Aaron vandenBerg not going - signs a new deal!!!

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

10 hours ago, McQueen said:

I can answer that. 

Yes. 

??

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

18 hours ago, Smokey said:

Yes but he also came into his handful of games against good teams with a completely fresh set of legs. The fact he was serviceable is to be expected of a player that's been in the system as long as he has. In fact I would have expected him to poll higher than he did based on that. 
If your looking at composite average stats, the fact he only played a handful of games and polled at 19 is quite a negative thing - it's much harder to keep your average stats up the more games you play after all. 

Don't let his story romance you too much - he ain't best 22 and I would be concerned if he was next year. 

I agree on terms of being harder to perform over longer periods.  But I would argue 7 games is still a fairly good indicator.  From what I saw (havent seen the Eagles match) he definitely warranted a place in our 22 (on current list attributes).

Plenty of other fringe players we could trade who dont have the additional physical impact that Vanders brings to the big stage.

Need him for at least one more season during premiership window

Edited October 2, 2018 by Rusty Nails

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

On 10/1/2018 at 12:50 PM, PaulRB said:

The way he stood up in the first half vs Eagle in the Prelim reinforced my view that he’s built for finals and is the type of player (like Stewart Dew circa 2008), who can impact and change a big game with sheer physicality, tenacity and drive towards goal. 

Those who recommend him being pushed out by Fritz or KK evidently missed how brutally physical finals are to play in and win. 

Sounds like he stood up ok.  Haven't seen that match.

Exactly the player type we need in our forward line.  Heavy hitter who will stand up and doesnt take any BS from the opp.

There were a couple of games where we got bullied up forward (even with Hogan in) and guys like Stratton were running around smashing into our forward players waiting for ball to be bounced (even putting some to ground like Fritsch & ANB? Swans at G also?) and no one stood up to them and flew the flag.

We were well beaten in both matches, especially the Hawks game.

Cant afford to lose Vanders if not replacing him and/or Hogan with a heavy hitting nasty bastard up forward who can play.

 

[Smokey 4,389]

38 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

I agree on terms of being harder to perform over longer periods.  But I would argue 7 games is still a fairly good indicator.  From what I saw (havent seen the Eagles match) he definitely warranted a place in our 22 (on current list attributes).

Plenty of other fringe players we could trade who dont have the additional physical impact that Vanders brings to the big stage.

Need him for at least one more season during premiership window

That's the thing though, we aren't simply considering to trade him - it appears he wants to for family reasons at this stage. 

That alone makes the entire discussion fairly moot. If Vanders' family comes before footy (which I am okay with), then that's that! 

[Red But Mostly Blue 4,547]

2 minutes ago, Smokey said:

That's the thing though, we aren't simply considering to trade him - it appears he wants to for family reasons at this stage. 

That alone makes the entire discussion fairly moot. If Vanders' family comes before footy (which I am okay with), then that's that! 

Totally agree, I'd love to keep Vanders, but it looks completely out of our control.

What we should be doing is trying to convince his mum to stay in Melbourne...

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

16 minutes ago, Smokey said:

That's the thing though, we aren't simply considering to trade him - it appears he wants to for family reasons at this stage. 

That alone makes the entire discussion fairly moot. If Vanders' family comes before footy (which I am okay with), then that's that! 

At the right price / deal he might reconsider but yes I get the non negotiable family aspect Smokey

[Smokey 4,389]

3 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

At the right price / deal he might reconsider but yes I get the non negotiable family aspect Smokey

So much for the family reasons if he's talked in to staying via money 

[Moonshadow 17,677]

8 minutes ago, Smokey said:

So much for the family reasons if he's talked in to staying via money 

There would be nuances to the deal, such as extra time off to go home, flights for his mother to visit, etc.

The world isn't black and white.

[Smokey 4,389]

4 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

There would be nuances to the deal, such as extra time off to go home, flights for his mother to visit, etc.

The world isn't black and white.

True. Still, I can't see the value of bending over backwards to keep a player who whilst has a big physical presence, has highly limited skills and (in my view) not much more upside than whats currently on offer. I'm not convinced he's the answer for next year's tilt. Bringing in players with good skills and decision making will I reckon. So if Vanders going will assist in netting us that somehow, I'll take it.  

 

[Moonshadow 17,677]

1 hour ago, Smokey said:

True. Still, I can't see the value of bending over backwards to keep a player who whilst has a big physical presence, has highly limited skills and (in my view) not much more upside than whats currently on offer. I'm not convinced he's the answer for next year's tilt. Bringing in players with good skills and decision making will I reckon. So if Vanders going will assist in netting us that somehow, I'll take it.  

 

Are we "bending over backwards"?

I'd say the FD rate him well, are ok about him leaving if the right deal can be met, but would prefer him to stay. They would be accommoding to his family needs either way.

[Wiseblood 24,637]

Having him return to the side at the end of the season, and generally play well, means that if he goes we're more than likely to get something half decent in return.  We can argue that, at the end of the season, he was best 22 in a side that made a Prelim.

I'd be happy with a second round pick in return if he decides to head to Sydney, although I'd rather have him on the list moving forward.

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

2 hours ago, Smokey said:

So much for the family reasons if he's talked in to staying via money 

Money can be a strong influence Smokey.  There's always a 1 hour flight option to Sydney and the return back also.  Businessmen are doing this sometimes 3 or 4 times a week.  Overseas also on occasions.  Fly ins Fly outs to OS locations for key mining operatives on an every other week basis in some cases etc etc.

[Lord Neville X Flash 284]

Sydney have an academy player that is highly rated, and will thus want to trade their first rounder (pick 12/13). I would be happy if we traded our second round pick for their first rounder. We would probably have to downgrade some our picks we get for Tyson and Kent as well. But i think it would be a good result if AVB does go

Best of pick 13 in recent years: Taylor Adam, Lachie Weller, Jack Riewoldt, Patty Crips, Daniel Talia, Crawford*, Brad Ebert, Brent Stanton, Tom Lynch (ADL), Bob Murphy, Shannon Hurn, Matthew Kennedy, Dal Santo.

[Red and Blue realist 2,058]

32 minutes ago, Lord Neville X Flash said:

Sydney have an academy player that is highly rated, and will thus want to trade their first rounder (pick 12/13). I would be happy if we traded our second round pick for their first rounder. We would probably have to downgrade some our picks we get for Tyson and Kent as well. But i think it would be a good result if AVB does go

Sydney need points, not necessarily a pick downgrade. They wouldn't be attaching AVB in this, unless something else comes through. 

For instance Sydney pick 13 (points 1,212)

Melb: AVB, pick 36 (563 points), 46 (331 points) plus 54 (220 points), so it would nearly come to the same point value but they get AVB and we get an earlier pick. I can't see that scenario working out, so it could be another 2nd (for Kent/Tyson maybe??) that we give up, so they end up in front on points, but I think it'll be too much of a stretch to think their first pick will be involved for AVB. 

Edited October 3, 2018 by Red and Blue realist

[Bring-Back-Powell 14,938]

Would be disappointed if he was traded as he'll be best 22 next year with the attributes he brings to the table (aside from being injury prone).

With that being said, club loyalty goes out the window when a close family member dies and the player wishes to move for personal reasons. I can't believe some posters are being bitter towards AVB. 

[beelzebub 23,382]

On a side note I marvel at all those that take the time to understand the points thing and how it all works and affects the dealing.

Thanks to those that bring this acumen to the boards. I cant be bothered to learn but appreciate those that have..Cheers

[Lord Neville X Flash 284]

1 hour ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Sydney need points, not necessarily a pick downgrade. They wouldn't be attaching AVB in this, unless something else comes through. 

For instance Sydney pick 13 (points 1,212)

Melb: AVB, pick 36 (563 points), 46 (331 points) plus 54 (220 points), so it would nearly come to the same point value but they get AVB and we get an earlier pick. I can't see that scenario working out, so it could be another 2nd (for Kent/Tyson maybe??) that we give up, so they end up in front on points, but I think it'll be too much of a stretch to think their first pick will be involved for AVB. 

Sydney have 30 (629), 35(522), 66(80). 

AVB is probably worth pick 30 IMO, so he's worth 629. If we also give 36 (563), 46 (331) then they get 900 points plus a player they want. Potentially we give better picks with what we get throughout the trade period.  

Seems fair to me, i might be wearing red and blue coloured glasses however. 

 

If we somehow get Sydney to cough up pick 13, which i think is a chance if we make the deal sweet enough, we can do a lot:

We could then offer GC pick 13 and our 2019 first rounder (with AFL permission) for May, which seems like a fair trade for GC.

We then are not at the whim of Freo, and could hold out on trading Hogan, which would force their hand in trading us pick 5&6. Then we trade for KK using Kent, Tyson compo.

In: May, KK, pick 5&6

Out: Hogan, Vanders, Kent, Tyson, 2019 first rounder, 2018 picks (round 2,3,4)

This is a pipe dream, but a nice one.

Edited October 3, 2018 by Lord Neville X Flash

[Bon appetit 23]

1 hour ago, Lord Neville X Flash said:

Sydney have 30 (629), 35(522), 66(80). 

AVB is probably worth pick 30 IMO, so he's worth 629. If we also give 36 (563), 46 (331) then they get 900 points plus a player they want. Potentially we give better picks with what we get throughout the trade period.  

Seems fair to me, i might be wearing red and blue coloured glasses however. 

 

If we somehow get Sydney to cough up pick 13, which i think is a chance if we make the deal sweet enough, we can do a lot:

We could then offer GC pick 13 and our 2019 first rounder (with AFL permission) for May, which seems like a fair trade for GC.

We then are not at the whim of Freo, and could hold out on trading Hogan, which would force their hand in trading us pick 5&6. Then we trade for KK using Kent, Tyson compo.

In: May, KK, pick 5&6

Out: Hogan, Vanders, Kent, Tyson, 2019 first rounder, 2018 picks (round 2,3,4)

This is a pipe dream, but a nice one.

What will we trade for Braydon Preuss?

[DV8 2,271]

13 hours ago, Smokey said:

But we don’t really know if he would be able to sustain that form over the period of 22 games and that’s my point. He is still a fairly unproven commodity to me after years on the sidelines. I can see his potential value, he just ain’t in my best 22 (yet). 

Yes, but the smaller SCG may just suit de Berg.   less klms ?

Mum's the word, Smoke.

[Lord Neville X Flash 284]

1 hour ago, Bon appetit said:

What will we trade for Braydon Preuss?

we have 2x third rounders, so one of them at most. But we may only need to give up a fourth or fifth rounder considering he has not played a single AFL game this year. 

[stinga 585]

Before VDB came back from injury our best players available to fill gaps were JKH, Garlett, Stretch who are lightly framed and easily pushed off the ball.  VDB gave us that extra grunt around the packs.  If he goes there's no one on our list of a similar type to take his place.  The nearest from Casey would be Lockhart and he's not on our list.  Baker is probably next cab off the rank but he is more like Clarrie

[DemonLad5 1,642]

This deal could unlock a way to really help us get May

• Swans want Nick Blakey, their academy player who's currently ranked a top 10 prospect. Sydney's current pick, 12 (soon to be 13 after Lynch compo)
• Pick 12 is worth 1,268 points
• We have picks 33, 43, 51 and will get pick 57 from St Kilda for Kent 
• pick 33 (563 points) + pick 43 (378) + pick 51 (259) + pick 57 (182) = 1,382 points
• Swans get Vanders as well as a pick trade and we get a top end 1st round pick to take to the draft or assist with other deals (e.g May) 

WIN - WIN

 

Edited October 3, 2018 by DemonLad5

[Moonshadow 17,677]

1 hour ago, DemonLad5 said:

This deal could unlock a way to really help us get May

• Swans want Nick Blakey, their academy player who's currently ranked a top 10 prospect. Sydney's current pick, 12 (soon to be 13 after Lynch compo)
• Pick 12 is worth 1,268 points
• We have picks 33, 43, 51 and will get pick 57 from St Kilda for Kent 
• pick 33 (563 points) + pick 43 (378) + pick 51 (259) + pick 57 (182) = 1,382 points
• Swans get Vanders as well as a pick trade and we get a top end 1st round pick to take to the draft or assist with other deals (e.g May) 

WIN - WIN

 

Pretty sure the AFL brought in a ruling to stop this. Clubs would bundle up picks to trade for higher picks. The bundled picks would be used for academy or F/S bid matching. IIRC we did that for Oliver/Weid, and it was changed shortly after. Something like that anyway

Edited October 3, 2018 by Moonshadow

[Jibroni 5,009]

1 hour ago, DemonLad5 said:

This deal could unlock a way to really help us get May

• Swans want Nick Blakey, their academy player who's currently ranked a top 10 prospect. Sydney's current pick, 12 (soon to be 13 after Lynch compo)
• pick 33 (563 points) + pick 43 (378) + pick 51 (259) + pick 57 (182) = 1,382 points
• Swans get Vanders as well as a pick trade and we get a top end 1st round pick to take to the draft or assist with other deals (e.g May)  

WIN - WIN 

 

True although that's assuming Carlton don't trade their 2nd round picks for the same reason.

[Matsuo Basho 1,053]

1 hour ago, DemonLad5 said:

This deal could unlock a way to really help us get May

• Swans want Nick Blakey, their academy player who's currently ranked a top 10 prospect. Sydney's current pick, 12 (soon to be 13 after Lynch compo)
• Pick 12 is worth 1,268 points
• We have picks 33, 43, 51 and will get pick 57 from St Kilda for Kent 
• pick 33 (563 points) + pick 43 (378) + pick 51 (259) + pick 57 (182) = 1,382 points
• Swans get Vanders as well as a pick trade and we get a top end 1st round pick to take to the draft or assist with other deals (e.g May) 

WIN - WIN

 

Some nice lateral thinking there, DL5. Like it.