mo64

Recall seeing Balic star in an Under 18's Championship game. Thought he'd be a top 20 pick at the least. Just went back and looked at some of his highlights packages from 2015. There's nothing about his game that stands out in a positive way other than being an accumulator of the ball. But on the downside, either his problems with wrist injuries prevent him from tackling, or he is the worst tackler I have seen. Take at look at his highlights package for The Academy against the Allies:

Then how can the AFL manipulate the competition for it's own benefit, Tom Scully, Chris Judd, cough, cough!!!. The reality is, clubs need to put work into a prospective recruit at least 6 months in advance. The re-negotiation of existing contracts can't all be done in trade week. They need to plan if they intend landing a big fish. The Storm have never been in a position to sign a big-name player from another club because a large chunk of it's salary cap has been locked into Smith, Cronk and Slater for the past 10-12 years.

Whilst I agree with you, Gibbs is contracted, and Carlton don't want to lose him. They can put whatever price on his head they like. Which is why I'd leave Carlton out of any trade scenarios when it comes to Lever. Deal directly with the Crows, and get it done early.

I think it's beyond doubt that Lever has told the Crows of his intentions to leave, and by the sound of things, he's also told them that Melbourne is his club of choice. Would love the deal to get done early in trade week, and save us the anxiety of thinking the deal will fall through.

Who said that Adelaide believe that Lever is worth $300k pa? I reckon that article by some tinpot journo was a piece of crock. They re-signed Milera to a $1m for 3 years last year, and see Lever as a potential captain. And clubs like North, Saints and Carlton (who had the cap space to go after Kelly) would snap up Lever before pick 10. IMO, I reckon that Adelaide has asked Lever to be honest about his intentions so they could plan going forward. After Lever told them he's leaving, they upped their offer to McGovern, and re-signed him.

Garland isn't AFL level depth. He's not a key defender, nor is he a lockdown 3rd tall. What does he offer at AFL level? Time to cut him and free up a list space.

What the hell are you talking about? For whatever reason, his future at the club is untenable. That doesn't mean that the Dogs believe that he was the sole reason for the failed season. You seem to forget that he was also dropped from the side in 2016.

Just as it is your opinion that Stringer has a higher ceiling. And I suggest that you look up the definition of "scapegoat". The Dogs are getting rid of him for a reason.

Here's some facts: Stringer - All Australian, recent premiership player and under contract. Lever - Out of contract. So why do you think it is that Lever would cost more financially and trade wise on the open market? Usually uncontracted players have less currency than contracted, because the threat of the PSD comes into play. And every other club would be prepared to pay more for Lever than Stringer, not just us.

Amongst all the crap rumours, how do we propose to get Gaff. He's contracted and worth at least an early 1st rounder.

If Waldron was in charge of our club, we wouldn't need to free up room. He'd just cook the books.

And they'll still beat us next year, like they have for the past 10.

So is he staying or going? Or is this one of Nixon's drunken rants?

Why would Adelaide want Watts when they just re-signed Mitch McGovern? Plus they also have Tom Lynch as a 3rd tall.

Disagree with your 1st point because Lever will get to his club of choice. Agree with your point about Frost. The timing of his re-signing seems more than a coincidence.

Was thinking the same thing. Maybe Lever's management advised the club that we're not in contention, so we immediately re-signed Frost.

Aside from Mac brothers and Frost, who are all playing, which other key defender is injured. And don't say Garland, because even if he was fit, we'd be looking to pension him off at seasons end. Smith is more of a half back, who could play on a 3rd tall.

Hulett looks like a suburban footballer. Could dominate a game due to his superior phsical prowess, but as you say, I don't see anything in his game that translates to AFL level. Another Leigh Williams in my opinion.

If the club is currently targeting opposition players to recruit, they'd be doing the sums as to what cap space is required. They'd have a fair idea as to which players are in the firing line.

No he wouldn't. Pedersen playing as an old fashioned follower is more effective than having Fitzpatrick on the field.

There are so many things wrong with your logic. For starters, if a quality player who addresses a need becomes available, you make a play for him, regardless of where you are on the ladder. And $700k is not exorbitant. Secondly, you want to use that 1st round pick on a classy outside mid. Do the names Morton and Toumpas spring to mind? How they translate from junior to AFL ranks for outside mids, is the hardest to assess. Take a proven commodity in May. If you think that Lewis is almost done, he has another 2 years on a contract which wouldn't be much less than $700k. And finally, your offer of $250k for Jack Leslie isn't much over the minimum wage.

It's the most inane list I've ever seen, and if anybody draws any conclusions from it, they need to give it away. Captain Obvious can tell that Freo will win more games with Sandilands in, and the same applies to Jarrad Waite, but 50% of the players on that list weren't playing because they weren't selected.

And what's your issue with that? That's the only way to get a trade done. We've got too many players with good reputations, that let us down too often. The Jack Watts of this year is like the Jack Watts of old. Does the odd cameo, and that's it. But I doubt the GC would be interested in him.

Nailed it. We've either had diabolical 1st quarters (Hawks, Roos) or been well on top (Dockers, Tigers). In each case the game has been winnable in the last quarter, but we don't have the mental capacity or belief to finish the job. I'm no psychologist, but it seems that the players get over excited when we score, and get down when we concede goals. Goodwin's got a tough job because Roos left him with a talented list that wasn't used to winning. As a start, I hope he never trots out the line, "We're a young team, blah, blah, blah." Psychologically it could be a crutch for the players to excuse failure.

I was just pointing out that our list management were silly enough to trade in Melksham for a top 25 draft pick and sign him for 4 years, and also re-signed Garland with a 3 year extension. Both were poor decisions, and that's not in hindsight.