Jarka

I'm going to play hypothetical for a second... Let's say that Jack Viney continues to improve and eventually becomes a top 5 player on our list and Todd Viney continues to work for the MFC. We potentially have a situation were we can pay Todd way over his worth and keep Jack's salary relatively low....just saying.

R.I.P.

Rereading that thread just confirms that I need to watch more TV, or perhaps I watch enough as it is!

Yes, I know he's not 193.

There is absolutely no doubt that the kid can play but one of the negatives is that people say that he's too short for a KPF. At 193 I don't see that as being an issue. I'd be very happy if we got him

*Warning* - Don't bother opening if you have an adverse reaction to reading Bigfooty or Mock Drafts For those who don't know Snoop Dog is a respected contributor on the Drafts & Trading board on bigfooty. Every year he does a pretty detailed mock draft and it's worth a read especially for a description on the players. http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=771940

Read somewhere that he's still growing and he's gone past the 190 mark and is currently about 191/192. Could end up around the 193 mark which is right up there for Key Forward size (and as an extra bonus it would make him taller than that dreaded 'inbetween' size of 190).

I'm also referring to the China trip as a whole. Why take a player who'll be delisted anyway? As for the contracts ending in November, why delist the likes of Brad Miller and co so early then and keep Newton till November? I would have thought that Miller would have been much more deserving of a junket trip to China rather than Newton. Hell, put our ex-captain in that category as well.

Really? I thought his current contract ends 2010. It's perplexing because I'd imagine that Newton wouldn't be offered an extension so having him on the trip would be a waste on time & money. Unless of course he's just there to make up the numbers, as I previously suggested. If you were in charge of the trip would you take a player who you knew that you were going to delist shortly?

My personal opinion is that Newton will never make it, the reasons has been discussed to death on this website and many others so I won't rehash, that's just boring. However, why he's still on the list and participating with the trip to China is....well, perplexing. One interpretation is that the FD think that he still has something to offer. Another is that he's just there to fill in the numbers and field a team. I have no idea why he's still on the list but stranger things have happened, and to answer a previous question of exactly what stranger things has taken place is Paul Hopgood playing over 100 VFL/AFL games. With that in mind anything is possible.

I hear this Hale bloke goes all-right

It's been reported that the decision is now being left to Hale with where he wants to go, sounds like the Roos has accepted our offer. The only thing Hutchy is interested in is ratings, the truth comes a distant second.

Just had a chat with a colleague who is also an ex-Saints player about Hale. I told him my concerns about the big fella and he basically laughed He rates him highly, in fact he thinks he's a better player than Jamar

I literally had to look up the two Saints players details because I have no idea who these are and what position they play. They're both 22 so if it's true perhaps the FD have seen something in them? It's a big IF though

Everyoen needs to stop and take a big, long, slow breath. This is Hutchy we're talking about. The guy is a bottom feeder and probably gets his info from bigfooty. Let's just wait and see what happens before we judge. PS It's a [censored] deal for Melbourne

That was pretty offensive. If you then take the IP address and go to http://toolserver.org/~chm/whois.php and enter the IP address that was captured you'll have the details of that address.

My opinion on him is a bit biased, I've had him in my supercoach/dreamteam on many occasions over the last half dozen years as I used to rate him highly. Not sure if you play but I tend to take an interest in the players I pick up and watch them a bit more closely. I'm not saying that we shouldn't get him (or perhaps I have), but I wouldn't part for a first rounder that some have advocated and I'm undercided on a second rounder. I understand though that if we want him it will have to be that pick. If we do pick him up I really hope I'm wrong about him as the idea of someone filling that role is brilliant. This is what I remember. Started off well in the ruck but was quickly overtaken by others. Laidley experimented with a forward role with some success although when he was tried as a CHF he failed. Strengths - Size, strong mark, good kick, plays as a pure tap ruckman. Weaknesses - Doesn't use his size to advantage (ie doesn't crash packs), extremely poor below his knees, unable to perform with niggling injuries, inconsistent.

Well then, why don't you tell me exactly how good Hale is, I'll even give you a starting point. http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pc-kangaroos--david-hale Don't try that crap on me H, keep to the discussion

So? Are you happy to through away a pick just because we'll trade away a depth player to get back into that round? That's not what I said. Reread my post and try again. His history and the direction that the game is headed is against him. There has been no satisfactory explanation from the pro-Halers regarding this, just that his 'type' of player is what we need. (That initself is doubtful). Hale is terrible below his knees and he fails to use his size to advantage, he also struggles with injuries. That is not the player we should be targetting to fill the role of big bodied forward/back up ruck. I want someone to break packs open for Watts and Jurrah, Hale is not that player It's completely irrelevant to this discussion, or are you just trying to deflect? Two completely different players fulfilling two completely different roles. I still don't see the relevance.

Hale is 27 next year. He doesn't have the agility of Dean Cox and he's not a power big man like Jamar. He's demonstrated a trend of slowing down over the last couple of seasons while the game has continued to speed up. Let's look at the recent successful teams, how many big logs like Hale do they carry? Collingwood had Fraser and will probably delist him, Saints have Kosi and he was a liability on GF day. Even if you're correct, what you're basically admitting is that it's an equal money bet that he'll fail or succeed. Those odds are not acceptable for a second round pick in a strong draft that will have good depth well into the the third round. Just as many players either perform at the same level or are worse. To say that Hale will be successful because of what happened to Josh Kennedy is ridiculous. That's a different topic, why bring it up here?

He rucked in round in round 21 against the Eagles when Goldstein didn't play. Don't tell me what I can or cannot remember. Terrible would probably be overrating his effort. How can a player who struggles to hold a regular spot allow us to make structural changes? Hale's challenge is to perform consistently at AFL level, he hasn't done this for three years, you yourself have admitted this. For a second round pick trade in a strong draft I would expect a player to walk into our starting 22 and be an immediate contributor. Hale has demonstrated that he's unlikely to do this as a forward and it's completely unknown as a ruck, although his recent past performance would suggest that this would also be unlikely.

Hale's rucking ability is poor, and his stats back that opinion. If we're getting him as a ruckman we'll be very disappointed. How will he protect our key forwards? The defenders will just put their best link man on him and use him to run the ball out of defence all day (or night). A return of one goal a game would be a virtual liability to the team because of how the opposition will xploit his weaknesses. Good luck with that, up until now he hasn't demonstrated that he's capable of doing it on a regular basis, why would he do it for us? You just answered your own question. Other than a one hundered year old oak I'd be more inclined to see who's available for trade or looking at mature age options around the country. The belief that David Hale is the only possible option is ludicrous. One thing that still hasn't been answered by the pro-Halers is that why would Hale suddenly be able to produce a career best performance just because he joins us? For him to be a successful trade that is what he'll have to achieve. It's a bit arrogant to think like this.

You have got to be kidding

In that case why don't we just go into the MCG carpark, chop down a tree and stick it in our forward line. That's just a stupid suggestion, Josh Fraser is Collingwood's equivalent to David Hale, he's not playing to today and probably won't play another game for them. The days of a big, stay home log in the forward line are gone.

I'm not convinced that Hale is a good ruck, but we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one, although I would like to see his 'taps to advantage' stats, that would help. His forward work is what most interests me, particulary his last two years, which I think we'll give us the bext indication of what he's capable of in the future. Performing as a key forward will be his main role, back up ruck secondary. In 2009 he kicked 22 goals from 16 games (averaged 3.4 hit outs per game) In 2010 it was 17 goals from 12 games (3.2 hit outs). The last 5 games in 2010 he didn't kick any goals at all. Those stats point at a liability in the making and why anyone thinks that he's going to instantly get back to his form from three years ago is deluded. Then there's the danger of the opposition using Hale's man to run the ball out of defence, as he's hardly the quick, agile type.