If we get pick 5 then I won't care.. but if we get screwed then we have no one to blame but ourselves.
No, we’ll have St Kilda to blame and Carlisle for choosing them. His value has nothing to do with the game St Kilda are playing. They want themselves a bargain and what’s fair to us and the player they supposedly want is secondary to that.
I think you missed my point but no matter. There wouldn't even be a trade discussion if the club hadn't screwed the pooch. Carlisle loved the club and would have been happy to play here for 10 years back in 2013... by middle of last year he was getting pretty ■■■■■■ but holding out for Hird to come back.
Once Hird played him forward… with more poor results… it was all over.
He is a sook. It is a team sport and you should play for the team not for yourself
I agree, and have ALWAYS agreed with this principal. However ask anyone that is forced to hire/work with/educate this younger generation.. they simply march to a different tune. They are used to be consulted from the age of kinder about what they "feel" like doing.. and by the time they go through school they basically don't do anything that they don't want too.
I’m not saying all Xers are like this or that they are lazy… most are hardworking and responsible people but they just grew up in a completely different environment that has lead to a very overdeveloped sense of entitlement.
Carlisle wanted to play as a defender and he made that clear… why the fark would he continue to play in a position he hated when clubs are willing to pay him top $$ to play exactly where he wants to?? Also he happens to play far far far better footy in that position.
It was a no brainer and has been since the experiment failed in about Round 3 last year. Sheer stupidity by the club and all involved… and I know for a fact that it was laid out VERY clearly to the club that he would leave if continued to play forward… and yet the change wasn’t made until too late this year when his mind was already made up.
If we get pick 5 then I won’t care… but if we get screwed then we have no one to blame but ourselves.
Have been shouted down for two years but I do know someone close to Jake and he wasn't happy about it.. warned the club and they did nothing and now we are left facing this shitstorm. Yes he can be called a sook.. but in this game.. the sook has all the power.
Compare that to Hooker who was thrown forward and played like he meant it every single week. No hissy fits, just went where his team needed him.
If we get pick 5 then I won't care.. but if we get screwed then we have no one to blame but ourselves.
No, we’ll have St Kilda to blame and Carlisle for choosing them. His value has nothing to do with the game St Kilda are playing. They want themselves a bargain and what’s fair to us and the player they supposedly want is secondary to that.
This guys headspace is farked.
Needs to sign and concentrate on winning games of footy commensurate with his prodigous talents rather than behaving like a drama queen.
Tom lynch edged him today.
Probably Lynch shaded Carlisle today, though Lynch has been in good form. In a perfect world Hurley and Carlisle would be out tall backs in the future.
We have to concede, that FA has diluted the value of having developed KP when you are entering the window to challenge, at least to some degree.
Look at the Hawks.
Bring in Lake…Norm Smith Medallist first year.
Bring in Frawley…keeps opposition Gun FF to a non existent game in the GF.
Even if you need to go the trade option, they were still able to get Gibson without giving up a really high Pick.
Not to say we won’t get Pick 5 eventually, but they will make us work for it.
Not in relation to trades… but completely agree that KPP can now be bought more easily via FA. I think this should make clubs really think twice about taking KPP in early rounds of the draft. Either stash some away on your rookie list or 4th rounders and then hope they come good and then hope you are in contention and then can poach a good KPP from a bottom club.
I actually think it is insulting that StK won’t do a sensible trade for Carlisle… but I still blame Thompson for putting him up forward last year and basically ruining his value and desire to play for EFC. Have been shouted down for two years but I do know someone close to Jake and he wasn’t happy about it… warned the club and they did nothing and now we are left facing this shitstorm. Yes he can be called a sook… but in this game… the sook has all the power.
Can Carlisle change his mind and re-sign with us or once he has decided to leave and has nominated a club, a trade must be done or he must go in the PSD?
Can Carlisle change his mind and re-sign with us or once he has decided to leave and has nominated a club, a trade must be done or he must go in the PSD?
We have to concede, that FA has diluted the value of having developed KP when you are entering the window to challenge, at least to some degree.
Look at the Hawks.
Bring in Lake…Norm Smith Medallist first year.
Bring in Frawley…keeps opposition Gun FF to a non existent game in the GF.
Even if you need to go the trade option, they were still able to get Gibson without giving up a really high Pick.
Not to say we won’t get Pick 5 eventually, but they will make us work for it.
Can Carlisle change his mind and re-sign with us or once he has decided to leave and has nominated a club, a trade must be done or he must go in the PSD?
edited in light of bennell trade 22 is gone but their preparedness to upgrade 22 to 16 is encouraging . Wonder if they are prepared to upgrade 10 and 19 for 5
aaarrgggh just lost a post re: another complicated trade scenario.
relies on port getting 39 (compo) from lions for Moore (absolutely no basis to that whatsoever), gc getting 16 for bennel and melb giving us 25
you’d expect we’d push for 19 or 16 instead of 22 (we might be able to get it if we gave 23 back) but i reckon the mechanics of that aren’t too bad. i reckon getting an end of 2nd round pick is actually pretty important because you’d think all of blues, GC and lions would have some interest in mitch brown with their 3rd round pick. THis all kinda presumes we are into brown.
Sorry, but that’s simply ridiculous.
A) In that scenario, why would the Saints get anyone else involved? Effectively your trade has them trading us #5 and #42 and getting Carlisle, #25 and #41. All the rest is just noise, and would only happen if we wanted to trade out #5 for other picks.
B) Which is why it won’t work. The Saints goal with a downgrade is to get two teens picks, SO THEY CAN KEEP ONE. #25 isn’t what they want, they want more. And we shouldn’t have to hand over #25 to get the #5 pick. We should get it clean.
don’t disagree but the saints seem reluctant so i’m thinking outside the box. in this scenario we get extra picks so there may be incentive for us to hand over 25 which we otherwise seem reluctant to. brown is pretty important to this because i’m not sure he gets to 41 in this draft. our trade would be melk and carlisle for 10, 19 and brown( with a bit of luck). if we could get carlisle for 5 straight up i’d take it but i don’t necessarily like carlisle and melk for 5.
edited in light of bennell trade 22 is gone but their preparedness to upgrade 22 to 16 is encouraging . Wonder if they are prepared to upgrade 10 and 19 for 5
aaarrgggh just lost a post re: another complicated trade scenario.
relies on port getting 39 (compo) from lions for Moore (absolutely no basis to that whatsoever), gc getting 16 for bennel and melb giving us 25
you’d expect we’d push for 19 or 16 instead of 22 (we might be able to get it if we gave 23 back) but i reckon the mechanics of that aren’t too bad. i reckon getting an end of 2nd round pick is actually pretty important because you’d think all of blues, GC and lions would have some interest in mitch brown with their 3rd round pick. THis all kinda presumes we are into brown.
Sorry, but that’s simply ridiculous.
A) In that scenario, why would the Saints get anyone else involved? Effectively your trade has them trading us #5 and #42 and getting Carlisle, #25 and #41. All the rest is just noise, and would only happen if we wanted to trade out #5 for other picks.
B) Which is why it won’t work. The Saints goal with a downgrade is to get two teens picks, SO THEY CAN KEEP ONE. #25 isn’t what they want, they want more. And we shouldn’t have to hand over #25 to get the #5 pick. We should get it clean.
