Thanks Thanks:  302
Likes Likes:  3,271
Page 5 of 263 FirstFirst 12345678910111213141555105 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 3937

Thread: Trade Dunkley

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Doglands
    Posts
    39,482
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    Quote Originally Posted by Sedat View Post
    Good question. He has missed a few games in the past but has had more continuity in the latter years of his career. I don't think he has chronic issues but I stand to be corrected by those in the know.
    For what it's worth he struggled before the season started with an Achilles injury missing round 1 then missed 4 weeks with a hamstring injury
    Western Bulldogs Football Club "Where it's cool to drool"

  2. Thanks Sedat thanked for this post
  3. #62
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    E.J. Whitten Stand
    Posts
    17,162
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    Quote Originally Posted by bornadog View Post
    There are a few players I wouldn't trade, so sorry you are incorrect in what you thought I said
    No need to apologise, you only mentioned 4 players as being untouchable, and none of them were English or Bailey Smith.
    Our 1954 premiership players are our heroes, and it has to be said that Charlie was their hero.

  4. #63
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    6,735
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    Quote Originally Posted by CarnTheScray View Post
    Probably not, he's that bad. Send him off to a bottom 4 club or delist.
    I think that’s incredibly harsh on Patrick. He’s had a rough few games but he certainly has value. He’s actually a smooth mover and usually good by foot. A lot of his errors right now look to be from fatigue. We need to remember he’s still inexperienced. Je will never be better than a bottom 22 player but delisting is way off the mark. My frustration with him, like English and many others on our list are their complete lack of intensity. We all cried out for it after round 2 and we responded for a few weeks but we’ve gone back into our shells a bit and look completely void of confidence. Patrick represents all of this the most, along with English. Funnily enough these two come across the most as "nice guys" who we seem intent on recruiting exclusively. Unfortunately footy is not an office job and sometimes you need total pricks to get you over the line. We got rid of all those guys after 2017 thinking they were the issue. Unfortunately they weren’t.

  5. Likes DOG GOD liked this post
  6. #64
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wherever the dogs are playing
    Posts
    60,856
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    Quote Originally Posted by comrade View Post
    No need to apologise, you only mentioned 4 players as being untouchable, and none of them were English or Bailey Smith.
    No, I was pointing out the 4 players that are the best on our list, and they would be untouchable.

    I said nothing about other players on whether they are touchable or not. That is a whole different debate.
    FFC: Established 1883

    Premierships: AFL 1954, 2016 VFA - 1898,99,1900, 1908, 1913, 1919-20, 1923-24, VFL: 2014, 2016 . Champions of Victoria 1924. AFLW - 2018.

  7. #65
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    4,822
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    It's the classic dilemma of you have to give up something to get something, and our conundrum is that the guys we want to give up aren't worth anything, and the guys that are worth lots we don't want to give up.

    For mine there is no point even bringing up the likes of Lipinski, McLean, Schache, Lewis Young as anything other than sweeteners. At absolute best you are getting a late pick in the 20s for any of them, but more likely a third rounder. So if you are gonna trade them it isn't because of what they'll get you, it's more about getting something back for a player you don't rate. Now i think there is some merit in trading those guys, but it's more as a list refresh idea or for a similarly fringe guy from another club than because they have any sort of currency worth cashing in on.

    So that leaves you with the guys that are genuinely worth something, and from there you need to look at which of those guys are valued higher on the open market than to you, both in terms of contribution currently and what it would cost to replace them. You also need to look at what impact does them leaving the club have on the club.

    On top of all that you have to consider that trading players out is a losing mans game.

    Player for player trades are virtually non existent, there's about 2 a year. If we traded Dunkley for another player it would be very unlikely that it's for a player of similar value, it'd be for a player and a pick, or just picks. Picks are the most overrated thing in the league, in that people treat them like they are a guarantee of a good player. If we traded Dunkley, and his value is probably an early teens pick, for say pick 11, the odds of that player being even as good as Dunkley are not great, let alone better. Plus you have to sit on that players development for a few years. Port's success (and basically the 2018 drafts instant success as a group) I think warps the perception that picks are sure fire things. They are not.

    I do think we will have enough issues keeping the main guys (Macrae, Bont, English, Smith and Naughton) to need to show them we are happy to push guys they respect and like out for their trade value, we need to be preaching to these guys that they are part of the team and that sticking together is super important. We can't do that and push someone like Dunkley out at the same time. I think naturally down the track there will be guys that can't get paid as much as they would like, or are starved of opportunity, and request trades as a result, that's where we try to maximise their trade value. Dunkley may very well find himself in that position down the track, and he is not someone I would be looking to overpay to keep, but I wouldn't be pushing him out prior to that scenario unfolding.
    I should leave it alone but you're not right

  8. Likes jeemak, Grantysghost liked this post
  9. #66
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    18,724
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    Good post Soup.

    It's complex. My original thinking was that we would try and trade for a couple of players or a player and a pick, which again, is a speculative play in itself.

    I just don't see how we shake things up without doing something pretty drastic.
    Nobody's looking for a puppeteer in today's wintry economic climate.

  10. #67
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    14,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    No from me
    Libba’s durability and age are an issue
    Dunkley’s not being traded
    Zac Williams is almost there most important player

  11. #68
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3,228
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    I more interested in how we can get the group accountable again, they clearly haven't recovered from the final last year.

    Go back and look at the tape, our players avoid contact at any cost. They ball watched all night stood back and allowed the lions to walk through and defence with limited pressure when the heat came on.

    Our players were more interested in how Charlie Cameron was after the game then being disappointed with the loss.

    We need Liam Picken and Matty Boyd(off HB) than any fleet footed midfielder atm. We need an example set, I love the Bont but he is really struggling atm, we need him now more than ever or its just going to be another year lost.

  12. #69
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Dogsville
    Posts
    12,737
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    We don't need to trade Dunkley, why would we? We should be looking to create a few list spots and go after a player or two to address our current issues. I'd certainly be looking at Zac Williams and would go hard he'd address some of our movement issues.

    I'd be devastated if Bevo thinks the current list is a future Premiership list, he knows we have holes, it's why we went after Martin (an acknowledgement that our forward line is unbalanced) and why we were reportedly into I.Smith because we were aware that we lacked outside run.

    The expectations on Lippa and Richards are unreasonable. They are cream players and young. We're just simply not in a position to maximise their skill sets. They need to stay and grow with the group. They've shown good signs.

    I would'nt trade anyone unless they want to go. I'm not sure what reduced lists look like but I'd cut deep into the bottom six players on our list and go after two restricted free agents or out of contract player and again look to address our small forward and outside run issues first and foremost. If we are constrained by our list size then we may need to make a hard decision and cut deeper or trade our fringes. This does not include Dunkley.

    Another year with this core group players and perhaps two inclusions that address our needs and we'll be getting results.

    We've had very good patches of football this season most of what we need is there we just need to fill two or three on-field holes and get some continuity as a group.
    But then again, I'm an Internet poster and Bevo is a premiership coach so draw your own conclusions.

  13. #70
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    18,724
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    Thanks for the discussion all.
    Nobody's looking for a puppeteer in today's wintry economic climate.

  14. Likes chef liked this post
  15. #71
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wherever the dogs are playing
    Posts
    60,856
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    Quote Originally Posted by 1eyedog View Post
    We don't need to trade Dunkley, why would we? We should be looking to create a few list spots and go after a player or two to address our current issues. I'd certainly be looking at Zac Williams and would go hard he'd address some of our movement issues.

    I'd be devastated if Bevo thinks the current list is a future Premiership list, he knows we have holes, it's why we went after Martin (an acknowledgement that our forward line is unbalanced) and why we were reportedly into I.Smith because we were aware that we lacked outside run.

    The expectations on Lippa and Richards are unreasonable. They are cream players and young. We're just simply not in a position to maximise their skill sets. They need to stay and grow with the group. They've shown good signs.

    I would'nt trade anyone unless they want to go. I'm not sure what reduced lists look like but I'd cut deep into the bottom six players on our list and go after two restricted free agents or out of contract player and again look to address our small forward and outside run issues first and foremost. If we are constrained by our list size then we may need to make a hard decision and cut deeper or trade our fringes. This does not include Dunkley.

    Another year with this core group players and perhaps two inclusions that address our needs and we'll be getting results.

    We've had very good patches of football this season most of what we need is there we just need to fill two or three on-field holes and get some continuity as a group.
    Great post 1eye
    FFC: Established 1883

    Premierships: AFL 1954, 2016 VFA - 1898,99,1900, 1908, 1913, 1919-20, 1923-24, VFL: 2014, 2016 . Champions of Victoria 1924. AFLW - 2018.

  16. #72
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Mulligan's Boogie-board
    Posts
    13,681
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    Quote Originally Posted by 1eyedog View Post
    We don't need to trade Dunkley, why would we? We should be looking to create a few list spots and go after a player or two to address our current issues. I'd certainly be looking at Zac Williams and would go hard he'd address some of our movement issues.

    I'd be devastated if Bevo thinks the current list is a future Premiership list, he knows we have holes, it's why we went after Martin (an acknowledgement that our forward line is unbalanced) and why we were reportedly into I.Smith because we were aware that we lacked outside run.

    The expectations on Lippa and Richards are unreasonable. They are cream players and young. We're just simply not in a position to maximise their skill sets. They need to stay and grow with the group. They've shown good signs.

    I would'nt trade anyone unless they want to go. I'm not sure what reduced lists look like but I'd cut deep into the bottom six players on our list and go after two restricted free agents or out of contract player and again look to address our small forward and outside run issues first and foremost. If we are constrained by our list size then we may need to make a hard decision and cut deeper or trade our fringes. This does not include Dunkley.

    Another year with this core group players and perhaps two inclusions that address our needs and we'll be getting results.

    We've had very good patches of football this season most of what we need is there we just need to fill two or three on-field holes and get some continuity as a group.
    Well said.

    We do have holes on the list, and we've targetted guys to fill those holes (e.g. mature KPD and KPF last year, taking a small forward at the draft). The guys we've missed out on are positions of need for us too - Marton as creative class forward of the ball, Smith as a wingman opposite Hunter.

    The nucleus of a "good" team is there, with holes exacerbated by Naughton and Hunter's absences. JUH helps enormously, ditto Raak (especially if he grows). I really think we need a genuine mature wingman, a guy in the 27-29 age range would be ideal. Reduced list sizes and having no picks this year will make it difficult to bring in mature talent though.
    Western Bulldogs: 2016 Premiers

  17. Likes 1eyedog liked this post
  18. #73
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,438
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    I think some are forgetting what Dunkley provides when fully fit. He had a poor game this weekend but when fit and firing he is fantastic.

    We actually dont need to get rid of an inside mid, we just need to add more run.

    Dunks can rest forward when needed and then swap out with Bont to continue with the inside dominance.

  19. Likes chef liked this post
  20. #74
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,930
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    Dunks turning into an A grader in 2019 corresponded with us turning into a contender

    His size physicality, defensive efforts, and improved decision making and disposal were key

    He's been off the boil physically in 2020 but I'd be banking on him to get himself up and firing again

  21. #75
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    footscray
    Posts
    113
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Trade Dunkley

    Quote Originally Posted by Yankee Hotel Foxtrot View Post
    We need another midfielder who has the kicking precision of Caleb Daniel.
    In fact, is Caleb's physical stature a problem for him playing minutes in the midfield?
    It didn't seem to be a problem for Sam Mitchell (around 178cm). I think Caleb can play the same roll.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •