Delist/Tradeable Players

Sultan of spin · Joined: 31 Aug 2003 Location: Burnley

I've seen some BS on this board in my time but this topic just about takes the cake.

Williams, Mckee and Kinnear must be delisted immediately. BK & stunning have given good service to the club but their time has come. Williams has never and will never be an AFL footballer and the sooner he goes the better.

Shaw, Lokan, Swan & O'bree are all capable of playing the occasional good game but are not consistantly good enough to be part of a premiership side so they should be traded or delested.

Whoever it was that was bagging Woey earlier obviosly has no idea about football, in case you haven't noticed he has been our best player for the last month and will be top 3 in the B&F.

Johnson#26 · Joined: 18 Dec 2003

I'm still not convinced with Swan. He doesn't do enough and his disposal is at times dodgy. SoS, you are right on O'B, Swan, Shaw and Lokan. They have one good game which gets them in for another 4-5 weeks - which is just not good enough. People forget San is in his 3rd season. Others in their third season include Cole, Davidson, McGough and Walker, who are all ahead of him at this stage. Nixon has not impressed anyone in his three games as he has poor disposal and doesn't seem to go in for the hard ball. Mullins is silky skilled and has class, but will mnost likely not survive the cut.

Lets face it. Kinnear and Williams are gone. There is no way back. I doubt that Willaims game has saved him.

Magpie-Pep · Joined: 25 Jun 2003

O'bree

Daks · Joined: 19 Aug 2003 Location: Melbourne.

Daniel · Joined: 22 Apr 2003

Williams game has saved him? WTF? I can't believe some of you guys think Williams did well on Friday? We were playing Carlton FFS and didn't you notice Williams' inability to tackle after Didak tried to lay 2.

Make no mistake, Carlton will not b playing finals in the next 3 years. They have no talented youth apart from Walker.... whose disposal looks questionable by foot.

Daniel · Joined: 22 Apr 2003

Swan - gone.... not quick, average disposal, got enough of his type.

Kinnear - gone.

Williams - gone.

Shaw - maybe.

Nixon - should go, but won't.

Lokan - should DEFINITELY go, but salty Malty is like a dog with a bone.

McKee- gone.

O'Bree - please trade him! Impostor!

Johnson#26 · Joined: 18 Dec 2003

The club will stall with players like BK, Willo, Lokan and Nixon on the list. We need to be creative and inventive like at the end of 2000 when we got Clemo and Molloy and Dutchy and a few others. Those guys need to be traded and fast.

TheGaffer · Joined: 29 Sep 2003 Location: Melbourne

For whats its worth.

Williams - Must go, either delisted or traded. He has suffered from too many KO's last year.

OBree - Gets kicks against the poor sides. Against quality opposition he struggles badly. Might get a very low 2nd or high 3rd round pick in a trade.

Davis - His value has increased in the last month. Maybe his ability to put together a quality game in WA, might see him as a good trade to one of the Perth sides.

Kinnear - G.O.N.E, delisted. No value in any trade situation

Nixon - Played one or two games early and considering the club injuries he has been able to play many more. Doubt he will make it and most probably get delisted.

Shaw - Only remain because of his name.

McGough - Will be traded.

Shackelton - One game only so value must be questioned. Fitness is an issue from all accounts.

McKee - Unfortunately the rules committe have made him redundant as an AFL footballer. Some very smart lawyer might be able to sue the AFL for restraint of trade????

That makes it at least 8 new faces next year.

Johnson#26 · Joined: 18 Dec 2003

Some haven't really brought up Shacks' name. I rate him highly, as he has grunt and is a strong body and not a bad kick. Will he stay or go? David King has certainly saved his carer.

bokka · Joined: 11 Apr 1999 Location: NY, Ex Land of Brave and Free

I hope they give Shack a nuther go - anyway I said that b4 in other thread.
The way I see it, the rules say they have to delist a certain number - 5 from memory. They should make sure that they trade with equivalent players ( or preferably pacy midfielders/forwards) who are the same vintage - eg only swap a 2nd year recruit for another 2nd or more year recruit of equal potential. Hopefully they are aware of that simple rule. This is because we need to aim at peaking in 2006 and if we trade for younger players they will be too far behind in devt. Provided they chose wisely we should not lose anything, I suppose that is what they did when they got Clemo and Co.
Then you have to leave at least 2 spaces for our first round (#7) pick and for Travis Cloke (pick 3), and probably a 3rd space for pick 2 (although that is optional).
Kinnear is an obvious one, probably won't be tradeable, Williams might be tradeable for a slight pick upgrade or a reject but taht's about all.
That leaves one more player to delist without trading for another player, so as to make use of pick 2, but I don't konw who that would be since all others seem to have some trade value.
I suppose that means trading one player for a higher pick. Ideally that would be for one of the priority picks of this year's 3 dunces, say for our #2 pick plus say Obree or Mccough, or a better player. I doubt they would agree to that (although Obee and Mckee would be very handy for the bullies IMO) so that leaves a trade of one of our decent recruits (say shack etc) plus our pick 2, for one of the other club's 1st picks, preferably those that are out of the 8 - Adeliade, North or Freo. (picks 8,9, or 11) - not Carlton, should definitely not help them build anymore.
From those basic principles complicated 3 way deals etc could be built on if necessary, the mind boggles.

HOwever looking at the way Scotland, a solid and promising young player, was not even traded last year but just delisted, I am not at all confident they will do this. Either Collingwood was pretty much stone-walled by all other clubs re Scotland and others, or they are just incompetent. Of course refusing to give him any game time but just leaving him rotting on the bench didn't help either for trade value, that was pretty dumb.

swooper · Joined: 24 Sep 2002 Location: Melbourne

Sheik, not sure yet about Davis myself (part of me wants to keep him, throw him in the midfield and use his pace and natural ability) BUT he would also have some fairly decent trade worth I would imagaine. BUT I dont think you are right calling him a show pony, bit rough there. Nothing like Farmer IMO anyway!

3rd degree · Joined: 22 Jun 2004 Location: John Wren's tote

Sheik, you aggorant little runt. If Davis is a show pony why did he kick 3 against your side. Okay you got up, just but u had no one to go with him so shut your mouth !

Cannibal · Joined: 10 May 2004 Location: Buninyong

bokka · Joined: 11 Apr 1999 Location: NY, Ex Land of Brave and Free

OK Cannibal glad to hear that (forgot). I stand corrected and that makes me feel more optimistic about the coming trade period. Mind you pick 35 was a bit low, would have thought he would have been worth a mid 2nd round pick but Hall was a very good pickup at the time, next year will tell whether it pays off.

Presti_is_god · Joined: 20 Jan 2004

Another point to remeber is that Heath wanted to leave for more game time. Clearly Mick didnt think he was worth giving more game time and I respect Micks judgement. And you've got to remember #35 was supposed to be used in the deal to get Stevens to the Pies but backfired. Anyway I'd rather have Hall than have a player whos not commited to the club..