Disagree. He said decent only once, and WOG in a few. Not trying to say that he has set the world on fire (clearly hasnβt) but he has been decent 4 times, WOG once and poor 5 other times.
For comparison, Tippa has had a similar record over the first 7 rounds, including 2 WOG. But we wouldnβt be talking about letting him go if his contract was up, and he has had a big form turnaround. Lav needs to be playing midfield with occasional stints forward, and given a decent run at it.
Seriously. We are measuring a players worth by farking stupidcoach points now? FMD.
But Tippa is really good at football
Do not become a lawyer.
It is the worst defense Iβve seen in some time.
It was quality last week when Hurley was ranked only above Dea and three particularly hapless Swans.
(Dreamteam, not SuperCoach)
The games Iβve seen him live proved to me he would be lucky to make it at any club. Injury prone, slow, melts on shots for goal, canβt pick a ball up below his knees, an makes dumb footballer decisions. An stop comparing Langford with this guy. Langford actually looks like a smart an skilful footballer, laverde looks like a choking ball of muscle
Youβre all β β β β β .
Laverde will rise
Like a Phoenix
And burn baby, burn.
I thought he was a good kick for goal when he arrived. He was just too quick to adopt the Essendon βbrandβ of goal kicking.
If he can get an uninterrupted run and get some confidence I think he can be a very good player. We do whinge about hanging on to injured/mediocre players for too long but I think heβd be worth 2 more years. (If thatβs the sticking point).
Laverde is in the kind of position that he could easily be classified in 12 months time as a young gun, a list clogger, or anywhere in between. I understand the club wanting to sign him for only one year, and I understand him looking elsewhere.
At the end of the day, this is one of those ones where being closer at the club and seeing his work, how he reacts to training, and knowing his injury situation in detail probably is important to determining what to offer him. Personally, Iβll be pretty unfussed whatever the club does. They could easily βstuff upβ with hindsight either way - either letting him go and he becomes a star, or keeping him and he just clogs things up.
I am Humble enough to recognise at the start of the year that I got a few things wrong about the coaches and some of the players.
I am Humble enough to want to give LAV another year, if this is what the coaches want.
We have the star power and match winners to make it to the promise land. We no longer have the luxury to pay a guy that hasnβt played one great game in his career good money over 2 years to find his potential. If he stays on he stays on the cheap or we use his list spot for a hard nosed role playing Guelfi type. I donβt think we can afford replacing Laverde with a 18 yr old, we will need to find a free agent or mature age recruit. I always feared only one of Laverde and Langford would make it.
He stays for a year.
He goes.
Or we try and bundle him with our third round pick for the top half of the second round. ( not much less than we drafted him for)
Reputation shot again
We donβt not have a third.
If clubs are indeed offering him 2 years then we should be able to get a second rounder for him at least.
Supply and demand.
I would take a second rounder.
Would be lucky to get a 3rd rounder for him at this stage imo
So we do have a third then?
We donβt not not have one β¦