The end of year cannon - who should be fired into the sun?


#1485

I’m actually a little surprised there isn’t more chasing of our fringe players who are not guaranteed a spot. Given we’d likely only get a third rounder back for any of the below.

  • Ambrose: Melbourne could really use him as an upgrade on Frost, and to add some bite to their defence. Hawthorn could also use him to replace Frawley.
  • Brown: I would have thought Geelong, Collingwood and Hawthorn could use him to give them more tall options going into attack.
  • Hartley: Any team needing a full back, such as Melbourne (upgrade on Frost), Hawthorn and Collingwood.

#1486

It was suspected as one of the reasons Jerrett and Long were kept last year. That it was better to keep guys who had been in the system and new our game plan than to get 1 year players with the intention to cut them next year.

And you should only cut players if you think what you’re getting in will be better. Just delisting the bottom 3 players “because” is a ridiculous move.


#1487

i’m a big fan of harts and paddy but i wouldn’t call either of them an upgrade on frost.


#1488

Really? He’s useless.


#1489

Been beating all the key forwards playing on in recent times.

Average defenders can be made to look good when the team is winning the midfield battle though.

If GC lose May then Ambrose/Hartley could be players we could send their way.


#1490

from the games i’ve seen he looks alright, but then again that would only be 8 or 10 times including when he was at gws.
he does have good speed though so that probably makes him seem better than he actually is, in my eyes at least.


#1491

fumbles again?


#1492

And kicks over the head of a leading target?


#1493

I reckon Frost is OK…got a lot of pace and takes the game on. Sometimes he makes blues…who doesn’t?

Not sure he’s there when Lever returns though. Depends on matchups.


#1494

Not a fan of the vitality curve I take it?


#1495

The extended goal square (rectangle?) I imagine will increase Harts value. He will be able to kick out to the widest point of the ground, or send it in shorter to McKenna or Saad. He will have a lot of space to kick in to, and the next kick will more often be to a scoring position.

We may well keep him because of this, because it could easily lead to more rapid scoring, which means even if he is scored against as a key defender, if he makes us score more this will off set it.

He may take Hooker’s place down back, and with Hooker going forward again, especially with Joe back at CHF (both as a target for Hartley and to take advantage of Hooker as a target up forward a la 2017).


#1496

Its not just because. If we cant find better players than Long, McNeice and Looney, then our recruiters need to go in the canon.

Watching the VFL last week and there are players in our own VFL side that I would have on our list ahead of those three.


#1497

Best 22 ???

C’mon Ants, he’s best 26-28 at best going into 2019.
I admire how the guy has extricated the maximum amount of talent out of himself, but he has limitations that we are now ready to improve upon.

Ambrose, whom I rate, is possibly in the same boat, but I see him playing large chunks of Seniors next year.
Not so much Dea.

A trade to a weaker club would be good for him IMO.


#1498

??
Who said delist the bottom 3 players just because? You have to delist 3, there’s no “because” about it. Pretty reasonable to start with your worst 3.

If you’re talking about only delisting players, if you’re confident you can bring in something better in their place. Then I couldn’t agree more, this should be the over-arching philosophy every off-season.

But that’s very different to keeping someone an extra year, just so that you have someone to delist next year, which is the premise I disagreed with and responded to.


#1499

I’m not necessarily a fan of keeping most of the guys you have in the cannon, but keep in mind we have picks 8 / 62 / 80 / 102.
Which is prior to the FA compo picks being handed out, and it sounds like there might be a few.

There might be a Brown/Hartley/Guelfi level player at those late picks, there might be two: there’s unlikely to be four or five.

Even if we do a rookie upgrade or two, it’s unlikely we’ll be improving our list much by taking 102 instead of (say) Dea.


#1500

We also have GWS’ second rounder, yeah?


#1501

I agree with your main point that there is a limit to how many picks you want.

I don’t think that limit is breached by delisting 6 though. For arguments sake take the 3 already delisted and 3 I identified.

  • McNeice is a rookie so thats just a rookie pick
  • Smack gets upgraded to the main list.
  • Hartley or Brown get traded for a 3rd rounder.

Your left with 4 ND picks 8, 32, 62 and the additional 3rd rounder. Its pretty reasonable.


#1502

I just think Frost gets tested up by good key forwards. Cost Melbourne a number of goals on the weekend with poor defensive efforts.

But I rate defence.

I literally have no idea what that means.


#1503

Some people seem to forget how good ambrose is when fit. Best 22 every day of the week. No way does he get traded out.

Hartley goes ahead of brown.

Brown prob stays ahead of dea as he offers ootions forward and back.

Brown also stays as he is worth more to is than what we’d get in a trade.


#1504

But Ambrose is never fit.