1858

Their seems to be too much focus on Hale's negatives. (Yes he's considered a 3rd or 4th ruckmen at North, but so what?)

Given what we could potentially be offering up to get him and the $ he will be on why shouldn't he be put under the microscope? I'm all for improving our list and obviously we don't need the best players to do this but there is still such a thing as over rating a player (at least in context of a potential trade). I don't think I have seen anyone argue that he isn't an improvement on PJ.

He's after an opportunity to get more time in the ruck (which complements what we appear to need at present, and allows Jamar given a 'rest' up forward)

He's actually after more time in the seniors let alone the ruck and his "forward pro-ess" hasn't been good enough to ensure that in a year where he had the perfect platform to produce.

Hale was North's leading goal kicker in 2008, and is capable of being a regular scoreboard contributor with 1 or 2 goals each week.

That was then this is now. If he was in '08 form he wouldn't be on the table. 1 or 2 goals has been my point, a stock ruckman can deliver that.

He's 26 and after a new club. Whilst a little older than most supporters desire, we need experience (particularly in the ruck to assist with Gawn, Spencer and Fitz's development).

No arguement with the experience factor.

Finally, we see it all the time, all a player often needs is new enviroment to blossom.

For sure, but this applies to any player we acquire in theory, attributes come first.

Ultimately if we take on Hale I won't automatically condemn the decision as he would add incremental improvement to our list. If we overpay (which IMO is on the cards) then I'll be severely disappointed though as it isn't necessary for what he brings.

And why, when we have an All-Australian ruckman, are we going to make him into a forward who rucks?

It should be the other way around.

In that case Hale should be a better forward option to facilitate this.

Jamar won't be an AA ruck for ever. IMO he is just as good if not a better forward option than what Hale would be and I said use him "more" up forward not predominantly up forward (ie a forward who rucks). If we obtained a stock ruckman with even the remote amount of ability I can't see why they couldn't return us at least a goal and a half per game ala Hale this year. A 50/50 rotation with Jamar could be ideal, would reduce injury risk significantly and perhaps keep him fresher longer over his career. Ironically the setup at North with McIntosh and Goldstein seems to be in the direction of a 50/50 setup.

We are never going to get a better ruckman than Jamar next week, but we sure as hell can get a better forward than Johnson/Newton/Spencer et al.

Hang on, what happned to the doesn't have to be a world beater mentality? In the case of Hale it is ok if he plays a role (ie a goal and a half per game) but if we acquire a ruckman they have to be better than Jamar all of a sudden? Lets keep it simple. What I'm proposing is that I haven't seen Hale produce anything up forward this year that suggests he is a better forward option than a stock ruckman in a rotation (before you mention PJ he isn't even a stock ruckman). People just can't get it in their heads that he was tried at North for this exact role and was not up to it. At least with a stock ruckman they can ruck. People use the arguement what if Jamar gets injured (which is a valid concern) I can tell you Hale won't save us but a more competent stock ruckman may.

We have to work with the system to get the best outcome for the MFC. And at the moment it looks to be Hale.

This is the thing, if we pay over the odds then that is aruguably not the best outcome. Sadly best does not always equate to adequate. As we have previously agreed price will be the issue here both in what we trade and the salary of the said player.

Half an hour of decent ruckwork and a solid contest in the square.

Role player. There are plenty of 'spud' premiership players out there.

Ok, that sounds reasonable rpfc. I agree with the "role player" description of what we need and I think it is a sound move to try and acquire someone experienced to help Jamar (who can also go forward).

Firstly wrt decent ruckwork if you look at Hales numbers over the last couple of years he is hardly any better than PJ. On paper he should be though. A lot of North supporters regard him as a forward who rucks rather than a ruckman who can go forward and I think his ordinary hitout numbers reflect that mentality. Arguably in his prime and over taken by a 22 yr old.

Secondly wrt being played as a forward. Bash and crash is great, a contest is great but the reality is that this was simply not enough for North this year in a year when Lindsay Thomas was their highest goal scorer and Drew Petrie played just 2 games due to injury - Hale should have shone out in these circumstances yet he averaged a goal and a half per game. The exact rationale we are applying was the exact same process North actually put Hale through and yet they want to offload him. The "role" he played at North was substandard. Unless we have set the bar very low then why will he perform any better at Melbourne?

The contest aspect of his play up forward (which is a crucial component to many arguements I have read so far) is one dimensional. Unless he takes a grab he'll be out of the contest. Hale is a 201cm Michael Newton.

IMO we should target a stock ruckman (not a world beater) and actually get a package that can deliver in 1 area rather than be a hack of all trades and use Jamar more up forward. Even a stock ruckman with a remote amount of talent will deliver just as many goals as Hale (who's main advantage on PJ is height) if given the chance.

As I said earlier, if it was between PJ and Hale then Hale is the better option but that doesn't say much. It is important that we get a reasonable commodity if we trade our 2nd pick (or equivalent player). Now that you have come around to the spud factor how many spud ruckmen are acquired potentially for a 2nd round pick in a strong draft and also on $400k per yr? We can do better than this.

What would be the minimum return to justify Hale in our best 22?

Hey i am liking that Cap, and i am not a big Cap wearer but that one Rocks, & the Darker Jumper is always welcome with me. B)

Yep, the cap's a winner. That emblem is going to sell a heck load of gear. Everything from pewter mugs to beach towels will look awesome. I still hold out hopes that the actual emblem itself will be available to buy as a coat of arms to hang up on the wall - I'm talking good quality.

Adelaide definitely have long term plans for Davis but he didn't feature in their estimations this year as best 22. They'll groom him over the next couple of years and I doubt they would consider Warnock. Carlton IMO are still a likely option but I reckon if they've learnt anything from last year it is to not go too hard too soon.

No point getting upset I suppose although it is disapointing given he was looking at staying on. Gave us good service, time for us to move on.

Just a pie in the sky thought atm but sometimes you have to sew the seeds early. Jimmy should get in the ear of Tadhg Kennelly about coming to MFC after he retires (he turns 30 next year). Could be a good defensive coach for us down the track and would obviously emphasise our profile. Oh the shenanigans...

hmmm, I guess if there is any truth to this then I'll have to wait until I see it but it does sound a little American to me. I'm curious none the less.

What will it be? About 29/30?

As it stands it is pick 32 but more importantly it is our 2nd pick so the next pick we have in the ND (notwithstanding other trades) would be hit and miss (probably miss) not to mention the fact that we may not even have room to use it - big factor here.

You'd have to ask Prendergast what talent he thinks will be there.

Otherwise, jettison a player and satisfy the Kangas through that in some way.

Personally I like your 2nd option. If we trade our 2nd pick we are looking at bringing in just 1 likely future prospect at a time when we still have a fair few question marks and this years draft is apparently not too bad for depth which is probably significant to perhaps the 30's at least (guessing a little here I admit).

My thinking is that they will keep PJ if they cannot get Hale/Clark/White etc but he's off if we get one of them.

Yep, for sure.

If the price is right, and Jesse White and Mitch Clark aren't available, why not?

Is our 2nd pick the right price?

I'm probably a tad harsh on Hale. It can take ruckman years to show their worth as we know too well. He may be a decent understudy to Jamar, especially as both can go forward. Hale needs to ruck and he hasn't been doing that very much at all the last few years.

You should trust your initial instinct on this one.

In my view, PJ's standard of rucking, marking and general aerial ability is so shocking that some of us have been spooked into the idea of taking on any old replacement. I get the feeling that the club's mindset is that incremental improvement (which is what Hale is at best) is good enough and personally I fear that our 2nd pick is on the table here.

The poster you quoted states that Hale only played ruck as a 21/22 yr old (and for some reason had to mention twice that he was still developing). That should ring alarm bells because at 26 (if the cliche stands) Hale should be coming into it as ruckmen apparently take time yet he's been over taken by a 22 yr old (who by the poster's logic is still developing).

Hale is slow, an ordinary tap ruckman for his height, extra weight doesn't seem to be a biproduct of extra strength and I see other comments about his ability that are none too complimentary regarding defensive pressure and agility. He's had quite some time to prove and improve on his rucking ability and as you put it so eloquently earlier he is a spud.

If we had both Hale and PJ on our list yes I would play Hale before PJ but there isn't much in it and what Hale may offer up forward (which IMO isn't that much) PJ at least makes up for in run and chase - both are spuds at the stopages or in the packs so if we give away our 2nd pick for him then North have done very well.

My concern is the balancing act post 2013 when the maturity of players and therefore their contracts swell on top of the one or two big name recruits we might catch.

I agree, it is almost inevitable that we will come to such a point regardless of list management but that is life I suppose. We are definitely going to have to get creative down the track. I'm thinking Jack Watts as environmental ambassador for Hankook not enough tyres are recycled in this country.

* Will be interesting to see if the salary cap increases during this period and what effect that might have. Whether that will benefit TH's strategy moving forward. (Sorry ! )

This is the latest article I could find from a half-assed search. The cap as well as ASA amounts go up next year but after that it is in limbo by the looks. Free agency and the format of player contracts (if they change) will put a spin on things too. Either way I think TH's strategy isn't too susceptible to cap changes on its own it is just a matter of how liberal they can be down the track.

But I wonder where we are at in the cap in terms of real terms, if we were at 85% (source is Chris Connolly) only a year ago we wouldn't be far away from that now with retirements and delistings.

I agree, in real terms there probably hasn't been a significant increase in TPP over previous years. I still think we are poised for that to increase though despite the delistings and retirements and I get the feeling that this expectation is a driving force behind TH's strategy.

You're assuming we have hit the minimum.

We have had to front load contracts to get to 92.5% of the cap.

With front loading we paid 100% this year I believe. Going by TH's WW presentation we shouldn't have any trouble keeping above the salary floor until about 2012/13 when the club plans to use that saved cap space for taking in some experienced players at a flag tilt. They seem to have a projection of how they want our cap to behave. You know more about this than I do but surely our list managers have a grasp of things without having to overpay experienced players simply to avoid the pitfall of over playing younger players down the track. It seems by the "apparent" negotiations that the club doesn't want to fork out too much for Bruce and tbh I think this is a better signal to send to the group if we actually want to avoid over paying players down the track.

Can't see Baker playing but geez it would make things interesting.

... I'm not sure if they still have to pay Lovett his entire salary or not either.

Yeah, wondered about that too.

Will re-sign with Adelaide by the end of the week.

Turned down better money from Richmond, Essendon and St Kilda.

That's an interesting one. You'd think they'd have to jettison some players in order to make space.

Pass

Yep. The term "stay at home forward" cops a bit of criticism in the modern footy vernacular but that is exactly what we need. Doesn't need to be an out and out champion either, just a competent forward who has the required strength and agility to give our ball carrieris confidence in kicking to a 1 on 1 (if required) and compliment our mobile forwards. If it wasn't already the case, I think it is curtains for Newton given he mentioned the rucking side of things. I'd be surprised if they gave up a first rounder but a player and a 2nd could be on the radar.

Thanks for informing me. I thought this was so- however was not sure.It will be very interesting what the FD does.They will upgrade Jordie McKenzie. Don't know about Spencer..do they either have to upgrade him or delist him or can they retain him as a rookie?. please advise. thanks in anticipation.

On ustream Schwabby mentioned that they are looking at elevating him to the senior list. He said that they definitely aren't delisting him (which I think only gives them 1 option anyway as he can't stay on the RL I don't think.

Jurrah's best position for both him and the team is up forward. The beauty of Jurrah is that he can have purple patches and I'm hoping that for a very long time he'll be giving opposition coaches headaches. We want a situation where opposition coaches are spending time chopping and changing defenders in their match ups throughout the game as this may not only bring our other forwards into the game (if they've been quiet) but it distracts the opposition coach from other things.

Knights would be a massive pick up for any team. Has a nice blend of class and power. 70m player.

It was a knee to the back area. That is legal. i.e. speccies etc. It was just unfortunate that Jonesy came of a bit worse for wear. All in the name of "bad luck".

In theory.

As an aside, a second round pick this draft is more like a 3rd round pick in a normal draft

As it stands our 2nd pick is pick 32. Under a non-compromised draft that is still a 2nd round pick. I understand your point that picks have been pushed down the order but we need to keep perspective of what a 2nd rounder actually constitutes. We've had it good over the years with early picks but this is the reality that teams at the other end of the ladder have had to deal with - a 2nd rounder in the 30's.

Smart footballer just starting to find his way in the game. Given the pressure our kids have been under and a rigorous gameplan you can forgive any single player for not "starring". I think once the intricacies of our gameplan start to flourish from the regemented level we have displayed this year he will become more prominent. One of many players who will benefit from another preseason and improved facilities. I actually prefer him midfield to forward due to his composure.