Rhino Richards

My comment was in reference to massive upside on Nathan Jones in another thread.

Carroll does not have any presence. Despite all the posing and bad haircuts, he is terrible with the one on one and is a more often not a goose when tempers flare. He gives us nothing on the ground. BTW, Miller does not have it either. Physical presence is best served by winning contested ball more times than not and using it effectively. Otherwise you overrate the "tough guy" stereotype. Only McLean comes close to my definition.

Correct. Or it might be case of having a sign in the Club saying "This way to the PSD". I think MFC has faulted in giving certain players 3 year contracts when they were clearly on the decline. We have also extended th service of NQR players as depth rather than refresh the list to get better players into the team. But dont go the blanket rule on contract by age. At 27, some players are coming into their peak. Sharper judgement needs to used by the Club with senior players coming up to contract review.

You have to work what players you are prepared to let go and at what price the market will pay. Davey has his shortcomings but he is quick and is a playmaker. We lack that in spades. He is also a crowd and junior supporter favourite. Its not the be all and end all but its a consideration. You would want a good pick for Davey (1sr round) . I dont think you would get the interest because most teams after underestimating in his early years have worked him out pretty well. That said in a good side he could be very good. But neither the Hawks (Rioli), the Cats (Varcoe) nor the Bulldogs (too many little guys) will pay over the odds for him.

Good point. He is really a 2nd year player for all the football he has missed.

I regularly do. Player managers regularly leak around the media and the relevant clubs which feeds into Forums. Right so we agree on contractual demands. Good. The next issue is what the other player wants re football career. Its not enough to just meet the players contract demands. If a player does not want to play for you then forget it. No trade. And if the Club is not holding the requisite PSD then its in the players interest to nominate his preferred Club so that Club can begin meaningful negotiations with the intended Club and by passing other offers. If you hold PSD#1 in the negotiations, it allows the intended Club to twist the deal I have yet to see a trade get to or hinge on a conscience vote. You are grasping at straws claim ethics of player manager. And it makes no logical sense for a player to push an intended Club to trade higher than it has to get the deal. There is no conscience or ethics to it. When a player moves Clubs he either wants to join a successful club or one that will be. Pushing an intended Club to deal higher than would punishes the intended Club from use that higher pick for a more talented player to create a more successful team.

Most of the forum speculation gets whipped up by player managers seeking to send a message. Warnock (or his manager) has stated that he is looking to come home east and wants more opportunity as an AFL ruckman. You can add Richmond to the mix as well as Carlton. Players will go where there best contractual arrangement and football opportunity will reside. I think MFC are astute to realise they are unlikely to play for Warnock just using their PSD#1. However if Warnock is going to leave Freo he will seek to negotiate with the Club that offers him the best terms. If he wants to go to MFC and MFC and Warnock agree terms, then MFC can bargain with Freo very hard on this matter and other Clubs wont have look in on this. The deal would be lopsided in MFC's favour. If Warnock wants to go to another Club other than MFC and has agreed terms with that Club, then that Club will have to negotiate a market linked trade with Freo to avoid Freo not agreeing and then letting Warnock go to the PSD and to the first PSD ranked Club that can meet his terms. And it may not be the Club that Warnock wants. It wont be conscience or ego that sways him at all.

Correct. And given your low opinion of him, what would a smart well researched team offer for an "obviously" NQR player in the market? At best he is a low second round pick possibly third round pick? And what gems would you expect to find at that level in the draft? Commander Picard is right on this one.

You missed out on the third question. 3) Will MFC receive better value by retaining him and improving his skills or trade him with no market value based on assessed mediocre performances in a 16th side?

....that claimed massive upside in a player when he has a lack of pace and limited penetration by foot. B)

When we have five or six picks in the ND why would we not go for an uncontracted AFL player with the PSD#1. It would be a waste of benefit of PSD#1 if we had to spend it a 7th round draft pick. And you wont quick fix Club problems through the PSD anyway.

If we compared their lack of success over their history with MFC's over the same period of time and took into account the current dispositions of the Clubs, I know which profile I would prefer. I am not sure why you are so critical of them. I think MFC would bottom out or close to on most meaningful metrics of success on and off the ground.

Warnock is not happy with the level of game time and opportunity at Freo. He wants to come home. Prisnall has echoed similar sentiments. Players will go where they see opportunity. Its not a matter of getting screwed either way If Warnock wants to come to MFC and he is out of contract then Warnock could go to MFC for nothing. Its happened before (eg Stephen Powell to St Kilda). Its not a preferred outcome. Players and their managers are more focussed on "demeaning" contractual offers that refelct a "lack of respect of the players talent" than club trading negotiations. The proposed low ball offer reflects the relativities of the trade rules and bargaining positions of both parties. I am sure players are not that wet behind the ears to misconstrue the mechanics of trading against their precious egos. This matter can be easily explained by the Club with the player over a cup of coffee to clear any lack of understanding.

They have 40,000+ members and making $millions annually. Its a pretty good basket IMO. What is that saying about glass houses?

You need to offer the club something as opposed to nothing that forces you to ultimately use the PSD#1 on that player as opposed to another. If he had no ACL problem, I'd go a 4th round. With ACL, I'd offer a fifth round. I cant see how Geelong can bargain much on this player. Warnock is a different matter. From a Freo perspective he is a required player more so than Prisnall is to Geelong. He is fit and ready to play AFL. I think we need to deal fairly with Freo. Offering them pick 67 (5th round) is akin to offering them nothing. If MFC have identified another needed player that they would use the PSD #1, I would offer Freo pick #51. Its a better incentive than having pick #67 in order to get Freo to agree to the deal. I dont agree with screwing a Club in the short term because it comes back on you in the long term.

Agree. If MFC wants Prisnall then we offer a fifth round pick while waving PSD#1 at them if they dont. Whether you would use PSD#1 is dependent upon what is available in the PSD this year. Players do recover from ACL injuries but the injury is a definite negative on his market value.

MFC have not signed any agreement with Casey so I cant see how it could state that it was moving. From an MFC perspective, insurance was a very important consideration particularly if Sandy 1st firsts were in the finals.

Aside from McLean who I cant see MFC letting go, there is no other MFC player (over 25) that would draw more mid range 2nd round draft pick at best.

But hang on he is good trade bait according to some!

If Jones has had such a dogged year and there are question marks about his disposal how would you achieve any upside position on such player. Jones is not going to get you better than early 2nd round pick at best. How do you know you would get any better than Jones? You dont. If Jones was a social delinquent or a culture stain, you would move him on. He isnt and given how threadbare our midfield is, why would you "punt" away what little midfield you have? He has upside but its serviceable but not massive. And how could it be when he lacks pace and has average kicking penetration. But wait hey he bleeds red and blue. All bets off. He is untouchable! If he loses any more weight he will be a short lighter Cale Morton. Otherwise you are heading in the right direction

Those veteran and experienced players were lost this year anyway and they have already been replaced. Dont slash your wrists.

Completely Agree. He has had to stand alone in the midfield that was regularly being shot to pieces. This has been a hard and unreasonable ask on a 20 year old with barely 50 games. I wonder how he would go as 3rd or 4th up midfielder in a better team. Undoubtedly better. He is no star but is hard at it and competitive. And given we have a profound weakness in our midfield, why the hell would we trade him? And who would replace him with ...Valenti?? Good grief. Some people trade for trade's sake without a thought for how you really improve your list.

I didn't think it would get any worse than this year.

Nathan Carroll would be the very last footballer I would want young players looking up. I am not sure what you value in Carroll but if he adds "grunt" on the field then MFC doesnt need him. He is a spud and we should look to more mature (football wise) and more skillful players who actually add some real grunt and contest on the field.

Nothing like overrating our own is there WW? Green is not even in Alves, Healy or Wells orbit. Neither Geelong nor the Hawks would need Green. He is honest. He is hardworking but he is not the sort of player that Clubs would pay hard to get hold of. Each of the Cats and Hawks have him covered.