Were we too hasty in delisting Fitzy?

[H_T 3,043]

I wish Fitzy all the best at the Hawks. I still recall Connolly and Bailey over the moon when they landed him at pick 50. Spruiking his speed, agility for a big man over a short distance, perfect as a forward ruck. Connolly referred to it as a huge coup.

I have no doubt the Hawks will utilise him to replace Hale and he'll be handy in their line up.

I'll miss his tunnel balling. All the best Fitzy.

[Gator 17,281]

I wish Fitzy all the best at the Hawks. I still recall Connolly and Bailey over the moon when they landed him at pick 50. Spruiking his speed, agility for a big man over a short distance, perfect as a forward ruck. Connolly referred to it as a huge coup.

I have no doubt the Hawks will utilise him to replace Hale and he'll be handy in their line up.

I'll miss his tunnel balling. All the best Fitzy.

I do.

He won't be near their best 22 and he's no Hale.

He may get a game or three and I understand why Hawthorn think it's worth a punt when one considers his versatility and attributes, but he was finished at Melbourne. King is a mile ahead in the talent stakes.

[rjay 24,887]

I wish Fitzy all the best at the Hawks. I still recall Connolly and Bailey over the moon when they landed him at pick 50. Spruiking his speed, agility for a big man over a short distance, perfect as a forward ruck. Connolly referred to it as a huge coup.

I have no doubt the Hawks will utilise him to replace Hale and he'll be handy in their line up.

I'll miss his tunnel balling. All the best Fitzy.

Whilst I wish him the best I think he will be lucky to play a senior game with the Hawks and will go down the same path as Morton, Gysberts & Blease to name a few. He doesn't have the football smarts of Hale.

The Hawks can afford to take the punt.

[Slartibartfast 17,190]

So if I've got this right, because Hawthorn are happy to have him as depth you think we made a mistake ?

Nice logic.

No, I'm just saying that he's not on a gungheap. Hawks may only have him for depth but they rarely recruit players who they think cant play. If Carlton picked him up I'd be more confident we hadn't made a mistake.

I'm not fazed either way but I do think he has elite attributes. I think he was delisted because he didn't have the natural competitiveness we wanted.

Either way it will be interesting to see where he finishes.

[H_T 3,043]

I do.

He won't be near their best 22 and he's no Hale.

He may get a game or three and I understand why Hawthorn think it's worth a punt when one considers his versatility and attributes, but he was finished at Melbourne. King is a mile ahead in the talent stakes.

PD I would normally agree he isn't near their best 22 based on this years list....

Hawthorn have now lost Hale and Lake. Do you see any other replacements coming into their list this period, for a utility down back or ruck/forward that I may be overlooking?

That's why I think he'll be handy for the Hawks which has cost them next to nothing.

[picket fence 17,058]

No loss, has Box Hill got a tunnel ball team?

[daisycutter 29,604]

Pick 94!!! You could have me for pick 94!!

think you might get the whole of demonland for pick 94, bitters

[rjay 24,887]

PD I would normally agree he isn't near their best 22 based on this years list....

Hawthorn have now lost Hale and Lake. Do you see any other replacements coming into their list this period, for a utility down back or ruck/forward that I may be overlooking?

That's why I think he'll be handy for the Hawks which has cost them next to nothing.

Most of the year they were struggling to fit both Frawley & Lake in the same defence. They have plenty of coverage there and it's why they picked up Frawley. Ceglar is the obvious one for Hale.

He's a handy back up and if lucky will get a few games like Cheney did with them.

[Deespicable 2,724]

Having watched three of his VFL games, I think Fitzy really came on this year and at that level looked a star defender.

Whether his kicking and decision-making is good enough to become a reliable member of any AFL sides is debatable, but for raw tools - speed, strength, height - he's as good as almost any player.

The thing now is at 25 he's no longer raw and is running out of time to make it.

I would have preferred he was kept as a back-up big because of his versatility, but the club chose Pedo for that role ahead of him and given how well our recruiting has ben for the past two seasons, you have to put faith in that decision.

I can see him getting the odd game at Hawthorn - not as Hale's back-up - but as Frawley's back-up now that Lake has gone.

[bandicoot 1,395]

I also think Fitz showed some promising signs this year and found a niche out of the backline.

Would have been worth to put him on the rookie list to see if he continued developing in that position.

Not too sure if we need another tall backman.

[Little Richard 6,262]

I also think Fitz showed some promising signs this year and found a niche out of the backline.

Would have been worth to put him on the rookie list to see if he continued developing in that position.

Not too sure if we need another tall backman.

Here's hoping that we have our eye on another potential tall to fill a rookie spot. Otherwise, it might have been handy to hold onto Fitz and rookie him.

Edit: Thanks for your service FitzGerald.

Edited October 22, 2015 by Django

[Viney Vidi Vici 145]

I was disappointed to see him delisted. There's a lot of faith been put in O Macdonald and Max King to be the depth talls now.

[old55 23,405]

I can hear Craig Willis now on Saturday 24 September 2016:

"Number 48, Jaaaack Fitzpatrick"

[DeeSpencer 25,477]

Having watched three of his VFL games, I think Fitzy really came on this year and at that level looked a star defender.

Whether his kicking and decision-making is good enough to become a reliable member of any AFL sides is debatable, but for raw tools - speed, strength, height - he's as good as almost any player.

The thing now is at 25 he's no longer raw and is running out of time to make it.

I would have preferred he was kept as a back-up big because of his versatility, but the club chose Pedo for that role ahead of him and given how well our recruiting has ben for the past two seasons, you have to put faith in that decision.

I can see him getting the odd game at Hawthorn - not as Hale's back-up - but as Frawley's back-up now that Lake has gone.

They already have Spangher and Litherland to come in to the backline. And could play Frawley, Gibson and Stratton most weeks as well wiithout adding another tall.

Fitzy certainly got good reviews for his defending this year, but given his age he should've smashed it at VFL level.

Most truly good AFL players (including talls) show they are too good for the VFL in their first 2 years or maybe 3rd year. He had a lot of injuries but it probably took him until 2013 or 2014 to regularly impact as a forward/ruck and it shouldn't be a surprise that he played well in the VFL down back, it's just more of a question as to whether it would mean anything for AFL.

[Dr. Mubutu 831]

Here's hoping that we have our eye on another potential tall to fill a rookie spot. Otherwise, it might have been handy to hold onto Fitz and rookie him.

Edit: Thanks for your service FitzGerald.

I wouldn't be surprised that it was that very reason Hawthorn traded pick 94 for him.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,693]

I wouldn't be surprised that it was that very reason Hawthorn traded pick 94 for him.

Are you suggesting Hawthorn traded pick 94 purely to stop Melbourne putting him on our rookie list? That's a creative thought process.

[rpfc 28,263]

I wouldn't be surprised that it was that very reason Hawthorn traded pick 94 for him.

Are you suggesting Hawthorn traded pick 94 purely to stop Melbourne putting him on our rookie list? That's a creative thought process.

Unfortunately, while creative - it is wrong.

There is no mechanism for us to Rookie Fitzpatrick before he would be available in Delisted FA. And even if we didn't delist him, Hawthorn would be able to take him at ND94 before we did in the Rookie Draft.

I think they did it as a statement of intent to Jack and because they know that means something to people and they are a strong club.

[Moonshadow 17,675]

Unfortunately, while creative - it is wrong.

There is no mechanism for us to Rookie Fitzpatrick before he would be available in Delisted FA. And even if we didn't delist him, Hawthorn would be able to take him at ND94 before we did in the Rookie Draft.

I think they did it as a statement of intent to Jack and because they know that means something to people and they are a strong club.

Also, they said it meant starting at the club earlier as he would be on their list earlier. They can get to work on him straight away.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,693]

Also, they said it meant starting at the club earlier as he would be on their list earlier. They can get to work on him straight away.

And apparently they have...

Guardian Australia ‏@GuardianAus 10m10 minutes ago

Baby giraffe at LA zoo makes his first official outing – video http://trib.al/Kjwbtjg

View summary

0 retweets0 favorites

Reply

Retweet

Favorite

More

[Daily Dose of Demons 155]

It was quite funny actually as soon as it was announced that Fitzy was leaving and headed to Hawthorn, my mate who plays for Boxhill messaged me saying can't wait to play with Fitzy at vfl. He Knows the order of call ups and the only way fitz gets a game is if half their defence gets injured.

[beelzebub 23,313]

Also, they said it meant starting at the club earlier as he would be on their list earlier. They can get to work on him straight away.

permission to train ?

cant see that as a problem imho