Page 1 of 2
Troy Simmonds
Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2004 5:35 pm
by richo
I read today the Dockers are considering trading Troy Simmonds as they may need more room in their salary cap due to Josh Carr coming over from chokesville. Simmonds would make a great key forward/back up ruckman. Who would we need to trade to get him and why wouldn't we want him?
Go the pies!
Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2004 5:36 pm
by Joel
Got some stats on him?
Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2004 6:47 pm
by richo
Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2004 6:57 pm
by Cannibal
What the hell do we need ANOTHER ruckman/forward for? We've got 'em coming out our bloody earholes!
Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:11 pm
by richo
We don't necessarily need another ruckman but we definitely need another key forward, especially one who can actually kick straight because Josh, Taz, Pebbles, Tex and even Dids struggled to kick straight last season and we didn't have too many blokes taking grabs inside 50. We won't win enough games to make the 8 with crumbers/midfielders kicking goals, we need 40+ goals from two key forwards and 20-30 + from someone else, minimum.
Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:19 pm
by richo
I would argue that we have a surplus of midfielders as well but we sure as hell need another classy, quick one if we are to give the flag a shake in 05. Just because we have a lot of ruckmen/forwards doesn't mean we couldn't do with another decent one.
Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2004 7:09 am
by Johnson#26
We don't really need another ruckman. I heard Gerard Healy on Sports Today yesterday saying that he wants to go to Sydney. If he was going to play as a forward - maybe - but we really don't need to waste players.
Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2004 3:01 pm
by erniedog
May not be exactly what we are looking for but if he is consistent with Freo's record (Bell, Clement, Holland, McPhee etc.) then he will become an all Australian
Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2004 3:18 pm
by BBHS
Bell still plays for them
Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2004 4:36 pm
by rand corp
I read elesewhere that he was not happy being relegated to a forwards role and wants to spend more time in the ruck. He came to the Dockers as a ruckman but now finds himslef as third ruck option and permanent forward.
So, is Guy the man?
Is he too injury prone and we therefore need some decent insurance?
Is the Guy/Josh combo the one to take us to a flag?
Is Pebs/Cam and Tex enough back-up?
I'd say, if he didn't cost us too much we should go for it but, Freo will want plenty.
Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2004 4:51 pm
by Johnson#26
Guy is the man for the job. His form cannot be questioned and he is ready to reload in 2005.
If anyone was going to get Simmonfds, it would be WCE or the Crows - who both need tall forwards.
Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2004 4:57 pm
by Di Di Didak
I think WC will only trade for Key backmen...
They Have McDougall, Staker, Lynch, Gaspar who was injured, Hansen, And next year Gardiner who will play forward.
Midfield is quality, backs a bit shaky.
They wont want another ruckmen forward, Cox, Seaby, Paul Johnson in waiting...
Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 10:14 am
by erniedog
what about
1. getting Simmonds for 2 round 2 (our own and in exchange for O'bree or Lokan or Shaw).
2. Trading Fraser to either Kangas for Harvey and their first round or to Geelong for Wojinski + Tennace.
This would arguably not leave us any weaker for a ruck backup/spare forward and would give us extra speed.
Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 12:37 pm
by Brown26
no one is trading Fraser, we don't need Simmonds.
Get real and think about it for a minute!
- Ben
Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 1:57 pm
by PiesFan
Doubt they would trade fraser and if they did, fraser = Harvey + draft pick??? I dont think he is worth that much