be the best of his generation. Josh Kelly is also 184cm. What if he is available. Some muttering  about him thinking about going back to Melbourne the city. 

I think the links to Richmond are just clickbait. Every major trade target is always linked to one of the big clubs; it's purely to get eyes on the story.

Look at Carlisle last year; he ended up at the Saints but was constantly linked elsewhere.

22 minutes ago, It's Time said:

O'Meara 184cm. Prestia 175cm. I see Prestia as an in and under extractor. Hard to play as an outside wing nowadays at 175cm. O'Meara fit will be the best of his generation. Josh Kelly is also 184cm. What if he is available. Some muttering  about him thinking about going back to Melbourne the city. 

I'd take Prestia for the inside (that will get you deep into finals) and I'll take Kelly for the outside (that will assist you winning finals deep into September). So both of them should be on our radar. Whether we could ever get them both is another matter.

1 hour ago, It's Time said:

O'Meara 184cm. Prestia 175cm. I see Prestia as an in and under extractor. Hard to play as an outside wing nowadays at 175cm. O'Meara fit will be the best of his generation. Josh Kelly is also 184cm. What if he is available. Some muttering  about him thinking about going back to Melbourne the city. 

O'Meara's injury is a pretty serious one. Even if he does recover - which is no guarantee - he will have limited mobility. I don't think we are talking about the same player who taken the league by storm years back. O'Meara comes with risk attached, and certainly more risk than Prestia. Now I am no huge fan of Prestia, but I would take him ahead of O'Meara, and I do think we still lack inside mids.

As far as Joshua Kelly goes, I would consider him by far the superior option to either O'Meara or Prestia. Kelly is the type of player you sell the farm for. People mightn't see it yet, but he is a potential superstar. Would compliment our midfield, and we should be able to afford him (due to a GWS cap squeeze).

We've already shitcanned two oportunities to get Joshua Kelly, so he probably think we're jerks at this point.

First was the Hogan mini-draft, second for Tyson/Salem. 

Would be funny to shove it up Purple's date though.

On 5/19/2016 at 10:00 AM, Fat Tony said:

I haven’t made up my mind either way on Prestia. But the counter argument to targeting Prestia is this:

 

Firstly, our inside midfield is already overstocked with talent. On the weekend the team included Viney, N Jones, Tyson and Oliver in the middle, plus Vince and Michie in defence and Petracca and up forward. Our outside midfielders were Salem, Harmes, Kennedy and Bugg – all of which could potentially go inside at some stage. In the VFL our best players this season have been Neal-Bullen, Trengove and Newton. And on the injured list now are Brayshaw (who has question marks over his head), Vandenberg and Kent.

 

Secondly, Prestia has come off a serious knee injury and has been playing ordinary football this season. He started the year well, but he has averaged only 80 Supercoach points since round 3. (By comparison, Tom Bugg has averaged 84 points this year.) Maybe he can come back and play well next year with a strong preseason. But maybe he can’t get back to his best.

 

Thirdly, the rule changes have seen the game open up this season. I think our greatest need is some outside players (who can still win their own ball when required) but offer pace and skill on the outside. And I don’t rate Prestia’s kicking or ability on the outside as highly as the masses here on Demonland.

 

Personally, I would definatly target Hurley before Prestia. And even if we miss out on Hurley, I would like to see Prestia return to playing at a higher level to even consider him. Especially given the likely cost of $600K plus our 2017 first round pick. 

 

Perfect example of the flaw in a lot of people's thinking about this.

At this point in time, Prestia is at the very least level with Jones, Tyson and Oliver and better than Vince, Michie (please!!), Petracca, Salem, Harmes, Kennedy, Bugg, ANB, Trengove and Newton.

In five years, only those three, Petracca and, in an ideal world, Salem would be anywhere near him.

To list these names as an example of our depth being too strong to make Prestia worth chasing is just wrong, especially when it's not pie in the sky that he would come to us.

11 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Prestia to MFC for 1st round selection 2017 draft and Chris Dawes.  Thoughts? 

Dawes is worth a 5th round pick at best, why would GCS or any other club want Dawes.

On 5/26/2016 at 1:52 AM, KingDingAling said:

O'Meara's injury is a pretty tuberious one. Even if he does recover - which is no guarantee - he will have limited mobility. I don't think we are talking about the same player who taken the league by storm years back. O'Meara comes with risk attached, and certainly more risk than Prestia. Now I am no huge fan of Prestia, but I would take him ahead of O'Meara, and I do think we still lack inside mids.

As far as Joshua Kelly goes, I would consider him by far the superior option to either O'Meara or Prestia. Kelly is the type of player you sell the farm for. People mightn't see it yet, but he is a potential superstar. Would compliment our midfield, and we should be able to afford him (due to a GWS cap squeeze).

If O'meara gets fit he is the best of those three by some distance, but that's a huge if, 

Prestia is an A grade inside/outside midfielder who has only shown patches due to injury, when he gets fit we'll see how good he really is, he's also a great leader and a great bloke.

Kelly is a gun in a gun side, but he may never get the pay day he quite deserves at the Giants, the club has said multiple times we weren't going to take Kelly at pick two that year anyway, and we passed him in the mini draft as well, if he wants to move to Melbourne i doubt we'd be able to satisfy any trade demands without giving up a good player, it would take either two first round picks or one of Mcdonald/Gawn/Hogan/Viney to get a deal done and that's just not going to happen.

53 minutes ago, DavidNeitz9 said:

Dawes is worth a 5th round pick at best, why would GCS or any other club want Dawes.

5th round would be overs. I think Dawes is worth keeping as a backup. Has more value playing at Casey and supporting the development of the young forwards than what we could get in return. And he will always be there to fill a role if required 

The one downside of the rest on the AFL realising we are on the rise is that our future picks have less value.

Clubs would now be shifting their rating of an MFC first round pick in 2017 from a pick 4-8 (ladder position 14th to 10th) to a pick 10-14...

So on one had we're more attractive (to Prestia and other players), while on the other hand we have less currency. 

New territory for us, we'll have to get creative.

1 minute ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

5th round would be overs. I think Dawes is worth keeping as a backup. Has more value playing at Casey and supporting the development of the young forwards than what we could get in return. And he will always be there to fill a role if required 

Strangely enough  I think not only would this be the case but I would suspect that as appreciation  for not be duck shoved to where ever but having been valued by the club for his efforts he would repay  back in spades with enthusiasm. Dawes is well respected at the club. ets use what abilities he has in a meaningful way. I suspect his remunerance  might adapt though.

Jaeger to me is a big risk. . Prestia seems a better get...just me...for the correct quantity of sheckles.

Michael Hurley to GCS, Dion Prestia to MFC, our 2016 second round pick and 2017 first round pick to EFC.

On 5/26/2016 at 9:07 AM, beelzebub said:

Strangely enough  I think not only would this be the case but I would suspect that as appreciation  for not be duck shoved to where ever but having been valued by the club for his efforts he would repay  back in spades with enthusiasm. Dawes is well respected at the club. ets use what abilities he has in a meaningful way. I suspect his remunerance  might adapt though.

Jaeger to me is a big risk. . Prestia seems a better get...just me...for the correct quantity of sheckles.

I would be keeping a very close eye on O'meara, would have spies at training, would be attempting to organise medicals etc.

I wouldn't discount him if a full recovery was considered likely.  To me he was on the way to being a champion, and his set of talents would compliment our list perfectly.

Should we throw the kitchen sink at him, I don't know, but i would certainly leave no stone unturned

52 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Strangely enough  I think not only would this be the case but I would suspect that as appreciation  for not be duck shoved to where ever but having been valued by the club for his efforts he would repay  back in spades with enthusiasm. Dawes is well respected at the club. ets use what abilities he has in a meaningful way. I suspect his remunerance  might adapt though.

Jaeger to me is a big risk. . Prestia seems a better get...just me...for the correct quantity of sheckles.

Yes! I really dont want them going for an injury prone player... talent or not success comes from players who are repeatedly on the park not those in the rehab group.

Our smart recruiting and new found ability to actually develop the top shelf talent we have into top shelf players means we need Dion less than in previous years.

Let me state this clearly:  I'd be happy to get him and don't doubt his talents.

However, one of the main reasons we're rising is because our football department has done several things very well

1. Identified MFC players whose currency outside the club is high, but whose role or value or commitment to the club may be limited (in terms of building a premiership team), and have traded them out for maximum gain. For example, Frawley, Howe, Clark.   
2. Identified and traded for players at other clubs who've yet to hit their ceiling as a player, or had issues, and provide something the club needs. These players have often come cheap as their current clubs didn't value what they offered. For example, Tyson, Bug, Kennedy, Garlett,...
3. Identified and recruited mature sub-AFL level players who would flourish under a professional and well managed development program. For example, Vanders, Wagner
4. Traded draft picks and players to gain access to high draft picks. For example, Oliver, Petracca, etc...

Dion represents a recruitment path that hasn't been great for us, that is, recruiting top shelf players who are at their ceiling and come at at high price financially and in terms of trade cost. For example, Dawes, Lamumba, Clark.

Perhaps we'd be better to stick to the strategies that have us on the rise and let other clubs engage in a bidding war to acquire Dion?

1 hour ago, Stretch Johnson said:

I would be keeping a very close eye on O'meara, would have spies at training, would be attempting to organise medicals etc.

I wouldn't discount him if a full recovery was considered likely.  To me he was on the way to being a champion, and his set of talents would compliment our list perfectly.

Should we throw the kitchen sink at him, I don't know, but i would certainly leave no stone unturned

Am sure we're looking at both of them among any number of players around the grounds as it were.  As AW highlights... Its all about tractable results though.  If risk analysis  pops him up as a legit get..well...  Id be surprised if we wouldnt  have that niggling suspicion  that he could topple over at any given moment.

Runs on board mean little here now, its about the likelihood of getting out there and STAYING out there that;s the issue.  Cant kick too many  or tackle much sitting in the stands !!

2 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

Our smart recruiting and new found ability to actually develop the top shelf talent we have into top shelf players means we need Dion less than in previous years.

Let me state this clearly:  I'd be happy to get him and don't doubt his talents.

However, one of the main reasons we're rising is because our football department has done several things very well

1. Identified MFC players whose currency outside the club is high, but whose role or value or commitment to the club may be limited (in terms of building a premiership team), and have traded them out for maximum gain. For example, Frawley, Howe, Clark.   
2. Identified and traded for players at other clubs who've yet to hit their ceiling as a player, or had issues, and provide something the club needs. These players have often come cheap as their current clubs didn't value what they offered. For example, Tyson, Bug, Kennedy, Garlett,...
3. Identified and recruited mature sub-AFL level players who would flourish under a professional and well managed development program. For example, Vanders, Wagner
4. Traded draft picks and players to gain access to high draft picks. For example, Oliver, Petracca, etc...

Dion represents a recruitment path that hasn't been great for us, that is, recruiting top shelf players who are at their ceiling and come at at high price financially and in terms of trade cost. For example, Dawes, Lamumba, Clark.

Perhaps we'd be better to stick to the strategies that have us on the rise and let other clubs engage in a bidding war to acquire Dion?

I kinda see it as possibly needing Jaeger less than in previous years but the likes of Prestia still warrant interest.  Not a 'must get"....but handy 

 

6 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

I kinda see it as possibly needing Jaeger less than in previous years but the likes of Prestia still warrant interest.  Not a 'must get"....but handy 

Yes he's certainly handy.

I see it as about relative gains vs other clubs. The strategies we've been using have made us stronger relative to most other clubs, hence we're on the rise. So when exploring a Dion Prestia acquisition the question is, will spending our draft picks and cash on him generate a better relative gains vs other clubs than continuing those strategies that have worked for us so well recently?

What are we losing to get him? and is the positional gain we get in gaining him worth the position loss (or missed opportunity) elsewhere in the team?

Edited May 27, 20169 yr by PaulRB

29 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

 

Yes he's certainly handy.

I see it as about relative gains vs other clubs. The strategies we've been using have made us stronger relative to most other clubs, hence we're on the rise. So when exploring a Dion Prestia acquisition the question is, will spending our draft picks and cash on him generate a better relative gains vs other clubs than continuing those strategies that have worked for us so well recently?

What are we losing to get him? and is the positional gain we get in gaining him worth the position loss (or missed opportunity) elsewhere in the team?

Becomes interesting though  if , as a hypothetical, Dion at seasons end were to suggest to GC. Im out of here. I WANT to go to the Demons.. You guys can deal with other civillly . ....

Of course given GC are in the tarpit presently they may not be as keen as in the past. I do however think as a club we are now viewing draft picks more and more as purely currency and not the player it might represent.

35 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

Our smart recruiting and new found ability to actually develop the top shelf talent we have into top shelf players means we need Dion less than in previous years.

Let me state this clearly:  I'd be happy to get him and don't doubt his talents.

However, one of the main reasons we're rising is because our football department has done several things very well

1. Identified MFC players whose currency outside the club is high, but whose role or value or commitment to the club may be limited (in terms of building a premiership team), and have traded them out for maximum gain. For example, Frawley, Howe, Clark.   
2. Identified and traded for players at other clubs who've yet to hit their ceiling as a player, or had issues, and provide something the club needs. These players have often come cheap as their current clubs didn't value what they offered. For example, Tyson, Bug, Kennedy, Garlett,...
3. Identified and recruited mature sub-AFL level players who would flourish under a professional and well managed development program. For example, Vanders, Wagner
4. Traded draft picks and players to gain access to high draft picks. For example, Oliver, Petracca, etc...

Dion represents a recruitment path that hasn't been great for us, that is, recruiting top shelf players who are at their ceiling and come at at high price financially and in terms of trade cost. For example, Dawes, Lamumba, Clark.

Perhaps we'd be better to stick to the strategies that have us on the rise and let other clubs engage in a bidding war to acquire Dion?

The main reason the final recruitment strategy hasn't been a main feature across Roos' tenure is because the MFC itself hasn't represented any value to the outside footballing community. Instead, we've decided to identify which players were worth keeping and building a side around. All the while, this enabled us to finish lower on the ladder and stockpile draft picks. Our defensive mindset was never going to win us a lot of games, but the scoreline was usually respectable.

Roos and co have basically performed a stealth rebuild and 'list management' strategy across three years, but done it very cleverly. Freo are doing vaguely similar things, playing an outdated brand of football that will see they don't get blown off the park every week, but also won't win most games. 

But returning to my original point, we are now in a position to attract quality players and Dion is one of them. 

Can I just reiterate, our midfield is a work in progress. We are not finished yet. Anyone who thinks we are is kidding themselves.

Just now, AdamFarr said:

Can I just reiterate, our midfield is a work in progress. We are not finished yet. Anyone who thinks we are is kidding themselves.

As premiership teams also have shown...a list is ALWAYS a work in progress

56 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

Our smart recruiting and new found ability to actually develop the top shelf talent we have into top shelf players means we need Dion less than in previous years.

Let me state this clearly:  I'd be happy to get him and don't doubt his talents.

However, one of the main reasons we're rising is because our football department has done several things very well

1. Identified MFC players whose currency outside the club is high, but whose role or value or commitment to the club may be limited (in terms of building a premiership team), and have traded them out for maximum gain. For example, Frawley, Howe, Clark.   
2. Identified and traded for players at other clubs who've yet to hit their ceiling as a player, or had issues, and provide something the club needs. These players have often come cheap as their current clubs didn't value what they offered. For example, Tyson, Bug, Kennedy, Garlett,...
3. Identified and recruited mature sub-AFL level players who would flourish under a professional and well managed development program. For example, Vanders, Wagner
4. Traded draft picks and players to gain access to high draft picks. For example, Oliver, Petracca, etc...

Dion represents a recruitment path that hasn't been great for us, that is, recruiting top shelf players who are at their ceiling and come at at high price financially and in terms of trade cost. For example, Dawes, Lamumba, Clark.

Perhaps we'd be better to stick to the strategies that have us on the rise and let other clubs engage in a bidding war to acquire Dion?

These strategies have done extremely well in delivering us to this point and we certainly have a lot of internal development to come - but now that we're here in a new phase of team development, is it time to implement another strategy? We're set to lose some draft currency for one thing, and the departing free agent bonuses that come with it. Will more Buggs, Kennedys, Vanders etc. along with lesser incoming elite talent see us simply hold ground rather than become serious challengers?