Most definitely worth a punt I reckon Piesnchess. Can’t see why not. If we get him we will not need to recruit McStay and we get to honour one of our greatest flag winning captains in 1958. A fabulous win - win situation.Piesnchess wrote:^ He would be much better than what we have now, which is sweet bugger all, he can take a good grab, and is a pretty decent kick for goal, he just never really has got his chance at the Deees. Be worth a punt, I reckon.
Trade Targets ~ Free Agency & MSD player movements
Moderator: bbmods
-
lazzadesilva
- Posts: 2206
- Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 7:01 pm
- Has liked: 2 times
- Been liked: 51 times
I term the current Collingwood attack based strategy “Unceasing Waves” like on a stormy and windy day with rough seas. A Perfect Storm 
-
Jezza
- Posts: 29193
- Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:28 pm
- Location: Ponsford End
- Has liked: 128 times
- Been liked: 191 times
He's been given chances.Piesnchess wrote:^ He would be much better than what we have now, which is sweet bugger all, he can take a good grab, and is a pretty decent kick for goal, he just never really has got his chance at the Deees. Be worth a punt, I reckon.
He's not good enough.
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | -
rad
- Posts: 107
- Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 6:46 pm
Must admit I don’t know a lot about McStay. I have taken an interest to watch him in recent games since it was rumoured we’re interested.
As a forward I don’t believe we need him, he isn’t good enough at the main target.
I know he was a defender. Can he play fullback to then release Moore to CHF? If McStay can replace Roughy then I say go in and get him otherwise please pass.
As a forward I don’t believe we need him, he isn’t good enough at the main target.
I know he was a defender. Can he play fullback to then release Moore to CHF? If McStay can replace Roughy then I say go in and get him otherwise please pass.
-
stui magpie
- Posts: 54653
- Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 10:10 am
- Location: In flagrante delicto
- Has liked: 72 times
- Been liked: 74 times
-
rad
- Posts: 107
- Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 6:46 pm
[quote="rad"]Must admit I don’t know a lot about McStay. I have taken an interest to watch him in recent games since it was rumoured we’re interested.
As a forward I don’t believe we need him, he isn’t good enough at the main target.
I know he was a defender. Can he play fullback to then release Moore to CHF? If McStay can replace Roughy then I say go in and get him otherwise please pass.[/quote]
Sorry was meant to be CHB not CHF.
As a forward I don’t believe we need him, he isn’t good enough at the main target.
I know he was a defender. Can he play fullback to then release Moore to CHF? If McStay can replace Roughy then I say go in and get him otherwise please pass.[/quote]
Sorry was meant to be CHB not CHF.
That’s my thoughts. We need to move on from only thinking of McStay as a forward, particularly when we invested in Krueger in the off season.stui magpie wrote:^
Play him FB, release Moore to CHB.
We have lots of forward options and are building a nice hybrid forward line. We could still use a good dominant KPP to build the mix around, McStay just aint it.
Where else will you find an automatic plug and play key defender to replace Roughead without getting involved in a decent trade in return ( albeit I accept the DeGoey free agency may muddy those waters ) You would certainly play him at F B and allow Moore to intercept further up the ground.
Let’s not forget, Leppitsch coached hm as a key defender in McStays early days at the Lions. If anyone knows his defensive attributes, it would be Leppa.
We can say what we like about Charlie Dean but one is yet to play an AFL game, while the other has played a battle hardened 150 odd.
Yep, that's my feeling too. While both Dean and Kelly are emerging defenders, neither of them are 200 cm plus, like Roughead was. They are more likely to be relied upon to replace the ageing Howe in a couple of years. In the meantime we need a genuine big bloke to look after the power forwards, and while I haven't seen much of McStay, he at least fits the bill in terms of size and strength. As you say stui, this would free up Moore to play his more natural game as our quarter back, marking and running off the half back line.stui magpie wrote:^
Play him FB, release Moore to CHB.
We have lots of forward options and are building a nice hybrid forward line. We could still use a good dominant KPP to build the mix around, McStay just aint it.
While I can understand the rationale of why so many people believe we must take a KPP with our 1st round selection, for mine the landscape has changed enough since the start of our season that we might be better served rethinking that position.
The most critical aspect that has changed is we'll no longer likely be making a selection within the top 10 which would have been unthinkable to most before the season began. While a decent KP prospect could still be on offer later in the first round if that player is the 4th or 5th best KP prospect on our draft board should we take him if another non KP prospect is rated much higher overall by us?
Another area to consider is just how strong the pool of KP prospects really are this year.
All the talk was this years draft included a bumper crop of KPP but looking at the latest round of power rankings by Chris Doerre aka Knightmare sees only 2 such players within his top 10 (@9,10) and another 2/3 within his top 20.
https://www.espn.com.au/afl/story/_/id/ ... -no-1-pick
Another question to ponder is whether with our rapid rise this season we'd be better off retaining both De Goey and Grundy and using this seasons 1st round selection as part of any trade currency required for an established player like Taranto. This is of course assuming we can afford Taranto should both players above be retained. I would imagine we would need to forget about McStay under this scenario and most would be happy with that outcome at present.
Taranto is two years younger than Jordan, is more a pure midfield option and doesn't carry the same off field baggage. On the flip side he doesn't have the same capacity as Jordan to be moved forward and influence a game off his own boot either. Personally I see losing De Goey and gaining Taranto as a net zero gain and would prefer they come together in our midfield. Comparing their 2022 seasons and De Goey is actually ahead when it comes to our hot topic of the moment, clearances.
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_ ... 1=S&fid2=S
As for Grundy I feel we should remember he's the only dual AA on our list outside of Pendlebury so we shouldn't be to flippant when discussing his future. At his best players of his talent aren't so easy to come by.
Yes we all hope he can get back to his form of 2018/19 and yes if he can't we wish he was on less money but I'm still drawn to the fact he's had barely any opportunity to play under our new coach and system as yet. He still remains the best pure ruck option on our list.
For mine we should only entertain trading Grundy if the currency gained went towards landing a really big KP fish yet unknown and not for the arrival of a Taranto and McStay combination.
The most critical aspect that has changed is we'll no longer likely be making a selection within the top 10 which would have been unthinkable to most before the season began. While a decent KP prospect could still be on offer later in the first round if that player is the 4th or 5th best KP prospect on our draft board should we take him if another non KP prospect is rated much higher overall by us?
Another area to consider is just how strong the pool of KP prospects really are this year.
All the talk was this years draft included a bumper crop of KPP but looking at the latest round of power rankings by Chris Doerre aka Knightmare sees only 2 such players within his top 10 (@9,10) and another 2/3 within his top 20.
https://www.espn.com.au/afl/story/_/id/ ... -no-1-pick
Another question to ponder is whether with our rapid rise this season we'd be better off retaining both De Goey and Grundy and using this seasons 1st round selection as part of any trade currency required for an established player like Taranto. This is of course assuming we can afford Taranto should both players above be retained. I would imagine we would need to forget about McStay under this scenario and most would be happy with that outcome at present.
Taranto is two years younger than Jordan, is more a pure midfield option and doesn't carry the same off field baggage. On the flip side he doesn't have the same capacity as Jordan to be moved forward and influence a game off his own boot either. Personally I see losing De Goey and gaining Taranto as a net zero gain and would prefer they come together in our midfield. Comparing their 2022 seasons and De Goey is actually ahead when it comes to our hot topic of the moment, clearances.
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_ ... 1=S&fid2=S
As for Grundy I feel we should remember he's the only dual AA on our list outside of Pendlebury so we shouldn't be to flippant when discussing his future. At his best players of his talent aren't so easy to come by.
Yes we all hope he can get back to his form of 2018/19 and yes if he can't we wish he was on less money but I'm still drawn to the fact he's had barely any opportunity to play under our new coach and system as yet. He still remains the best pure ruck option on our list.
For mine we should only entertain trading Grundy if the currency gained went towards landing a really big KP fish yet unknown and not for the arrival of a Taranto and McStay combination.
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD!
^ ^ ^
Swoop, totally agree about the usage of your first pick in the draft.
Just because the club identifies we need to find a 10 year K P P prospect as a priority, doesn’t mean you automatically pick him with your next pick. Particularly, if a) you’re not totally convinced he is the answer or b ) you believe you’re leaving a better player on the table just because he’s not over 194cm.
What we’re seeing now with the draft rankings happens after every U18 championships. Kids who weren’t even on the radar 12 months earlier, rocket up the rankings because they had a good carnival, while others who have been all the rage for the previous 12 months, drop away because of injury or a poor carnival. Scully and Lemmey were all the rage as K P Fs 12 months ago and for various reasons, they aren’t in Twomeys top 25 TODAY..
Jefferson and Busslinger had brilliant carnivals, so everyone is talking about them over the last month. I have a bit to do with the Chargers ( voluntary these days ) and no one can believe how much Jefferson has improved over the last few months, while Busslinger ( W A KPD ) has been thereabouts for a while.
I posted previously the Lions would need a ridiculous record amount of points for 2 x F / S prospects when no one was even talking about Fletcher as a factor. Now Twomey has him at #15 ( on the back of a BOG for the Allies ) and Ashcroft remains at #1.
Things change quickly with draft prospects but the one constant that shouldn't change when it comes to drafting them, is to not automatically commit to filling a hole on your list if you’re not convinced that selection will cut it ( and obviously you can still easily be wrong anyway )
The only thing that won’t change is Will Ashcroft being the best player in this draft pool. He’s a super talent !
Swoop, totally agree about the usage of your first pick in the draft.
Just because the club identifies we need to find a 10 year K P P prospect as a priority, doesn’t mean you automatically pick him with your next pick. Particularly, if a) you’re not totally convinced he is the answer or b ) you believe you’re leaving a better player on the table just because he’s not over 194cm.
What we’re seeing now with the draft rankings happens after every U18 championships. Kids who weren’t even on the radar 12 months earlier, rocket up the rankings because they had a good carnival, while others who have been all the rage for the previous 12 months, drop away because of injury or a poor carnival. Scully and Lemmey were all the rage as K P Fs 12 months ago and for various reasons, they aren’t in Twomeys top 25 TODAY..
Jefferson and Busslinger had brilliant carnivals, so everyone is talking about them over the last month. I have a bit to do with the Chargers ( voluntary these days ) and no one can believe how much Jefferson has improved over the last few months, while Busslinger ( W A KPD ) has been thereabouts for a while.
I posted previously the Lions would need a ridiculous record amount of points for 2 x F / S prospects when no one was even talking about Fletcher as a factor. Now Twomey has him at #15 ( on the back of a BOG for the Allies ) and Ashcroft remains at #1.
Things change quickly with draft prospects but the one constant that shouldn't change when it comes to drafting them, is to not automatically commit to filling a hole on your list if you’re not convinced that selection will cut it ( and obviously you can still easily be wrong anyway )
The only thing that won’t change is Will Ashcroft being the best player in this draft pool. He’s a super talent !
Gary Player “ the harder I practice, the luckier I get “
I think the knock on Matt Crouch is that he has no defensive part to his game. Hard to see how someone who can get above 30 processions a game needs to be defensive but that is what I have heard why he can't hold his spot in a very average Adelaide team.
I'm also not sure that his disposal is as good as it should be, so I doubt that Collingwood would be interested in chasing someone else who can get the ball a lot but can't kick over a jam can or regularly butchers the disposal to provide the opposition with a turnover opportunity.
Be good to hear from any South Australian based Nickster's who have a better understanding of Crouch's demise from AA who was given a big long term contract to being on the outer at the Crows.
I'm also not sure that his disposal is as good as it should be, so I doubt that Collingwood would be interested in chasing someone else who can get the ball a lot but can't kick over a jam can or regularly butchers the disposal to provide the opposition with a turnover opportunity.
Be good to hear from any South Australian based Nickster's who have a better understanding of Crouch's demise from AA who was given a big long term contract to being on the outer at the Crows.
Collingwood Domination. Envy of the Nation!