I love Marty
I for one would consider it and can understand the talk. We have plenty fighting for that same position who in my opinion have a higher ceiling, and are AFL ready.
I think that Gleeson is a great player, and wouldnāt be trading unless the price is right. If he could be used in some way to gain us another very good inside mid, with speed (eg Sheil) then Id go for it.
There is no one else who would be worth anything, who we would be willing to trade.
2 Likes
This sums up my thoughts better than iāve Said it so far, although I would subsitute āgreatā with āgood solidā.
In reality I think itās very unlikely that weāll trade him seeing as he signed a new contract this year.
1 Like
Had a great pre-season and played a great game vs Geelong, agree he would have been best 22 without question. But Redman, Francis, and Ridley certainly all have a lot of upside from what we have seen this year. More than likely though there is room for all of them. as I can see these guys been able to play multiple positions.
1 Like
Like Laverde last year against Geelong, Gleeson got injured in the last minute or two. We donāt want to play Geelong in the pre-season again.
Two players gone for a very large part of the season, if not all.
2 Likes
All of Redman, Francis and Gleeson will play in the same side next year IMO.
Goddard and Dea out, Gleeson and Redman in. Ridley will be on the next line. Heās shown something but isnāt deposing Gleeson yet.
2 Likes
I think thats right but there will be times when Francis, Hurley, Gleeson, Hooker isnāt going to be well matched against sides. Iām not suggesting Gleeson wonāt play plenty of games next year I just donāt think your missing a whole lot having Dea over him and Iād hope that Ridley replaces them both by years end. Decent player but suspect 1 on 1 imo.
2 Likes
Matty Dea is a solid contributor, but he has very rarely been picked ahead of Marty, if at all.
Gleeson has a key weakness in terms of size. He has been improving year on year. No way Dea gets picked ahead of him in my view.
2 Likes
Totally disagree, Gleeson had a great year last year, and has steady improved his footy craft. Last year he consistently floated across marking contests in the back line, taking the cutout mark and moving the ball on quickly. He and Irish were particularly responsible for a high percentage of attacking rebounds off half back. We definitely missed Marty early this year IMHO and yes Saad picked up the slack eventually, but there weee early games where Gleesonās influence was solely missed.
4 Likes
Iād give Stewart 2 years. If we give him a one year deal and he turns it around, weāll have clubs chasing him and weāll have to pay overs.
Lock him in for 2 and get him at a discounted rate.
2 Likes
I reckon Stewart is a soft kokā¦he wonāt change his stripes. Best to move him on if he has any value, he has had his chance and watching him in the VFL, he is a ā ā ā ā ā ,
Smack & Brown are the ones we need to hold on to
1 Like
Spot on.
I see no reason at all to keep Hartley.
If Smack is traded, then maybe. But probably not even then.
Possibly but on a one year deal for depth/coverage, I donāt see the harm. The other delistees are no brainers IMO.
1 Like
So the idea with Luen being delisted is Smack plays seniors and is relief ruck?
What are you saying? Gleeson is a keeper, perhaps Smack also.
Gleeson is going to comeback and remind everybody on hereās short memories how friggin good he is.
3 Likes
I would take a second rounder for either of them and if that wasnāt forthcoming I would hold onto them.
If Smack was offered money and opportunity elsewhere I would be happy for him to leave. Not because I donāt rate him but I respect the effort he is putting in to make a career and I think he deserves a pay rise and more opportunities.
1 Like
Patrick Ambrose could be useful to facilitate a trade. Heās 27 (older than Matt Dea) and will be battling to get a game next year if Hooker, Francis, Hurley stay fit
1 Like
Stewart not hungry enough -trade