A good mate of Clarrys ...

If you are not good enough for North's midfield you might not be that good

Only as a direct swap for someone in the Sparrow / Langdon / Chandler category of fringe players, and even then I'm not convinced.

Pass

I would for Langdon, that’s probably about all. Whilst I think Sparrow doesn’t do enough, he’s young and might be put in better positions with a new coach (s)

He’s a shoddy ball user but he does work hard and offer a bit more versatility than some of our mid/forward types.

If it’s Tracc out and no Flanders/Windhager in I’d consider it but 3rd round and his salary for years 3 and 4 better be reworked down to a role players number. Happy to spend some cap space up front but no point getting stuck with the back end years.

Lever for Simpkin? (One injury prone player for another?)

Absolutely not, never, nope, move right along.

Do players know what a captain is these days?

you expect a team to follow you when you walk out?

57 minutes ago, GawnOfTheDead said:

I would for Langdon, that’s probably about all. Whilst I think Sparrow doesn’t do enough, he’s young and might be put in better positions with a new coach (s)

You’d give away our only natural wingman for a bloke who can’t get in the midfield of the second worst team in the comp, wouldn’t get in ours, and is on a million bucks a year?

Good lord.

A decent contributor but let's be real, North will demand the world for him which will be significant overs and far more than a player of his 'average' caliber is worth.

Probably worth a late first rounder at most.

Pass.

I think he is on silly money

3 hours ago, Dee Boys said:

You’d give away our only natural wingman for a bloke who can’t get in the midfield of the second worst team in the comp, wouldn’t get in ours, and is on a million bucks a year?

Good lord.

if hes leaving hes surely prepared to shed some coin for just a whiff of september footy, and agreed that the role for us is HFF so langdon/sparrow/viney are in the gun there. give X the far wing and then, maybe simpkin can add to that mix as well with culley and windsor/langford whoever else rolls through there

2 hours ago, The Jackson FIX said:

I think he is on silly money

900k per year til 2029.

No interest

i actually think simpkin is a seriously underrated player

i'd rank him alongside merrett - great player who does not have a 'winning' impact upon games of footy, if that makes sense?

he's a midfielder pure and simple; they tried him as the gut-running half forward and it didn't work

He’s on a shocking contract compared to his actual output as a player.

3 hours ago, NeveroddoreveN said:

900k per year til 2029.

Silly money for a midfielder who can’t crack North Melbourne’s midfield

Nil interest, Sharon.

13 hours ago, poita said:

Only as a direct swap for someone in the Sparrow / Langdon / Chandler category of fringe players, and even then I'm not convinced.

Langdon is a far better worker and contributor than both Tom and Chin.

Simpkin is a a better player and could add to our mids more then Tom or Chin simply with more output which is aBout what Lingers provides on a regular basis.

8 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

i actually think simpkin is a seriously underrated player

i'd rank him alongside merrett - great player who does not have a 'winning' impact upon games of footy, if that makes sense?

he's a midfielder pure and simple; they tried him as the gut-running half forward and it didn't work

Simpkin is exactly the sort of player most here would be complaining about if he went elsewhere and played well, while we brought in someone else like McAdam or Sharp.

"Asleep at the wheel"
"Sack Lamb"

etc etc

Edited September 16Sep 16 by JTR

I know his Dad is at Kangaroo's and he used that to leverage a great deal for himself so it has me thinking about Viney.

I've loved Viney's past work and I know they're different players, but which of those two is:

A: currently the better player?

B: a better fit for what our club needs?

Bearing in mind I try not to subject myself to too many Norf games.

14 hours ago, NeveroddoreveN said:

900k per year til 2029.

It's a hard pass on that sort of coin. I don't mind him as a player and think he could add something to our team, but not keen on him at that wage for that long.

7 hours ago, JTR said:

Simpkin is exactly the sort of player most here would be complaining about if he went elsewhere and played well, while we brought in someone else like McAdam or Sharp.

"Asleep at the wheel"
"Sack Lamb"

etc etc

Not at all. Simpkin fits the Lamb prototype of a player being on the decline, and doesn't address a need at the Dees McAdam and Sharp aren't getting paid $900k and potentially addressed a need.

A big no to Simpkin.