15 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

 

 

The trade talk surrounding Weed is some of the funniest I've heard and if posters buy it they have genuinely NFI about anything regarding football lists and list management.

Let's understand a bit about Sam first and the context surrounding him as a player and what the word 'development' looks like:

Having come off pretty much no pre-season leading into his last year of TAC cup (his draft year), he managed only five games at TAC cup level as well as the game he played against the Northern Blues where he showed enormous potential. The injury was due to an ankle stress fracture that he eventually had operated on and he also had an iron deficiency at the same time.

Sam was touted as a top three pick at one stage based on his talent levels for his type of player and what he had shown as an underaged player the year previous.

So he had next to no pre-season leading into his last year with the Rangers, only managed five games at TAC cup level that year before having an operation, and then he had to carefully manage and rehab an extremely delicate injury that can easily be re-aggravated.  

Have a think about how much conditioning and fitness he lost during that time and compare it to his contemporaries at that level? Yet we still had the balls to take him inside the top 10 on the back of all that! So into the club he came on a very modified first pre-season with the full knowledge and understanding that he was going to take time. Much more time than your average first year underdeveloped forward given his injury history. 

And look what he achieved in his first year at Casey on the back of all of that conditioning he missed. Granted, this year was clearly more difficult for him but I still saw games in which he played and looked like an AFL level player playing in a lower league.

In what will be his second full pre-season both in the gym and on the track, I know that we're going to see him a lot more at AFL level next year and I also know that he's going to show why he was picked inside the top 10. As soon as his body allows, his AFL level talent will shine on the big stage.

The Weed is not going anywhere.

I have no concern about his strength or conditioning. They will improve over time. It doesn't explain why the ball flies over his head every time. He simply can't read the play.

We took a punt on a player who looked great in the under 14's but was injured through most of his maturing years.

 

19 hours ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Could someone please make up a rumour to get this thread back on track. 

My God

What have you done

Wouldn't trade him for 9 first round picks...

@Wiseblood

 

45 minutes ago, jackaub said:

No in fact it may be they realise the window is only open for a short time and we have to make hard decisions to get a premiership group together

It would in fact be seen as proactive team development we invested in Wied now we maximise his value

There is no doubt that we have been seduced by opening a present from the draft without really knowing what's inside.  It's exciting when a new player comes to the club particularly when that player is one of the best of his vintage.  And over 10 years it's mainly what we've enjoyed as Demon supporters.

But it's the position of the hack team, not one looking to win finals.  Our objective is to put as much talent on the park as we can at the one time.  That is not achieved by trading out talent to get in younger talent, all that does is spread your talent over a longer period and limits the talent you can put on the field at the one time therefore limiting your chances of winning finals.

IF Weideman is worth pick 6 it's indicative that he's loaded with talent.  We traded a future first rounder to be able to get him to compliment the impressive list of first rounders we'd accumulated in previous years and bunch our talent.

The last thing we want to do is dilute our bunched talent and trading Weideman would be a huge mistake and clearly won't happen.

It's why Watts won't be traded for a pick.  It's why none of our young early picks will go anywhere for Lever.  What's the point in trading out someone of equal talent to who you get in?  The object is to improve your list.

It's why jackaub's suggestion and position is just simply wrong.

1 hour ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Our first pick in the 2018 draft as well?

Where does Eddie sign? 

That's pick 18 in 2018!!

The original rumour was Weid AND our first rounder for 2018 to Collingwood for pick 6.

That is nothing but a pick upgrade for an untried number 9 draft pick. Not the greatest deal.

2018 is the key for the Weid one way or the other. Needs to show steady development a la Moore during 2017

Wiseblood PMS etc remember my comment was a big No to a weid trade.  

1 hour ago, GawnWithTheWind said:

I'd trade Weid for the Pies first round pick in a heartbeat.

as would I...and roll again

3 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

as would I...and roll again

Then you'd be very silly.

20 minutes ago, Vogon Poetry said:

There is no doubt that we have been seduced by opening a present from the draft without really knowing what's inside.  It's exciting when a new player comes to the club particularly when that player is one of the best of his vintage.  And over 10 years it's mainly what we've enjoyed as Demon supporters.

But it's the position of the hack team, not one looking to win finals.  Our objective is to put as much talent on the park as we can at the one time.  That is not achieved by trading out talent to get in younger talent, all that does is spread your talent over a longer period and limits the talent you can put on the field at the one time therefore limiting your chances of winning finals.

IF Weideman is worth pick 6 it's indicative that he's loaded with talent.  We traded a future first rounder to be able to get him to compliment the impressive list of first rounders we'd accumulated in previous years and bunch our talent.

The last thing we want to do is dilute our bunched talent and trading Weideman would be a huge mistake and clearly won't happen.

It's why Watts won't be traded for a pick.  It's why none of our young early picks will go anywhere for Lever.  What's the point in trading out someone of equal talent to who you get in?  The object is to improve your list.

It's why jackaub's suggestion and position is just simply wrong.

Well it all depends on the time lines and speed of development.We cannot afford to wait 3 years for maturity to kick in

This club has got it wrong on many occasions

Not simply wrong just a diffefent view VP

Pick 6 would give us leverage to get ready yo go players

Edited September 22, 20177 yr by jackaub

To sum up the grist of the trade rumours thread we are going to trade the meat of our forward line, Watts, Hogan and Weid for a defender Lever. Pedo will own the forward line next season.

6 minutes ago, Vogon Poetry said:

Then you'd be very silly.

VP... its my opinion. Weed wont amount to much. 

You re welcome to yours.

1 minute ago, jackaub said:

Well it all depends on the time lines and speed of development.We cannot afgotd to wait 3 years for maturity to kick in

This club has got it wrong on many occasions

Not simply wrong just a diffefent view VP

Pick 6 would give us levetage to get ready yo go players

If the proposition is to effectively trade Weideman for a better player (your current proposition) then it's worth evaluating.  But if it's for the lure of what we might get with pick 6 this year it should be rejected out of hand. And we'd need to have that player locked in before we traded Weid.

I haven't done it but the club would have.  They'd have a timeline of when our window will be open the widest and they will be working towards that and maximising our talent at that time.

But the "Weid for a player" proposition is totally valid I agree.

 

9 minutes ago, Vogon Poetry said:

Then you'd be very silly.

Count me in as a silly one too then. 

2 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

VP... its my opinion. Weed wont amount to much. 

You re welcome to yours.

If he won't amount to much then it's highly unlikely that we'd get a decent offer for him.  If we did get a decent offer you'd be backing your judgement against the judgement of a fully resourced and IP rich FD.

Big call and I wonder if it was you who had to pull the trigger whether you would.

Just now, Vogon Poetry said:

If he won't amount to much then it's highly unlikely that we'd get a decent offer for him.  If we did get a decent offer you'd be backing your judgement against the judgement of a fully resourced and IP rich FD.

Big call and I wonder if it was you who had to pull the trigger whether you would.

That doesn't necessarily hold true. It's about perceptions and how they can cloud. Another may view something more favourably than its holder.

Just now, beelzebub said:

That doesn't necessarily hold true. It's about perceptions and how they can cloud. Another may view something more favourably than its holder.

Too true, the one bloke out of step might be the only one who's got it right.

1 hour ago, Demons11 said:

Did McGuire say this?

I didn't hear it directly but the rumour is he wants a bit of nostalgia with Moore, Brown, Daicos and Weiderman. It would be true to type - and he would want it for nothing. Eddie has an overinflated sense of entitlement IMO.

I'd trade weid if the right offer was put to us, but the question is what is the right offer??

5 minutes ago, deeflog said:

I'd trade weid if the right offer was put to us, but the question is what is the right offer??

9 first round picks.

1 hour ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Wiseblood PMS etc remember my comment was a big No to a weid trade.  

PMS?  Hardly.

You said 'no', then in the same sentence said if they put Pick 6 on the table they could keep talking, and the came up with a ludicrous trade idea that would have everyone in the competition laughing at us.

11 minutes ago, deeflog said:

I'd trade weid if the right offer was put to us, but the question is what is the right offer??

I still think he has some value. 

But not enough to outweigh the potential I think he has. 

57 minutes ago, Vogon Poetry said:

If the proposition is to effectively trade Weideman for a better player (your current proposition) then it's worth evaluating.  But if it's for the lure of what we might get with pick 6 this year it should be rejected out of hand. And we'd need to have that player locked in before we traded Weid.

I haven't done it but the club would have.  They'd have a timeline of when our window will be open the widest and they will be working towards that and maximising our talent at that time.

But the "Weid for a player" proposition is totally valid I agree.

 

YES VP that is my proposition use pick 6 to improve the current ready to go list

thanks for the  focussed reasoning

I think Kent is the most vulnerable to being the steak knives in a deal. Less likely JKH. I think we would be likely to  get a bog ordinary player for Watts unless we were very lucky - hardly worth the trouble. I expect him to be given another year to prove himself after having the collective boots of the leadership group applied to his arse.

1 hour ago, beelzebub said:

That doesn't necessarily hold true. It's about perceptions and how they can cloud. Another may view something more favourably than its holder.

As they say in the classics - "one man's Vickery is another man's David Hale" (hasn't worked out that way, Hawks)