"South Australian footy champ Kane Cornes says Adelaide's Brad Crouch is 'disgruntled' and looks set to return to Victoria."

http://www.3aw.com.au/news/hawthorn-perfect-fit-for-brad-crouch-says-kane-cornes-20160623-gpqkn9.html

Thoughts? Would we have to chose between him and Prestia, or could we have a crack at both and hope to get one of them?

 

Would be just our luck to have a trade period where a more than usual number of guns want to come home to Vic and we have no 1st rounder to trade.

7 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

Would be just our luck to have a trade period where a more than usual number of guns want to come home to Vic and we have no 1st rounder to trade.

We can trade another future first rounder if we want to.

 

We were pretty interested during the mini draft period. Whether we are now im not sure.

Apparently off field he needs a bit of discipline.. I also reckon if Hawthorn miss out on Jeager they will turn their attention to Crouch.

9 minutes ago, stuie said:

"South Australian footy champ Kane Cornes says Adelaide's Brad Crouch is 'disgruntled' and looks set to return to Victoria."

http://www.3aw.com.au/news/hawthorn-perfect-fit-for-brad-crouch-says-kane-cornes-20160623-gpqkn9.html

Thoughts? Would we have to chose between him and Prestia, or could we have a crack at both and hope to get one of them?

 

Rate him pretty high, but if I had the choice I would take Prestia, just. Well worth investing some effort into. We can trade 1 more future rd 1 pick but im not convinced the club will be too keen to do that 2 years in a row. That would tie our hands for the following 2 years.

12 minutes ago, stuie said:

We can trade another future first rounder if we want to.

 

I thought we weren't allowed to do that again this year, having done it last year.  

1 minute ago, Nasher said:

I thought we weren't allowed to do that again this year, having done it last year.  

Someone else might know the exact machinations, but I believe it's just that we have to use 2 in any given 4 year period.

(Or something along those lines)

 

Meh.

Prestia.

11 minutes ago, stuie said:

Someone else might know the exact machinations, but I believe it's just that we have to use 2 in any given 4 year period.

(Or something along those lines)

 

You're right, according to this article, assuming it's reflective of the final rules.  

Given that we took two first rounders in 2015 (Oliver, Weideman), in theory we could trade our 2017 first rounder this year, *and* our 2018 first rounder next year and still fall within the "two first rounders in four years" rule.  

A future first rounder is a pretty risky commodity to accept for the receiving club though - firstly because of the obvious reason you don't know where the position of it will be, but the second reason is that it delays your player development by a year.  This is why the trade with Gold Coast last year was such a belter - had it not happened, we'd have had pick 6 and not 3 or 10 - assuming Oliver was gone and we took Weideman at 6, our Oliver equivalent player would a) be a year behind in development and b) probably a lower caliber player since our pick will be in the 10ish range.

I don't reckon it'd get the deal done for a player of any significant quality.  Especially when we are competing with clubs who have a first rounder *this* year to offer (and I know you weren't suggesting it would Stu - just extrapolating my own point further).

9 minutes ago, stuie said:

Someone else might know the exact machinations, but I believe it's just that we have to use 2 in any given 4 year period.

(Or something along those lines)

 

We used 2 last year, also although not included (I think) we used 2 the year before.

2 minutes ago, Nasher said:

You're right, according to this article, assuming it's reflective of the final rules.  

Given that we took two first rounders in 2015 (Oliver, Weideman), in theory we could trade our 2017 first rounder this year, *and* our 2018 first rounder next year and still fall within the "two first rounders in four years" rule.  

A future first rounder is a pretty risky commodity to accept for the receiving club though - firstly because of the obvious reason you don't know where the position of it will be, but the second, more subtle reason is that it significantly delays your player development by a year.  This is why the trade with Gold Coast last year was such a belter - had it not happened, we'd have had pick 6 and not 3 or 10 - assuming Oliver was gone and we took Weideman at 6, our Oliver equivalent player would a) be a year behind in development and b) probably a lower caliber player since our pick will be in the 10ish range.

I don't reckon it'd get the deal done for a player of any significant quality.  Especially when we are competing with clubs who have a first rounder *this* year to offer.

Yeah good analysis mate. We'd surely be more attractive to the Crows though in that scenario as opposed to Hawthorn or North as Cornes is suggesting though.

The more we all grasp the future picks and points system rules the more Mahoney looks like a genius. It's like watching a season of Game Of Thrones unfold. IF either Prestia or Crouch were to say they were keen on Melbourne I could see Mahoney finding a way to make it happen.

 

Crouch is a very good player and would be a great pick up. Adelaide looked impressive last night.

In theory, I'm not too fussed about trading first rounders for mids that already have a couple of years under their belt as they should have immediate impact and still play for another 10 years. I wouldn't have said that before Team Roos, however.

Assuming our trajectory continues next year, we might just become the new 'destination' club to returning players. It would be a very successful outcome if we could re-sign Watts, TMac and Jetta and then nab Hibbert and Crouch at the end of the year.

It's not often a departing player doesn't get to his nominated club. Usually this only happens when unreasonable club/player expectation can't be met. It appears other clubs consider Roos/Goodwin/Mahoney fair to deal with, so let's hope some of these guys choose us.

I'd take Prestia ahead of Crouch. Whilst I accept that Prestia has come off a knee reco, Crouch's injury record is ongoing.

21 minutes ago, mo64 said:

I'd take Prestia ahead of Crouch. Whilst I accept that Prestia has come off a knee reco, Crouch's injury record is ongoing.

Take Dion he would be more emotionally invested in playing 4 the team he & his family support

I would take Crouch ahead of Prestia and the decision would be a very easy one.

1 hour ago, stuie said:

Someone else might know the exact machinations, but I believe it's just that we have to use 2 in any given 4 year period.

(Or something along those lines)

 

No one really knows

 

Prestia is more proven than Crouch but Crouch has a higher ceiling. If we could get either it would be good for our midfield stocks as they've had a few years in the system and could both be a graders if their bodies hold up.

Crouch doesn't add anything to our list that we don't already have, so no.

I'd be astonished if we targeted him.

Great users and a bit of speed is what we are after. 

Crouch is neither of those.

24 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Great users and a bit of speed is what we are after. 

Crouch is neither of those.

Well if we are to be honest, neither is Prestia

I think we need a definitive answer on future-drafting regulations and then sticky it. It seems to pop up in every second thread.

Crouch is a very talented inside/outside midfielder who fits the bill perfectly in terms of the type of mid we want, tough, competitor, and good outside skill and speed, issue is he apparently has some off field troubles as Dazzle says, having said that the club offered the Crows pick 2 for Brad when we got Tyson so clearly we rate him as a top 2 pick. 

I think he's someone we'll definitely look at if he decides to come home

1 hour ago, leave it to deever said:

No one really knows

 

the afl does

Quote

AFL general counsel Andrew Dillon said the following rules would govern trading of future draft picks:

-       Clubs can trade one year in the future only.

-       Clubs must make at least two first-round selections in each four-year period. If they don't, they will face restrictions from trading any further first-round draft picks.

-       If a club trades a future first-round selection, it may not trade any other future selection from that same draft. But if a club keeps its future first-round selection, it can trade any of its future selections from other rounds

 

1 hour ago, Demon Disciple said:

Well if we are to be honest, neither is Prestia

I never stated so.

But if we're comparing the two, I'd say Prestia is more creative with the ball and seems to have more poise which generally means a 'better user'.

Bet yes, neither has elite foot-skills or speed.

Hawks and Geelong will combine to get O'Meara, Crouch and Prestia.

The other 8 VIC clubs will be forced to feed off the scraps / C graders.

 

Just now, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Hawks and Geelong will combine to get O'Meara, Crouch and Prestia.

The other 8 VIC clubs will be forced to feed off the scraps / C graders.

 

It's a shame players want the opportunity for an easy flag.  I'll leave my club and go to a top team so I can have success, rather than working with the current group to create something special.