I would love to have a crack at getting this guy. He's contracted until the end of next year, but there's some talk he may be gettable this year for a Victorian club as WC try to get currency together to get Tim Kelly.

Gut feel is the Eagles would be more keen on picks than players given the Kelly situation but I would guess our second round pick is already tied up in a trade for Langdon, and you could argue it might be overs for him anyway. What do we think we would need to offer up for WC to be enticed?

Now this is the guy

5 minutes ago, Demonland said:

Honestly my favourite moment of 2019. It's not even close. #Frosted

Edited August 15, 20196 yr by Lord Nev

2 minutes ago, Demonland said:

Lol Still the guy

what pick was this guy in 2017?

you have to be impressed in the WC Eagles drafting and player development

They really have a gun recruiting group

17 minutes ago, Demonland said:

did he turn it straight over in the corridor with the free kick?

11 minutes ago, Kent said:

what pick was this guy in 2017?

you have to be impressed in the WC Eagles drafting and player development

They really have a gun recruiting group

Pick 37, 2017.

27 minutes ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

did he turn it straight over in the corridor with the free kick?

Close, he kicked it on the full wwsw.

I imagine if WC were to use Petruccelle to assist gaining Tim Kelly they’d bundle him up with some picks and ship him off to Geelong (if he agreed). I can’t see the pick they’d get for him from another club assisting with the trade. 

8 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

I imagine if WC were to use Petruccelle to assist gaining Tim Kelly they’d bundle him up with some picks and ship him off to Geelong (if he agreed). I can’t see the pick they’d get for him from another club assisting with the trade. 

Yeah true, that seems the most obvious course of action. Do Geelong need any more small forward types though? Potentially could be a 3 way deal with us sending a pick to Geelong to even out a trade?

For example:

WC get Kelly and pick 39 (from MFC).

Geelong get picks 17 (from WC) and pick 3 (from us).

MFC get Petrucelle and pick 25 from WC and pick 19 from Geelong.

 

Then we send pick 19 to Freo for Langdon.

Pick 21 Elijah Taylor or Cam Taheny (both quick, talented, goal kicking half forward types)

Pick 25 we draft Harrison Jones (key forward).

 

So for our first and second round picks we get a peak age winger, almost peak age quick small forward, a quick hf kid who can score and a key forward project.

I'd take that personally.

4 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Yeah true, that seems the most obvious course of action. Do Geelong need any more small forward types though? Potentially could be a 3 way deal with us sending a pick to Geelong to even out a trade?

For example:

WC get Kelly and pick 39 (from MFC).

Geelong get picks 17 (from WC) and pick 3 (from us).

MFC get Petrucelle and pick 25 from WC and pick 19 from Geelong.

 

Then we send pick 19 to Freo for Langdon.

Pick 21 Elijah Taylor or Cam Taheny (both quick, talented, goal kicking half forward types)

Pick 25 we draft Harrison Jones (key forward).

 

So for our first and second round picks we get a peak age winger, almost peak age quick small forward, a quick hf kid who can score and a key forward project.

I'd take that personally.

Thank goodness you aren't in charge. You don't throw away early picks like that.

Escpeically when you are giving them to Jason Taylor, who could have had him instead of Spargo to begin with.

1 hour ago, Demonland said:

TORCHED BY FROST. ?❄️

1 minute ago, Watts the matter said:

Thank goodness you aren't in charge. You don't throw away early picks like that.

Escpeically when you are giving them to Jason Taylor, who could have had him instead of Spargo to begin with.

Just putting a hypothetical up mate.

If you think one 18 year old is going to change our fate enough next year then you perceive our situation differently to me.

1 hour ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

did he turn it straight over in the corridor with the free kick?

 

40 minutes ago, Dee Zephyr said:

Close, he kicked it on the full wwsw.

That's the dochotomy of Frost.

1 hour ago, Lord Nev said:

Just putting a hypothetical up mate.

If you think one 18 year old is going to change our fate enough next year then you perceive our situation differently to me.

Surely we have learnt enough from the Kelly (and pick 22) for Tyson and Salem trade. 

It's not about next year, it's about adding class, the kind that I don't trust Taylor to be able to find in the 2nd round.

I personally think apart from the top four or five teams, there is little difference in the rest of the teams excluding the Gold Coast. If we have a good run with injuries, an easier fixture and make some alterations to the game plan, I see no reason we would not be back in the finals next season.

I would rather keep elite draft picks and use other methods such as free agency to improve our team. We have had 4 second rounders in the past 2 seasons, if you do not think they're going to help us improve then the issue is our recruitment and the last thing we need is more second round picks.

 

1 minute ago, Watts the matter said:

Surely we have learnt enough from the Kelly (and pick 22) for Tyson and Salem trade. 

It's not about next year, it's about adding class, the kind that I don't trust Taylor to be able to find in the 2nd round.

I personally think apart from the top four or five teams, there is little difference in the rest of the teams excluding the Gold Coast. If we have a good run with injuries, an easier fixture and make some alterations to the game plan, I see no reason we would not be back in the finals next season.

I would rather keep elite draft picks and use other methods such as free agency to improve our team. We have had 4 second rounders in the past 2 seasons, if you do not think they're going to help us improve then the issue is our recruitment and the last thing we need is more second round picks.

I would argue it IS about next year.

We're no longer the 'youngest most inexperienced' team, and we have a bunch of players that we rely upon that don't have enough years in them to wait for the next few draft's worth of players to come through and fill the holes in our list.

Where did I say our 2nd round picks weren't going to help us? I'm a big fan of Sparrow, Hore was a 3rd or 4th round pick, Fritsch, Petty, Baker, wouldn't have thought that was all as bad as you seem to want to make out.

I'm all for Noah Anderson this year, big big fan. But he's not going to make as big a difference to us as adding a bunch of good quality players would IMO. What if he gets injured? What if he doesn't become a great player? There's no guarantees there so putting all our eggs in one basket is not a guaranteed recipe for success.

Why would the Kelly trade even be relevant? Firstly, we weren't even going to draft Kelly. Secondly, they're all completely different players coming into a completely different Melbourne team with different coaching, structures and needs. Pointless argument.

As much of an Anderson fan as I am, I would much rather see us address our needs more comprehensively than add one possibly future gun into the team. We can't always be looking way down the path at the future, we need to start aiming for actual success.

There's also no guarantees about injuries and game plans. This year should tell you that much. Adding in one gun doesn't do much to improve our sorely lacking depth.

Find it absolutely bizarre that you can be so sold on the draft as the answer while simultaneously doubting our drafting.

Is there anything in action here or is this more of a ‘I like this guy so I will make a thread about him’ thread?

5 minutes ago, olisik said:

Is there anything in action here or is this more of a ‘I like this guy so I will make a thread about him’ thread?

Read the OP mate.

2 hours ago, raDeelaide said:

That's the dichotomy of Frost.

it's why, ideally, he's not in our best 22

he's got better this year, no doubt, but he's still a very average (at best) footballer

4 hours ago, Demonland said:

 

10 seconds later, West Coast took the free kick for an out on the full.

#frosted

42 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

I would argue it IS about next year.

We're no longer the 'youngest most inexperienced' team, and we have a bunch of players that we rely upon that don't have enough years in them to wait for the next few draft's worth of players to come through and fill the holes in our list.

Where did I say our 2nd round picks weren't going to help us? I'm a big fan of Sparrow, Hore was a 3rd or 4th round pick, Fritsch, Petty, Baker, wouldn't have thought that was all as bad as you seem to want to make out.

I'm all for Noah Anderson this year, big big fan. But he's not going to make as big a difference to us as adding a bunch of good quality players would IMO. What if he gets injured? What if he doesn't become a great player? There's no guarantees there so putting all our eggs in one basket is not a guaranteed recipe for success.

Why would the Kelly trade even be relevant? Firstly, we weren't even going to draft Kelly. Secondly, they're all completely different players coming into a completely different Melbourne team with different coaching, structures and needs. Pointless argument.

As much of an Anderson fan as I am, I would much rather see us address our needs more comprehensively than add one possibly future gun into the team. We can't always be looking way down the path at the future, we need to start aiming for actual success.

There's also no guarantees about injuries and game plans. This year should tell you that much. Adding in one gun doesn't do much to improve our sorely lacking depth.

Find it absolutely bizarre that you can be so sold on the draft as the answer while simultaneously doubting our drafting.

Who are the good quality players you are referring to? Petrucelle is a huge unknown, his season looks very similar to Sam Blease's 2nd season on paper. Promising player,  but good quality is an overstatement. The other 2 you suggested, I've never heard of.

The Kelly trade is relevant because we passed up the opportunity to draft an elite talent and ended up with a good player and a player who had his moments and is now not AFL quality. The point about not drafting Kelly is poor judgement from our recruiting team.

It's quite the opposite, I have little faith in Taylor with picks between 20 - 40. If you were proposing a trade that actually included 'good quality players' then it would be a consideration, but you are just throwing away an elite pick which most teams would kill for the opportunity for, for 3 averages pieces. 

 

Edited August 16, 20196 yr by Watts the matter

1 hour ago, Watts the matter said:

Who are the good quality players you are referring to? Petrucelle is a huge unknown

Yet you want to base our future on an 18 year old draftee?

1 hour ago, Lord Nev said:

Yet you want to base our future on an 18 year old draftee?

There is a much better chance of getting elite talent at the pointy end of a draft, you don't throw that away for average players.

I can not think of any circumstances where a trade as you proposed has been completed in the AFL. You simply don't throw away picks that early.

Trading for Langdon has nothing to do with pick 2 if that is part of your justification.

1 minute ago, Watts the matter said:

There is a much better chance of getting elite talent at the pointy end of a draft, you don't throw that away for average players.

I can not think of any circumstances where a trade as you proposed has been completed in the AFL. You simply don't throw away picks that early.

Trading for Langdon has nothing to do with pick 2 if that is part of your justification.

What, like Watts? Scully? Trengove? Toumpas? Sorry mate, but you literally can't argue that a draftee with 0 games is a safer bet than players who have been in the system a few years already. You could certainly argue they have more talent, more potential, but there is no exact science to drafting as the examples above show.

I never said pick 2 had to be part of getting Langdon. You can re-read my post if it was too complicated for you the first time, I'm not going to explain it again. My hypothetical is about getting us a mix of draftees and known young players that fill specific needs for us as a club. As I said earlier, you obviously think we're one 18 year old player away from success, but I believe we have wider problems than that.

As I also said, I'm not against getting Anderson at all, I rate him very highly, but I'm also open to other possibilities to improve our overall list, especially our depth for pacy players who can kick goals. You're not, and that's fine, they're all just opinions.