8 hours ago, Redleg said:

Interesting that we are now a destination club, but we don't seem able to take advantage of it and get a FA, well at least not so far.

Maybe there are no FA's we're interested in.

Hopefully it’s upward from here. 

4 hours ago, Sadler said:

That’s great but it’s one example.

I love it how one example always gets used as the be all and end all to an argument. Critical mass is what I want. How many list changes did the last 10 premiership teams have? 

You're welcome to do the research. I'm not your intern.

26 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

You're welcome to do the research. I'm not your intern.

Seems as I stuffed everyone around with the Garlett quiz last night, the answer (for the last six years) is an average of 9.17 

And that includes a Hawthorn three-peat.  

But we're heading towards ten list changes so it'll probably cost us a premiership with four fifths of one our players being not so familiar with our game-plan. 

Edited October 5, 20186 yr by Skuit

1 hour ago, Skuit said:

Seems as I stuffed everyone around with the Garlett quiz last night, the answer (for the last six years) is an average of 9.17 

And that includes a Hawthorn three-peat.  

But we're heading towards ten list changes so it'll probably cost us a premiership with four fifths of one our players being not so familiar with our game-plan. 

Outside the best 28, and a few younger project players, could nearly rotate out rest of list each. 

Probably leaves about 10 spots to move on. Sounds a familiar number!

1 minute ago, D4Life said:

Outside the best 28, and a few younger project players, could nearly rotate out rest of list each. 

Probably leaves about 10 spots to move on. Sounds a familiar number!

That's almost exactly close to what I was saying D4Life, except for the bits about the other bits. 

Honestly, with the exception of Hogan, has any of the players who have left/are leaving, going to dent our premiership hopes? 

And if we end up getting a rock solid defender in May, and some outside pace in KK and a backup ruck, does anyone really care if we replace the others who left with more speculative draft picks or discards from other clubs? How will they be any worse than the players we let go, who are clearly not good enough to make it?

No point holding onto players who can’t crack a game for the sake of limiting list changes. As for Tyson and AVB, we won’t let them go for nothing. We will try to get decent compensation, which will balance them leaving. 

13 hours ago, Redleg said:

Is it selling the farm to pay what others offer if it costs you nothing to get a top player? I understand there is a cap, but other clubs seem to manage or are true destination clubs.

Would we have matched Nuffs money for gaffe ? I'm not sure

16 hours ago, Redleg said:

Is it selling the farm to pay what others offer if it costs you nothing to get a top player? I understand there is a cap, but other clubs seem to manage or are true destination clubs.

Interesting to see if things change with FA. To date it has been used by the power clubs to attract players from the lesser clubs at much the same salary. The lesser clubs don't scream that much as they get a good draft pick in return.

I sense that the wheel is now slowly turning with the lesser clubs offering big money to the players from the power clubs. And moreover the power club gets comparatively little by way of compensation.

It is yet another subtle manipulation of the system a la the way Sydney used the so called "interstate supplement" to pay its top players that much more.

Imagine the fun of the trading season if they move the FA requirement down to five or six years.

Richmond and Lynch are an interesting exception on the money side of things

Edited October 5, 20186 yr by Diamond_Jim

3 hours ago, Jaded said:

Honestly, with the exception of Hogan, has any of the players who have left/are leaving, going to dent our premiership hopes? 

And if we end up getting a rock solid defender in May, and some outside pace in KK and a backup ruck, does anyone really care if we replace the others who left with more speculative draft picks or discards from other clubs? How will they be any worse than the players we let go, who are clearly not good enough to make it?

No point holding onto players who can’t crack a game for the sake of limiting list changes. As for Tyson and AVB, we won’t let them go for nothing. We will try to get decent compensation, which will balance them leaving. 

Good post.

Also with those that are NQR that have left, the hope is to get 1 or 2 that are better than them, not just to replace them. That is always the aim of list changes.

6 hours ago, Skuit said:

Seems as I stuffed everyone around with the Garlett quiz last night, the answer (for the last six years) is an average of 9.17 

And that includes a Hawthorn three-peat.  

But we're heading towards ten list changes so it'll probably cost us a premiership with four fifths of one our players being not so familiar with our game-plan. 

It was a good quiz just slightly out of context which made it harder.  Still someone got it so that's a plus.

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Good post.

Also with those that are NQR that have left, the hope is to get 1 or 2 that are better than them, not just to replace them. That is always the aim of list changes.

Yep. But even if worst case scenario happens, and we replace them with equal amounts of talent (or lack thereof), we have lost absolutely nothing. 

People talk as if we will go into next year short of players. 

Are we out of the running for one of the Irish boys as a category B rookie?

I know we have Bradtke as one.  Do we have another one?

Sad when we started this and one of the boys is the talented 198 cm Anton Tohill, son of Anthony, who played Reserves for us in the 80's.

Edited October 6, 20186 yr by Redleg

7 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Are we out of the running for one of the Irish boys as a category B rookie?

I know we have Bradtke as one.  Do we have another one?

Sad when we started this and one of the boys is the talented 198 cm Anton Tohill, son of Anthony, who played Reserves for us in the 80's.

Got the answer Walker and Bradtke.

40 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Got the answer Walker and Bradtke.

is the limit 2 for cat b rookies?

21 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

is the limit 2 for cat b rookies?

A poster Theo, on Tohill thread said you can have 3.

If so, I hope we are into Tohill, or one of the others, if of course they are good enough or showing potential.

Edited October 6, 20186 yr by Redleg

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

A poster Theo, on Tohill thread said you can have 3.

If so, I hope we are into Tohill, or one of the others, if of course they are good enough or showing potential.

Correct - you can have 3 category B rookies (but only one can be in the Irish recruit category). Problem is that Melbourne has shunned the Irish experiment that produced such greats as the late Jimmy Stynes and Sean Wight. I raised it a couple of years ago at a club function about recruiting and was told that at least at that time, there was little interest.

Have we left yet?

I wonder if Lobb is angling at the new ruck/forward position recently open at West Coast. If you were a Western Australian wanting to go back to your home state, surely you'd prefer to go to West Coast if you could contribute to their side. With Port lodging the FA paperwork for Lycett, if I was West Coast I'd be playing Lobb ahead of Vardy and playing him alongside NikNat.

Only seen this on Facebook so don't know the strength of this, but apparently Robbie Gray may be put on the trade table. Apparently, we're in for his services.

Grain of salt but depending on the cost, he'd be a great get. Not sure why we've been linked to him other than being a Victorian.

6 minutes ago, A F said:

Only seen this on Facebook so don't know the strength of this, but apparently Robbie Gray may be put on the trade table. Apparently, we're in for his services.

Grain of salt but depending on the cost, he'd be a great get. Not sure why we've been linked to him other than being a Victorian.

Gee that would throw a spanner in the works! Wonder what it would take to prize him away..

6 hours ago, A F said:

Only seen this on Facebook so don't know the strength of this, but apparently Robbie Gray may be put on the trade table. Apparently, we're in for his services.

Grain of salt but depending on the cost, he'd be a great get. Not sure why we've been linked to him other than being a Victorian.

Maybe Port are trying to bait St Kilda into giving up pick #4 to get one of the prized SA draftees!!!

7 hours ago, A F said:

but apparently Robbie Gray may be put on the trade table. Apparently, we're in for his services.

 

7 hours ago, layzie said:

Gee that would throw a spanner in the works! Wonder what it would take to prize him away..

Love Robbie Gray but at 31yo start of next season if you look at the Lewis & Mitchell trades he would be worth peanuts on the trade table.

Pick 51/87 or a trade for Garlett should get it done...

...and yes I'm not serious but I don't think Port are either.

Edited October 7, 20186 yr by rjay

13 minutes ago, rjay said:

 

Love Robbie Gray but at 31yo start of next season if you look at the Lewis & Mitchell trades he would be worth peanuts on the trade table.

Pick 51/87 or a trade for Garlett should get it done...

...and yes I'm not serious but I don't think Port are either.

Eep, 31 was a surprise. Thought maybe 28. 

Likely Dees will look at 1-2 delisted free agents to top up given likely turnover of 10-12 players.  

List to date of such players doesn’t quite excite.

Or Maybe some late trade action might see MFC offering picks in 60-70s to grab someone as a 11th hour deal.