How is this better then trading picks for Dunkley?
1 Like
Because we are rebuilding, and we need to bring in more quality young players via the draft to cover the gaps in our list.
Trading a type of player we enough of, and bringing in a player who covers an area we lackā¦ā¦ thatās good list management.
1 Like
Weāve struggled for goals full stop this season. Last year we were fine for goals from midfield.
Ham would normally be 5th in line for a wing position. But with Langford and Cox injured heās getting a game.
If we were trading Parish Iād prefer two picks around #10. So Shiel kind of cost.
Dunkley doesnāt fix our surplus of midfielders issue. Back in Hobbs, Perkins and Caldwell and add some more talented youth.
1 Like
Parish is a quality young player. Trade out Shiel to make room for Dunkley. We would be unlikely to get anyone near Parishs quality in the draft. Dunkley is older then Parish, whatever contending team he is young enough to be a part of Parish is too.
1 Like
Parish for Deven Robertson and another 1st round pick would be delicious.
We should be getting rid of Shiel and bringing in Brayshaw as a free agent and then drafting someone like Phillipou who can develop in the forward line and become a big body in the midfield in the future. Merrett to follow Mcgrath out to the flanks if Caldwell and Hobbs deserve more CBAs.
1 Like
You would be willing to trade Parish?
Only 25?? i think. Still playing well, i know his possessions arenāt always great but if that was the criteria for a trade we would only have about 8 players.
If it is simply we have others who are similar i would kind of agree but not 100% i think others should go before him.
Only 24
2 Likes
I would be up for Redman to play on a wing, runs all day offensively and defensively.
Allows plenty of room in the back line for McGrath, Hind, Massimo, Heppell & etc.
I think it would be better for Stringer to play 90% forward and have him come into the centre only if we are in desperate need, this would allow more midfield minutes for everyone else.
lol ahem, no
Perkins nearly had a bag of 5, heās a game winning HF
Hobbs is 2 years off being physically strong enough to endure midfield minutes, heās our Zerrett transition investment
What we saw is that Caldwell and Shiel and Zerrett are a fairly damaging combo, put so is Parish, the fact we have one injury to one of our top 5 mids and we stay elite in there is a great thing, you donāt want to lose that, as injuries do happen
We need Perkins class and agro in front of goals, something we could barely kick over 10 the last month
We were even with the saints for clearances, i wouldnt call that elite.
itās a 50/50 cos all youāre doing is swapping players who youād have to still keep predominately in the midfield, which inturn is still robbing the developing players of exposure in there.
the point of trading out (in this fancy scenerio thatāll never happen cos omg our players are super duper awesome and we canāt let them go) a player here is to allow other players to step into the midfield for more minutes (hobbs, perko, caldwall) that doesnāt happen if Dunkley is wanting major minutes in there.
As Iāve said Iām not the biggest fan of Dunkley, I think heās a good average player.
But Iām looking purely through the eyes of list management without any emotion. The evidence shows that our midfield mix doesnāt work. Also our 3 starting midfielders are the most unaccountable players in the team. One of them needs to be traded. Merrett just signed on last year, Shiel still has a few years to go (on a massive deal), and Parish has 1 year left and could easily walk into the FA next year.
It makes sense to me that Parish is traded for a couple of first rounders. Then I trade one for Dunkley. This gives us a big, marking, tackling, contested, accountable midfielder. I donāt rate disposal stats as much as most people. I pay more attention to team performance, and how they work as a unit.
Iām not in a huge rush to get Perkins & Caldwell into the midfieldā¦ā¦ but Dunkley can also do a role a HFF. So itās not an either/either situation.
Iām also in the camp that Parish might just be our most expendable mid. Heās a absolute gun and love him as a player, but with the balance of the group it might give us an opportunity to cash in when his currency is at its peak.
Might be crazy, but Iād certainly consider it if we can improve our balance. McGrath, Caldwell, Shiel etc donāt have the currency Parish currently has.
1 Like
This is the only reason Iād support trading for Dunkley.
He can be just as good as a forward as a midfielder.
The same cannot be said of Parish and Shiel.
It makes it difficult to run up to 8 players through the middle (like the Bulldogs do) when two players cannot play anywhere else.
1 Like
Totally agree with this.
1 Like
I think this would be interesting to discuss with the current list. Especially with Setterfield and Hobbs doing well. How many mid fielders does Essendon need and how do we keep them all happy and playing?
Parish missing plus setterfield and shiel a good thing to have guys who can cover.
if we get another injury though weāre probably giving midfield minutes to someone like Snelling.
Itās important to have midfield depth and also flexible players who can be best 22 in another position but fill in on ball if required.
think on team balance we have more guys who can go onball than through the wings.