Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

We could do worse than Crisp... Hes a good size and his 2014 stats look ok.... 18 touches per game, 1 goal per game...

They gave him number 5, i know it means nothing but maybe they rated him and for whatever reason it hasnt worked out.

Like i said, numbers look ok and we could do worse.

Museman wrote:

AN_Inkling wrote:

blakis wrote: Rated in the top 10 at the draft for kicking skills at 83%.

And then didn't get drafted .

He also went top 10 standing vertical, and apparently top 10 3km time trial

He also won the bushrangers b&f...

Why didn't he get drafted...he rob banks too???

Well if you're gonna take a chance on a player whose worth is speculative then he's seems like a worthy candidate.

His best form has come this season under a first year coach who I'm sure has implemented his own development system.

His first two seasons were during the "Voss years" which resulted at the end of 2013 in a multitude of players wanting out.

I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that at Collingwood with our development system, one which has had great success with rookie selections over the years can get more out of Crisp and develop him into a handy AFL level player.

AN_Inkling wrote:^^Elliott wasn't passed in the draft. Fairly sure GWS took him with one of their pre-selections or something. And Crisp was drafted 3-4 years ago.

None of that matters anyway. What is his worth now? If the Lions put him on the market I'd be very surprised if they got more than a 4th rounder. That's the point.

A fairly decent deal for Beams is one we requested last week: 5, 21 and 25. If Crisp is worth close to a 20s pick then it's a decent deal, but I don't think that's the case.

Exactly inky. I get the feeling it's not just the club that rolling over. Seems a lot of supporters are now looking at the rubbish on the table and rolling over too.

Forget greenwood, forget varcoe and late picks, that's all irrelevant to this deal.

If we trade beams for 5, 25 and a rookie draft 40 , we lose. That's just my opinion.

What pisses me off is we don't have to win, we just need to break even, but we seemingly will not even do that.

I've already said it but I like what I've seen of Crisp. I've since seen more videos of him after lurking on Big Footy.

I thought defender was taking the piss when he said he can't kick. Going on the vision I've seen he seems to be one of the very few Pies players that can actually hit a target.

I could see this kid playing on a wing next year, and possibly rotating through the middle.

Think it's now obvious we can only deal with Brisbane if the Pies have gone back on their word, which is a real shame with Boyd trying to get away.

I'm still shaking my head re: Varcoe. I don't want him and it's not that I despise Geelong, I just don't rate him.

Hope he proves me wrong, but I think he will be our list clogger.

I like the look of Crisp. He has size, pace and seemingly good foot skills. Looks a really good runner which should be our number 1 priority. So I'm not disappointed that it seems as if he'll be added to our list.

The fact remains though that he has very little value and that the deal, if it goes ahead, is a loss for us and a big win for the Lions.

And let's remember that Simon Buckley had most of the same attributes .

September Zeros wrote:

AN_Inkling wrote:^^Elliott wasn't passed in the draft. Fairly sure GWS took him with one of their pre-selections or something. And Crisp was drafted 3-4 years ago.

None of that matters anyway. What is his worth now? If the Lions put him on the market I'd be very surprised if they got more than a 4th rounder. That's the point.

A fairly decent deal for Beams is one we requested last week: 5, 21 and 25. If Crisp is worth close to a 20s pick then it's a decent deal, but I don't think that's the case.

Exactly inky. I get the feeling it's not just the club that rolling over. Seems a lot of supporters are now looking at the rubbish on the table and rolling over too.

Forget greenwood, forget varcoe and late picks, that's all irrelevant to this deal.

If we trade beams for 5, 25 and a rookie draft 40 , we lose. That's just my opinion.

What pisses me off is we don't have to win, we just need to break even, but we seemingly will not even do that.

We have to consider the Lumumba trade as well though, because if we break even on Beams, then lose on H, we're still behind.

If the overall result is that we lose Beams, H and picks 30 and 48 for Greenwood, Varcoe, Crisp and picks 5 and 23 then I think even though it looks bad on paper, we'll probably break even or maybe even be big winners if we draft and develop well.

If pick 23 doesn't come, then I'm with you, we got rolled.

I think the deal's about par if we can get 23. It's reported that we aren't though. Melbourne need this pick for their Trengove deal and it seems everyone else's needs take precedence over ours .

Reports are that we'll get: 5, Greenwood, Varcoe, Crisp for Beams and Lumumba.

That's a loss for us. The details can change though. Last week we seemed like we were requiring pick 21 to be included (can't be now that the Lions have already moved it, but Melbourne's pick 23 still a possible). We looked a lot stronger last week than this though.

AN_Inkling wrote:I like the look of Crisp. He has size, pace and seemingly good foot skills. Looks a really good runner which should be our number 1 priority. So I'm not disappointed that it seems as if he'll be added to our list.

The fact remains though that he has very little value and that the deal, if it goes ahead, is a loss for us and a big win for the Lions.

And let's remember that Simon Buckley had most of the same attributes .

Note the comparison, I think this kid has more tricks though. He isn't scared is very quick and I liked the way he stepped around opponents.

Anyway time will tell, how long to the NAB Cup or whatever they call it these days? I will admit I'm a shit judge of talent as I thought Jesse White was going to be our recruit of the year, wow I got that horribly wrong.

burnsy17 wrote:We could do worse than Crisp... Hes a good size and his 2014 stats look ok.... 18 touches per game, 1 goal per game...

They gave him number 5, i know it means nothing but maybe they rated him and for whatever reason it hasnt worked out.

Like i said, numbers look ok and we could do worse.

well, hopefully in years to come everyone will look back and wonder how the f we managed to do so well out of this. you just never know.

Also, as a Rookie listed player, Crisp played 10 games in his first year. That's a good start. Only managed 2 in his next and then played the final 6 of 2014 where he showed some good form.

If Varcoe stays fit he's going to make a lot of people on here look stupid by the end of next year...

If the tigers are really that interested in Trengove and willing to give up pick 12 for him I can't see why they wouldn't accept 30 plus Trengove in return for it.

For me Melbourne are either bullshitting us and hope to swap Trengove for pick 12 alone or are paying overs with adding pick 23.

Pick 30 and Trengove for pick 12 seems more about right to me.

Retaining that pick in the 20's makes or breaks this deal for me.

We either get it and break even or we lose.

AN_Inkling wrote:I think the deal's about par if we can get 23. It's reported that we aren't though. Melbourne need this pick for their Trengove deal and it seems everyone else's needs take precedence over ours .

Reports are that we'll get: 5, Greenwood, Varcoe, Crisp for Beams and Lumumba.

That's a loss for us. The details can change though. Last week we seemed like we were requiring pick 21 to be included (can't be now that the Lions have already moved it, but Melbourne's pick 23 still a possible). We looked a lot stronger last week than this though.

Well Trengove is a pick 2 with 2 clubs chasing him, surely Melbourne can get away with giving back pick 30 instead of pick 23. They're only getting pick 10 or 12 out of it. If not, then they can also include our pick 48 that we're trying to find a home for.

I haven't seen anything today about the details of the H trade. But I know we can't be using picks 30 and 48 if we bring in 3 new players, pick 5 and Darcy Moore. We wouldn't upgrade Jack Frost at 30 would we?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPof9YVLFEM Ugly kicking action Crisp has. They are trying to force him onto us. I don't understand how the Suns and all their picks got shut out of the equation. Isn't Dayne from the Gold Coast anyway?

He's a natural backman. Must play in the defensive pocket.*











* 'Coz there is nothing like a good Crisp Frost.