I thought Brucey did lead by example in that last qtr. His big pack mark and goal was leadership stuff.

Are you having his babies? Honestly, you cannot surpass the play of Jones, Bizz and even Godfrey in that last quarter. He may have made a few good plays that got us closer, but he was as far away from bringing this team back from the dead as Daniel Ward was.

He had the most possessions of any Melbourne player at three-quarter, yet we trailed, big.

So in the general scheme of things, would you prefer to keep the players who had the least number of possessions in the first three quarters? Just wondering.

Besides I wouldn't have thought taking a good pack mark (no matter how good it was) is necessarily a sign of leadership.....

Are you having his babies? Honestly, you cannot surpass the play of Jones, Bizz and even Godfrey in that last quarter. He may have made a few good plays that got us closer, but he was as far away from bringing this team back from the dead as Daniel Ward was.

So in your eyes wardy had as much influence on the game as bruce did? ward was near BOG? wow

Are you having his babies? Honestly, you cannot surpass the play of Jones, Bizz and even Godfrey in that last quarter. He may have made a few good plays that got us closer, but he was as far away from bringing this team back from the dead as Daniel Ward was.

I'm not saying his play surpassed that of Jones, Bizzell and yep Godders too. What I'm trying to say is that true leaders come to the fore when they are needed.

Neita fired up when the team needed him - leadership.

Robbo the same - leadership.

Bruce the same - leadership.

To a lesser extent, McLean did the same yesterday, though it was harder for him after being out for so long.

LEUCOPOGON....

I apologise for my calling you a clown, I guess I'm still a bit upset from yesterday. I think we'll just have to agree to dis-agree on Bruce, but in my eyes he is the closest we have to a superstar.

So in the general scheme of things, would you prefer to keep the players who had the least number of possessions in the first three quarters? Just wondering.

Ok. You've missed my point here. I'm not delegating Bruce to the bench or to Sandrigham. All I'm saying is that some of you have to take him of that high purch. You hear "He was fantastic yesterday" because he got 30+ possessions. Most of them were in the quarters where we butchered the ball and when we trailed by 35 points. I'd love to see the stats of how many inside 50s he had in that last quarter, a stat you'd expect to be fairly high considering the stature of player he is according to many on this board. I don't think he had a big enough influence, or ever has a big enough influence, to help us win a game or when we need him. I am very critical of him being considered our "best player" and our next leader.

I never disagreed that Wheats shouldnt be sacked at the end of the year, actually I think he will be, but to call him the worst 100 gamer ever is extremely harsh. He helped hold up out backline with Rivers and Whelan for a few years.

i have to agree with the worst 100 gamer ever. He would not have got nearly as many games at another club. i know i will be howled down by people saying but he has such a great long kick etc. but what good is that if you dont actually go in and get the ball?

You don't even see the real reason why I advocate trading Bruce do you? He's a good player I don't argue that, but, he's no superstar and if we want to get a superstar here, we need to cut loose some good players at our club that have trade value in the eyes of the other 15 clubs in the comp. In my eyes, Cam Bruce fits this bill to a tee. Sorry if I didn't spell this out more clearly above.

P.S. I'm not a clown

I can sorta see ur opinion. U can't trade a Daewoo for a Ferrari.

Bruce does have trade value but u won't get anything from other clubs that is value for his worth.

We undersold Farmer, Simmonds, Woewodin, Thompson etc etc and I would hate to c MFC get bent over again with Bruce.

Jolly though.

So in your eyes wardy had as much influence on the game as bruce did? ward was near BOG? wow

Stats and influence, imo, are completely different. Bruce had little influence when it counted. He had influence when we were down 35.

I apologise for my calling you a clown, I guess I'm still a bit upset from yesterday. I think we'll just have to agree to dis-agree on Bruce, but in my eyes he is the closest we have to a superstar.

You have absolutely got to be kidding me...?

Brock? Jones? Davey? Rivers? All those players have had more influential games than Bruce has.

LEUCOPOGON....

I apologise for my calling you a clown, I guess I'm still a bit upset from yesterday. I think we'll just have to agree to dis-agree on Bruce, but in my eyes he is the closest we have to a superstar.

No offence taken Dees_rule, I realise we're all hurting after yesterday's loss. The worrying thing about what you write is: he probably is the closest thing we have to a superstar which is very concerning to me because there are far better players out there. For example I'd have probably 5 Eagles players ahead of Bruce.

For what its worth, I rate Robbo and McLean as the closest thing we have to superstars.

He had 22 touches in the second half did Bruce. 11 in the last qtr. But thats all I'm gonna say on the topic, we could go on forever arguing his worth, or any other players worth.

He had 22 touches in the second half did Bruce. 11 in the last qtr. But thats all I'm gonna say on the topic, we could go on forever arguing his worth, or any other players worth.

So that equates 11 in the 3rd quarter as well...so he practically had the same amount of impact, which is what I said earlier.

Stats and influence, imo, are completely different. Bruce had little influence when it counted. He had influence when we were down 35.

his best quarter was the last! 11 possessions and goal. he was pivotal in getting us back into the game!

If things are gonna change there has to be a drastic move. I agree with most.

The blokes I'd say good bye to without a second thought are: Bizzell, Brown, Ferguson, Godfrey, Holland, Pickett, Ward, Wheatley.

I'd seriously consider trading one or two of Bruce, Green, Miller, White and Yze.

If things are gonna change there has to be a drastic move. I agree with most.

The blokes I'd say good bye to without a second thought are: Bizzell, Brown, Ferguson, Godfrey, Holland, Ward, Wheatley.

I'd seriously consider trading one or two of Bruce, Green, Miller, White and Yze.

Even after Bizzell's game yesterday? And I can't believe I'm saying this, but Godfrey deserves to be kept on next year. His tagging this year has been sensational.

Stats and influence, imo, are completely different. Bruce had little influence when it counted. He had influence when we were down 35.

So that equates 11 in the 3rd quarter as well...so he practically had the same amount of impact, which is what I said earlier.

so which one is it?

on one hand you say stats are not the same as influence, but then you say that because he had the same number of stats in the last as he did the 3rd that his influence is the same????

If things are gonna change there has to be a drastic move. I agree with most.

The blokes I'd say good bye to without a second thought are: Bizzell, Brown, Ferguson, Godfrey, Holland, Pickett, Ward, Wheatley.

I'd seriously consider trading one or two of Bruce, Green, Miller, White and Yze.

I can't imagine getting much for White or Miller. White is past his day. 2 seasons ago, yeah, but I don't think anyone would be prepared to take on his contract. As for Miller, he is tradeable, but what would you get for him?

Bruce and Green are our most tradeable imho. Throw in a 1st round draft pick and bam, you have Judd in a Demons uniform

Let's just agree to disagree. I think I've lost the plot on the topic...and interest.

Bruce and Green are our most tradeable imho. Throw in a 1st round draft pick and bam, you have Judd in a Demons uniform

I think you'll find it will take more than probably both Bruce and Green plus a first round pick to get Judd. My guess is that its going to cost us McLean plus Bruce and draft picks. I'd consider this because I reckon Judd's definitely the best player in the comp (just in front of Ben Cousins) and is much more durable than McLean who has been very injury prone in his first four seasons.

I think you'll find it will take more than probably both Bruce and Green plus a first round pick to get Judd. My guess is that its going to cost us McLean plus Bruce and draft picks.

Which means we will never see Judd in a Melbourne jumper.

Bruce + Green + a first round pick could do, especially if it's an early first round pick.

With Bruce and Green, West Coast would finally have a forward line!

Green would kick 100 a season at Subiaco.

And with Judd, our midfield of dreams would be complete. Who wouldn't salivate over the thought of Brock, Jones and Judd in the same centre bounce!

So Jaded, are you saying that you wouldn't trade McLean for Judd? Even though I love McLean's work, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Which means we will never see Judd in a Melbourne jumper.

Bruce + Green + a first round pick could do, especially if it's an early first round pick.

With Bruce and Green, West Coast would finally have a forward line!

Green would kick 100 a season at Subiaco.

And with Judd, our midfield of dreams would be complete. Who wouldn't salivate over the thought of Brock, Jones and Judd in the same centre bounce!

I agree Jaded its unlikely to ever happen but even if it did and we lost Bruce, Green and a first rounder to get him wouldn't we just be robbing peter to pay paul. In effect we would probably not improve.

Because Judd is out of contract at the end of the year WCE, if he decides to go, will be forced to trade or lose him in the PSD for nothing.

If the season ended today we could offer WCE pick 2 and Green. I reckon that would do it.

But why would Judd leave?

I can't imagine getting much for White or Miller. White is past his day. 2 seasons ago, yeah, but I don't think anyone would be prepared to take on his contract. As for Miller, he is tradeable, but what would you get for him?

You could probably add Yze to that list as well for having a reduced trade value at this point in time.

I agree Jaded its unlikely to ever happen but even if it did and we lost Bruce, Green and a first rounder to get him wouldn't we just be robbing peter to pay paul. In effect we would probably not improve.

And there is the real question, what would we get if we decided to trade all these players and is it worth it?

I have never been, and will never be, an advocate for trading for trading sake.

So unless you can guarantee me that the deal will absolutely be an obvious improvement to the list (at least on paper) then fine, but otherwise the whole transaction can end up be nothing more than swapping like for like and therefore our current list problems for some whole new and shiny ones.

The other thing is, what getting a Judd (just an example) across the line will cost us in return. And while I am well aware of just how good he is, and it would be great to see him the red and blue, there has to be some sense in knowing what we would have to give up and the problems that that could create.

In the end is it worth giving up two or three of our best, plus a probable draft pick for a single player, no matter how good he may be?