Chris Dawes?

[azabob]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Given that an announcement on Dawes was supposedly imminent this time yesterday, and we've still heard nothing, is it fair to assume that the wheels have fallen off the deal?

It appears the deal was never imminent. Dawes is still yet to decide which club he wants to go to.

[DOG GOD]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Clayton was only recruiter from 1999 to 2003 - in 2003 Stephen Newport was our trade week negotiator and head of football. When he was given the lemonade and sars, Clayton stepped in and became list manager and player contract negotiator before Fantasia's arrival at the kennel.

Oh, forgot about Newport. Thanks for clarifying that sedat.

[LongWait]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Can't argue with any of that Guido. Dalrymple stuffed his first draft with us but he has shown a good eye for talent since then - would be good to back him in and give him a strong hand to deal with on draft day this year. How good would it be to unearth another 1999 crop, or a Geelong 1999/2001 crop?

It's as if we got Lachie Hunter for slight unders so feel duty-bound to give overs for the rest of our trades. Clayton was shrewd during trade week (still is) and never paid overs for any recycled player. Sure they didn't all work out but when you bring in a Tim Callan for a 2-spot downgrade from pick 61 to 63 it's not exactly betting the farm.

The drafting strike rate once you get past the top dozen picks is not very high. The average AFL footballer will play less than 30 games. Not saying we shouldn't invest heavily in the draft and use drafting as our primary team building strategy, but to only use the draft would be just as flawed in my opinion as only using trading and free agency.

I think it is about getting the balance between the recruitment methods right for the club at any given time. Assess each opportunity on it's merits and not be dogmatic about any one approach.

Which was the last Premiership team not to have a single player that was traded in from another club?

[DOG GOD]

Re: Chris Dawes?

It appears the deal was never imminent. Dawes is still yet to decide which club he wants to go to.

Hopefully with the neeld/ brown influence that will get him to Melbourne.

[Mantis]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Dawes has been paid a visit from Neeld and Leigh Brown (now Melbourne ass) to try and convince him to go to Melbourne.

I won't be unhappy if he doesn't choose the dogs, but will welcome him if he does. Personally, I don't think he will be playing for us.

If some of the offers I'm hearing are true in reagrd to players from other clubs Dawes would eb silly to knock back an offer from Melb.

Given that an announcement on Dawes was supposedly imminent this time yesterday, and we've still heard nothing, is it fair to assume that the wheels have fallen off the deal?

Has Dawes even told Coll that he wants out? Considering that he is still contracted I'm pretty sure nothing can happen until a request for trade is made.

[LongWait]

Re: Chris Dawes?

If some of the offers I'm hearing are true in reagrd to players from other clubs Dawes would eb silly to knock back an offer from Melb.



Has Dawes even told Coll that he wants out? Considering that he is still contracted I'm pretty sure nothing can happen until a request for trade is made.

Collingwood were shopping Dawes around last week without his knowledge apparently.

[Bornadog]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Dawes decision 'by Monday'
By Peter Ryan
1:42 PM Thu 11 Oct, 2012

MELBOURNE expects Collingwood's Chris Dawes to make a decision on his future before the weekend is over.

Dawes has a contract with the Magpies but indicated last week he was keen to explore his options after Collingwood recruited ruckman/forward Quinten Lynch from West Coast under free agency.

Demons coach Mark Neeld said he and assistant coach Leigh Brown had met with Dawes - a player Neeld coached at Collingwood and a former teammate of Brown's - a couple of times but Dawes was yet to make the call on where he wanted to play next season.

"We've also been told that we are one of three (clubs interested in Dawes) so at the very worst we're 33 and a bit per cent chance," Neeld said.

[Guido]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Dawes almost certainly will play 100+ games for us. I have more faith in that than in Tutt or Howard getting to 100 (I like Tutt but the coaching staff seem to have issues with him).

If we are going to take a risk on a Stringer or Menzel (and I'd be happy to get Stringer), than Dawes balances the risk with the safety of a known quantity.

I don't think he'll make 100 games with us, but regardless, you could say "could probably play 100+ games for us" for most established mid-tier 24/25 year olds in the comp. It doesn't mean trading a first rounder for them is quality list management.

IMO, there are certain keys to a successful trade pick-up:

Must be more likely than not to be among the comps top 100 players - possible, but probably not
Must be of an age where he is likely to be a contributor to your next flag tilt - possible, but probably not
Unless 5 mins to midnight on the premiership clock, must be more likely than not to play 100 games or more - 50/50

Look at the range of pick (+/- 3 selections) we're looking at. Just in the last few years, 19-25 gets the likes of Fyfe, Ward, Bastinac, Menzel, Redden, Shuey, Zaharakis, Isaac Smith ... if there's quality of that standard in this year's draft at the pick we're discussing, is this a good trade?

[Eastdog]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Free Agency it causes all these rumours. Apparently Dawes is going to announce what he is going to do in a couple of days.

[Hotdog60]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Free Agency it causes all these rumours. Apparently Dawes is going to announce what he is going to do in a couple of days.

I don't think Dawes is a free agent and is still under a 2 year contract (I think)

[azabob]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Free Agency it causes all these rumours. Apparently Dawes is going to announce what he is going to do in a couple of days.

I don't think Dawes is a free agent and is still under a 2 year contract (I think)

Correct Hotdog, free agency has nothing to do with the Dawes situation.

[Eastdog]

Re: Chris Dawes?

I don't think Dawes is a free agent and is still under a 2 year contract (I think)

You're right Hotdog60. If Dawes is going to move its going to be a trade and will cost something as yes he is still contracted. I was just saying with free agency that it has created lots of rumours some maybe true some not.

[Sedat]

Re: Chris Dawes?

The drafting strike rate once you get past the top dozen picks is not very high. The average AFL footballer will play less than 30 games. Not saying we shouldn't invest heavily in the draft and use drafting as our primary team building strategy, but to only use the draft would be just as flawed in my opinion as only using trading and free agency.

I think it is about getting the balance between the recruitment methods right for the club at any given time. Assess each opportunity on it's merits and not be dogmatic about any one approach.

Which was the last Premiership team not to have a single player that was traded in from another club?

All good points LW. I would say we've under-utilised the draft since 2000 and over-used recycled players. Apart from 2002 when we had 3 picks in the top 20, we've never had a really strong hand of high picks in any given year - we've always had a penchant for trading out 2nd/3rd round picks, even when we've had a clutch of really high picks in some years and decided to trade them out (like 2003).

As you say, a good mix of the two philosophies is what's needed, but just as importantly it is crucial to understand the worth of a) the draft pick in question and b) the player being recycled - IMO we've been poor in establishing the true worth of players we are trading in and have paid overs on just about every single one (including Barry Hall) in the last few seasons, which goes back to my point about us being poor negotiators. Also when there are multiple suitors (as is the case with Dawes) sometimes it is best just to walk away and hold onto the pick/s, because invariably you'll pay overs.

[Guido]

Re: Chris Dawes?

Can't argue with any of that Guido. Dalrymple stuffed his first draft with us but he has shown a good eye for talent since then - would be good to back him in and give him a strong hand to deal with on draft day this year. How good would it be to unearth another 1999 crop, or a Geelong 1999/2001 crop?

It's more the players that he's missed out on which gives me confidence.

His number #1 option before Howard was Jetta, a couple of year's ago the number #1 on his draft list given our position was Howe, he had Mzungu as a pre-list target, there's plenty of examples/cues to prove he's not out of his depth.

Clayton was shrewd during trade week (still is) and never paid overs for any recycled player.

IMO a couple of his trades were too smart/cute by half and cost us, but we'll agree to disagree.

[Eastdog]

Re: Chris Dawes?

All good points LW. I would say we've under-utilised the draft since 2000 and over-used recycled players. Apart from 2002 when we had 3 picks in the top 20, we've never had a really strong hand of high picks in any given year - we've always had a penchant for trading out 2nd/3rd round picks, even when we've had a clutch of really high picks in some years and decided to trade them out (like 2003).

As you say, a good mix of the two philosophies is what's needed, but just as importantly it is crucial to understand the worth of a) the draft pick in question and b) the player being recycled - IMO we've been poor in establishing the true worth of players we are trading in and have paid overs on just about every single one (including Barry Hall) in the last few seasons, which goes back to my point about us being poor negotiators. Also when there are multiple suitors (as is the case with Dawes) sometimes it is best just to walk away and hold onto the pick/s, because invariably you'll pay overs.

Recycled players: Why do you reckon Sydney can pull it off so well. Why do clubs like us always struggle with that.