I'd agree with you and make that trade but feel it would cost us our first round and Howe to get Patton. Maybe we pay a club to take Garland at a HUGE price and get a 1st round compo

I think we'd have a bit of leverage, given Patton's injury history.

Edited July 12, 20159 yr by AdamFarr

I don't.

He's a former #1 pick, and a key position player, whereas Howe is a third tall.

Regardless of knee injuries, we would have to pay a premium.

I don't.

He's a former #1 pick, and a key position player, whereas Howe is a third tall.

Regardless of knee injuries, we would have to pay a premium.

Agree to disagree. He's been injured for a year, he certainly hasn't reached his potential yet and he's a Melbourne boy. I'd be presenting a little package to him. $500,000. He wouldn't get that at GWS.

I'd agree with you and make that trade but feel it would cost us our first round and Howe to get Patton. Maybe we pay a club to take Garland at a HUGE price and get a 1st round compo

There's enough inept clubs that would pay well overs for him anyway. I could see North, Carlton and Richmond all putting forward offers to Garlo.

The AFL will probably look after us again, depending on how we finish off the year.

Trade week will be interesting

isn't it always? the only time of year i actually enjoy.

There's enough inept clubs that would pay well overs for him anyway. I could see North, Carlton and Richmond all putting forward offers to Garlo.

The AFL will probably look after us again, depending on how we finish off the year.

I think they will again as well. Thinking about our trades under Roos we've had one big trade which was the Tyson deal. The rest have been great, but we've won out (paid unders, got overs) Vince, Harry, Garlett, Cross, Frost (ish), and then Newton, Michie and Riley for next to nothing - not that we have got a lot (yet?)

I think we will be looked after because I don't see us landing a big free agent (or one at all). Unless we get an old cat to come to us ala Cross I don't see us yet as a destination for any 2015 free agents. Collingwood would be the place I'd be looking if I was Danger et al.

You'd need to offer Patton $1m a year on a Boyd type deal. Make it a 4 year deal - he got through today in the NEAFL and he'll be back and ready to dominate the competition.

On the Prestia debate - yep he'd be great but he is not what we need. We have in and under ball winners. We need speed, we need spread, we need some height. I'll be the first to put his number on my back, but Bennell is the type of player we need (not character).

Essendon is my other destination of poaching. I'm a big fan of Kavanagh and would love to see him in the red and blue next year.

You're right 'Adam', he really did need stick the tackles...

Dawes, well I'm not s fan and can see why Bucks was keen to move him on. Unfortunately we were too willing a buyer.

I cringed when I first heard we were keen 2 get Dawes, just like years ago when we traded pick 20 for Ben Holland.

I enjoy your posts WB, but you brought women into it for absolutely no reason at all.

I really don't see the issue

If WB had compared Steve to a man in a different context, would you have a problem?

Stop treating women as victims

Edited July 12, 20159 yr by M C

I really don't see the issue

If WB had compared Steve to a man in a different context, would you have a problem?

Stop treating women as victims

How is that treating a woman like a victim? Both times WB had a problem with someone, he mocked them by comparing them to a female. Pointing that out is not treating women like victims.

How is that treating a woman like a victim? Both times WB had a problem with someone, he mocked them by comparing them to a female. Pointing that out is not treating women like victims.

To be fair here Adam, and I don't want to belabor the point as it's off topic, I compared some of Steve's posting to how a 50 year old woman reacts in a staff meeting - something I sit through on an all too regular basis and, therefore, something I relate to. That's just the way it is. And if you don't think following all the players' instagram accounts is acting just like a 13 year old girl, something they do much more than 13 year old boys, then that's up to you. It's not looking at females being lesser than males or vice versa, it was two simple comparisons I made. Nothing more, nothing less.

To be fair here Adam, and I don't want to belabor the point as it's off topic, I compared some of Steve's posting to how a 50 year old woman reacts in a staff meeting - something I sit through on an all too regular basis and, therefore, something I relate to. That's just the way it is. And if you don't think following all the players' instagram accounts is acting just like a 13 year old girl, something they do much more than 13 year old boys, then that's up to you. It's not looking at females being lesser than males or vice versa, it was two simple comparisons I made. Nothing more, nothing less.

Yeah, let's just leave it there. Not a lot to be gained from back and forthing.

And so as not to be completely digressional (if that's a word), we should delist Terlich even though he's contracted.

Really hope we get Prestia

We arent going to land a true superstar but getting a very good B grader in Prestia would put the finishing touches on a very nice midfield, and its then up to us to develop our own young midfielders who have superstar potential ie. Petracca and Brayshaw

Edited July 12, 20159 yr by hogans_heroes

Really hope we get Prestia

We arent going to land a true superstar but getting a very good B grader in Prestia would put the finishing touches on a very nice midfield, and its then up to us to develop our own young midfielders who have superstar potential ie. Petracca and Brayshaw

Mate Prestia is borderline A grader if not already is.

As I've mentioned before, Mark Robinson has alluded to Prestia using the "unsafe workplace" argument if push comes to shove.

Not sure I'm a fan, but if we're in the winning side of that argument...

Now that is a laugh - Robbo referring to GCS as an unsafe workplace, but his beloved Ess-onDrugs is safe as houses!

Were he consistent in his thinking (which he clearly isn't, ever; that requires sober thought) then Ess-onDrugs would have been cleared out completely (Zacharrakis excepted) long ago.

And as far as the extra tall forward position, the one that [Pedersen] sometimes filled very well, the one that Dawes rarely does - just a thought bubble - IF Frost comes good next year, and IF Fitz stays as a tall defender (OMG one can only wonder if he had played on Danaher what may have eventuated yesterday: I know one can never ever tell) and IF OMcD makes some progress towards 2017, was the move of TMcD forward yesterday just maybe a glimpse of a possible move forward. IIRC he was recruited as a forward. Other than his kicking at goal, yesterday the move forward certainly generated more contests and shots at goal than did #6. Set shots at goal is something that can be worked on - look at Danaher and Choke's transformation, or does that only work when playing vs Demons?

Mate Prestia is borderline A grader if not already is.

Yes, a very good b grader is a borderline A grader DD!

Reckon Roosy might go back a couple of years and put our first pick on the table and see what it shakes loose. Worked then.

You sometimes remind me of a 50 year old woman at a staff meeting Steve - puts forth her opinion loudly, and when someone questions it or has a differing view they get all poopy and quickly side with anyone who agrees with them as if it vindicates their view.

If Garland is such a big problem then what is your solution? Who do we have to fill his role? He is no world beater, far from it, but you can have a team of world beaters. He plays his role well and as far as I am concerned we don't have any better options to fill his position. We might be able to draft a young key position player but they take time - just look at the younger McDonald. He will take time.

We can rebuild again, and unless there is someone to replace Garland with, we stick with a bloke who gives his all and frankly doesn't do much wrong.

Frost MAY be a solution, but we don't know that yet. The kid has good pace and the size but is a questionable kick at best and a young kid who is unproven at AFL level. We don't have the freedom to be too risky with how we go about our list management at the moment.

I'm always happy to defend my view so I'll move past what 'annoys' you about my posting and get to the point. Pleasant opening line though, thanks.

You and others who consistently 'defend' Garland seem to almost entirely miss the much broader and more relevant picture.

The rebuilding and reshaping of our list. I'll repeat that. The rebuilding and the reshaping of our list.

Is there a complete lack of awareness of how [censored] putrid our club has been over this period of time? It sure feels like it when talking about things like this.

You all write the same response. 'It's hardly Garland's fault', 'He plays his role', 'Who do we have to fill his role'. etc etc. The same [censored].

When you are faced with reshaping one of the worst lists seen in AFL football, some difficult decisions are going to need pondering.

Read some of these stats from only last year:

* Lowest average score since 1920

* 20 straight losses at Etihad

* 15 straight losses at Subiaco

* Second worst total score ever in a 22 game season

There are plenty more. I'll also mention our consistent drop-offs in effort and skill during games. Brisbane game last year at etihad. The last half against GWS at the G when they had blokes dropping like flies from injuries. This year against GWS after half time. Our non effort until the last quarter of last weeks game. These are a few examples of SO MANY.

How about other stats like goals scored to opposition teams from our turnovers this year? Inside 50 deferential averages. The lists are endless and these astonishing records that we've tallied up point directly to the deeply rooted problems that have surrounded our club and list for so long now. We've had a leadership void. We've had a shocking recruiting strike rate with high picks meaning many less talented players have been playing many more games at AFL level than they should have. We've had terrible trade ins and FA bring ins through the Neeld days.

We still have so much work to do with the list. That can't be stressed enough.

With all that in mind I'll now talk about Garland and my view is as follows.

He is unique in that he's yet to sign a contract and he is a restricted FA meaning there is some value there for us. We wouldn't talking about the guy if I wasn't out of contract and wasn't a FA.

He has been with us since 07 and he offers no inspired change on the field which is one of the things we so desperately need and can get through moving someone like him on if there is potential for a player upgrade.

He is part of a back six who have some of the most questionable footskills and decision making skills in the AFL and as a backline we are desperate for attacking run and footskills.

He plays a role and position that can be easily covered and we've seen that in the games that he hasn't played this year.

Garland is not 'the' problem. But he is part of the 'problem'. Tough decisions need to be made with guys like him who are coming out of contract and who are not inspiring change at the club. The very thing we need most.

Edited July 12, 20159 yr by stevethemanjordan

Reckon Roosy might go back a couple of years and put our first pick on the table and see what it shakes loose. Worked then.

I think it's always been on the table 'Dockett' but only once was the offer good enough.

Can't wait to see Salem back either...by the way.

I'm always happy to defend my view so I'll move past what 'annoys' you about my posting and get to the point. Pleasant opening line though, thanks.

You and others who consistently 'defend' Garland seem to almost entirely miss the much broader and more relevant picture.

The rebuilding and reshaping of our list. I'll repeat that. The rebuilding and the reshaping of our list.

Is there a complete lack of awareness of how [censored] putrid our club has been over this period of time? It sure feels like it when talking about things like this.

You all write the same response. 'It's hardly Garland's fault', 'He plays his role', 'Who do we have to fill his role'. etc etc. The same [censored].

When you are faced with reshaping one of the worst lists seen in AFL football, some difficult decisions are going to need pondering.

Read some of these stats from only last year:

* Lowest average score since 1920

* 20 straight losses at Etihad

* 15 straight losses at Subiaco

* Second worst total score ever in a 22 game season

There are plenty more. I'll also mention our consistent drop-offs in effort and skill during games. Brisbane game last year at etihad. The last half against GWS at the G when they had blokes dropping like flies from injuries. This year against GWS after half time. Our non effort until the last quarter of last weeks game. These are a few examples of SO MANY.

How about other stats like goals scored to opposition teams from our turnovers this year? Inside 50 deferential averages. The lists are endless and these astonishing records that we've tallied up point directly to the deeply rooted problems that have surrounded our club and list for so long now. We've had a leadership void. We've had a shocking recruiting strike rate with high picks meaning many less talented players have been playing many more games at AFL level than they should have. We've had terrible trade ins and FA bring ins though the Neeld days.

We still have so much work to do with the list. That can't be stressed enough.

With all that in mind I'll now talk about Garland and my view is as follows.

He is unique in that he's yet to sign a contract and he is a restricted FA meaning there is some value there for us.

He has been with us since 07 and he offers no inspired change on the field which is one of the things we so desperately need and can get through moving someone like him on if there is potential for a player upgrade.

He is part of a back six who have some of the most questionable footskills and decision making skills in the AFL and as a backline we are desperate for attacking run and footskills.

He plays a role and position that can be easily covered and we've seen that in the games that he hasn't played this year.

Garland is not 'the' problem. But he is part of the 'problem'. Tough decisions need to be made with guys like him who are coming out of contract and who are not inspiring change at the club. The very thing we need most.

Agree, I've always liked and defended Garland but I'm starting a see a player down in confidence and not really providing us with what we need. He's failing to impact contests and is making poor choices. Definitely should explore the market with him and it won't be a huge shame either way

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-07-12/lions-crying-out-for-a-key-forward-says-leppitsch

Send them Dawes for the highest pick they will give us

or for Leunberger

Gotta blame somebody.

Gotta blame somebody.

Not sure if you're referring to the Dawes comments here 'rpfc', but as a forward yourself you must be disappointed in his output and how a first year forward is copping the attention of the opposition defenders that Dawes should be at least minimising. At the moment I don't think op coaches put much work into Dawes and focus on Hogan.

The only focus they put on him is how they can use him to run off.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-07-12/lions-crying-out-for-a-key-forward-says-leppitsch

Send them Dawes for the highest pick they will give us

or for Leunberger

Leunberger is an UFA.. don't need to give them anything to attain his services.

Dawes + 2nd round pick for Aish. Thanks.

Gotta blame somebody.

Not blaming Dawes for anything, hes just not a good player. In fact hes a liability.. But the Lions are desperate for key forwards of any variety so maybe we can get something for him.

What are the following players worth on the open market?

Howe

Dawes

Grimes

What does Garland get us if he leaves under FA?