Crisp is a very good prospect. Good pace, very clean hands, tall but with a standout vertical leap, hard to beat in marking contests because he uses his bulk well to shield the ball, excellent in the clearances, awesome tackler has a kick as penetrating as Myers, seems to have a decent engine. Has added the ability to kick goals from the midfield and play as a half forward to his bow in recent years.
The one knock on him is his kicking. It was horrible in his draft year. His ball drop was just ghastly. Even though he tested well for kicking in the combine (many poor kicks have which is a bit of an indictment to the kicking test), his kicking is one of the principle reasons for being sent to the NEAFL for so long. During this period his ball drop has improved markedly and his kicking has been far more efficient as a result. He still tends to spray some and has a habit of overkicking his passes to leading forwards, but the improvement he has shown in that department to date is very encouraging.
I think he plays like a poor mans version of the Paddy Dangerfield game, strength, power, raking kick and damaging up forward.
Send him to the best ball drop kicking coach in the business....
Trav can you send him his number?
And its not like you can’t make a completely made up deal out of thin air that is more believable. How about this: Port: In: Ryder, #53 Out: #17, #37 and O’Shea Brisbane: In: Beams, O’Shea Out #5, #25, #44, Crisp Collingwood: In: #5, Melksham, Greenwood Out: Beams #30 Kangaroos: In: #25, #44 Out: Greenwood Hawthorn: In: #37 Out: Lowden Essendon: In: #17, #25, #30, Crisp, Lowden Out: Ryder, Melksham, #53 Brisbane take O’Shea to replace Patful, and yes I’m rating Melksham as something Collingwood want (heh, apart from Heppell he’s our best midfielder under 23, played 96 games and Collingwood keep insisting they want a young best 22 player). Of course, Essendon has to win, don’t they? The pick #44 tides North over accepting #25 for Greenwood, Brisbane have had to up their trade for Beams, but get a replacement for Pratful who has finals experience and is young, Port get away with using two sets of steak knives. And we hope to hell the draft has some depth. Pretty sure those deals are almost all interlinked, with the exception of #37 for Lowden.
It would be more reasonable to replace Melksham with Kav.
For pick #30? Maybe. If we could replace Kav in that, and someone actually offered that deal, we'd take it and run. I think with Melksham we'd still take it. Ironically, I don't think it's too unfair to anyone, depending on how Melksham and Lowden are rated by competitors and us. Crisp looks promising, but plenty of Brisbane fans left him out of their best 22 for 2015 on their Bigfooty board.
It would be more reasonable to replace Melksham with Kav.
For pick #30?
Maybe.
If we could replace Kav in that, and someone actually offered that deal, we'd take it and run. I think with Melksham we'd still take it. Ironically, I don't think it's too unfair to anyone, depending on how Melksham and Lowden are rated by competitors and us. Crisp looks promising, but plenty of Brisbane fans left him out of their best 22 for 2015 on their Bigfooty board.
Well, I figure - KAV! is very much an unknown, pick 19 & three years in the system. Compare to O'Rourke who has had two years in the system and a very similar output to KAV!. Yes, there is a big difference between selections 2 and 19 but there is also a difference between pick 19 (From Hawks to GWS) and 30.
It would be more reasonable to replace Melksham with Kav.
For pick #30? Maybe. If we could replace Kav in that, and someone actually offered that deal, we'd take it and run. I think with Melksham we'd still take it. Ironically, I don't think it's too unfair to anyone, depending on how Melksham and Lowden are rated by competitors and us. Crisp looks promising, but plenty of Brisbane fans left him out of their best 22 for 2015 on their Bigfooty board.
Well, I figure - KAV! is very much an unknown, pick 19 & three years in the system. Compare to O'Rourke who has had two years in the system and a very similar output to KAV!. Yes, there is a big difference between selections 2 and 19 but there is also a difference between pick 19 (From Hawks to GWS) and 30.
Yeah, but Collingwood's whole spiel has been they want #5 and a young mature best 22 player. Melksham fulfills that (barely), KAV doesn't.
Traditionally, when there is a 5 or more way deal, at least one club stalls the deal at the last minute for just that little bit extra. I would like us to be that team. 17, Crisp and another draft pick please.
On Bigfooty they’re talking about us trading #20 for Crisp and #30. Then Brisbane trade #5, #20 and #25 to Collingwood for Beams and #30 (on-traded to us for Crisp). Is Crisp worth a 10 pick downgrade? Garlett may still be available at #30, maybe Cockatoo.
On Bigfooty they're talking about us trading #20 for Crisp and #30.
Then Brisbane trade #5, #20 and #25 to Collingwood for Beams and #30 (on-traded to us for Crisp). Is Crisp worth a 10 pick downgrade? Garlett may still be available at #30, maybe Cockatoo.
On Bigfooty they're talking about us trading #20 for Crisp and #30.
Then Brisbane trade #5, #20 and #25 to Collingwood for Beams and #30 (on-traded to us for Crisp). Is Crisp worth a 10 pick downgrade? Garlett may still be available at #30, maybe Cockatoo.
I don't get how Collingwood get #30.
What are Collingwood giving us?
Edit: This is my third crack at this (deleted the first one 'cause I thought I must have being stoopid).
Looks like a desperate deal-saver solution with a flaw to me.
Collingwood proposal?
Brisbane don't get #30 back to ontrade to Collingwood. That's Essendon's pick. Otherwise it's just #20 for Crisp.
Which won't happen.
And so it's just Beams for #5, #20 and #25.
Which won't happen.
I mean, unless Collingwood send us Lumumba (here's hoping!).
On Bigfooty they're talking about us trading #20 for Crisp and #30. Then Brisbane trade #5, #20 and #25 to Collingwood for Beams and #30 (on-traded to us for Crisp). Is Crisp worth a 10 pick downgrade? Garlett may still be available at #30, maybe Cockatoo.
On Bigfooty they're talking about us trading #20 for Crisp and #30.
Then Brisbane trade #5, #20 and #25 to Collingwood for Beams and #30 (on-traded to us for Crisp). Is Crisp worth a 10 pick downgrade? Garlett may still be available at #30, maybe Cockatoo.
I don't get how Collingwood get #30.
What are Collingwood giving us?
Brisbane: In: Beams Out: #5, #25, Crisp Collingood: In: #5, #20, #25 Out: #30 Beams Essendon: In: #30, Crisp Out: #20
Collingwood already have #30, it's their 2nd round pick.
Assumes Brisbane are willing to up their offer to include Crisp, and that we are willing to downgrade our pick. Edit: Forgot to include Beams in the "outs" for Collingwood
On Bigfooty they're talking about us trading #20 for Crisp and #30.
Then Brisbane trade #5, #20 and #25 to Collingwood for Beams and #30 (on-traded to us for Crisp). Is Crisp worth a 10 pick downgrade? Garlett may still be available at #30, maybe Cockatoo.
I don't get how Collingwood get #30.
What are Collingwood giving us?
Brisbane: In: Beams Out: #5, #25, Crisp Collingood: In: #5, #20, #25 Out: #30 Essendon: In: #30, Crisp Out: #20
Assumes Brisbane are willing to up their offer to include Crisp, and that we are willing to downgrade our pick.
Thanks, much clearer.
I assumed Brisbane starts with #30, but I see Collingwood does.
Problem with that, as i see it, is that it helps Brisbane, Collingwood and (indirectly) Port, while we get to stew.
Well, it doesn’t really effect the Port/Ryder trade. We would be saying that Crisp is worth a 10 pick downgrade. I’ve never seen him, but some here before trade week did comment they thought he’d be a gun, so maybe he is. The problem will be we suddenly need to trade out someone or we’re not going to have enough spare senior list spots to use what we get from the Ryder trade.
Well, it doesn't really effect the Port/Ryder trade. We would be saying that Crisp is worth a 10 pick downgrade. I've never seen him, but some here before trade week did comment they thought he'd be a gun, so maybe he is.
The problem will be we suddenly need to trade out someone or we're not going to have enough spare senior list spots to use what we get from the Ryder trade.
That's the point.
It gives us nothing in our major trade.
We get Beams to Brisbane and send a high pick Collingwood's way.
Gosh, awfully nice of us. Now how about helping us out with Ryder?
Collingwood, Brisbane: Sorry, can't help you.
Port: So, new deal. Pick blow me and an empty can of West End.
On Bigfooty they're talking about us trading #20 for Crisp and #30.
Then Brisbane trade #5, #20 and #25 to Collingwood for Beams and #30 (on-traded to us for Crisp). Is Crisp worth a 10 pick downgrade? Garlett may still be available at #30, maybe Cockatoo.
Well, it doesn't really effect the Port/Ryder trade. We would be saying that Crisp is worth a 10 pick downgrade. I've never seen him, but some here before trade week did comment they thought he'd be a gun, so maybe he is. The problem will be we suddenly need to trade out someone or we're not going to have enough spare senior list spots to use what we get from the Ryder trade.
That's the point. It gives us nothing in our major trade. We get Beams to Brisbane and send a high pick Collingwood's way. Gosh, awfully nice of us. Now how about helping us out with Ryder?
Collingwood, Brisbane: Sorry, can't help you. Port: So, new deal. Pick blow me and an empty can of West End.
Why should they help us? The premise of this deal is we effectively think Crisp and pick #30 is better than #20 and the later pick we would have used. If we think Crisp is a good young talent, we may win this deal. Port is completely separate. If Beams goes to Brisbane I don't think Brisbane has the salary cap for Ryder as well anyway. Back to hoping GWS are interested.
First I'd heard of Crisp was his mention in these trades. Would he really cost a pick 37? (or a 10 pick downgrade, which I think is worth more). He's played 18 games in 3 years and only 6 (yes all at the end) last year. With O'Rourke and Christensen going for 19 and 21, I would have thought pick 37 would be a stretch for Crisp.
That said, I have liked the (brief) look of him. Looks like a very balanced player.
