Jump to content

Nasher

Primary Administrators
  • Posts

    14,398
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    159

Everything posted by Nasher

  1. Ruck/Forward, Stef. Make it happen. He has my backing too.
  2. You guys trying to break the record for the worst thread ever or something? You're doing pretty well so far. Is it footy season yet?
  3. Your measure of success is premierships, but you call two premierships "underperforming". So what would you call "par"?!
  4. I don't agree with that at E. Every year, 50+ players get delisted and usually only a very small handful of them get recycled once they do - two or three a year at the most would be my guess. Even the power Essendon/Brisbane/Geelong teams of the 00s always had waste to shed every year. I just find the notion that we're that chock full of quality to be a bit unbelievable.
  5. There are always players to be sent to the scrapheap. Any year if you're struggling to come up with at least three players to be moved on, you're not looking hard enough.
  6. It's probably a tad inappropriate to have this conversation so far out, but I think it's an interesting topic, just because I think it'll be interesting to see which players unexpectedly come on, and which players unexpectedly fizzle out once the year is over. At the most risk are Maric, Martin and Jetta for mine. A heck of a lot of water to pass under the bridge first though; last year I'd have had Bell, Miller, Dunn, Bartram, Johnson and McNamara. A lot can change in one season. A lot harder to do it this year compared to last year.
  7. Well, that came totally out of the blue. Fantastic news.
  8. As has already been said, this is not correct; by agreeing to the trade (and presumably signing it etc) the contract now belongs to Hawthorn. He's not our player anymore, neither in principle nor in law. On the question: even if he were still our player from a legal point of view, why would the club bother to play him? There are a lot of risks and costs associated, and absolutely no gains whatsoever. It's a bit of a dumb question really, you only need to go skin deep with a little bit of logic and it's obvious the answer is 'no'.
  9. No doubting that he has all the attributes, the only question mark remains over when he is actually any good or not, and the idea of all our eggs being in the one basket there makes me nervous. I agree with old though that Martin sounds good in theory. He definitely has all the attributes to fill the prototype 'forward-ruck' role.
  10. I think that rule only applied to players not on an AFL list. (e.g. Liam Jurrah, who got an exemption).
  11. Agreed. Very pleased with this - especially since we managed to get a pick we could actually use (as opposed to token very late picks).
  12. Sure they're low, but the chances of finding a player just as good as McNamara are very high. Like I said, low risk, low pay-off. I don't see the point. You're right. Poor old Isaac Weetra only got two games to show his wares too. By your logic, he didn't fail either then.
  13. With an end goal of him becoming what? I agree that he's shown glimpses and in a completely fair world he should be given the chance to extrapolate on that (I thought that's what his 1 year contract was for this year) - but life's not fair and I don't think "he deserves another chance" is reason enough to keep a player on the list. To be worth retaining on the rookie list when they have failed as a senior player, the player in question has to have some quality - a trick, if you will, that will bring high reward if it comes off. Otherwise you're risking missing out on another Jordie McKenzie just so you can hold on to an ordinary player. Examples of the qualities I'm talking about: Michael Newton has a high leap and goal kicking potential. John Meesen had size and athleticism. Tom McNamara has... ?
  14. I wouldn't bother rookie listing him. He might make it, but so might a million other players out there and I would've thought that even if he did, the best we'd get would be a dime a dozen good-ordinary player. Just a textbook delisting for mine. Open up the spot for a player with a higher payoff.
  15. Sometimes I think an IQ test should be required before being allowed to join Demonland.
  16. You're setting the bar pretty low if you think Shannon Motlop "went ok". He played a handful of good games but was mostly either rubbish, or playing in the VFL. Not interested in Daniel either. Fantastic player at his best, but I get the feeling the headache of having him would outweigh the on-field benefit. No d-head rule anyone?
  17. No, it finishes on Monday for some reason.
  18. A useful contributor, scored for free in the PSD; can't be too unhappy about that. Don't know that he'll be able to hold his spot forever as the side develops, but I'm more than happy to have him in it right now.
  19. I wholly endorse your sig.
  20. Well thanks for the reminder. I may have forgotten otherwise.
  21. Well as long as I have your blessing for having my opinion and view I guess all is okay!
  22. He has, and he has. If he didn't and didn't, the club would not have persevered with him for so long. Until 2009-2010, being aggressive in contests was Jamar's only trick. He showed nothing else. If you want to draw a parallel with Jamar, then Jake Spencer is the guy to expect to come on, not PJ IMO.
  23. I find it staggering that people can't at least see the potential with Spencer. I guess where some see a dilapidated old dump, I see a renovator's delight.
  24. Martin and Fitzpatrick are the players currently on our list that fit the mould, but I'm not sure the former is good enough and the latter is not likely to come on enough this year to provide adequate cover. There's no science behind my assessment of Fitzpatrick, just gut feeling. Spencer I see as a first ruck - I think he'll develop in to a good ruckman - a poor man's Jamar perhaps. He's aggressive and likes to hit bodies, has shown that he has the ability to take a grab (without being able to do it consistently), but I don't think he provides the forward line threat that we would want for a second ruck/forward yet. He's also got the obvious problem that he's hopelessly unco, but I think there's every chance that will improve with age. Don't know enough about Gawn other than the fact that he's a man mountain and by all reports, fairly mobile for his size. I think he'd be years away from being a threat to anyone or anything. Dunn, Sylvia and Newton are third last, second last and absolute last resorts in that order. Plan X, Y and Z if you will. So basically, if we are unable to pick up any ruck-forward this trade period, we're relying on Fitzpatrick to come on sooner than expected, or Martin to come on full stop. It's not the ideal position to be in as you've not mitigated the significant risk that neither player will be of any use next year. I'm hopeful that the feelers are still out for someone to play in the role we had earmarked for Hale, but I have no idea who that could be. Mature aged player from a second tier competition?
  25. That doesn't make logical sense to me - PJ is not capable of playing the role we were targetting Hale for, otherwise there would have been no need to target Hale in the first place.
×
×
  • Create New...