2 hours ago, kallangurdemon said:

tough on Jack Grimes.More a case of injury coming rather than talent leaving .Jack until his foot problems was a very talented player .

Do you mean Jack Trengove?

He is in demand and under contract! We need to get a favourable deal here..

Definitely worth an early 2nd round pick or a half decent player with 3-4 years left in the tank.
 

My dream trade would be with the Hawks; 

OUT- Preuss, Pick 47, 2021 1st Round Pick

IN - Gunston (29yo), Breust (30yo) and 2021 2nd Round Pick
 

Dees window open and Hawks rebuilding! 
 

 

9 minutes ago, The Jackson 6 said:

Do you mean Jack Trengove?

No I mean Jack Grimes .Jack Trengrove was a similar tale of woe ,a great player struck down by a seemingly innocuous injury .However I did not rate him as highly as Jack Grimes.If you add Mitch Clark and Jack Viney you will agree that we have been indescribably unlucky with foot injuries .No other club comes close .

1 hour ago, Dee tention said:

He is in demand and under contract! We need to get a favourable deal here..

Definitely worth an early 2nd round pick or a half decent player with 3-4 years left in the tank.
 

My dream trade would be with the Hawks; 

OUT- Preuss, Pick 47, 2021 1st Round Pick

IN - Gunston (29yo), Breust (30yo) and 2021 2nd Round Pick
 

Dees window open and Hawks rebuilding! 
 

 

Pretty much got laughed at for saying anything less than an early 2nd and we lose this trade. 

It's bang on, he is a required player on our list (doesn't mean he is best 22) and contracted for 2 more years and we have 3+ teams wanting him. 

An early second is a fair trade for all parties especially in this [censored] up draft.

All those saying we hold all the power as he's contracted and it will be a bidding war, forget how it works. He'll nominate a club and we'll get him there at a fair price. In recent years there's only been the odd case (papley/daniher) where the player hasn't got to where they want, contracted or not, but can't see us standing in his way here. 

26 minutes ago, adsy said:

All those saying we hold all the power as he's contracted and it will be a bidding war, forget how it works. He'll nominate a club and we'll get him there at a fair price. In recent years there's only been the odd case (papley/daniher) where the player hasn't got to where they want, contracted or not, but can't see us standing in his way here. 

If all we get is a 4th round pick id rather keep him as back up, we have to ask for a second round pick, or a player who would be in our top 26

Edited October 7, 20204 yr by Rednblueriseing

17 minutes ago, Rednblueriseing said:

If all we get is a 4th round pick id rather keep him as back up, we have to ask for a second round pick, or a player who would be in our top 26

Agreed, I'm not saying we will give him away for nothing, hopefully we get fair compensation, but very little gained keeping him if he's made his mind up he wants the opportunity to be #1 elsewhere. 

While it's true he's not in our best 22, that's only because we have a Gawn and it's clear he would be in others best 22.  Ready made ruckman are a bit of a rare breed and can also have a pretty influential impact on a sides performance, so that's got to put a reasonable premium on him to start with. 

Depending on his appetite for living in Sydney, I would think GWS should be his preferred destination and they seem to have an excess of players and draft picks of value at their disposal that should be able to provide us with good compensation.

54 minutes ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

While it's true he's not in our best 22, that's only because we have a Gawn and it's clear he would be in others best 22.  Ready made ruckman are a bit of a rare breed and can also have a pretty influential impact on a sides performance, so that's got to put a reasonable premium on him to start with. 

Depending on his appetite for living in Sydney, I would think GWS should be his preferred destination and they seem to have an excess of players and draft picks of value at their disposal that should be able to provide us with good compensation.

Preuss would only be competing for a spot in a sides best 22. Until he shows he can get fit and stay fit for a full season he can't be considered a lock best 22 players.

Every year there are ruckmen who hit the 23-25 year old age range and become ready made rucks. It's not rare at all.

2 hours ago, GCDee said:

Pretty much got laughed at for saying anything less than an early 2nd and we lose this trade. 

It's bang on, he is a required player on our list (doesn't mean he is best 22) and contracted for 2 more years and we have 3+ teams wanting him. 

An early second is a fair trade for all parties especially in this [censored] up draft.

Teams are competing for Preuss' signature, they won't be competing for offering us more. We can set a minimum bar of what we'll accept in a trade but if it's a high second I think every club will say thanks but no thanks.

He's just not worth that much.

7 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Preuss would only be competing for a spot in a sides best 22. Until he shows he can get fit and stay fit for a full season he can't be considered a lock best 22 players.

Every year there are ruckmen who hit the 23-25 year old age range and become ready made rucks. It's not rare at all.

Teams are competing for Preuss' signature, they won't be competing for offering us more. We can set a minimum bar of what we'll accept in a trade but if it's a high second I think every club will say thanks but no thanks.

He's just not worth that much.

I dont think early second... But I don't think a third round pick gets it done, especially this year. You and I had this exact same discussion last year actually.

I think in hindsight GWS should have gone after him last year and offered their 2020 second round pick.

8 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Preuss would only be competing for a spot in a sides best 22. Until he shows he can get fit and stay fit for a full season he can't be considered a lock best 22 players.

Every year there are ruckmen who hit the 23-25 year old age range and become ready made rucks. It's not rare at all.

Teams are competing for Preuss' signature, they won't be competing for offering us more. We can set a minimum bar of what we'll accept in a trade but if it's a high second I think every club will say thanks but no thanks.

He's just not worth that much.

Yeah, sure, that's why GWS rolled out grandpa Shane again this year.

People need to stop thinking of Preuss as whether he is best 22 and think of him as a quality  2nd option in a position with low coverage. This is not like saying he is our 10th best mid, 8th best forward. If Gawn went down early in the season you are not going to throw second year LJ into the ruck for a year. He has significantly more value on our list as risk mitigation than being considered for a player in contract. If he goes this will not be to do him favours this will be because the deal works well for us. With potentially 3+ clubs in need if he leaves I am confident it will be for an important part of our list management puzzle whether player or pick(s) that support the overall picture.

On 9/29/2020 at 11:53 AM, Wiseblood said:

Plenty to play out yet, Steve.

By the sounds of things, Preuss is happy at the club but his head has been turned by guys like Pittonet who have gone from being  a second or third string ruckman to first choice at another club.

In the end, we either get a good deal or keep him.  That's a win/win for me.

I'd reckon that Preuss has a fair bit to give - perhaps, quite a good deal to give the MFC. By the time Gawny plays his sunset year with a walking stick and medical assistance - Preuss has the basic profile now (with close development and well-structured performance targets ongoing) to be hot-to-trot as number one ruck, with the young 'uns so aspiring to play in the ruck under very intense development processes, as well. Game time is what the Beast requires, albeit in cameo to Gawn for a few more seasons. He's a big obstacle to any opposition side when going for the tap, leaning well on opponent rucks and thus negating their experience at the task and reducing their skill exhibition. Plus, he can kick 'em when resting from immediate rucking duties and screen anyone for the little blokes to clean up towards or near goal. Keep him! 

49 minutes ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

People need to stop thinking of Preuss as whether he is best 22 and think of him as a quality  2nd option in a position with low coverage. This is not like saying he is our 10th best mid, 8th best forward. If Gawn went down early in the season you are not going to throw second year LJ into the ruck for a year. He has significantly more value on our list as risk mitigation than being considered for a player in contract.

Ken Oath!

1 hour ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

People need to stop thinking of Preuss as whether he is best 22 and think of him as a quality  2nd option in a position with low coverage. This is not like saying he is our 10th best mid, 8th best forward. If Gawn went down early in the season you are not going to throw second year LJ into the ruck for a year. He has significantly more value on our list as risk mitigation than being considered for a player in contract. If he goes this will not be to do him favours this will be because the deal works well for us. With potentially 3+ clubs in need if he leaves I am confident it will be for an important part of our list management puzzle whether player or pick(s) that support the overall picture.

Agree. He goes to make us better, or he stays. He is not someone we have to get rid of. Other clubs have a need, let them pay for it.

If he goes I would rookie an experienced ruck as backup for a season or 2, while LJ and Bradtke develop. Otherwise we could be left vulnerable.

19 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Agree. He goes to make us better, or he stays. He is not someone we have to get rid of. Other clubs have a need, let them pay for it.

If he goes I would rookie an experienced ruck as backup for a season or 2, while LJ and Bradtke develop. Otherwise we could be left vulnerable.

In that case, why not keep Preuss?

7 minutes ago, Elwood 3184 said:

In that case, why not keep Preuss?

Presumably because a balance of what goodies we get for him minus the inferior backup rookies we replace him with is beneficial to us overall.

42 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Agree. He goes to make us better, or he stays. He is not someone we have to get rid of. Other clubs have a need, let them pay for it.

If he goes I would rookie an experienced ruck as backup for a season or 2, while LJ and Bradtke develop. Otherwise we could be left vulnerable.

Is Bradke still on the list? I never hear anything about him 

Anybody see him play?

1 minute ago, Kent said:

Is Bradke still on the list? I never hear anything about him 

Anybody see him play?

Not seen him play. Did get some praise in some of the Magoos reviews this year . No idea if that counts for much.

If the Cats show an interest which i assume they will i feel like you could offer a deal like 

pick 23 and Pruess for their pick 16 

it's not a huge upgrade but gets us back into the first round. 

7 hours ago, TRIGON said:

Not seen him play. Did get some praise in some of the Magoos reviews this year . No idea if that counts for much.

Bradtke is a raw talent at the moment, nothing more. Placing our ruck back-up hopes on an unproven youngster who lacks match and intense training time (for quite some time now) would be foolish and the concept of ridding the MFC of Preuss for longer-term hopes of a Bradtke talent surge in an unidentifiable future timeframe is absurd. Preuss is not there yet, either but is a long way towards the craftsmanship that the MFC will be requiring, and we have him NOW. He has several ruck back-up qualifications already and particularly, has proven himself in being 'difficult' to handle; plus, he is already under Gawny's talented influence (as experienced by Goldstein) and capable of improving even more in several important 'big bloke' roles. These are the things that interest other clubs at the moment. Our coaching team must make the effort - it must stop skirting the development of our talented list and its requirements. 

Need a player that suits our needs rather than a pick 

 

10 hours ago, Elwood 3184 said:

In that case, why not keep Preuss?

Because players aren't used cars. If he wants to go then the question of keeping him doesn't arise, contract or not.

Keep for one more year then reassess. Value will still be there plus Max will be a year older. Supporters are always pushing for the next big thing in the draft but in a compromised draft year sometimes it's better to have patience and have a quality backup if required. 

I am happy to trade him, because he is surplus to our needs. But I don't want us to do what the market sees as being a fair trade. I want to extract the maximum return.

My view is that Preuss will become a very good player. Ruckmen of that size have been shown to have a big advantage and I think he has shown enough to suggest that he will be at least a good AFL ruckman.

The trade will be seen as a loss down the track IMO, but he is not going to get a game ahead of Max.