The Chad Thread

[hujsh]

I hope he's right!!

What is he basing his views on?

Everyone else is guessing Hawks so if I guess Dogs I look real smart?

[bulldogtragic]

Everyone else is guessing Hawks so if I guess Dogs I look real smart?

Makes sense to me.

[Happy Days]

Think we're clutching at straws if we're relying on Greg Denham.

[Greystache]

I had some confidence Wingard might be coming to us, but that's now taken a hit if Greg Denham is calling it. The man is an oracle on all things that won't happen. His ability to be consistently wrong even on the simplest subjects is legendary.

[The Pie Man]

I read the article - it’s about Jesse Hogan moving to Freo, with the reference to Wingard moving to Victoria being ‘headed by the Western Bulldogs’

He mentioned 5 days ago we met with him before announcing Wallis. No new detail following that.

Based on that, I’ll remain safely pessimistic.

[Rocket Science]

Is there a bigger wheezing bag of piss and wind covering the game than Denham?

Fare thee well Chad, we barely knew ye.

[jeemak]

Think we're clutching at straws if we're relying on Greg Denham.

I had some confidence Wingard might be coming to us, but that's now taken a hit if Greg Denham is calling it. The man is an oracle on all things that won't happen. His ability to be consistently wrong even on the simplest subjects is legendary.

Is there a bigger wheezing bag of piss and wind covering the game than Denham?

Fare thee well Chad, we barely knew ye.

It's funny, we only ever seem to hear about him when he, like birds flying south, without fail once a year shows everyone just how full of bullshit he is.


I won't hold my breath...…..

[bulldogtragic]

Terry Wallace the other day said Essendon should chase Wingard, assuming in competition to the dogs. Today, Wingard is worth two first rounders.

[ratsmac]

Terry Wallace the other day said Essendon should chase Wingard, assuming in competition to the dogs. Today, Wingard is worth two first rounders.

What's Wallace's problem. Is he still harboring unforgiveness. Remember Terry you left us!

[ledge]

Why would the bombers want Wingard when they got the best opportunist goal kicker and future Brownlow medallist in Stringer last year ?

[GVGjr]

Terry Wallace the other day said Essendon should chase Wingard, assuming in competition to the dogs. Today, Wingard is worth two first rounders.

Do you think we would still be interested if it was a first and a second round pick or two first round picks?

I tend to think pick 6 should be enough but I get where Plough is coming from

[bulldogtragic]

Do you think we would still be interested if it was a first and a second round pick or two first round picks?

I tend to think pick 6 should be enough but I get where Plough is coming from

No. Pick 6 is a very, very good pick to give up. Especially in this draft if I believe you! Which I do of course. If they demanded our first next year, I'd demand SPP to be added with a third rounder this year second rounder next year. Pick 6 & 2019 1st is overs, and I wouldn't be rushing since Hawthorn can't compete with a prized pick like 6.

The only way in which Wingard is worth two first rounders, is very low ones, like Hawks pick 14 this year and Hawks pick 12-14 next year. He's not in the Treloar 2 X pick 7's first rounders.

All that said, if the equation was one of our players, say Jackson Macrae, taken a year later than Wingard at the near identical pick. Both huge talents. Would we want pick 6 this year, or a pick 14's over two years? I'd take the single digit pick, especially 6. Port would want more as an ambit claim, but if Wingard did the admirable thing and said either club to go to so Port gets the best trade, I couldn't see Hawthorn dislodging our hand and I think Port would take Pick 6. Mind you if he picked us for any reason, I'd like pick 46 back (which they might not use). But I don't see Wingard as a straight out two first rounders. He's a one exceptional first rounder in a strong pointy ended draft, for a local kid ahead of tour cross town rival to me.

[Go_Dogs]

I wouldn't give up 2 first rounders based on form and also on the assumption Port aren't rushing to extend him, again, based on his performance over the past 2 years. It has to cut both ways.

[GVGjr]

I wouldn't give up 2 first rounders based on form and also on the assumption Port aren't rushing to extend him, again, based on his performance over the past 2 years. It has to cut both ways.

I don't think many are acknowledging his form line isn't as strong as what it was 2 or 3 years earlier.
Port don't seem willing to offer a long term deal at 800K plus whereas we might have that ability.

Would you consider a first and a second round pick for Wingard?

[bornadog]

Port Adelaide can’t justify paying Chad Wingard more than $800,000 a season, writes Jon Ralph

PORT Adelaide would be negligent to pay Chad Wingard $800,000-$1 million a season based on his output on the past three seasons.

The Western Bulldogs should seriously consider handing over pick six and paying him a salary somewhere in that ballpark.

If those two sentences seem to be wildly conflicting, welcome to football 2018-style.

Where often the price to stay at a club desperate to shake itself up after a 10th-placed finish is very different to one desperate for an ounce of class and goalkicking power.

On face value, Chad Wingard’s likely departure from Port Adelaide is the ultimate head scratcher.

Why would Port Adelaide allow him to assess his Melbourne options when he is a 25-year-old matchwinner who would surely be in the Power’s next premiership team?

Boil it down to one sentence — Port Adelaide isn’t prepared to pay extraordinary money for what they see as three seasons of average performances.

In seven completed seasons Wingard’s best is phenomenal, highlighted by two absolutely outstanding years.

He kicked 43.20 to go with 500 possessions in 2013 to win the best-and-fairest and win an All-Australian blazer, backing it up in 2015 with 53.27 and 422 possessions in another All-Australian year.

In between he kicked 43.31 in 2014, but his returns have diminished in the past three years.
His 2016 season was still solid — 38 goals, but last year he kicked 24.25 and this year 22.21.



Chad Wingard has had three below-average seasons after winning All-Australian honours in 2015

In 21 games he was eight times in the AFL coaches votes but only once in the top three in the ground, as voted by coach Ken Hinkley and the opposing coach.

Port Adelaide’s issue isn’t salary cap related — Ken Wood rated its wage bill this year as the second smallest in the competition.

It just can’t justify vast sums for a player who finished outside the top 10 in the 2016 best-and-fairest, eighth last year and is likely to finish outside the top 10 again this year.


Not when it has done that kind of thing with Hamish Hartlett and Matthew Lobbe before and seen it backfire.

The issue is whether Port Adelaide has tried to turn Wingard into something he is not.

In 2015 in that 53 goal season he played 74 per cent forward, averaging 98 rankings points for the season.
Last year he played 47 per cent midfield and this year 45 per cent in that role, becoming a jack of all trades and master of none.

Luke Beveridge is desperately in need of goal power and having drafted Aaron Naughton, Tim English, Ed Richards and traded for young tall Josh Schache they can this year justify trading an early pick.



Only Fremantle, Gold Coast and Carlton kicked less goals than the Dogs this year, with the Dogs looking to replace the goal power of Luke Dahlhaus (which evaporated this year) and Jake Stringer.

Take Wingard as a small forward — effectively for a comparable wage to Dahlhaus and Jordan Roughead — then draft inside-midfielder Rhylee West as a father-son and your list is going somewhere.

Hawthorn is in a similar boat, pushing hard for Wingard and suddenly with the desire to replace Cyril Rioli plus the cap space from his retirement to afford him.

So is he worth the money?

Dan Hannebery, a player with a similar pedigree by dint of three All-Australian blazers — is going to be paid $800,000 a year for five years when there is clear uncertainty about whether his best is behind him at 27.

Based on Champion Data’s official player ratings Wingard is the 68th best player in the competition.
So if you rank him the 68th best player two years and he is paid $800,000 he’s only just getting overs.

Back in Round 12, 2016 he was the 10th ranked player in the competition, so you only need to believe he can recapture that form to pay him what he is asking.

Melbourne clubs will pay him on talent and potential and the Dogs on output, and in a market where plenty of clubs have cash to burn that means he is like