Delistings/trades at end of the season

[GawwnDawgg 12]

And I'm sure that the player he replaced (Salem) has a worse stat line. That doesn't change the fact that Salem has far more impact on the game than Grimes. Grimes hasn't been awful this year, but for us to improve, we need more creative players in the backline. Grimes and Garland are neither creative nor lock-down backmen, and both need to be replaced.

Right.

Which lockdown/creative players can fill the void on our list?

Long term maybe but short term 223 games of experience between them both is something we need in our back line.

In 2010 the guy was touted as potential all Australian. Give Grimes another year or two!

[GawwnDawgg 12]

That is not what I am commenting on. You are defending Grimes with stats and I am saying that you must interpret stats with a grain of salt, sometimes the whole salt shaker.

But I do agree with you, there are more people in the side that do do this as well.

I don't know what it is, but whenever Grimes gets the ball in hand I cringe. His disposals are either a complete stuff up or non-theatening, (eg a 45 degree kick to the wing)

Whereas, Howe shanked some kicks on the weekend, but the ones he gets right are dangerous and/or are through the corridor.

His kicking action is mechanical and I'll concede his not our best kick, but I reckon you see Grimesy through the same eyes that I see Rohan Bail.

I am all for Howe being creative and if we are ignoring stats, Howe is arguably in our top 3 most valuable players. In terms of his ability, I can't recall a more classy medium sized tall on most lists. Eastern Wood has been lauded as the potential All Aus for that floating half back. I'd love to compare his states with Howe's last year without the same sort of reception from the journos.

If he's asking half a million reckon he's worth it personally.

[mo64 5,874]

Right.

Which lockdown/creative players can fill the void on our list?

Long term maybe but short term 223 games of experience between them both is something we need in our back line.

In 2010 the guy was touted as potential all Australian. Give Grimes another year or two!

I'm ok with Dunn, Jetta and Cross as lockdown defenders. We need more creativity in the backline, and if we can't get someone like Yarran, I'd play Brayshaw as a half back/mid. He'd offer more than Grimes/Garland's combined 223 games of experience, for f'all wins. You seem to have too much of an emotional attachment to both. Having said that, I wouldn't be unhappy if Grimes remained at the club on a 1 year deal.

[Chris 2,892]

Really struggle with the dislike of Garland. He certainly isn't perfect but he is easily in our best 22. If you want to get rid of him put up a viable replacement that would be an improvement!

Grimes I see as a first drop defender to cover for any injuries. Again, is you want him gone then who plays that role?

[Devil is in the Detail 883]

Really struggle with the dislike of Garland. He certainly isn't perfect but he is easily in our best 22. If you want to get rid of him put up a viable replacement that would be an improvement!

Grimes I see as a first drop defender to cover for any injuries. Again, is you want him gone then who plays that role?

Garland seems to have ability, at his best, to not get tackled by the oppositions attackers when he should. Then have composure to hit a target.

[Redleg 40,910]

Do not go NEAR any players under a looming 2 year ban.

That would be my thought.

[Adam The God 30,243]

Carlisle, Heppell, Zaharakis and probably Hurley are the only guys I'd touch on their list, but ultimately I wouldn't risk any of them.

NOTE: I understand Zaharakis isn't one of those potentially facing a ban.

[Little Richard 6,262]

Carlisle, Heppell, Zaharakis and probably Hurley are the only guys I'd touch on their list, but ultimately I wouldn't risk any of them.

NOTE: I understand Zaharakis isn't one of those potentially facing a ban.

I would love to have Zaharakis in our midfield. Carlisle wouldn't be too bad, but obviously there's a cloud over him.

Why aren't you keen on Zaharakis?

[boydie 655]

Zaharakis' best is probably better than anyone on our list, but for what he offers he would cost more than what he's worth.

Personally I find him overrated, he plays 4-5 excellent games a year and the rest you wouldn't even notice that he played

[Adam The God 30,243]

I would love to have Zaharakis in our midfield. Carlisle wouldn't be too bad, but obviously there's a cloud over him.

Why aren't you keen on Zaharakis?

We'd have to give up too much for him and Heppell is a better player. He's a little overrated for mine too.

[GawwnDawgg 12]

I'm ok with Dunn, Jetta and Cross as lockdown defenders. We need more creativity in the backline, and if we can't get someone like Yarran, I'd play Brayshaw as a half back/mid. He'd offer more than Grimes/Garland's combined 223 games of experience, for f'all wins. You seem to have too much of an emotional attachment to both. Having said that, I wouldn't be unhappy if Grimes remained at the club on a 1 year deal.

All for Yarran and Brayshaw has legitimate superstar potential! BUT up and until we have genuine replacements keep them on the list.

[GawwnDawgg 12]

We'd have to give up too much for him and Heppell is a better player. He's a little overrated for mine too.

Zaharakis is shite mate! As soon as he has an opponent that is accountable he goes missing and he can't kick further than 45 on a good day.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

Really struggle with the dislike of Garland. He certainly isn't perfect but he is easily in our best 22. If you want to get rid of him put up a viable replacement that would be an improvement!

Grimes I see as a first drop defender to cover for any injuries. Again, is you want him gone then who plays that role?

I know posters are sick of hearing me harp on about it, but if you haven't seen some of the reasoning given for supporters being 'pro-Garland leaving' then I'm not sure who's posts you've been reading.

All of the reasoning is absolutely valid.

I will say this however. Garland's game on the weekend was the best I've seen of his this year. He more often than not defends well in most games, but against Collingwood he also played with flair, was creative with the ball, provided run and played with much more intensity.

If he played like that all the time, I think you'd find most would be keen for him to stay. But he doesn't. He is a senior player who's form is up and down like a yo-yo and he plays in a backline that is one-dimensional.

We desperately need creativity, run and carry, urgency and foot-skills in our backhalf.

No one is 'bashing' Garland.

Supporters are looking at ways in which we can improve our list all over the ground and that takes into account many things.

Things like who is coming out of contract this year?

What are they offering the club presently?

Are they or are they not a FA?

Could our team and backline gain from losing a player like Garland given that he is a FA?

There are many questions.

It's not as simple to say, 'he is clearly best 22 atm therefore he's important'.

Jordie McKenzie, Bail, Matt Jones and Terlich were best 22 not long ago. If you adopt that kind of a philosophy about a list, it's not going to improve or grow very much.

[GawwnDawgg 12]

I know posters are sick of hearing me harp on about it, but if you haven't seen some of the reasoning given for supporters being 'pro-Garland leaving' then I'm not sure who's posts you've been reading.

All of the reasoning is absolutely valid.

I will say this however. Garland's game on the weekend was the best I've seen of his this year. He more often than not defends well in most games, but against Collingwood he also played with flair, was creative with the ball, provided run and played with much more intensity.

If he played like that all the time, I think you'd find most would be keen for him to stay. But he doesn't. He is a senior player who's form is up and down like a yo-yo and he plays in a backline that is one-dimensional.

We desperately need creativity, run and carry, urgency and foot-skills in our backhalf.

No one is 'bashing' Garland.

Supporters are looking at ways in which we can improve our list all over the ground and that takes into account many things.

Things like who is coming out of contract this year?

What are they offering the club presently?

Are they or are they not a FA?

Could our team and backline gain from losing a player like Garland given that he is a FA?

There are many questions.

It's not as simple to say, 'he is clearly best 22 atm therefore he's important'.

Jordie McKenzie, Bail, Matt Jones and Terlich were best 22 not long ago. If you adopt that kind of a philosophy about a list, it's not going to improve or grow very much.

Jordie McKenzie, Bail, Matt Jones and Terlich were best 22 not long ago. If you adopt that kind of a philosophy about a list, it's not going to improve or grow very much.

They were in our 22. However, they definitely were not in our best 22

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

They were in our 22. However, they definitely were not in our best 22

Yeh they were.

That was the state of our list.

They were considered best 22.

[Skuit 10,031]

Just had a thought (rare). Brisbane are in need of forwards and the AFL want marquee players up north - if they made a big dollar play for Howe we could get seriously bent over. Maybe we should offer Jeremy a handsome bridging contract to see him through to free agency so we can maximise the best return and insure against getting screwed? Or have I got it wrong that he could slip through to the pre-season draft?

[Little Richard 6,262]

Just had a thought (rare). Brisbane are in need of forwards and the AFL want marquee players up north - if they made a big dollar play for Howe we could get seriously bent over. Maybe we should offer Jeremy a handsome bridging contract to see him through to free agency so we can maximise the best return and insure against getting screwed? Or have I got it wrong that he could slip through to the pre-season draft?

I still think we can get a reasonable offer for him. Despite all the talk of players walking out to the draft, it rarely happens. Plus, we could get screwed over if he were to be a FA... his worth might be deemed quite low.

I just wish we'd taken the offer of pick 7 for him last trade period.

[Skuit 10,031]

I actually secretly want him to stay. Not for the exact but for similar reasons people want Garland to stay: I like him.

Edited August 6, 2015 by Skuit

[Good Times Grimes 2,396]

I still think we can get a reasonable offer for him. Despite all the talk of players walking out to the draft, it rarely happens. Plus, we could get screwed over if he were to be a FA... his worth might be deemed quite low.

I just wish we'd taken the offer of pick 7 for him last trade period.

I may be mistaken, but I believe that we were prepared to accept said offer but either Howe did not want to move or we ran out of time and were unable to finalize the deal.

Edited August 6, 2015 by Good Times Grimes

[Adam The God 30,243]

Enlighten me which current Melbourne player doesn't make this same mistake every game?

Yeah, that's not really point being made. The DE stat is one of the most useless stats in footy. Tells you pretty much nothing.

[Adam The God 30,243]

Zaharakis is shite mate! As soon as he has an opponent that is accountable he goes missing and he can't kick further than 45 on a good day.

Once again. Was saying he wasn't worth it. Would much prefer Heppell or Carlisle. Wouldn't touch them though with bans looming.

[Chris 2,892]

I know posters are sick of hearing me harp on about it, but if you haven't seen some of the reasoning given for supporters being 'pro-Garland leaving' then I'm not sure who's posts you've been reading.

All of the reasoning is absolutely valid.

I will say this however. Garland's game on the weekend was the best I've seen of his this year. He more often than not defends well in most games, but against Collingwood he also played with flair, was creative with the ball, provided run and played with much more intensity.

If he played like that all the time, I think you'd find most would be keen for him to stay. But he doesn't. He is a senior player who's form is up and down like a yo-yo and he plays in a backline that is one-dimensional.

We desperately need creativity, run and carry, urgency and foot-skills in our backhalf.

No one is 'bashing' Garland.

Supporters are looking at ways in which we can improve our list all over the ground and that takes into account many things.

Things like who is coming out of contract this year?

What are they offering the club presently?

Are they or are they not a FA?

Could our team and backline gain from losing a player like Garland given that he is a FA?

There are many questions.

It's not as simple to say, 'he is clearly best 22 atm therefore he's important'.

Jordie McKenzie, Bail, Matt Jones and Terlich were best 22 not long ago. If you adopt that kind of a philosophy about a list, it's not going to improve or grow very much.

You missed the part about who you would replace him with. I am happy to lose him if it is a gain, I haven't seen one argument where we gain from it, except draft picks, which aren't a gain either.

[olisik 4,060]

If we took that Howe deal the. We would have Jake Lever on our list.

[Pennant St Dee 13,173]

I really like Myers and think he would be good for our list and the strong midfield we are trying to build long term. The bigger bodied sides and midfields stand up in September when it matters. As others have said his injury history is a concern

Zaharakis would be fantastic with his run and carry and a big improve for our midfield

Carlisle I really rate as a CHB

Those three are good targets at the right price and dependent on the WADA outcome (Obvioulsy Zaharakis is excluded from this)

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

You missed the part about who you would replace him with. I am happy to lose him if it is a gain, I haven't seen one argument where we gain from it, except draft picks, which aren't a gain either.

Well we do have Frost for one. A 196 cm agile and aggressive giant who from most reports is going to be groomed as a backman. (And played most of his days at GWS as a backman).

The fact that he's so quick and agile for his size will also mean he doesn't have to always play on the giants. Leave them for Tommy Mac and Dunn.

So there's a straight swap of you're worried about 'replacement'. The other argument is that as a player, we've won and our backline hardly looks out of sorts without him. Sure if and when he plays like he did on the weekend he can be a valuable player, but in my eyes, if hypothetically he left and we picked up someone like Yarran or McKenzie from GC we'd be far better off as a backline unit. We are too one-dimensional. And the only reason I'm bringing Garland up is because he's out of contract and a FA. Not because I have some problem with the guy.