3 minutes ago, old dee said:

You opened with "Ridiculous question not even worth debating." Then debated it for nine long paragraphs. So is it worth debating or not? 

I was pointing out the futility of debating the question just like it was when D/Lers wanted to trade Clarry and Trac. 

That was the mentality of the post really. A waste of time fir the reasons I gave OD. 

I make a habit of supporting my opinions not just making  motherhood or sweeping statements without evidence. 

In a word YES

Did anyone else see the boys stitched him up brilliantly last night and make him lead us off the ground after he did his ‘lap of honour’? I think he’s a Demon for at least the next 3 years. Seems very happy.

What’s he going to learn from Nik Nat? How to be under prepared, over eat, and get on the park for 9 games a year?

Ask Underwood. She seems to know everything about him, probs even his favourite colour and what size jocks he wears. 

We don't give players money off potential. Jackson has showed potential but is still not a bonefied "star" whereas gus is a heart and soul leader, you can't just buy those heart and soul leader. In my opinion gus is more important than Jackson as he is a leader showing the troops what to do. But hopefully we can keep them both!  

Is (premiership player and Grand Final momentum turner) Luke Jackson the right guy? #ISayItWithAHeavyWallet

 

Not an issue, Melksham and Hibberd will probably finish up, replaced by two draftees, enough money to go around.

I've said it before but if Luke Jackson leaves, it could work out better for us long term given the ridiculous offer we'll receive for him. 

Obviously the club will be considering all of these possibilities as well.

He's a future star ruckman. But if we were to receive two top 10 picks with one inside the top 5 you'd have to seriously consider it given Taylor and co's history at the draft. 

We're also in this for sustained success over a period rather than being a flash in the pan great team so you've got to give up to get back. 

If we lost Brayshaw and Jackson in the next little period, it'd be scary to think what our draft haul could be over the next couple of seasons and that'd be another young core/crop that will grow and be the nucleus of the next wave once our current core push into their late 20's.

Always looking ahead, but still in awe of our current side. Eyes on finishing top two for the perfect platform for another crack at it. 

 

Edited May 15, 20223 yr by JimmyGadson

1 minute ago, JimmyGadson said:

If we lost Brayshaw and Jackson in the next little period, it'd be scary to think what our draft haul could be over the next couple of seasons

Where would West Coast get a second top 10 pick from? How would Freo get two top 10 picks?

Brayshaw is a free agent, absolute best case scenario is we maybe get pick 19 for him.

3 hours ago, rpfc said:

Jackson is a luxury that we won’t need until Gawn is done 3 years from now. But when that happens the outlay to get a star ruckman and one of the 15 best players in the comp would be ridiculous.

If he stays it will be within our cap framework. I am sure his agent would be pushing for more but Jackson himself would have Gawn and co in his ear saying what they have done to keep the band together. The fact that Petracca will average $900k through his prime is stunning.

Oh, and lastly, you don’t let players like this go. Kids a unicorn.

That could do more damage to the Club than letting him go 

I’d never believe the rumours about the money being offered.  That said, any decent player is offered ‘overs’ to leave their club.

I trust our clubs discipline and list management and any players from our best 22 will be offered under their ‘market value’ to remain at a successful club.

The real concern for list management in successful clubs is the peripheral and depth players leaving for opportunity.

WERRIDEE obviously had little sleep over the weekend 

Hit the Night Clubs, did we??

12 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Where would West Coast get a second top 10 pick from? How would Freo get two top 10 picks?

Brayshaw is a free agent, absolute best case scenario is we maybe get pick 19 for him.

The following year. One this year and one next year. Simples! 

In the AFL era, how many West Australians have left Victoria and had good, long careers in Perth? 

2 minutes ago, old dee said:

The following year. One this year and one next year. Simples! 

No guarantee it's a top 10 pick next year though.

1 minute ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

In the AFL era, how many West Australians have left Victoria and had good, long careers in Perth? 

I can think of a bloke called Kennedy who got traded by Carlton for the Visy bandit and is still playing. 

1 minute ago, Lord Nev said:

Where would West Coast get a second top 10 pick from? How would Freo get two top 10 picks?

Brayshaw is a free agent, absolute best case scenario is we maybe get pick 19 for him.

Don't let short-sightedness get in the way. 

Is our history of pick swapping alone  not enough evidence to show the endless possibilities clubs have to move up the draft? 

If clubs want a player that badly, they'll do what's required. We are in prime position. 

And with Gus, it'll be up to him. Again, this is about sustained success. Not short-lived. It's about the possibilities and potential we'd have with the compensation received. 

Sustained success requires a different type of list management. Got to give up to gain. Even in your prime. Short term-pain for long term-gain. However in this instance, because we're such a system-based side, I would say losing Gus and Jackson at the same time wouldn't have as big an impact on the win/loss ledger as many think. And that's because nobody is looking at possibilities that would come from the compensation we'd receive. 

 

1 minute ago, Lord Nev said:

No guarantee it's a top 10 pick next year though.

Better than average chance. 

2 minutes ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

In the AFL era, how many West Australians have left Victoria and had good, long careers in Perth? 

We need to realise that as a Club players come and go especially after a run of being on top..... and the further you are at the top the harder it becomes to recruit "excellent" players. History shows us that we will lose "valuable" players to other Clubs but the art of recruiting is making value out of those we lose. 

1 minute ago, JimmyGadson said:

Don't let short-sightedness get in the way. 

Is our history of pick swapping alone  not enough evidence to show the endless possibilities clubs have to move up the draft? 

If clubs want a player that badly, they'll do what's required. We are in prime position. 

And with Gus, it'll be up to him. Again, this is about sustained success. Not short-lived. It's about the possibilities and potential we'd have with the compensation received. 

Sustained success requires a different type of list management. Got to give up to gain. Even in your prime. Short term-pain for long term-gain. However in this instance, because we're such a system-based side, I would say losing Gus and Jackson at the same time wouldn't have as big an impact on the win/loss ledger as many think. And that's because nobody is looking at possibilities that would come from the compensation we'd receive.

I get where you're coming from, and I won't bother writing a whole long thing, but my short version is:

- Draft picks are no guarantee of a gun player.

- Our window is now. Right now. A bunch of our key players only have a couple of years left. I'd be worried about the period between when they finish and when these draft pick players come through.

There's 'possibilities' in many directions with draft picks.

Jackson must have really enjoyed auditioning for the wooden spooners. 

Who needs another premiership or 3 when you can go out nightclubbing and lose by 10 goals every week?

 

A lot of his value comes from being as mobile as a smaller player, allowing us to play 2 rucks, a couple of clunky tall forwards and the up and down Fritsch and keep decent forward pressure.

If he left there'd probably have to be a domino effect on our forward structure as well as the hole to fill in the ruck. 

 

6 minutes ago, old dee said:

Better than average chance. 

Would prefer to not trade Jackson out on a gamble.

It's funny you know. 

I remember how many posters were up in arms on this forum nearly a decade ago about the potential of losing James Frawley (of all players) to Free Agency. 

Many didn't want to lose him. For the exact same fear that many hold for losing Brayshaw now. Who hilariously happens to be the compensation we received for losing James Frawley. 

 

Put this in really simple terms. Jackson is well worth hanging on to.