@goon_squad I agree with you like 95%…which is extraordinarily high.
My only difference of opinion is McKernan. If we keep him, we risk a situation in perhaps 2-3 years’ time when Draper has risen to be our lead ruck, but we have no other depth…Leuenberger/ TBC/ McKernan could all be played out at a similar time.
So I think we need to use McKernan’s list spot immediately, in search of a longer term offsider to Draper.
Only way I would keep McKernan, is if we somehow managed to trade Leuenberger…but I think that is unlikely.
Am I missing something, or is a players contract worth more than the paper it is written on?
Colyer and Myers are contracted to the end of 2019, if they don’t want to go, we can’t push them.
Francis is different because he is open to an opportunity to play in Adelaide if it suits the club.
I will be happy if you can explain why it is not ridiculous to suggest that we should try to get rid of 2 players who are committed to the club, and EFC have indicated they are committed to them.
After going through all the crap of the past 5 years why should the club try to trash their relationship with the players now?
Yep. Totally understand that they are contracted and they can say no. That they likely would initially.
But also remember that there contract is also to perform to a certain level.
They haven’t. We should be clear and we owe it to them as well to say you know what, based on last year’s form and our expected trade inclusions we no longer see you in our best 22. Perhaps your opportunities are going to be very very limited. Now you can stay, or we can facilitate a trade.
That is actually more honest and holds more integrity than not having the conversation. Now you have that with 3-4 players and it is likely 1-2 will choose to move on.
That is not treating them like crap. That is respecting them. Had they of performed as was expected the conversation wouldn’t be needed anyway.
But like you say, contracted, but when a club pushes a little many players read the writing.
Tell me.how many people have Myers or Colyer in our best 22 next year with the expected inclusions??? They would likely be best served going elsewhere.
On CONTRACTS
The industry will shift to view contracts more as guaranteed money. It’s what a player agrees to play for until a certain point. Clubs will then trade players more and more as long as those contracts are met (in principal) or only changed in agreement with said player.
On TREATING PLAYERS LIKE TRASH
Treating players like trash is not exploring all options to make the club and all involved more successful.
Imagine telling BJ, yeh we could have got Schache but we didn’t feel right telling Colyer and Myers they weren’t in our plans anymore so we didn’t try. That is treating BJ’s commitment to our club like trash.
Most of the returning players had pretty scratchy inconsistent seasons, I wouldn’t be writing off Colyer personally, especially considering having some depth in our running players is sorely needed, and Myers strength in the middle is also in short supply, with Jobe and Heater gone, and with Bobcat and Bird still up in the air without a contract.
I can handle talk of Francis because our third tall type depth is probably our strong suit. When you consider Gleeson, Brown, Ambrose and Ridley in the backline and Stewart, potentially Stringer, Laverde, Langford and Begley in the forwards. That is where we have the most depth, but at least the forwards have more potential to double up in the midfield.
Three returning players (Hibberd, Hurley and Ryder) made the AA team and had career-best years. Hooker was a very solid second forward behind JD, Heppell finished 3rd in the B&F, Bellchambers was solid for most of the year after an injury-interrupted preseason albeit let himself down badly in a few games (as he has done his entire career), Melksham was solid for the Dees, and Carlisle was better than solid for the Saints (4th in their B&F).
The guys who struggled were either in the completely cooked category (Watson, Hocking, Stanton, Howlett, Monfries, Crameri) such that probably all will be retired/delisted, or the consistently-not-up-to-AFL-standard category (Myers, Colyer).
I cant see Colyer or Myers being delisted. They were constantly picked in the first 18 or 22 which tells you the coaches value them. If the deal to get the SSS on board is successful they may find it harder to to get a game in 2018. If that’s the case then I can see Colyer being good for trade in 2018. What he offers would be beneficial to another club.
I’ve said before, that with Howlett, Smack, Jerrett and Bird they know what they have and it was generally not getting them a game. The question is whether or not its worth looking at new blood and what they have to offer.
I am sympathetic to Bird, he only played two games. Against the Saints he was good and the other (against Adelaide) wasn’t too bad in team that was well beaten. Still he seemed to be constantly overlooked despite playing well in the magoos. That isn’t a good sign.
I suppose we will find out closer to the draft when clubs have to finalise their lists.
Most? I would agree and raise you that all of the returning Essendon players had down years. Whether they’ll pick that up, I don’t know, but I also agree that writing off Colyer and selling him at a low price may really come back to bite us. Myers I’m more ambivalent on, although I’m hoping he’ll improve too.
I agree on Ryder. Hibberd had a pretty slow start to the season, but did hit good form for a large part of it. Hurley getting AA was pretty ridiculous, and considering his form this year versus 2015 it was a long way off.
Melksham and Carlisle both struggled to get back to form, but slowly did. As I said, all the Essendon and I’d argue most of the non-Essendon players had poorer years than their best.
Agree that we def need to develop someone to partner with Draper as option 2 Ruck moving forward, but don’t agree that means we have to trade Smack out. He’s also a capable tall forward for depth as well.
We have 3 rookie picks in my scenario earlier, rucks picked in the main draft just seem to be a waste of time (how’s Tim English going?) and this is the perfect spot to get a couple of project talls. Gach Nyuon didn’t work out but Draper is, they’ve now been pretty inventive with Luke Lavender, pick up another one or two this year but wait another year on Smack.
I’m happy for them to move McKernan on. I’d upgrade Draper in that scenario. 3 main list rucks + 1 rookie list ruck is reasonable. That depends on us thinking that Draper can ruck if need be, but if that is the case I can’t see what we would keep McKernan for. I’d probably try and draft a KPF as well, but KPF depth for 2018 would come from guys like Francis and Brown etc…
Sheesh how many talls do you want us to draft, while still keeping SMack? We still need to find an inside mid, someone to take Jobe’s place, since Bird is not a preferred option with the coaches.
I’d rather keep Smack and move on Loony. Smack is able to play forward as well as ruck, and we have only one key forward on our list. Hooker is very good, but would be playing back if we had an adequate player for that role. Stewart is no more key forward than Lang or Lav.
Tend to agree with this also because there is at least some value in trading Leuey, whereas there’s basically zero trade value with SMcK. There’s a few clubs around that wouldn’t mind Leuey on their list for a couple of years.
Pedantic past the point of relevance to claim Hooker is not a key forward, he took more contested marks forward than almost anyone this year.
You may as well say we need 4 new key backs, because we don’t have any key backs -Hurley plays loose, Hartley is terrible, Hooker is forward, yada yada yada.
Fact is we used 6 different guys over 190cm as marking forwards this year, with varying levels of success, and settled on 3. And that’s without turning to Hurley, Bellchambers or Brown who have played that role in the past, or the new giant we just signed who will see some time forward.
I think McNernan is stuffed either way. Maybe has a Hail Mary lifeline if Francis does go.
