Managed to catch a bit of and interview with Leigh Matthews on 3AW yesterday. He was asked how has Mal Michael been this year. he response went something like this. "...he's been fantastic this year at full back. Only been beaten once by his opponent, and would have to be close to all Australian selection".
Now let me clear one thing up. I am a huge D9 fan. His work around the forward line is instrumental, setting up alot of the play with 1 percenters and striking fear into the heart of the opposition backmen.
BUT!!
Trying to look at the trade from a realistic piont of view, we have lacked a to quality defender for the whole year. A defender like Mal Michael. Now Molloy is mainly a forward and his primary job would be to kick goals, which he really has not done. Most of the time MM has to give him a spray or change his position to get him into the game. Now according to afl.com.au Mal had "3 top ten finishes in the best and fairest with the magpies". Not bad even though they were all bad years.
Fact: Mal was going to Queensland one way or another. Accourding to certian posts that were correctly deleted from Member he was not exactly welcome around the club. There for trade him.
Fact: The move has been made now and there's really no piont in bitching about it now.
BUT!
Michael is the defender we have been lacking all year and could have been the deference between us playing Finals Football!
Fact: Another important trading period is just around the corner but good full backs do not grow on trees. What we need is to be positive, and if we can not get a defender in the off season we need Roach, Cloke or even Kinnear to step up and play some senior footy. In my oppinion the trade has not worked this year but could still end up working in our favour.
The Michael and Molloy trade.
Moderator: bbmods
-
MarkT
- Posts: 1350
- Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2001 6:01 pm
- Location: Melb
Given that Mal was going to Queensland we were a little hamstrung with our options. We did as well as we could have. In view of some of our previous trading efforts we did very well.
Mal and Molly play different games. The fact is that we need both of them but that is not an option. Molly plays it tough and sets the example our young (and light) side needs.
Mal and Molly play different games. The fact is that we need both of them but that is not an option. Molly plays it tough and sets the example our young (and light) side needs.
-
Legga
- Posts: 97
- Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2001 6:01 pm
- Location: Lilydale, Melbourne, Victoria
Look. If the guys going to go, it's best to get what you can for him. Great, he has had a good season with the bears, but look at the team they have. McKee would probably have a good season with them, because a team like that elevates a player, as the on-field support you receive is fantastic.
I have been a critic of Noel Judkins, for the sole reason that I don't think we have done enough with of top draft choices, and we have made some dumb trades. With Molloy, it seems that he was brought in to do the heavy work up forward. He would be the first to admit he needs to kick more goals, but Buckley does as well.
After the Booze loss on saturday, I was disheartened by 2 things. Our performance, and the bagging our list got on 3AW. Boy, they weren't to complimentary, and in a depressed state of mind, I think some of the points they raised were valid. They named quite a few of the constant offenders that are named on this site as needing to be traded, and basically said that with the list we have, we would be at best a side that finished around the 8-14 mark.
In the cold light of day, I think they could be right. We have about 6 really good players, and then we really drop off. Don't know what can be done, except really trade and recruit smarter than we have been.
I have been a critic of Noel Judkins, for the sole reason that I don't think we have done enough with of top draft choices, and we have made some dumb trades. With Molloy, it seems that he was brought in to do the heavy work up forward. He would be the first to admit he needs to kick more goals, but Buckley does as well.
After the Booze loss on saturday, I was disheartened by 2 things. Our performance, and the bagging our list got on 3AW. Boy, they weren't to complimentary, and in a depressed state of mind, I think some of the points they raised were valid. They named quite a few of the constant offenders that are named on this site as needing to be traded, and basically said that with the list we have, we would be at best a side that finished around the 8-14 mark.
In the cold light of day, I think they could be right. We have about 6 really good players, and then we really drop off. Don't know what can be done, except really trade and recruit smarter than we have been.
-
ash
MarkT: The trade was okay but it could have been better. With their list they could have lost another name player like Mcdonald or Power (but thats getting too far down the track because we would have had to offer more as well). We do need both of them but Michael would have had more of an affect than Molloy in out side this year.
Legga: Yes Michael has played in a top side but I go back to one of my earlier pionts "3 top ten finishes in the best and fairest with the magpies". If he was still with us he probibly would not be pushing all Australian selection but defenity would have had more of an affect than Molloy. On Judkins, well I am not exaclty sure what his role is at the club. My understanding is that he looks at the young players in the draft and recommends them to the coaching staff. I thought he did not do any recruiting, but I am not 100% sure. Feel free to correct me on that one. As for there attack on out list which I did hear, they were put on the spot by Rex Hunt but thats their job and they were not far off the mark with most players. Lyon and Whalls (spelling) have alot of experience and they made some tuff but far calls on Rintoul, Dimma and co.
Rohan: I find most of your posts critising the club and its staff insulting because this is something I hav alot of trouble doing, but everybody has the right to there opinion so her goes any way. With so many close games putting Michael back with Molloy I feel would give us 12 wins for the years macking us a finals team, But to be a top team we definitly need another ruckman.
A midfeilder would be a luxury because we have Scotland, Didak and Adkins playing for Willy. Another small/medium backman (Soloman/Wirrupunda (spelling)) to free up Burns would be better.
Legga: Yes Michael has played in a top side but I go back to one of my earlier pionts "3 top ten finishes in the best and fairest with the magpies". If he was still with us he probibly would not be pushing all Australian selection but defenity would have had more of an affect than Molloy. On Judkins, well I am not exaclty sure what his role is at the club. My understanding is that he looks at the young players in the draft and recommends them to the coaching staff. I thought he did not do any recruiting, but I am not 100% sure. Feel free to correct me on that one. As for there attack on out list which I did hear, they were put on the spot by Rex Hunt but thats their job and they were not far off the mark with most players. Lyon and Whalls (spelling) have alot of experience and they made some tuff but far calls on Rintoul, Dimma and co.
Rohan: I find most of your posts critising the club and its staff insulting because this is something I hav alot of trouble doing, but everybody has the right to there opinion so her goes any way. With so many close games putting Michael back with Molloy I feel would give us 12 wins for the years macking us a finals team, But to be a top team we definitly need another ruckman.
A midfeilder would be a luxury because we have Scotland, Didak and Adkins playing for Willy. Another small/medium backman (Soloman/Wirrupunda (spelling)) to free up Burns would be better.
-
MarkT
- Posts: 1350
- Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2001 6:01 pm
- Location: Melb
I am less concerned than most, it seems, with the midfield. Bucks, OBree, Lica (to do a job), Adkins, Davis (both), Roids, Lockyer, Didak, Shaw (I'm still hopeful about Reece) is a good mix. Pace, skill, persistance and nouse are all well represented in that lot. I would not give up a required player to top up the midfield. With natural improvement in the younger players our midfield will stand up next year. On that basis I would trade Dima, Steiner, Lane, Freeborne without hesitation. I would keep Rupe because I think he is the best of the "goers".
We obviously need a ruckman. As I have said before, if we cannot convince a decent ruckman to jump on board and do a deal with his club, the recruiting staff will have been negligent in their duties and should be held accountable. The need is painfully obvious and the void has cost us finals and maybe top 4.
There seems a consensus that we need A tall running defender. If you look at the number of times we get beaten by a forward kicking a bag it seems well founded. I am not 100% convinced because if you really look into it, as often as not, that forward is not the No1 but a second or even 3rd stringer. (Dickson, Beamont, etc. last year). If we get the ball out of the centre our "adequate" backline would look better. I would think of trading Waklin if we get something for him but not Presti at this stage. He has height and has improved year by year. He works on his game and reaps the rewards. Let him keep doing improving and he could be a 200+ gamer. Solomon has been mentioned so often I think he already plays for us! I doubt we will get him but if we do I will be happy. He has the hardness we need whilst still having plenty of skill.
I am satisfied with the forwards by and large.
SO,
other than a ruckman I think we should get quality irrespective of position. IE build the top end of our list.
We obviously need a ruckman. As I have said before, if we cannot convince a decent ruckman to jump on board and do a deal with his club, the recruiting staff will have been negligent in their duties and should be held accountable. The need is painfully obvious and the void has cost us finals and maybe top 4.
There seems a consensus that we need A tall running defender. If you look at the number of times we get beaten by a forward kicking a bag it seems well founded. I am not 100% convinced because if you really look into it, as often as not, that forward is not the No1 but a second or even 3rd stringer. (Dickson, Beamont, etc. last year). If we get the ball out of the centre our "adequate" backline would look better. I would think of trading Waklin if we get something for him but not Presti at this stage. He has height and has improved year by year. He works on his game and reaps the rewards. Let him keep doing improving and he could be a 200+ gamer. Solomon has been mentioned so often I think he already plays for us! I doubt we will get him but if we do I will be happy. He has the hardness we need whilst still having plenty of skill.
I am satisfied with the forwards by and large.
SO,
other than a ruckman I think we should get quality irrespective of position. IE build the top end of our list.
-
Nick is RAD
I heard on the grapevine, 'Spider' Everitt was at the end of his contract. (I'm not certain, but thats what i've been hearing) How would he go as the new ruckman (?!)
BUT, i dont know if this is true or just another rumour, if it is true, we really should push for him as a draft.
--nick davis is the next best thing!!--
BUT, i dont know if this is true or just another rumour, if it is true, we really should push for him as a draft.
--nick davis is the next best thing!!--
-
MarkT
- Posts: 1350
- Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2001 6:01 pm
- Location: Melb
Spider has 2 years left on his contract.
I believe he wants out and so does Hall who is out of contract. I have no interest in Hall at all. Everitt is an interesting one. We have probably done that subject to death but I would take him if the price wasn't one of our young guns. He has attitude problems but MM could sort him. Put him on an incentive contract with a big performance bonus element so if he really performs to his capabilities he gets big $$.
The question is, will the Saints let him go and if so, for what?
I'de give our first draft choice plus our last choice and 2 of Lane, Dimma, Steinford, Tuckey, Freeborn, Wasley, Roach, Stone, McKee. I'd let 'em have 3 if they took 2 of the last 4 in that list.
There may be scope to trade some of these to other clubs for draft choices to bolster our trading position. In effect, if we get Everitt for the abouve we will be a better side if he produces and a worse one if he doesn't. Worth the punt I'd say because our current list, as promising as some of them are, cannot win a premiership.
I believe he wants out and so does Hall who is out of contract. I have no interest in Hall at all. Everitt is an interesting one. We have probably done that subject to death but I would take him if the price wasn't one of our young guns. He has attitude problems but MM could sort him. Put him on an incentive contract with a big performance bonus element so if he really performs to his capabilities he gets big $$.
The question is, will the Saints let him go and if so, for what?
I'de give our first draft choice plus our last choice and 2 of Lane, Dimma, Steinford, Tuckey, Freeborn, Wasley, Roach, Stone, McKee. I'd let 'em have 3 if they took 2 of the last 4 in that list.
There may be scope to trade some of these to other clubs for draft choices to bolster our trading position. In effect, if we get Everitt for the abouve we will be a better side if he produces and a worse one if he doesn't. Worth the punt I'd say because our current list, as promising as some of them are, cannot win a premiership.