Do something with Naughton.

[bulldogtragic]

Back to defence. He?s great at spoiling teammates, why not opponents.

Trade.

Something else. He can?t kick easy goals regularly.

We are ain?t getting $850,000 value. I don?t know the answer, but him continuing this isn?t it.

[jeemak]

Would we be worse off if we put Naughton back, removed Gardner, and played Bruce forward?

Probably something we could have considered at the start of the year, I guess.

There's just something about the way he plays that is so chaotic and bombastic that it would be hard to try and settle a structure with and play with any level of precision with (in a three tall set up, which is what we're seemingly wedded to).

We can't put Jamarra back, Lobb should be anchored to the front half of the ground. Maybe those two just contribute more with a player like Bruce who puts in the effort but knows how to keep his own space.

It'd be a big ask of Bruce, but it could be worth a try over the coming weeks as he can actually convert.

[azabob]

Following on from that thought Jee, Lobb definitely knows how to keep his own space and I would think Jamarra would also have played forward all his life.

How would Jamarra go with the getting the number one defender?

[jeemak]

Following on from that thought Jee, Lobb definitely knows how to keep his own space and I would think Jamarra would also have played forward all his life.

How would Jamarra go with the getting the number one defender?

He'd struggle with the number one defender, mostly, but can get up the ground a bit.

I think Lobb and Bruce would benefit from that however, firstly because they're on the same defenders they're taking now, and secondly, Jamarra wouldn't be bringing his defender onto them as much as Naughton does currently.

So that gives the best defender the opposition has something to think about. Go the ball or go with Marra? At the moment the best defender just has to follow Naughton to crowd the contest.

[hujsh]

Would we be worse off if we put Naughton back, removed Gardner, and played Bruce forward?

Probably something we could have considered at the start of the year, I guess.

There's just something about the way he plays that is so chaotic and bombastic that it would be hard to try and settle a structure with and play with any level of precision with (in a three tall set up, which is what we're seemingly wedded to).

We can't put Jamarra back, Lobb should be anchored to the front half of the ground. Maybe those two just contribute more with a player like Bruce who puts in the effort but knows how to keep his own space.

It'd be a big ask of Bruce, but it could be worth a try over the coming weeks as he can actually convert.

A very wise man created a poll to ask a very similar question some time earlier this year. They say he still wanders the boards on the night of the full moon to this day

[jeemak]

A very wise man created a poll to ask a very similar question some time earlier this year. They say he still wanders the boards on the night of the full moon to this day

I don't remember starting a poll. Ever.

[bulldogtragic]

Controversial view; Trade Naughton.

He’s not the gun forward. He’s unknown as a gun back. He’s on $850,000 and clearly wants more. He flies for marks and is a marketing dream. Maybe he’s worth more on the trade table than as a player.

Paying over $1M to not be an outright gun in a position doesn’t make a lot of sense. With Bruce, Lobb, Marra, Darcy & Croft we have cover for 1-1.5 goals a game. Huge draft picks and a million dollars deployed elsewhere wouldn’t be the worst thing.

[Bumper Bulldogs]

Controversial view; Trade Naughton.

He’s not the gun forward. He’s unknown as a gun back. He’s on $850,000 and clearly wants more. He flies for marks and is a marketing dream. Maybe he’s worth more on the trade table than as a player.

Paying over $1M to not be an outright gun in a position doesn’t make a lot of sense. With Bruce, Lobb, Marra, Darcy & Croft we have cover for 1-1.5 goals a game. Huge draft picks and a million dollars deployed elsewhere wouldn’t be the worst thing.

I would Agree with trading him, the way he plays it's only time before he does a knee, this will take away any advantage that he may have right now. Sell hime when his value is highest, he is a gun but not worth any further cash and we still have plenty of upside with the other talls.

[Grantysghost]

We are never going to trade Naughton.

He's in a form slump presently however he will be BACK to his best soon

I'd play him in the Tom Stewart role.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Controversial view; Trade Naughton.

He?s not the gun forward. He?s unknown as a gun back. He?s on $850,000 and clearly wants more. He flies for marks and is a marketing dream. Maybe he?s worth more on the trade table than as a player.

Paying over $1M to not be an outright gun in a position doesn?t make a lot of sense. With Bruce, Lobb, Marra, Darcy & Croft we have cover for 1-1.5 goals a game. Huge draft picks and a million dollars deployed elsewhere wouldn?t be the worst thing.

It wouldn't happen unless he requested it, and it would be diabolical for our culture (but there's arguments to be made we should blow this list up anyway)....

.... But I don't disagree. We like to think he's a gun forward. He's not. How many games has he actually won by himself like other gun forwards (Hawkins, Cameron, Curnow, McKay, Walker, Lynch etc).

I love watching him play and he at least makes footy half interesting, but he's not as good as we pretend he is / would like him to be. Poor forward craft and poor conversion will forever limit him.

[bulldogtragic]

It wouldn't happen unless he requested it, and it would be diabolical for our culture (but there's arguments to be made we should blow this list up anyway)....

.... But I don't disagree. We like to think he's a gun forward. He's not. How many games has he actually won by himself like other gun forwards (Hawkins, Cameron, Curnow, McKay, Walker, Lynch etc).

I love watching him play and he at least makes footy half interesting, but he's not as good as we pretend he is / would like him to be. Poor forward craft and poor conversion will forever limit him.

So pay him $1.1M a season to continually topple Marra & Lobb and Darcy for a 1.2 a game? Not ideal either.

Just because you can dunk, doesn’t mean you a serious basketballer. That’s how I feel about him. His hype is bigger than his output. And if he wants 10% of our salary cap a year, maybe he’s worth more in top 10 draft picks and money elsewhere.

Even if we move him back, we need to see he’s a $1.1M KPD.

Anyway, I’m open to offers. We are not getting return on investment now and the ratio will get worse. He’s under contract and if can extract a huge draft haul and he gets his $1.1M+, then let’s keep an open mind. Feels like a win/win.

[DOG GOD]

At least if he plays back, he’s not costing us with easy misses. I’ve been a big advocate of moving him back. Nothing has changed my mind.
Playing fwd he looks best running at the ball, when you see him half fwd/wing areas. When he’s at FF, if he’s not taking the pack mark, he’s not doing anything.

[hujsh]

At least if he plays back, he’s not costing us with easy misses. I’ve been a big advocate of moving him back. Nothing has changed my mind.
Playing fwd he looks best running at the ball, when you see him half fwd/wing areas. When he’s at FF, if he’s not taking the pack mark, he’s not doing anything.

How many is he giving up by kicking it to the opposition?

[bulldogtragic]

How many is he giving up by kicking it to the opposition?

Here in lies the issue…

If he can’t kick straight for goal, which it very much seems
If he turns it over in defence, yet to be confirmed and can’t do a Chris Grant and go to CHB

Why are we going to commit about 10% of our salary cap to such a player? Honest question.

[Grantysghost]

How many is he giving up by kicking it to the opposition?

Long down the line or someone runs passed for the hands xD