grazman

From the Age: Essendon is highly unlikely to meet Gold Coast's asking price for onballer Josh Caddy, who wants to return to Melbourne to be with his unwell father. The Bombers had been trawling clubs trying to access two compensation picks to satisfy the Suns, to no avail. Read more: http://www.theage.co...l#ixzz1asmPwJth

Well it looks like Brisbane have 8+12. Let''s see if that's what they use to get Tippet.

By virtue of the fact that we were third in line for one of two options we've missed out on securing a replacement for Scully. I think next year represents a good opportunity though with the club having a bit of a war chest behind it to grab a ready made replacement. Besides Pendlebury and Goddard who come out of contract (who I think are only the remotest of chances -if at all) there are others such as Andrew Gaff whose player managers we should be persuading to look at joining the red and the blue. Even if we have to commit our first pick to Jack Viney we can still activate both compensation selections at the start of the year in what will be a much stronger draft. Neeld will have had 12 mths to work out what he needs from our list and who can be traded to get a suitable deal done.

Won't work... if you read between the lines the deal the Lions have worked out for Tippet is picks 8 &12. Whilst both players have similar currency in the current market, one is in contract and one out of contract, that effects the bottom line price because the Lions know they will lose Clark regardless. The Crows have 12 more months to work out a deal.

Brisbane want our first pick to bundle with theirs to get Tippet from the Crows to replace Mitch Clark. Freo's pick 16 isn't enough so the Crows must have some good drum on who will be taken where in the draft. If Freo really want him then it appears that the only way to do this deal for them is to do a three way with Melbourne. Such as: Freo give Melbourne a player and pick 16 Melbourne give Freo pick 12 Freo give Brisbane pick 12 for Clark. The complication could be that Brisbane may still want to be involved in the first round of the draft so to get our compensatory pick that was on offer for Clark it'd have to be a pretty good player (from the MFC perspective) thrown into the mix. This is why trade time is so interesting. The real drama is about how much are Freo prepared to pay for Clark... he doesn't want to go anywhere except Perth, but GWS won't care about that. An alternative, but less likely three way would be between Melbourne, Brisbane and Adelaide. delivering Tippet to the Crows, a player/s from Brisbane to Melbourne and two first round draft picks to the Crows. (which in essence is the clark deal - but with an alternative player) the real stumbling block here for clubs is that the groundwork needs to be done ahead of the proposal. I imagine there are few player that the MFC would be genuinely interested in that are available/willing to be traded by the club or player themselves.

I seriously doubt the club will trade anyone unless like Warnock they wish to be traded for greater opportunities (potentially this may include Bate, Dunn and Maric as well) No matter how good a deal armchair experts come up with the reality is always far removed. The player has to 'agree' to any trade and there's always an impact on the playing group. I think the club might be active in trade week, but I'd see us getting anything substantial based more around our draft picks than players on the periphery.

Straight swap for Cotchin, Martin and Vickery.

A lot depends on the incoming St Kilda coach, but they're definitely struggling to make room in the TPP. Kosi has been touted as trade bait for some time. He definitely has his limitations, but the argument is about what attributes he possesses that we lack in general. He's more than happy to dish out punishment and crash into defenders. We have absolutely no one that can play that role at the moment with the exception of Jamar - but he's no where near Kosi in terms of contested marking. As Old said he fills a gap for a few years... that's what you'd recruit him for to allow you to have the structures you need to develop a workable game plan. I've seen Jesse White over the last couple of years and I can't see why people rate him... According to Gerard Healy he's the laziest footballer going around. Personally I think he wouldn't offer anywhere near the physicality of Kosi and I just don't see what others see in him.

Yes

Gee for the next 'elite' midfielder that couldn't get a regular game for the Cats, Prismall is struggling to get a game for the Bombers. Oh well he didn't want to come to our club... wonder if Brock McLean will get a recall soon. I'm happier with Gysberts and Bennell (even though he didn't have a great game yesterday).

The analogy works for Brisbane as well, perhaps more so... back to back spoons, followed by a second last, then third last and then fourth last before finishing 8th and then another spoon in 98 ( keep in mind they had pretty much their premiership team playing by then - sans Brown) a couple of years playing finals and then the three in a row. from start to finish 9 years. How ironic I'm listening to Soundgarden right now... Jesus Christ Pose... Bails assume the position!

I know some won't agree (which is fine- I'm more than comfortable with the idea that there won't be agreement - or God forbid I'm wrong) but I see more than a few similarities with our regeneration and that of Geelong's - albeit we're coming from a lot further back than they did. In 99 Geelong went to the draft to rebuild their list, they had a newly installed coach (the difference being that they retained their recruiting manager for the journey). They had a lot of early picks due to trades. In 99 they got Joel Corey with pick 8 then missed with their next three selections (Spriggs 15, Bray 17, Foster 23) before getting Chapman, Ling and Enright. Steven Wells obviously didn't rate the 00 draft and they only got Josh Hunt with the first of their three selections at 44, before going back to the 01 draft to get Bartel, Kelly, Johnson and Ablett. This was to be the nucleus of their side during their premierships. Interestingly not every early pick worked , but on balance some of the later ones turned out to be solid gold to get the ledger back to black. While it's true Bomber Thompson didn't need to bottom out quite as badly to rebuild his list, it still took a while. True he had a honeymoon first year where they played finals (though lost in straight sets) on the back of what had been a very successful (but ultimately no premiership) decade in the 90s, but then it was very middle of the road 12th, 9th, 12th while he took stock. They started to make their charge in 04 finishing 4th, then 5th then 10th (a year that provided the catalyst for the premiership the next year) It took no less than 8 years from the start of the process to their first premiership, and you could argue that may have been 12 mths overdue, but the analogy is I think valid. It all takes time and football supporters aren't patient. I still remember in 06 the chorus of Geelong fans calling for Thompson to be sacked, Bartel and crew to be traded as too flakey, too slow, not hard enough etc. Bailey deserves time, the team deserves time.

Congrats RPFC. This is one of the best threads I've seen on here for a while. It's interesting that on the weekend we were clearly outpointed for tackles inside 50 (meaning the Swans were able to lock the ball in for longer - where it tended to rebound straight out again from our forward line) I think this in part is due to the more open nature of our forward line, but it's also supports what Old was saying about the interpretations that can be placed on what stats mean. Last year our F50 entries were pretty much the lowest in the comp, but we had one of the highest % of scores from those entries. Clearly the differential is an issue (as identified many times by our own coaching staff) but that's also assuming we can continue to score at the same rate. The amount of time a ball enters the fifty is more an indication of the effectiveness of the midfield not necessarily their efficiency - particularly if those entries don't produce scores. I've always looked at tackles as being a measure of work-rate and pressure, but the more time you have the ball in your hands the less time you have to worry about chasing the opposition, so whilst I'm not predicting a massive reduction in tackles this year, I think over time if we are to be as successful as everyone hopes we will, our trend will be a reduction not only in tackles but probably towards the overall number of possessions needed to kick over 100 points a game. (which is just an arbitrary figure I plucked out given few sides that kick more than a 100 points a game lose - but I'm sure some more mathematically inclined person can come up with a more definitive "winning score' bench mark.)

Exactly. I'd also make the point that for those that want him to be more instinctive. Jack Watts wasn't born with a footy in his hands like Scully he's a basketball convert. There's a lot of similarities between the games, but his natural inclination is to wait for the right option. He'll be a very, very good KPF in time, but like Spunj said he won't be a Jonathon Brown... same, but different.

To those wondering about why Ricky was the sub, my view is that Maric completed 90% of the preseason and was rated by the club as one of the top three trainers. Ricky had a reduced preseason due to a slight tweak in his hammy. It's entirely fair and reasonable in the first match of the year to reward consistency and effort. Ricky will probably start next week after today, that's also fair and reasonable.

I can't believe I'm going to say this, but I agree with Gerard Healy (err I feel so dirty). Jack should be played off half back/wing for a while. I thought his field kicking was outstanding today. He picks the right option and hits targets consistently whether 20 or 50 metres away. I thought overall he had a reasonable game today, but what he needs is to get is plenty of ball in his hands. I can see why he went pick 1. He's lightening quick off the mark. Once he gets a little stronger and more experienced he's going to be a weapon.

One of my all time favourite demons. I played around the same time and chose to wear #27, I could never emulate his courage or skill, but at least I wore his number. He'll be in my prayers.

Well they went for Cook instead of Darling who slid to 26... I'd say that there were more than just a few concerns as to Darling's extra curricula activities. I like the sound of Cook (but then I've always liked the quiet, humble types who play for the team rather than themselves.)

My take is that while Cam and DB (although in reality it's probably more to do with Chris Connolly) are the main protagonists, their agents are very savy and experienced negotiators in Tim Harrington and Ricky Nixon (albeit that Nixon appears to loves to see his name in the papers more than the average player agent). I don't know the specifics of how long the contract was on the table, but I doubt that either Cam or the Club were really surprised by the final result. The papers are mooting Hawthorn, but I see GC as a far more likely destination. Their last pick in the draft is 48 which is still before Hawthorn's third pick. They will have already stockpiled a plethora of young talent all from the same cohort, what they lack is experience. We may have been able to trade him for that pick, but that's on the supposition that before the end of the trade period that all of the MFC, Cam & GC (you can insert Hawthorn here if you wish) were in agreement that he'd be traded. I don't think either Cam or Nixon are the villains here, but I think it's a little fatuous to claim they thought the club would have a change of heart on the contract that'd been offered. Cam's got a business degree, I think he's done his sums and at the end of the day he'll be getting more money somewhere else, that's why he's left. BTW I think this is where free agency will be heading, players who are best 22, but aren't top tier at a club who see greater opportunities (such as money) elsewhere.

The story also mentioned that it wasn't so much money or length of contract, he was seeking assurances of his place in the team.... business decision in a business world. He'll get more money and a longer contract elsewhere, but the club remains consistent in developing a 'team first' attitude.

Wonder if they'll opt for a split round again this year with a twist? You could effectively have 7 teams with a bye one week and 7 teams with a bye the next week. Of course it's not even meaning three teams miss out, but it's a fixture and not a draw. Gives you 14 byes over two rounds leaving 20 byes for 20 rounds.

Maybe, but then maybe it's not a test match either, but a 20/20. As for Hampson as you say IF Jacobs had stayed, everything else after that is academic and that's where the reality of footy is different for a club than for a fan.

Well yes, but it depends on what the sticking point in terms of negotiations might be. I wouldn't be offering any more unless it was the deal breaker, (but then you'd be also looking at reducing the payments). I'd love North to pay a % of his wage, but clubs hate doing this and will want to free up their books. 400K may seem steep when compared to what other's might be getting, but the club has had to front load contracts anyway so I doubt this is as big an issue for the club as it is for many supporters who don't think that Hale should get more than another player (insert name here).

This post makes no sense to me whatsoever.... You're not concerned about getting a tall foward/ruck in the short term, so we don't need to give up something now... what about next year or the year after? You'll be OK with the trade if Hale addresses the need identified, but otherwise we've been burnt... I think it's safe to say that's a pretty unadventurous assumption you've made there. You don't want to give up anything or pay too much in terms of money or years.... safe to say the only players you'll get to the club on that basis will be players other clubs would otherwise delist.

Hampson I rate as a good ruckman, but what information have you to suggest that he's cheaper than Hale or going to be a better forward (remembering that Hale at least has several games that he's kicked multiple goals in). From the little that I know Hampson is rated highly at Carlton as you'd expect from a first round draft pick. Have you heard he isn't happy and wants to move? The difficulty in trading isn't identifying the type of player you need, but having them available at an affordable price. I'm not sure Hampson is.