The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I don't think it's quite fair to say fair value or par for a Hrovat (for example) is what you paid for him initially (pick 21). That's a bit like buying a car, getting 3 years of use out of it and expecting the same price to sell it. If you pick a player at 21 or so and get 10 places or so lower 3 years down the track, that is a pretty fair reflecton that the player has held good value.

I'm not convinced that Hrovat would land us a pick in the 30s, should he have another yo-yo season with us. Therefore, using 21 on Hrovat and then losing him for a low pick (40+) is a poor outcome. The criticisms of our persistence in drafting similar players are warranted and it is a myth that we can just trade them out for needs. If we are able to hold onto them and maintain our depth it's fantastic, and I think a player like Hrovat can be good value, but it's generally unrealistic even for sides like Hawthorn and Sydney who have lost good players for basically nothing over the years (Kennedy, McGlynn, Dempster, Schneider and to lesser degrees Biggs, Everitt, Hallahan in recent years).

[Axe Man]

I'm not convinced that Hrovat would land us a pick in the 30s, should he have another yo-yo season with us. Therefore, using 21 on Hrovat and then losing him for a low pick (40+) is a poor outcome. The criticisms of our persistence in drafting similar players are warranted and it is a myth that we can just trade them out for needs. If we are able to hold onto them and maintain our depth it's fantastic, and I think a player like Hrovat can be good value, but it's generally unrealistic even for sides like Hawthorn and Sydney who have lost good players for basically nothing over the years (Kennedy, McGlynn, Dempster, Schneider and to lesser degrees Biggs, Everitt, Hallahan in recent years).

I reckon Koby Stevens is a good example of the current approximate worth of Hrovat. Drafted at #22, after 3 years at the Eagles we traded him in for pick #44. Granted Hrovat has played more games in his first 3 years than Stevens did, but I think it's a fair comparison.

[Greystache]

I'm not convinced that Hrovat would land us a pick in the 30s, should he have another yo-yo season with us. Therefore, using 21 on Hrovat and then losing him for a low pick (40+) is a poor outcome. The criticisms of our persistence in drafting similar players are warranted and it is a myth that we can just trade them out for needs. If we are able to hold onto them and maintain our depth it's fantastic, and I think a player like Hrovat can be good value, but it's generally unrealistic even for sides like Hawthorn and Sydney who have lost good players for basically nothing over the years (Kennedy, McGlynn, Dempster, Schneider and to lesser degrees Biggs, Everitt, Hallahan in recent years).

Totally agree. Players like that only appreciate in value if you win premierships. Geelong and Hawthorn showed that average fringe players can convince some clubs they just need opportunity, the rest go in a fire sale.

[bulldogtragic]

Ok, not naming anyone. I'm interested in Brian Lakes's comments that Hawthorn are staggering 2 retirements each year for 3 years. It seems quite a sensible thing to do. I wonder if we'd follow suit? We have Minson, Murphy, Morris & Matty (4M's). With what's being built I can't see anyone of them willingly walking away, much like Lake said he didn't want to walk away last year. Assuming injuries play no part, a) should we copy the plan 2 retirements each over the next two years b) if you said yes, which two in which year?

[bornadog]

Ok, not naming anyone. I'm interested in Brian Lakes's comments that Hawthorn are staggering 2 retirements each year for 3 years. It seems quite a sensible thing to do. I wonder if we'd follow suit? We have Minson, Murphy, Morris & Matty (4M's). With what's being built I can't see anyone of them willingly walking away, much like Lake said he didn't want to walk away last year. Assuming injuries play no part, a) should we copy the plan 2 retirements each over the next two years b) if you said yes, which two in which year?

YES
Minson and Morris, followed by Bob and MBoyd

[1eyedog]

I'd say Minson and Boyd. Morris is still killing it. He's still a gun.

[bornadog]

I'd say Minson and Boyd. Morris is still killing it. He's still a gun.

So is Boyd.

The reason I said Morris is we need to give an opportunity to another tall to develop, and Morris' role is the logical one.

[Mantis]

So is Boyd.

The reason I said Morris is we need to give an opportunity to another tall to develop, and Morris' role is the logical one.

There is the opportunity for a tall to develop now.. When they are playing well enough they will be picked.

[bornadog]

There is the opportunity for a tall to develop now.. When they are playing well enough they will be picked.

Yes that is true, however, we are discussing the future.

Put it this way, If Morris wasn't playing this week, who would take his spot? A tall or a small?

[Mofra]

I have been a huge supporter of Roberts but... is he in trouble? Hard to see him getting the nod over Cordy/Collins if they both have another pre-season, and Hamling must have been close to selection too.

[Mantis]

Yes that is true, however, we are discussing the future.

Put it this way, If Morris wasn't playing this week, who would take his spot? A tall or a small?

I would say a tall.

But if M.Boyd or Biggs weren't playing I would give the same answer.

[soupman]

Not sure aiming for two retirements per year is necessary for our club.

Hawthorn have a much older list profile than us and therefore need to address it more directly, we however have such a long list that we'll soon be delisting 29 year olds to meet our quota.

I think in our case we address retirements on a case by case basis, but have to beconscious not to keep anyone out of sentiment. If Morris or Murphy start dropping away we need to be prepared to pull the trigger, but only based on real things like form and not on an arbitrary number.

[1eyedog]

So is Boyd.

The reason I said Morris is we need to give an opportunity to another tall to develop, and Morris' role is the logical one.

Yeah but he still butchers the ball and his decision making at times on Sunday wasn't flash. His turnovers resulted in two Freo goals. I thought he was solid but I was thinking about how quickly Ponting declined on my way home. Boyd's position is transferable to Webb who I would prefer to actually start playing. There is enough experience down back without Boyd.

I'd keep Morris for the very reasons as discussed above. It doesn't matter how the opposition structure up he can play big or small.

[ledge]

I think all our rucks will stay next year but Goetz will run over the top of all Of them by the next year.

[bornadog]

Yeah but he still butchers the ball and his decision making at times on Sunday wasn't flash. His turnovers resulted in two Freo goals. I thought he was solid but I was thinking about how quickly Ponting declined on my way home. Boyd's position is transferable to Webb who I would prefer to actually start playing. There is enough experience down back without Boyd.

I'd keep Morris for the very reasons as discussed above. It doesn't matter how the opposition structure up he can play big or small.

Murphy, Morris and Boyd will turn 35 years old next year.