bing181

It's because it's only "potential" that the numbers aren't higher. In reality, he just hasn't done enough.

We'll never know the full story, but I'd say he was completely on the mark with Clark. No-one inside or outside the club knew that after getting back to full health Clark would turn around and do what he's done.

Of course. But there are a lot more players who go the other way. Also, it's not as if he'd had 5 or 6 great years, and then a year off with an ACL, Trengove has never had one breakout year, yet alone a succession of standout seasons -he's just not had a chance to get going or established. I can certainly understand Richmond fans being wary of this deal (if it's true). If you judge Trengove by what he's actually done rather than what he did as an 18 year old, it's hard to see much that he's put on the field that would justify a particularly high pick.

Important to bear in mind.

None of us know the exact situation, I wouldn't be too quick to judge. These are professional footballers, with a short career that could be ended every time they step onto the field. I don't begrudge them their right to maximise their income. In any case, not sure what more Beams could have done to get to Brisbane? But now the cat's out of the bag, hard to see him going back either - though Dustin Martin tried his hardest to leave Richmond and had to eventually back down. On that note, will be interesting to see who calls whose bluff re Griffin/dogs.

Surprised no-one has mentioned it earlier. Above and beyond ability, there's "culture". Roos is, apparently, very big on culture, so it comes as a surprise, given Trengove's position and past. He's not quite at Junior levels, but still ... Perhaps post-Grimes and Jones, the club sees the future leadership group being built more around Viney than Trengove, or even, that Trengove is just too tied to a past that we're having trouble moving on from. Interesting one. Hugely mixed feelings myself, but we need to let this play out to see where we end up. Things are changing, that's for sure. As if losing Mitch for next to nothing after he'd done his Lazarus wasn't enough, or having Frawley move simply because he can (and get more money) ... The new face of professional football?

Wish people would stop mentioning Dangerfield in regards to every trade. Myopia.

Or not. 3 and 12 to Collingwood for Beames?

This is what "everyone is tradeable" looks like. No point throwing our hands in the air, this is typical of the kinds of trades that many here have been proposing in regards to players from other clubs coming to the Dees.

Trengove hasn't played for a year, and had a disappointing season the one before. His value isn't as high as many here would like to think.

They're called trades. i.e., there are multiple protagonists and criteria to be satisfied: clubs, players, agents, money, girlfriends, wives, ex-wives and ex-girlfriends, (sick) parents or grandparents, money, playing opportunities, coaches, team-mates, injury history, age, money, etc. ... its a long long list, and they all have an impact on possible outcomes. Amongst it all, it's a wonder that ANY trades get done! But if they're not done, it's not because someone has "put their cue in the rack". It's because between the clubs, players, agents, money etc. etc. - keeping all these balls in the air and getting them to come down at the right place at the right time just hasn't been possible. If it was as easy as what you're making out, we'd have a team full of AA players and Brownlow medalists, and the rest, as they say, would be history. One final point: it's perfectly feasible that half of the top 10 at next year's B&F will be made up of players who have been traded in over these 2 years. That's a more than solid result.

Griffin went to GWS for 3 specific reasons: Cameron (coach) is ex Bulldogs, and they get on well and have worked together before. There are ex-Bulldogs players there who he's mates with (Callum Ward for starters). He's not a "limelight" player, and nowhere better to quietly ply your trade than GWS. He would not have come to us under any circumstances, because none of the above criteria apply (except for having Daniel Cross). He would not have gone to any other club either for that matter.

Big fish? Well who exactly? It's not as if they're cueing up to change clubs, and with clubs willing to let them go. It's also not the case that all players want to go to all clubs - Blease to Brisbane (sick father), Griffin to GWS (knows the coach, wants to get out of the limelight) etc. etc. I know it's called the Trade Period, but participating isn't compulsory - the Swans have already said they probably wouldn't be doing any trades. We've got two great trades incoming - Garlett and Lumumba, both of whom should easily finish in our top 10 for quite a few seasons to come. Add to that Stretch and a couple of great draftees, then add in 2 "new" first round picks in Hogan and Trengove - I for one would be very happy with that. The Tyson deal was a happy meeting of coincidences - we wanted Salem, and were confident he'd still be there at 9, Tyson was a bit under the raider because he'd had serious injuries and hadn't played much footy, GWS wanted to control the top end of the draft etc. etc. We can only work around what's available/possible, and rather no trade than the wrong trade just for the sake of making one - which is what you seem to be asking for.

That is a smile.

Just because he was unwanted, doesn't mean they were prepared to give him away for nothing, or that he has no trade value. Also, what happens with the 4th round pick is irrelevant, because it'll be used to upgrade Jetta. Whether it's 75 or 95 or even 65, it has no value to us in trade terms. Smart dealing it seems to me.

Not necessarily disagreeing, but the guy who just won the Brownlow was taken 31 in the Rookie draft, Lumumba has been at or near Collingwood's top handful for many years but was a rookie, as was our other potential trade, Garlettt, who averaged around/over 2 goals a game for 3 years. Some players just don't manage to put it all together by the time they're 18 - a rookie position is not necessarily a guarantee of long-term mediocrity. Frost will be taken on what Roos, Taylor, Viney and co. see in him now, regardless of where he was drafted, and if it takes round 2 to get it done, perhaps it'll have to be. Agree though that it would be bizarre to be paying more for Frost than for Lumumba or Garlett (if it works out that way), or even that Geelong should get Clark for less than what we need to get Frost.

Time to pull out the heavy artillery - we need someone to wash his car for a year. Volunteers?

To reply to/update my own post, our 4th round pick is actually 61. Not sure if that'll be enough, even under the circumstances. (BTW, just realised we got Stretch at pick 42. That could be a bit of a steal if he turns out to be a player).

Blease plus 55 for Gartlett, and we'd still be in front.

Well yes. But then again ... no. Lumumba is Mr. Consistency, both in the way he plays, and in keeping himself on the field. Has missed very few games. So, a useful Lumumba in the hand, who you'll get a very solid 20+ games out of a year, verses (in the bush) an A-Grade player who may or may not even get onto the park. I could live with Lumumba receiving a higher pick.

One thing I'd throw in to all this - I bet there are a few at Essendon now wishing they'd had a couple of HL's in the change rooms asking the odd question rather than just toeing the company line.

Getting laid off/moved on isn't the best place to be at any age, couldn't help.

Yes, like he got into the heads of the Collingwood players and tore the club apart. FFS.

Actually, that's called an opinion.

It would appear the right-wing faction of Demonland is upset at recruiting someone with leftist attitude.