Delistings/trades at end of the season

[dee-luded 2,958]

They pay with their knees, their head injuries, their loss of privacy, their curfews and team rules and weekly workplace appraisals, and with the round-the-clock fact of being public targets for every loud-mouth seeking an audience by trashing others. Well and truly earn every cent.

But "supporters", you would think, would be on their side...

oh knees, ankles, bracelets, seriously todays generation of players would crap their pants back in the 70's & 80's.. cause they would get this treatment onfield more than off..

too many princesses in todays game. most likely because they are taught at private schools to think their shyte is too good for today's public. & they don't want to tire in a game, they want to rest every 4 minutes... come on.

[chook fowler 18,230]

I think garland is very under-rated and harshly judged. Currently he is playing very consistently and smart. Would hate to see him go.

Likewise Howe is important to us and shouldn't be written off until he returns to the forward line. Saturday showed he has plenty to offer in that position.

Would like to see us make minimal changes for next year - may be bring in one gun midfielder eg Prestia and a couple of young draft picks.

[The Song Formerly Known As 6,479]

Garland is crucial.

[Northern Summer 292]

Garland's problem is a bit like Grimes' in my opinion, they both take too long to dispose of the ball when they take possession/marks. Garland needs to back himself more rather than wasting vital seconds on the clock, by which time the opposition have man-ed up or flooded back and filled the holes. . it's the reason why (yesterday aside of course), generally we are too slow at moving the ball, and revert to kicking sideways because we have no other options. .

[Binmans PA 26,076]

I think garland is very under-rated and harshly judged. Currently he is playing very consistently and smart. Would hate to see him go.

Likewise Howe is important to us and shouldn't be written off until he returns to the forward line. Saturday showed he has plenty to offer in that position.

Would like to see us make minimal changes for next year - may be bring in one gun midfielder eg Prestia and a couple of young draft picks.

Well, we're going to be going nowhere then. We need to keep improving the list every year. In fact, every club needs to do that every year, otherwise they risk falling behind.

Garland's problem is a bit like Grimes' in my opinion, they both take too long to dispose of the ball when they take possession/marks. Garland needs to back himself more rather than wasting vital seconds on the clock, by which time the opposition have man-ed up or flooded back and filled the holes. . it's the reason why (yesterday aside of course), generally we are too slow at moving the ball, and revert to kicking sideways because we have no other options. .

Col's a far more influential player when he plays instinctively. I just wonder whether he'll ever have the freedom to do that under Roos (and rightfully so).

Garland is crucial.

Spot on, mate. Very versatile. Can play on tall or small, can break the lines and isn't a bad kick.

Edited May 25, 2015 by AdamFarr

[chook fowler 18,230]

Well, we're going to be going nowhere then. We need to keep improving the list every year. In fact, every club needs to do that every year, otherwise they risk falling behind.

Col's a far more influential player when he plays instinctively. I just wonder whether he'll ever have the freedom to do that under Roos (and rightfully so).

Spot on, mate. Very versatile. Can play on tall or small, can break the lines and isn't a bad kick.

We progress through good development and stability. I think the fundamentals are now in place to allow that to happen.

There will be some change anyway through retirements and delisting. Just don't want to see solid players traded without a clear benefit.

[Binmans PA 26,076]

We progress through good development and stability. I think the fundamentals are now in place to allow that to happen.

There will be some change anyway through retirements and delisting. Just don't want to see solid players traded without a clear benefit.

Fair enough. I think there are still far too many (5 to 6) D to C graders on our list. We need to start replacing them with B graders at the very least. Agree about one A grader though, if we can manage it.

I also think you'll find that Howe will be traded if the price is right. He still only does one thing and that is mark.

Edited May 25, 2015 by AdamFarr

[robbiefrom13 877]

oh knees, ankles, bracelets, seriously todays generation of players would crap their pants back in the 70's & 80's.. cause they would get this treatment onfield more than off..

too many princesses in todays game. most likely because they are taught at private schools to think their shyte is too good for today's public. & they don't want to tire in a game, they want to rest every 4 minutes... come on.

??

and what do you want - that today's players aren't good enough for you, sitting pontificating in the grandstand, or grandstanding on your keyboard?

Ex-players I know are semi-crippled, having been broken for our entertainment. Today's players will be too - and you call them princesses!

I respect players. They earn a lot more than I do, but there isn't anybody'd call it entertaining or pay money to come and watch me for an afternoon a week - or discuss me on a site like this. These guys are on a different level to us, and they put in and get knocked around beyond anything we face in our lives. (Except I suppose possibly those of us who are in the armed forces.)

What exactly is your point, claiming players want a rest every 4 minutes? - to keep 18 on the field they'd have to be less than one minute rest each time, making over 20 rests per game by 18 players = more than 360 interchanges per game. Your big-talk is drivel.

Edited May 25, 2015 by robbiefrom13

[jackaub 1,402]

Garland's problem is a bit like Grimes' in my opinion, they both take too long to dispose of the ball when they take possession/marks. Garland needs to back himself more rather than wasting vital seconds on the clock, by which time the opposition have man-ed up or flooded back and filled the holes. . it's the reason why (yesterday aside of course), generally we are too slow at moving the ball, and revert to kicking sideways because we have no other options. .

It happened a few times on Sunday though thankfully not as much

Grimes, Garland and now Harry is doing it

I agree they have to take the first option. I think Sunday was a watershed game and the team and indiviguals will gain great confidence from it and play a more fluid active game rather than the reactive style that we have exhibited this year so far

[Bombay Airconditioning 5,880]

They pay with their knees, their head injuries, their loss of privacy, their curfews and team rules and weekly workplace appraisals, and with the round-the-clock fact of being public targets for every loud-mouth seeking an audience by trashing others. Well and truly earn every cent.

But "supporters", you would think, would be on their side...

They pay with their knees, their head injuries, their loss of privacy, their curfews and team rules and weekly workplace appraisals, and with the round-the-clock fact of being public targets for every loud-mouth seeking an audience by trashing others. Well and truly earn every cent.

But "supporters", you would think, would be on their side...

I don't work in an office I work in construction, I've worked with blokes who have nearly died, one bloke has lost his right arm another bleeding on the brain and possible limited mobility for the rest of his life. Sorry what was your point again?

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

Few that have been on our list for 7 + years would be deemed 'crucial' players in my eyes, which is only one of many contributing factors as to why we've been so bad for so long.

Garland is one of those guys like Frawley and like Grimes who is incredibly up and down. The difference between his best and worst is astonishing.

Defensively, when on song, he can be an extremely valuable member of our back six.

His offensive drive, intensity, kicking skills and decision making however have all been questionable over the entirety of his career. When he plays a great defensive game and plays with a visible intensity as he did on Sunday, he (like others in the same boat) lift our side enormously.

It's again a question of consistency. It's a question of intensity and concentration.

He's another senior bloke who seems as if he's been really affected by what he's endured for many years. Of course it's not all the clubs fault as someone like Jones has been able to overcome it.

In my opinion, the need for decision making skills and foot skills coming out of our back line is a priority along with adding to the midfield so losing Garland on current form would not worry me in the slightest. Especially considering our success rate for players we've got into the club from losing long time MFC players.

He is part of the Dunn, Frawley and Jamar crew era. None of them are club changing players.

I think Dunn is the one to hold onto as part of the 'old crew'.

Garland leaving will net is something good. Unless he decides to play the remainder of the season like he did on Sunday. (With minimal skill errors).

Edited May 26, 2015 by stevethemanjordan

[dee-luded 2,958]

??

and what do you want - that today's players aren't good enough for you, sitting pontificating in the grandstand, or grandstanding on your keyboard?

Ex-players I know are semi-crippled, having been broken for our entertainment. Today's players will be too - and you call them princesses!

I respect players. They earn a lot more than I do, but there isn't anybody'd call it entertaining or pay money to come and watch me for an afternoon a week - or discuss me on a site like this. These guys are on a different level to us, and they put in and get knocked around beyond anything we face in our lives. (Except I suppose possibly those of us who are in the armed forces.)

What exactly is your point, claiming players want a rest every 4 minutes? - to keep 18 on the field they'd have to be less than one minute rest each time, making over 20 rests per game by 18 players = more than 360 interchanges per game. Your big-talk is drivel.

so what, tradies are crippled in their joints as well from their careers. what do they want, medals as well. this is they're chosen profession, no-one chained them to the plough.

they ought to stop grumbling and play footy & play hard, & stop whinging. If they don't like it they can step away & others will gladly take their places.

Edited May 26, 2015 by dee-luded

[MadAsHell 4,088]

With Fitzy and Pedo finding form and Riley having an impact in his first game, it may take a little longer to figure out some of the likely delistings.

[Binmans PA 26,076]

With Fitzy and Pedo finding form and Riley having an impact in his first game, it may take a little longer to figure out some of the likely delistings.

I'd still be delisting Terlich, Matt Jones and Rohan Bail. But the latter two might be given a pass of there isn't a better alternative. At least, they're both prepared to run and harass opponents. Bail doesn't get enough of it for mine.

[whatwhat say what 18,937]

aren't terlich and matt jones signed up til the end of 2016?

has to be a minimum three draft picks taken at the national draft, plus vandenberg will be upgraded, which is effectively the 'last' nad pick. plus we might want to have a spot 'open' to claim any free agent who falls through the cracks, a la newton.

so unless we're trading out players (howe, trengove, watts, toumpas) for picks or losing free agents (garland), we have to drop a minimum of four players.

at this stage the likely leavers would be:

cross (retired, although i think he could comfortably go around again in 2016)

bail

mckenzie

hunt

jamar may retire too, which would give us five spots in the draft before we even think about trades and free agency losses / gains.

[Binmans PA 26,076]

aren't terlich and matt jones signed up til the end of 2016?

has to be a minimum three draft picks taken at the national draft, plus vandenberg will be upgraded, which is effectively the 'last' nad pick. plus we might want to have a spot 'open' to claim any free agent who falls through the cracks, a la newton.

so unless we're trading out players (howe, trengove, watts, toumpas) for picks or losing free agents (garland), we have to drop a minimum of four players.

at this stage the likely leavers would be:

cross (retired, although i think he could comfortably go around again in 2016)

bail

mckenzie

hunt

jamar may retire too, which would give us five spots in the draft before we even think about trades and free agency losses / gains.

I think they are both contracted. I'd pay them out if we think we can replace them with better players. I reckon we might be able to. Particularly, Terlich.

[dazzledavey36 48,751]

Terlick comes out of contract this year and Jones next year...

[Binmans PA 26,076]

Terlick comes out of contract this year and Jones next year...

Didn't Terlich get a two year deal at the end of last year? Inexplicably...

[dazzledavey36 48,751]

Didn't Terlich get a two year deal at the end of last year? Inexplicably...

Pretty sure he signed the one year deal along with Bail and Riley.

Still perplexed on how Jones got 2 years.

[Binmans PA 26,076]

Pretty sure he signed the one year deal along with Bail and Riley.

Still perplexed on how Jones got 2 years.

Fair enough. And it'll be Jones' last deal, otherwise we're in a world of pain.

[DeeSpencer 23,133]

I'm a fan of both Howe and Garland. I'd prefer to keep both. I think versatile medium tall players are very valuable and you don't know how much so until they are gone.

Delist: McKenzie, Bail

Pay out: Terlich, Matt Jones

Retire: Cross, Jamar (Neither are certain yet)

Monitor: Trengove

Watch: Spencer, Fitzy - not sold on either yet. Riley. Hunt.

Potential trades: Toumpas, Watts, Grimes (not saying we should trade any of these guys).

Rookie upgrade: vanders

Rookie hold: King, Harmes, White

The tall guys - Jamar, Spencer and Fitzy are all dependant on what we can find in a trade period and/or mature recruitment. It would be silly to axe any of them if you can't find worthy replacements. The same principle probably applies for the contracted Matt Jones and Terlich. It's expensive to move those guys on and doesn't achieve much if you're just adding different limited depth on longer contracts.

Hunt and Trengove would both be candidates to move back to the rookie list due to injury.

I like how up in the air it is at the moment. We've got plenty playing for their immediate future but at the same time there's not a lot of inevitability about anyone on our list right now. Bail and McKenzie might be the obvious ones but they've both had a shot in the team recently. There's 2 thirds of the year left and every player can provide at least some case for staying on. I think that's a key reason Casey are doing better this year.

[monoccular 16,071]

When you look at the guys out of contract, there will be 4-6 players most of us would agree will get the chop. The one of most interest to me is Jamar. Four weeks ago, I was lamenting our desperate ruck situation, with an ageing Russian and his protégés barely progressing. When Roos replaced Jamar with Spencer I thought he was having a lend, but full marks to Roos for not waiting until the end of the year to act on the ruck department. While beating the lifeless, fetid corpse of Ayce Cordy might not be a true test of Spencer's mettle, we are at least now making the necessary steps towards the ruck division of the future. Hearing that Gawn and King played well on the weekend is great too. More of that please.

The loser here is Jamar. I like him, he's battled manfully for years now and is the longest-serving player on the list. It'd be hard to be bothered turning up to Casey Fields to play out the rest of your days, but hopefully he gets a farewell game in Round 23 (provided we're not playing for a top 4 spot) and gets to steamroll T Scully on his way out. If we can get continued improvement out of Spencer, Gawn and King, then we should be able to avoid spending valuable assets via trade on a ruckman at season's end.

The English language can have some amazing nuances when used creatively. Beautiful turn of phrase.

And, back to topic. What is Dawes' contract status?

Edited May 27, 2015 by monoccular

[KingDingAling 3,596]

I'm a fan of both Howe and Garland. I'd prefer to keep both. I think versatile medium tall players are very valuable and you don't know how much so until they are gone.

Delist: McKenzie, Bail

Pay out: Terlich, Matt Jones

Retire: Cross, Jamar (Neither are certain yet)

Monitor: Trengove

Watch: Spencer, Fitzy - not sold on either yet. Riley. Hunt.

Potential trades: Toumpas, Watts, Grimes (not saying we should trade any of these guys).

Rookie upgrade: vanders

Rookie hold: King, Harmes, White

The tall guys - Jamar, Spencer and Fitzy are all dependant on what we can find in a trade period and/or mature recruitment. It would be silly to axe any of them if you can't find worthy replacements. The same principle probably applies for the contracted Matt Jones and Terlich. It's expensive to move those guys on and doesn't achieve much if you're just adding different limited depth on longer contracts.

Hunt and Trengove would both be candidates to move back to the rookie list due to injury.

I like how up in the air it is at the moment. We've got plenty playing for their immediate future but at the same time there's not a lot of inevitability about anyone on our list right now. Bail and McKenzie might be the obvious ones but they've both had a shot in the team recently. There's 2 thirds of the year left and every player can provide at least some case for staying on. I think that's a key reason Casey are doing better this year.

I agree with most of that. I would hold off on a Toumpas trade though, we wouldn't get a lot for him. Unless we were offered a first rounder, I just don't see the value in trading Toumpas. Actually the same can nearly be said of Jack Watts. I think Watts is becoming underrated around here. He simply isn't that bad of a player IMO. Can he lift? Yes, and he needs to, but I wouldn't be off loading him for the sake of it.

Edited May 27, 2015 by KingDingAling

[CBDees 3,162]

Pretty sure he signed the one year deal along with Bail and Riley.

Still perplexed on how Jones got 2 years.

Maybe because he was in our top five players (and most Clubs would do exactly the same on that basis)?

[CBDees 3,162]

Looking at the marked improvement of a few players last weekend (against the Dogs), I think that we should shelve this post and revisit it at the end of the season!