When did I say we had 2 1st rounders or 1.5 mil? Sounds like your making BS up to suit your agenda. IF we had the option of trading our 1st round pick (lets say pick 4-6) for Kelly then yes absolutely I would do that & pay him a very good salary (nobody is on 1.5, that’s just stupid talk). Would that solve all our problems - NO. Would it be far more likely to solve a massive midfield issue than pick 5 - yes. Draft picks are a lottery & I would take a known gun over the hope of a gun in a heartbeat. Now Fyfe is a little bit different because of his age. Would I pay him every cent we could scrape inside the cap - absolutely. Would I trade something we have to get another 1st round pick (say Fantasia) plus our 1st round pick for Fyfe - no.
your not gonna get Kelly for one first round pick to quote you -“Sounds like your making BS up to suit your agenda”
If Fyfe goes to another club, I guarantee he will be paid over 1 mill a year.
I think you are massively underrating some of the doggies other players. Macrae is a gun, Hunter, Dahlhaus are top end & when fit Libba is one of the best clearance mids in the game. That’s not even including Wallis who was pretty good pre-injury. Add in a guy like Boyd who is a bit like Kelly for us in that he was a genuine top end mid & now rotates off the half back line & the run & carry of JJ & Jong & you can see how far in front of us they are.
I’ am not underrating them at all, I’m suggesting that people don’t usually recognize how good these players are until they have had success.
I just think that maybe you are underrating what we have and given time and a few more foot soldiers we could be real improvers!
Things in the AFL can happen fast and usually it’s not the team that most supporters think will win it!
2 Likes
The best player in the league was traded for pick 9, 28 & Dean Gore plus he was not paid 1.5mil. Again, its not easy & my hypothetical was simply in response to your post. I’m not saying I expect we will trade our 1st round pick for Kelly, I simply used that example to highlight that trading is whats needed.
Treloar took 2 first rounders, unless your willing to cough up the pics and the bucks your just talking out your behind.
it was you that first mentioned Fyfe and Kelly
Fyfe, Kelly, Swallow, Rockliffe, Wines, Shuey, Mcrae, Hannebery, Cripps, Hall, Parker, Dumont. Steven. Without knowing the contract status of every player, that’s the type of targets I would be looking at. Now I know that again its not exactly easy to get players of that quality BUT other teams have & you can bet your sweetarse that other teams will have no fear of trying to pry Merrett, McGrath, Fanta & any other young talent we have out from us.
What do you think the club should give to get Kelly?
I’m sure Danger could of got a lot more if he put himself on the open market, and he was a restricted free agent. lousy example.
Club would be foolish to give up any first rounders and bags of cash at the current stage we’re in.
The only hope we would have with any of the players you listed is if they were at least restricted free agents and had nominated EFC as their club of choice.
1 Like
How do we know who the club has, and hasn’t tried to poach? Hasn’t all been played out in the media.
We have far more to pitch in order to convince top end talent (mids) from other clubs.
A developing core under 23 squad that looks very solid.
You see, if Jobe and Stanton were still at peak performance.
And Pig off half back
The side would be significantly better right now.
But circumstances have completely messed up a hell of a lot recently.
I think we will land some significant players in the next couple years BECAUSE of how we held together and survived the saga. I believe amongst opposition playing ranks, there would be a respect there for the resilience and integrity shown.
And of course, we should have plenty of $$$ to offer.
I wonder if we had the picks wether we would have more mids? Weren’t we into Bont and Lobb? Then we may not have had Merrett? Or would we still have had Ryder and not needed Lobb and gone another mid instead of chasing Looney. Still have Carslile and not got Franga. Still had Pig. The alternates are endless.
While I have no doubt Collingwood expected the price to be less (they were banking on finals & their future pick to be in the teens) Treloar is a far better player for them than their previous 2 1st round picks (Scharenberg & DeGoey). They have secured a genuine midfield gun for the next decade & can build around him. That makes far more sense than hoping you find 1 player of that quality in the draft. Are we going to find a better player than Kelly at say pick 5 this year - its very doubtful. With Kelly in the side could rise quicker up the ladder & have say pick 14 next year - that’s possible. Is Kelly worth pick 5 this year & 14 next year - yes he most likely will be better than the players we would pick. Its not a case of trade at any price, its a risk/benefit scenario.
3 Likes
Umm how is using the example of the best player in the league not a perfect example of what is actually possible? Is Fyfe not in a similar position? Isn’t it possible to get any player to nominate 1 club only therefore controlling the value? Hawthorn have bent a few clubs over by having them only nominate them & not all were free agents. Tom Mitchel is another example of a top end midfielder who just changed clubs & only cost pick 14 & steak knives swaps. Now we could hope & pray that we find a player like Mitchel in the draft this year & who knows maybe we might, but the fact is that 20 years of line & length drafting has given us a list that can’t make finals. You want to continue with the same approach & expect a different outcome, I want to change the approach & get in line with whats worked elsewhere.
1 Like
Part of this is the impact of the draft sanctions. Pretending the SAGA penalties would impact last year and last year only only is a great narrative to sell memberships, but it’s a 2 or 3 player penalty on the club that will last for many years to come.
Interesting discussion.
Think there’s truth to both sides. One star doesn’t make a side, and players only get recognised once the unit as a whole is successful, and that comes through development of 12+ guys. But also trading in quality takes some of the risks out of the development process, and can push the side to the next level.
Personally I’ve leant more towards the KM side, in terms of drafting for the quality, and trading for the role players, but it’s fair to say JBomber has been focused on improving the midfield for 15 years, and is rightfully getting impatient with what the club had actually done in that time (which would have been theoretically the draft for quality approach).
So how do we make this all happen most efficiently and easily for the club?
I don’t think I’d go for a Fyfe still as the cost is extreme for maybe 5 years of quality. I think I’d be targeting the early career star who is not quite Dangerfield standard yet, but who we know is going to be to level. The price is probably the same, the risk is higher, but the payout is greater in terms of getting 10 years out of them. It’s what we tried to do with Caddy, but I’d like to think our target would be better chosen this time.
But who knows. I still think there is a core of quality there already, and that once Jobe, etc have moved on that the structures will work better with the game plan Worsfold wants to implement (ie Hird’s game plan suited Jobe, Worsfold’s doesn’t as much).
But whatever, we need to keep teaching and growing what we have, and hope it clicks starting this week. And if it doesn’t click this year we get to tweak the mix and go again next year.
1 Like
lol, I think you could sell refrigerators to Eskimo’s. Unfortunately i’m not smart enough to sort through all your waffle.
“I want to change the approach & get in line with whats worked elsewhere.”
I’m not as sure as you that this approach works, definitely can push you up a few spots, but ultimate success, don’t think so.
Then simply point out the example in recent memory of a club who hasn’t traded to fill gaps in their list & have won a flag with only drafting. When you realise you can’t do that maybe you might be ready to realise where your position is flawed. I’m happy to consider the evidence you use to support your beliefs but frankly so far you haven’t provided a thing. Ultimate success requires a lot of things to go right so nobody is suggesting there’s a single solution, just that history dictates that you can’t win a premiership without a strong midfield group & that drafting alone makes the likelihood of ultimate success less likely. Again you may want to believe we can buck the trend & have faith that Dodoro can do what no other recruiter has done. I’m more pragmatic & logic tells me he’s had 20 years to work on this list & its still got the same issues. You’re banking on luck, I believe success comes from making your own luck.
It is my opinion you need both approaches, depending on where your list is at. My current focus is on Daniher as the key indicator of what phase we are in. When he is nearing the end of his prime footballing life we need to be in the “throw everything at a flag” phase.
My personal thoughts are that we are in a draft phase at present. Daniher is a couple of years from his prime footy years.
The time to start to move back to a trade phase will be in 2 years time. This should be our flag winning opportunity. If it works that’s great, try and keep the window open as long as possible. But if it doesn’t work then …
In 4 years you are basically selling your soul trying to get in ready-made players and have the last grasp at the flag.
If no success, trade everyone of value out and start working the draft again.
2 Likes
I agree.
It’s to early to be throwing big contracts at elite talent when our list is still being defined.
Carlton’s recruitment of Judd is an extreme example of the effect of buying a player when your list is not ready.
I also believe the recruitment of Dangerfield will have negative long term effects on Geelong as it will keep them up in that 3 to 8 position for a couple of years where they wont have access to elite kids through the draft, and in the meanwhile their core list will be aging.
1 Like
While you are correct, I don’t think it’s actually that meaningful, given the way the drafts have been compromised for a decade which has artificially changed the balance, and allowed teams with a quality core (based on drafting from 2001-2004) to tweak the fringes and stay at the top, while other sides haven’t had access to the top level talent to make significant gains.
Also, are you trying to trade to fill gaps in the Paul Bernard style, or the Dangerfield style. Which successful teams sold the farm for a massive star? Carlton (Judd), Sydney (Buddy), Geelong (Dangerfield) haven’t won a flag.
The Boyd trade was the biggest $ success, but he wasn’t an established star, and really was a highly paid role player in the flag.
Other successful trades have generally been well targeted needs fillers, not the “franchise player” types in my opinion.
And I think we’ve absolutely been trying to do that, and will continue to try to do that.
1 Like
Sadly, somebody must be getting it. Clubs must pay 95% of the salary cap each year.
This we are ‘cashed up’ call is a bit of an overstatement I reckon.
The maximum cap space (or ‘cashed up’ amount) any club can have is $530,000.
Also Xavier Campbell on Bomber Radio last week said that the Club pays near to the maximum each year (or words to that effect).
1 Like