Tim Membrey

Football Discussion Trade week Duursma head in
41

Assuming for the moment we did bring Membrey in, I'd expect us to push Ambrose further up the ground.  His enormous tank would allow him to be better in a leadup role and with his tackling ability and strength he could potentially even tag effectively, especially once he's got another AFL preseason in him.  Ambrose has enormous raw potential, I don't think we should be pigeonholing him as a permanent deep fwd simply because that;s where he played this year.

I don't really see Ambrose as a permanent forward. He's more like Myers than Crameri.

 

I like the idea of Membrey...he gives a good target while JD and Jake can roam and come over the top.

42

Is he the kid with the **** tatt- Palm tree or something?
Pass

You must be on the EFC board, sighting irrelivant crap as a reasons for club decisions
BTW swan, beams, jones, clark, martin and dempsey all say hi

This is blitz - every second post is irrelevant.
43

 

 

 

 

 

 

And it's not a high priority. Our issue isn't taking marks, it's small forwards. Sure, he's under 190cm but he plays tall. With Carlisle & JD settling in taking marks isn't what we'll struggle with.

I don't get the point of him at all.
I look at our forward line and about the last thing I tihnk we need is a mid-size mid-role mid-pace mid-everything.
He certainly wouldn't be a high priority but would still be very handy depth at worst imho
Ambrose cover?
Priority 214892418.
Besides being similar in size they are nothing alike at all
Given, but can you see him being used alongside Ambrose? Or replacing Carlisle or JD?

I can see him being very handy to have if any of those 3 are injured especially if god forbid one has a long term injury because if that were to happen right now who would we play?
Pears? Stein? I think having solid back up who is an actual forward would be wise and also we lacked fire power this season so another forward putting some pressure on the incumbents could only be a good thing

 

I'm a big believer that we need to add some actual, real talls (both key position at either end and ruck) through either draft or trade.

 

 

Preferred list structure:

 

Back - Hooker/Hurley/Fletcher in the best 22, then Stein, then Carlisle, then , then Pears (since it doesn't look like we can shift him).

 

Ruck - Bellcho as the best 22, then , then JD & Carlisle, then &

 

Forward - JD & Carlisle as the best 22 key forwards, Hurley next cab off the rank, , then Bellcho, then Ambrose "playing tall", then as a pretty much last resort Jobe & Goddard.

 
 
 
My (tall or tall-ish) priorities would hence be 1) a tall kid who can play at least backline & preferably a bit at both ends, 2) a somewhat seasoned ruck as the backup, and 3) another ruck on the rookie list.
We also really really need to add a clearance mid as a pretty high priority, and a quick forward as well, I'm not sure we've got the picks to get Membrey.
The good talls generally seem to be within the top 30, the good inside mids maybe last to pick 40 or 45.
Small forwards can be had late on.
People say they'd be willing to use a 3rd rounder - and I agree that's a fair price - well that's our 2nd pick with the draft penalties. Non-starter for mine.
44


And it's not a high priority. Our issue isn't taking marks, it's small forwards. Sure, he's under 190cm but he plays tall. With Carlisle & JD settling in taking marks isn't what we'll struggle with.

I don't get the point of him at all.
I look at our forward line and about the last thing I tihnk we need is a mid-size mid-role mid-pace mid-everything.
He certainly wouldn't be a high priority but would still be very handy depth at worst imho
Ambrose cover?
Priority 214892418.
Besides being similar in size they are nothing alike at all
Given, but can you see him being used alongside Ambrose? Or replacing Carlisle or JD?
I can see him being very handy to have if any of those 3 are injured especially if god forbid one has a long term injury because if that were to happen right now who would we play?
Pears? Stein? I think having solid back up who is an actual forward would be wise and also we lacked fire power this season so another forward putting some pressure on the incumbents could only be a good thing
I'm a big believer that we need to add some actual, real talls (both key position at either end and ruck) through either draft or trade.
Preferred list structure:
Back - Hooker/Hurley/Fletcher in the best 22, then Stein, then Carlisle, then , then Pears (since it doesn't look like we can shift him).
Ruck - Bellcho as the best 22, then , then JD & Carlisle, then &
Forward - JD & Carlisle as the best 22 key forwards, Hurley next cab off the rank, , then Bellcho, then Ambrose "playing tall", then as a pretty much last resort Jobe & Goddard.
My (tall or tall-ish) priorities would hence be 1) a tall kid who can play at least backline & preferably a bit at both ends, 2) a somewhat seasoned ruck as the backup, and 3) another ruck on the rookie list.
We also really really need to add a clearance mid as a pretty high priority, and a quick forward as well, I'm not sure we've got the picks to get Membrey.
The good talls generally seem to be within the top 30, the good inside mids maybe last to pick 40 or 45.
Small forwards can be had late on.
People say they'd be willing to use a 3rd rounder - and I agree that's a fair price - well that's our 2nd pick with the draft penalties. Non-starter for mine.
Whilst i dont disagree for the most part, i think membrey has one thing all our forwards lack - he can kick straight and almost always does
He also provides much more usable depth than scrawny project player x which you just know is who we would draft
I should also add that my interest is dependant on the other trades playing out the way we'd like them to ie: add a 1st rounder and 2nd rounder plus address at least one other area of need (garlett)
45

That value question would change if we can get something for Hardie / Pears / Jetta. Even if it's a pick 50.

46

Who is he?

47

As long as he nominates us getting the deal done shouldn't be hard. My take on it is that we will focua on young promising players who are looking for more opportunity and will try to get them over by paying them overs and offering them an extra year than we otherwise might. Wouldn't be surprised if we offer a 3yr/300k contract to counteract our off field issues.

48

And it's not a high priority. Our issue isn't taking marks, it's small forwards. Sure, he's under 190cm but he plays tall. With Carlisle & JD settling in taking marks isn't what we'll struggle with.

I don't get the point of him at all.
I look at our forward line and about the last thing I tihnk we need is a mid-size mid-role mid-pace mid-everything.
He certainly wouldn't be a high priority but would still be very handy depth at worst imho
Ambrose cover?
Priority 214892418.
Besides being similar in size they are nothing alike at all
Given, but can you see him being used alongside Ambrose? Or replacing Carlisle or JD?

I can see him being very handy to have if any of those 3 are injured especially if god forbid one has a long term injury because if that were to happen right now who would we play?
Pears? Stein? I think having solid back up who is an actual forward would be wise and also we lacked fire power this season so another forward putting some pressure on the incumbents could only be a good thing

What I would say is we have a serious lack of natural goal kicking players. I would say that Zerrett, Chappy, Winders, Daniher and Zaka display a genuine goal sense.....so anyone who knows where they are should be looked at very closely.
49

Pick #50 seems more than fair. He was a mid to latish pick who has failed to crack more than a handful (only 1?) AFL matches.


I'd say we have a lot of guys on our list who wouldn't get even 1 game at the swans
Their depth isn't what it was. Buddy deal taking effect, the money's all concentrated at the top end rather than a big deep squad.
 
Towers / Biggs / Membrey / LRT / OKeefe / Zak Jones / Naismith (???) all got game/s and didn't really do much.
 
The 22 from the GF + Laidler, Mitchell, Derickx is about the extent of their depth.

Biggs is an interesting one. Think he came in late season last year and played some very good football, not sure what happened this year but he could be good depth with swap of late pick
50

I don't think we have a good enough best 22 to start chasing "depth" players.

51

 

 

 

Pick #50 seems more than fair. He was a mid to latish pick who has failed to crack more than a handful (only 1?) AFL matches.


I'd say we have a lot of guys on our list who wouldn't get even 1 game at the swans
Their depth isn't what it was. Buddy deal taking effect, the money's all concentrated at the top end rather than a big deep squad.
 
Towers / Biggs / Membrey / LRT / OKeefe / Zak Jones / Naismith (???) all got game/s and didn't really do much.
 
The 22 from the GF + Laidler, Mitchell, Derickx is about the extent of their depth.

Biggs is an interesting one. Think he came in late season last year and played some very good football, not sure what happened this year but he could be good depth with swap of late pick

 

Was a Bendigo Bomber originally (didn't look that good there).

But yeah he looked OK, showed a bit, not quite sure what his role is though. Pretty outside, not that big(gs) and IIRC not that much of a goalkicker.

52

I don't think we have a good enough best 22 to start chasing "depth" players.

Well, no, but options-we-can-initially-use-as-depth-who-hopefully-improve-towards-best-22-players takes too long to type every time.

 

If we have only kids outside the 22, we might battle when we get an injury or two, to me it makes sense to get (or retain) 1 or 2 guys who are ready to go. Need to strike a balance.

53

Would play the role Hardy play at the start of the year but has so much more upside..can kick and doesnt have brain fades

54

I don't think we have a good enough best 22 to start chasing "depth" players.

+1

The voice of reason

55


I don't think we have a good enough best 22 to start chasing "depth" players.

+1
The voice of reason
Who says he doesnt take someones spot and a member of our current 22 become the depth i mean its not like thats ever happened
56

Would be an upgrade to Hardie

Supported the Bombers as kid. Says it all

57

http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/video/2014-08-04/swanstv-tim-membrey-on-his-debut

58

Good to see players still want to come to this great club

59

Wonder if Bruce will maintain his enthusiasm for all things Membrey when he lands at tullamarine.

“He just looks like he can play, doesn’t he?”

LMFAO

60

Do not want