#32 Travis Cloke

[AN_Inkling]

If the boot was on the other foot and we were attempting to procure the services of Travis, what we we be willing to pay?

I argued this earlier today, no way we would pay a 2nd or 3rd round pick. I could imagine the outrage on these pages if we did.

I'd definitely be willing to pay a third round pick.

[stui magpie]

Thanks Mightymagpie.
So it depends on his new contract with a new club.
Not what he got previously.
So his value needs to be pumped up by kicking a bag of goals.
So he is worth about a packet of chips at the moment.

Not that much.

Buyers market, only one buyer and they're offering a piece of already chewed chewing gum.

[MightyMagpie]

Speaking of Picken did people see Bucks give Mick a clip on the final AFL360?Apparently on radio Mick claimed he rated Picken very highly in his draft year ... (mock laughter from Bucks) "well we didn't pick him did we?". I found it amusing.

[mooretreloar]

If the boot was on the other foot and we were attempting to procure the services of Travis, what we we be willing to pay?

I argued this earlier today, no way we would pay a 2nd or 3rd round pick. I could imagine the outrage on these pages if we did.

I'd definitely be willing to pay a third round pick.

Fair enough, on football only there is an argument for a 3rd rounder and I stated the other day that this is probably the starting point. I could argue it could be a 4th rounder on football only, but for now let's agree it's a 3rd rounder.

As soon as the salary (ie we don't want it in our books) comes into the argument his value is devalued significantly, then the fact we don't want him and he doesn't want to play with us, further reduces his value.

Unfortunately, 4th round is the best we can hope for, a few weeks back I was hearing 5th rounder.

[stoliboy]

So why cant we keep Travis Cloke to his contract and if he walks , then he has to go into the pre season draft where Essendon could pick him up.

Surely we wouldnt have to pay out his salary if he walks out on the club.

All this talk of letting him go for pick 70 whatever ( which even worse than what i first thought we dont even get any points to put towards Daicos and Brown)and having him bend us over the barrell this year like the last contract negotiations which affected our year, (remember how it went on and on ).

Why are we so accommodating to him. You would think after getting $800K from us this year ( omg how overpaid is that!!) he would at least ask the doggies to give us something.

Where is the fair trading bloke in all this anyway?!!

BTW with all this talk of freeing up salary space, what about Tooveys salary space,and McCaffers and N.Brown and Frost and Witts and Blair and Swans and Williams??

If what we get is nothing then why dont we say "you can play with us one more year".
Do what Liverpool did to Louis Suarez and make him play out the year. They soon get the point and put in the effort as there is no use hanging around like a bad smell.
Ever since when has a player been bigger than a club? Why are we so accommodating ?

I like this idea.

[watt price tully]

Robert Walls said he was done 2 years ago.
David King says the same.
Jason Dunstall said at the end of 2015 we should have traded him at the end of 2015.
Leigh Matthews said after the GF that he couldn't see a spot for Cloke at Footscray, unless he could play the forward/ruck role.
Nathan Buckley said in early 2016 that Cloke's form slump was oot a new thing, it had been apparent for 18 months.

Robert Walls - I thought he was in France 2 years ago.
David King - pls find the source
Dunstall trade views were right but that doesn't say he is done just what his value was at the time
Leigh's views that you've quoted doesn't mean he's done
That Bucks couldn't get the best out of him is another matter

So really you have possibly 2 names in that list, not plenty of experts

The freeing up of his salary however combined with a form slump & as Cloke Senior was quoted as saying recently playing for a coach that believes in you is another matter.

Robert Walls - article in Herald Sun 16/9/16. Says Cloke's AFL days are over in his opinion. In his view, Cloke has struggled for 3 years.
David King - multiple times on AFL 360, don't know episodes or exact times, as I didn't think at the time that watt price tully would want the exact details.
Dismiss Leigh's views if you want, but just quietly I would back him over you.
Your view that Buckley can't get the best out of him, no fact to this statement.
.

With all due respect, I haven't dismissed Matthew's opinion. That's a misrepresentation by you of what I posted. I posted this:

"Leigh's views that you've quoted doesn't mean he's done" what you posted was:

Leigh Matthews said after the GF that he couldn't see a spot for Cloke at Footscray, unless he could play the forward/ruck role.

Again, that doesn't mean he's done: that's your deduction from what you quoted about Mathews comments regarding Cloke & about a role at Footscray.

Now, if your're going to post please try to do it without misrepresentation.

[mooretreloar]

Robert Walls - I thought he was in France 2 years ago.
David King - pls find the source
Dunstall trade views were right but that doesn't say he is done just what his value was at the time
Leigh's views that you've quoted doesn't mean he's done
That Bucks couldn't get the best out of him is another matter

So really you have possibly 2 names in that list, not plenty of experts

The freeing up of his salary however combined with a form slump & as Cloke Senior was quoted as saying recently playing for a coach that believes in you is another matter.

Robert Walls - article in Herald Sun 16/9/16. Says Cloke's AFL days are over in his opinion. In his view, Cloke has struggled for 3 years.
David King - multiple times on AFL 360, don't know episodes or exact times, as I didn't think at the time that watt price tully would want the exact details.
Dismiss Leigh's views if you want, but just quietly I would back him over you.
Your view that Buckley can't get the best out of him, no fact to this statement.
.

With all due respect, I haven't dismissed Matthew's opinion. That's a misrepresentation by you of what I posted. I posted this:

"Leigh's views that you've quoted doesn't mean he's done" what you posted was:

Leigh Matthews said after the GF that he couldn't see a spot for Cloke at Footscray, unless he could play the forward/ruck role.

Again, that doesn't mean he's done: that's your deduction from what you quoted about Mathews comments regarding Cloke & about a role at Footscray.

Now, if your're going to post please try to do it without misrepresentation.

With all due respect, Cloke has never been a forward/ruck, so I would suggest Matthews was saying in a very diplomatic way that he was done. Thus, in my view you are dismissing his opinion.

Suggest that you take your own advice. If you don't like what I post, don't try and discredit or misrepresent me when what I have posted is correct. Also, don't try and say I only named 2 experts when I named 5 and have a basis for all.

[mooretreloar]

Also, watt price tully, I would be very careful in quoting anything David Cloke says, as a basis for Buckley not getting the best out of Travis. David is going to say whatever is the best for his son and I suggest it should be taken with a grain of salt. This is especially the case when both Buckley and Cloke say they are good mates.

[Cam]

Leigh Matthews said after the GF that he couldn't see a spot for Cloke at Footscray, unless he could play the forward/ruck role.

Given how premiership teams create roles -> the 'Matera Goalkicking Wingman Role', the 'Leigh Brown Sh#t Truck Role', the 'Gunstan Leadup Role' etc i guess Lethal is saying that Cloke would need to play the 'Boyd Mobile Forward/Ruck Role', which might be slightly difficult given that the Boyd in question is young and still there.

[mooretreloar]

Leigh Matthews said after the GF that he couldn't see a spot for Cloke at Footscray, unless he could play the forward/ruck role.

Given how premiership teams create roles -> the 'Matera Goalkicking Wingman Role', the 'Leigh Brown Sh#t Truck Role', the 'Gunstan Leadup Role' etc i guess Lethal is saying that Cloke would need to play the 'Boyd Mobile Forward/Ruck Role', which might be slightly difficult given that the Boyd in question is young and still there.

Could be, but he said he didn't see a spot for him at the Dogs and then suggested if there was a spot it was a role that he has never played.

At the end of the day, we are all going to have our opinions on whether he has good footy left in him and what his value is. Time will provide the answer for the first point, the market will provide the answer to the second.

Unfortunately, with the second point, there isn't much interest in him, so that means we aren't going to get much. In respect to the first point, I am grateful for all the years of great footy he played with us and wish him all the best, but whether he plays well or not is not relevant to me, as long as he doesn't dominate against us.

[jackcass]

With all due respect, Cloke has never been a forward/ruck, so I would suggest Matthews was saying in a very diplomatic way that he was done. Thus, in my view you are dismissing his opinion.

Suggest that you take your own advice. If you don't like what I post, don't try and discredit or misrepresent me when what I have posted is correct. Also, don't try and say I only named 2 experts when I named 5 and have a basis for all.

Played forward - ruck in at least 2 games this year unless I'm mistaken, Saints and Dees. Either way, long bow to go from Matthews saying he can't see a role for him to assume it means he thinks Cloke is done.

[watt price tully]

Leigh Matthews said after the GF that he couldn't see a spot for Cloke at Footscray, unless he could play the forward/ruck role.

Given how premiership teams create roles -> the 'Matera Goalkicking Wingman Role', the 'Leigh Brown Sh#t Truck Role', the 'Gunstan Leadup Role' etc i guess Lethal is saying that Cloke would need to play the 'Boyd Mobile Forward/Ruck Role', which might be slightly difficult given that the Boyd in question is young and still there.

Cheers:

I understand what Mathews was saying: that was quite clear. He did not say however he was done.

Moore Treloar (MT) believes this was Mathews diplomatic way of saying Cloke is done and that for MT constitutes fact. I'm saying Mathews did not say he is done. That MT believes this is is the case is Moore's opinion & not a fact.

[HAL]

I thought it was too.

[mooretreloar]

With all due respect, Cloke has never been a forward/ruck, so I would suggest Matthews was saying in a very diplomatic way that he was done. Thus, in my view you are dismissing his opinion.

Suggest that you take your own advice. If you don't like what I post, don't try and discredit or misrepresent me when what I have posted is correct. Also, don't try and say I only named 2 experts when I named 5 and have a basis for all.

Played forward - ruck in at least 2 games this year unless I'm mistaken, Saints and Dees. Either way, long bow to go from Matthews saying he can't see a role for him to assume it means he thinks Cloke is done.

Disagree, but happy to take your opinion on board. My reading of it may be wrong, but to say he doesn't see a spot and then suggest a role he has not played, suggests otherwise. He pinched hit in the ruck those days, not specifically playing a forward/ruck role.

[mooretreloar]

Leigh Matthews said after the GF that he couldn't see a spot for Cloke at Footscray, unless he could play the forward/ruck role.

Given how premiership teams create roles -> the 'Matera Goalkicking Wingman Role', the 'Leigh Brown Sh#t Truck Role', the 'Gunstan Leadup Role' etc i guess Lethal is saying that Cloke would need to play the 'Boyd Mobile Forward/Ruck Role', which might be slightly difficult given that the Boyd in question is young and still there.

Cheers:

I understand what Mathews was saying: that was quite clear. He did not say however he was done.

Moore Treloar (MT) believes this was Mathews diplomatic way of saying Cloke is done and that for MT constitutes fact. I'm saying Mathews did not say he is done. That MT believes this is is the case is Moore's opinion & not a fact.

Don't care if you agree with my view of his comments or not.
Don't particularly care about any of the experts views, was just making the point that some experts were saying he was done.
Form my opinions on what I see and for mine he is done. Don't care if you agree or not.
Suggest the offer the Bulldogs are giving and the fact there is no other interest provides support there are more than me thinking he is done.
Love Travis, as I have posted before his form from debut to mid 2014 would have meant he went down as an AFL Hall of Famer if he could kick straight. However, the wear and tear on his body from being a key forward has caught up with him, as it did with the greats like Brererton and Carey.