Barrett again questions the swap of Tyson and GWS pick 12 for MFC pick 2.

Tyson had a great game against the Dogs (after a very good start to 2016). He was runner up in Demons B&F in 2014.  Salem is still developing and must stand up in 2016 if the Dees are to improve.

Josh Kelly is a star and all class but its 2 for 1 so its probably still a win-win trade. 

 

On 5/20/2016 at 6:40 PM, spirit of norm smith said:

Barrett again questions the swap of Tyson and GWS pick 12 for MFC pick 2.

Tyson had a great game against the Dogs (after a very good start to 2016). He was runner up in Demons B&F in 2014.  Salem is still developing and must stand up in 2016 if the Dees are to improve.

Josh Kelly is a star and all class but its 2 for 1 so its probably still a win-win trade. 

 

Tyson is as important to us as what Kelly is to the Giants in terms of Role, Tyson allows Viney and Jones to do what they do in a lot of ways and is clearly a class player, Kelly i think will end up being a better player, but not by much. 

this is just an overreaction to Salem not being picked, he's still got a heap of class and ability and extremely highly rated and imo we win this trade by some distance.

Barrett is greatly overrating Kelly on his current output ( as good as it is ) and greatly underestimating Salem & Tyson again.

Make no mistake Tysons improved form is a big factor in our improvement.

 

3 minutes ago, Peter Griffen said:

Tyson is as important to us as what Kelly is to the Giants in terms of Role, Tyson allows Viney and Jones to do what they do in a lot of ways and is clearly a class player, Kelly i think will end up being a better player, but not by much. 

this is just an overreaction to Salem not being picked, he's still got a heap of class and ability and extremely highly rated and imo we win this trade by some distance.

Barrett is greatly overrating Kelly on his current output ( as good as it is ) and greatly underestimating Salem & Tyson again.

Make no mistake Tysons improved form is a big factor in our improvement.

 

Spot on - His return to form is huge for us. He's rock solid over the ball and seems to have regained confidence in his kicking.

He only brought it up because Salem got dropped.  [censored].

wgaf?

Why do we bother to react to Barrett's musings. We got Tyson and Salem and they got Kelly. All will be good players.

Edited May 20, 20169 yr by btdemon

I have got a Creek full of crocodiles about 200 mtrs away from where we live called Barrett's Creek. Haven't seen him yet.

29 minutes ago, Peter Griffen said:

Tyson is as important to us as what Kelly is to the Giants in terms of Role, Tyson allows Viney and Jones to do what they do in a lot of ways and is clearly a class player, Kelly i think will end up being a better player, but not by much. 

this is just an overreaction to Salem not being picked, he's still got a heap of class and ability and extremely highly rated and imo we win this trade by some distance.

Barrett is greatly overrating Kelly on his current output ( as good as it is ) and greatly underestimating Salem & Tyson again.

Make no mistake Tysons improved form is a big factor in our improvement.

You get the feeling that Barrett has been waiting to pull this one out for a while. He was so utterly embarrassed by having to admit he hadn't even seen Tyson play, but his ego has clearly dictated that he couldn't help himself but to comment. This is the first time I can recall Salem being dropped and what do you know. What an acne-scarred [censored] he is.

14 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

He only brought it up because Salem got dropped.  [censored].

Exactly.

The bloke is merchant banker of note.

Really do think we missed one in Kelly. Precise kicking and raking left foot make him special. Having said that,much easier to play in a team flying like GWS. Yes, Tyson is playing well but the jury is still out. Best to come for Salem methinks. The point Barrett and all else seem to forget is that we gave up pick 20 also in this trade.Sadly, I think we're well behind ATM.

34 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Barrett again questions the swap of Tyson and GWS pick 12 for MFC pick 2.

Tyson had a great game against the Dogs (after a very good start to 2016). He was runner up in Demons B&F in 2014.  Salem is still developing and must stand up in 2016 if the Dees are to improve.

Josh Kelly is a star and all class but its 2 for 1 so its probably still a win-win trade. 

 

It was 2 for 2

Think Salem was dropped due to Michie playing last week and doing heaps of intercept marks. Havnt seen Salem do that before. Michie has taken his spot I think

22 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

He only brought it up because Salem got dropped.  [censored].

It's fair enough to bring it up, he's been dubious about the trade from the start.

We traded picks 2, 20 & 72 for Tyson, Salem (pick 9) and Michie (pick 53)

They picked up Kelly, McCarthy (trading on pick 20 & some other deals) and passed on 72, Kelly is a win and McCarthy has disappeared but will probably give them another high draft pick.

With pick 2 we could have taken Billings, Bont, Cripps to name a few and at pick 20 Matt Crouch and Billy Hartung were available to name a couple.

Tyson has been good but Salem no matter which way you look at it has been disappointing, Viv is at the crossroads...

In hindsight we could have had Cripps and Hartung, now that's not the point I'm raising here.

The real point is for the trade to be a winner we need a lot more from Salem and at present he's way off the mark.

All the players mentioned above at other clubs have started to make their mark with the exception of McCarthy who had...Hartung is still in and out but would be a walk up and what we need at our club.

No point shooting down Barrett on this one...to date he is probably right, well part right...I'm still happy to have Tyson but we could have got him with one pick.

Edited May 20, 20169 yr by rjay

5 minutes ago, olisik said:

It was 2 for 2

Exactly - it was Salem & Tyson for pick 2 (Josh Kelly) & pick 20 (Matt Crouch - Adel), people seem to forget the full trade. 

 

Fair deal IMO. 

 

For or the record Paul Roos has said in the past we wouldn't of taken Kelly, Bontempelli went pick 4 and I think we would have taken him as we have targeted tall mids that win contested ball in the past, Oliver, Brayshaw etc...

Edited May 20, 20169 yr by Vineytime

Just on this particular draft, i believe we parted with a pick in the 20s and 70s and received a pick back in the 50s to get the deal to work.

With pick 57 in the 2013 draft we selected Hunt. 

Barrett can bang on all we wants but that 2013 draft has really bolstered our talent pool. Kelly looks great, but i like what the club did and still defend the trade.

Salem has slipped under the radar a bit till now. Most supporters have been patient with him. Just slightly better than an average player so far in his career.  Playing nowhere near to his potential and has found himself at a cross roads of sorts.

Edited May 20, 20169 yr by america de cali

On 5/20/2016 at 7:17 PM, rjay said:

It's fair enough to bring it up, he's been dubious about the trade from the start.

We traded picks 2, 20 & 72 for Tyson, Salem (pick 9) and Michie (pick 53)

They picked up Kelly, McCarthy (trading on pick 20 & some other deals) and passed on 72, Kelly is a win and McCarthy has disappeared but will probably give them another high draft pick.

With pick 2 we could have taken Billings, Bont, Cripps to name a few and at pick 20 Matt Crouch and Billy Hartung were available to name a couple.

Tyson has been good but Salem no matter which way you look at it has been disappointing, Viv is at the crossroads...

In hindsight we could have had Cripps and Hartung, now that's not the point I'm raising here.

The real point is for the trade to be a winner we need a lot more from Salem and at present he's way off the mark.

All the players mentioned above at other clubs have started to make their mark with the exception of McCarthy who had...Hartung is still in and out but would be a walk up and what we need at our club.

No point shooting down Barrett on this one...to date he is probably right.  

I think the other point to make is that the timing of the trade is a big factor here, we needed a more immediate injection of top end talent and we got 2 top 10 midfielders, and i think though Salem is under performing i think he's shown enough to say he has the ability to be a quality AFL player.

I still think both sides would be pretty content with the outcome and there wouldn't be any huge regrets, as Barrett is suggesting. 

Barrett is a cretin. Who let him out of his cage?

Just now, rjay said:

It's fair enough to bring it up, he's been dubious about the trade from the start.

We traded picks 2, 20 & 72 for Tyson, Salem (pick 9) and Michie (pick 53)

They picked up Kelly, McCarthy (trading on pick 20 & some other deals) and passed on 72, Kelly is a win and McCarthy has disappeared but will probably give them another high draft pick.

With pick 2 we could have taken Billings, Bont, Cripps to name a few and at pick 20 Matt Crouch and Billy Hartung were available to name a couple.

Tyson has been good but Salem no matter which way you look at it has been disappointing, Viv is at the crossroads...

In hindsight we could have had Cripps and Hartung, now that's not the point I'm raising here.

The real point is for the trade to be a winner we need a lot more from Salem and at present he's way off the mark.

All the players mentioned above at other clubs have started to make their mark with the exception of McCarthy who had...Hartung is still in and out but would be a walk up and what we need at our club.

No point shooting down Barrett on this one...to date he is probably right.  

Hindsight.  What a wonderful thing.  Is this the same hindsight we always use when we talk about all the other players we could have had in other drafts?  You want to say it's not the point you're raising, but you kind of continue to talk about it anyway.

Tyson has been good, Salem has been ok, but he's only been in the system a few years and he's being asked to play a position he never played as a junior.  Kelly has just started to come into his own, but I'd hardly say Salem is 'way off the mark'.

It doesn't matter what Barrett thinks.

He can be right, wrong, somewhere in between, or sideways, and nothing changes.

Hindsight and $4.50 will get you a medium skinny soy mocha latte with a tofu marshmallow. (But don't mention Barrett to the barista or he'll jump it to $5.50 and then short change you.)

 

15 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

Hindsight.  What a wonderful thing.  Is this the same hindsight we always use when we talk about all the other players we could have had in other drafts?  You want to say it's not the point you're raising, but you kind of continue to talk about it anyway.

Tyson has been good, Salem has been ok, but he's only been in the system a few years and he's being asked to play a position he never played as a junior.  Kelly has just started to come into his own, but I'd hardly say Salem is 'way off the mark'.

My point is that to date Salem has been disappointing, he needs to lift to make this trade a win for us. That's nothing to do with hindsight.

...and remember hindsight or not pick 20 was part of the deal, it wasn't 2 for one. Salem at current output is not a pick 20 player.

Bontempelli and Crouch. [censored]....yeah we havnt won that trade 

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_compare?playerStatus1=A&tid1=25&pid1=3919&fid1=S&playerStatus2=A&tid2=12&pid2=3641&fid2=S&type=A

 

Direct comparison J Kelly and D Tyson - this year's stats only. They're pretty much on par - Kelly has a couple of extra uncontested posses and kicks more than he handballs. Dom Handballs more (at the bottom of every pack!)- has a better efficiency as well. I'd rather the hard in and under bloke.

Plus we got Salem too. Salem is a bit down at present - no biggy he will be just fine long term. 

Morons Luke Barrett think we offloaded Kelly to get Salem .... but somehow forget about a bloke he never saw play. With our list then and even now Tyson is a bigger cog in the wheel. 

Edited May 20, 20169 yr by jako13

On 5/20/2016 at 8:28 PM, olisik said:

Bontempelli and Crouch. [censored]....yeah we havnt won that trade 

Doesn't mean we would have drafted those two, we might have picked Aish at 2 and another spud at 20

29 minutes ago, jako13 said:

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_compare?playerStatus1=A&tid1=25&pid1=3919&fid1=S&playerStatus2=A&tid2=12&pid2=3641&fid2=S&type=A

 

Direct comparison J Kelly and D Tyson - this year's stats only. They're pretty much on par - Kelly has a couple of extra uncontested posses and kicks more than he handballs. Dom Handballs more (at the bottom of every pack!)- has a better efficiency as well. I'd rather the hard in and under bloke.

Plus we got Salem too. Salem is a bit down at present - no biggy he will be just fine long term. 

Morons Luke Barrett think we offloaded Kelly to get Salem .... but somehow forget about a bloke he never saw play. With our list then and even now Tyson is a bigger cog in the wheel. 

This post doesn't mention the Crouch part