North delists 4 'stars'

[Dee-licious 1,953]

3 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Harvey last week against the swans:

32 touches, kicked 3.2 in a low scoring game

10 score involvements, 5 tackles

YOU'RE CUT HARVEY!

\

 

North Melbourne's cutting strategy..... 

[leehow 303]

Pretty sure that Harvey has said he wouldn't play for anyone else if North didn't keep him on.

[Deespicable 2,726]

2 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

Weird timing, but it's still the right decision.  All 4 need to be moved on and they need to look to the future.

I'd look at Dal for a season as well, but I'm probably the only one who would.  Can't see us going after any of these 4.

You are not the only one - but as per my comment below on the rival Brent Harvey thread - Nick Dal Santo would be a strange step given Goody has signalled he is all about quick transition.

This is what I said on other thread:

Of the four, there are two we should consider and two we shouldn't.

The main reason that we consider them is that we are one of the youngest side's going around and with Melky and Hibberd on horizon, we will also already have even more outside run than this year - which means we should be one of the faster lists in the comp, as well as youngest.

As a result we are one of about four clubs that are the right mix for them, just as GWS or the Bulldogs were the only two clubs where Stevie J could have gone last year without him just slowing their side down even more.

The two players who we can't consider are:

1 Nick Dal Santo - while he is skillful, we already have strong depth in our midfield ranks and he will just slow our midfield down. Goody can't get rid of Grimes and Trengove and justify such a replacement.

2) Barnaby Firrito - he's as tough as old nails but now just too slow as a defender and Goody has made it clear he wants quick transition. He would be a Mark Neeld type backward step.

The two who we can consider are:

1) Brent Harvey - he is still pretty freakish as a player and kicks the ball as well as ever. If he wants to play on, then we'd be mad not to talk to him. Is he better than Jeff Garlett? Based on this year's overall work - yes. The likely losers if we go Harvs are Jeffy and Ben Kennedy - but injuries do happen and his inclusion would give us great depth and quality in the small forward ranks. But he may just decide to stay loyal to the Roos and call it a day.

2) Drew Petrie - As with Boomer, he has to want to play on before we consider him. We also have to check that injury-wise there's no issues with him going into the ruck - as he used to do before Brown kicked on. His arrival would solve our current problem of not having a reliable forward/back-up ruckman and he would come way cheaper (free agency) than Vickery (who's going to Hawthorn), Daw (who will now stay at the Roos) and Vardy (who sounds like he's going to the Swans or GWS).  His arrival would also mean that both Dawes and Pedo are delisted - some would argue that's no big deal. His arrival would also mean Weideman would have to wait a bit longer for games - but clearly he is a project player and is still at least a year away. Having an older head like Petrie around the club, who tackles hard, would also help with both Weids and Hoges, who of late have forgotten the importance of that role once the ball hits the ground. His arrival would also reduce the chance of Jack Watts getting injured as back-up ruck.

In Petrie's case, there may be another tall forward/ruckman who becomes available - so it may be a wait and see what's around for a few weeks before committing.

In Harvey's case, he's still a freak. He will be able to choose where he goes if he decided to play on for another year.

The good thing is that we now shape as a side that is no longer merely a developing side. As a result, we appeal as a one-year potential finalist for either player.

 

[leehow 303]

1 hour ago, stuie said:

 

Do you have some kind of notification set for whenever ProDee posts? Amazing how quick you are to respond, and look to argue with everything he says.

[DubDee 25,921]

2 minutes ago, Dee-licious said:

\

 

North Melbourne's cutting strategy..... 

Firrito - I like your hussle.  

That's why its so hard to cut you

[stuie 7,374]

1 minute ago, leehow said:

Do you have some kind of notification set for whenever ProDee posts? Amazing how quick you are to respond, and look to argue with everything he says.

 

[Undeeterred 3,124]

1 minute ago, leehow said:

Do you have some kind of notification set for whenever ProDee posts? Amazing how quick you are to respond, and look to argue with everything he says.

Let it roll mate - especially when the response is such nonsense. Makes the day go by much faster.

[chook fowler 19,459]

Wycheproof seconds might be interested in them - for the right price.

[old55 23,625]

56 minutes ago, nutbean said:

Yes and no - sends a poor message. " we are out first week of the finals so come and see them off whilst you still have a chance".

If, big if, North win this week they will probably get the Dogs in Melbourne at MCG first week.

[Fat Tony 5,253]

17 minutes ago, Deespicable said:

You are not the only one - but as per my comment below on the rival Brent Harvey thread - Nick Dal Santo would be a strange step given Goody has signalled he is all about quick transition.

This is what I said on other thread:

Of the four, there are two we should consider and two we shouldn't.

The main reason that we consider them is that we are one of the youngest side's going around and with Melky and Hibberd on horizon, we will also already have even more outside run than this year - which means we should be one of the faster lists in the comp, as well as youngest.

As a result we are one of about four clubs that are the right mix for them, just as GWS or the Bulldogs were the only two clubs where Stevie J could have gone last year without him just slowing their side down even more.

The two players who we can't consider are:

1 Nick Dal Santo - while he is skillful, we already have strong depth in our midfield ranks and he will just slow our midfield down. Goody can't get rid of Grimes and Trengove and justify such a replacement.

2) Barnaby Firrito - he's as tough as old nails but now just too slow as a defender and Goody has made it clear he wants quick transition. He would be a Mark Neeld type backward step.

The two who we can consider are:

1) Brent Harvey - he is still pretty freakish as a player and kicks the ball as well as ever. If he wants to play on, then we'd be mad not to talk to him. Is he better than Jeff Garlett? Based on this year's overall work - yes. The likely losers if we go Harvs are Jeffy and Ben Kennedy - but injuries do happen and his inclusion would give us great depth and quality in the small forward ranks. But he may just decide to stay loyal to the Roos and call it a day.

2) Drew Petrie - As with Boomer, he has to want to play on before we consider him. We also have to check that injury-wise there's no issues with him going into the ruck - as he used to do before Brown kicked on. His arrival would solve our current problem of not having a reliable forward/back-up ruckman and he would come way cheaper (free agency) than Vickery (who's going to Hawthorn), Daw (who will now stay at the Roos) and Vardy (who sounds like he's going to the Swans or GWS).  His arrival would also mean that both Dawes and Pedo are delisted - some would argue that's no big deal. His arrival would also mean Weideman would have to wait a bit longer for games - but clearly he is a project player and is still at least a year away. Having an older head like Petrie around the club, who tackles hard, would also help with both Weids and Hoges, who of late have forgotten the importance of that role once the ball hits the ground. His arrival would also reduce the chance of Jack Watts getting injured as back-up ruck.

In Petrie's case, there may be another tall forward/ruckman who becomes available - so it may be a wait and see what's around for a few weeks before committing.

In Harvey's case, he's still a freak. He will be able to choose where he goes if he decided to play on for another year.

The good thing is that we now shape as a side that is no longer merely a developing side. As a result, we appeal as a one-year potential finalist for either player.

 

Harvey is a no brainer "yes" for me despite his age. He is the 26th best player in the AFL according to Champion Data. And he has pace and skill, which we lack.

I wouldn't go after Petrie because his production has waned this season. And I think we need to get AFL games into Weideman.

Dal Santo is still producing good numbers but would make our midfield slower. He is still worth considering given his skill level IMO.

[Redleg 40,977]

1 hour ago, Rod Grinter Riot Squad said:

Can't believe that the oxygen thief Jarrad Waite is not in this group, I would have moved him on in a heartbeat before Boomer.

May have another year of contract left.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,235]

2 hours ago, Members' Wing said:

I can't stand the little rat but I'd have boomer for a season. He'd immediately become our best small forward. Still playing very good footy.

Came here to post this exact thing. I would take Boomer for at least a season, probably two. Would some pace that we desperately need.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,235]

1 hour ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Would take Harvey in an instant.

Just me.

Not just you.

[Rob Mac...... 638]

I'd definitely take Harvey for one year as long as his price is reasonable. 

Still got the speed, outside class & goal kicking we need, plus the kids could learn from him. 

I'll even forgive him for all those times he annihilated us.

[Demon Spofforth 288]

Yeah I'd take Boomer for a year and I'd also take Dal Santo.

Dal Santo not as a MID though but to play off half back with his foot skills and good decision making.

Petrie and Firrito no way.

[Want a Flag 46]

Why take Harvey as a player. Take him as a part time coach of our small forwards and any other crumbing drills. Saves a place on the list whilst tapping into his knowledge and experience

[stuie 7,374]

3 minutes ago, Demon Spofforth said:

Yeah I'd take Boomer for a year and I'd also take Dal Santo.

Dal Santo not as a MID though but to play off half back with his foot skills and good decision making.

Petrie and Firrito no way.

Ahead of Hibberd and Melksham you reckon?

 

[The Lobster Effect 893]

4 minutes ago, Rob Mac...... said:

I'd definitely take Harvey for one year as long as his price is reasonable. 

Still got the speed, outside class & goal kicking we need, plus the kids could learn from him. 

I'll even forgive him for all those times he annihilated us.

There's a big risk that Harvey could lose a bit of speed though, he'll be 39 next year.

[Demon Spofforth 288]

Just now, stuie said:

Ahead of Hibberd and Melksham you reckon?

 

Well Hibberd is far from a guarantee and from what I've seen of Melksham his decision making isn't a highlight.

Of course it would come down to what we get in the trade period and only as a delisted agent if the need was there after trades.

Just wish Salem had come on enough to make these discussions irrelevant.

[Rob Mac...... 638]

1 minute ago, The Lobster Effect said:

There's a big risk that Harvey could lose a bit of speed though, he'll be 39 next year.

Sure, fair enough Lobster.  But that's why i said, " for one year as long as his price is reasonable."  Worth a low priced bet I'd say.

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,508]

I think about how a few stars who were deemed 'past it' have fared over the last few seasons: Stevie J, James Kelly even Chapman's first year at Essendon...

These give me pause for thought. 

[Dr. Gonzo 24,235]

57 minutes ago, chook fowler said:

Harvey's ego would make him demand top dollar. Absolute no from me.

No it wouldn't

[Sir Why You Little 37,052]

1 minute ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

I think about how a few stars who were deemed 'past it' have fared over the last few seasons: Stevie J, James Kelly even Chapman's first year at Essendon...

These give me pause for thought. 

Yep. 1 year Max

Byron Pickett was great in 2006

[Dr. Gonzo 24,235]

35 minutes ago, Deespicable said:

1 Nick Dal Santo - while he is skillful, we already have strong depth in our midfield ranks and he will just slow our midfield down. Goody can't get rid of Grimes and Trengove and justify such a replacement.

 

I'm not saying you're wrong but your justification is ludicrous. Trengove and Grimes are not even in the same league as Dal Santo, you could quite easily justify cutting those two and bringing him in.

I mean, Grimes FFS.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,235]

17 minutes ago, Redleg said:

May have another year of contract left.

Only thing saving him surely