ARE WE GETTING PAVLICH

clokeforever34 · Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 8:15 am

does anybody no what the situation on pavlich and collingwood is. heard that eddie had a meeting with him and his parents.DO YOU THINK WE NEED HIM??

Dr Alf Andrews · Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 8:29 am

I don't normally go in for this business of trading with other clubs, but Pavlich is a great player and still young enough to be worth going after ... if the price is right. He'd be worth a couple of high draft picks for sure ...

But, gee ... it's a bit early in the year for this sort of speculation, isn't it?

floreat pica
**************
My Ph.D. thesis, "Football: the People's Game?" is now available for viewing and/or downloading at http://alf.magpies.net

foxy · Joined: 28 Jun 1999 Location: melbourne

yeah, for some reason, people always start talking trades straight after a loss.

i seriously doubt we'll get pavlich. we'd have to give up a LOT. and i'd prefer if we didn't break up our young group of guys.

clokeforever34 · Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 9:08 am

to tell u the truth i dont even think we need him

Black_White · Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 10:18 am

Let me think, 9 rounds in and ppl are talking about recruiting already?
Just another way of pumping a players price up, say that Collingwood are interested.
Besides, I'm pretty sure that if Ed himself meet about this that would be a breach of the draft rules. Big fine and loss of draft choices. Is Ed that dumb? No.

-Craig

clokeforever34 · Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 10:39 am

just wanted to know what was going on black_white

ramjet21 · Joined: 31 Mar 2002 Location: perth

pavlich would be worth every dollar but a problem collingwood is beginning to experience is similar to that of essendon - a growing list of very good players that we somehow need to all fit under the salary sap. bucks, tazza, fraser, obree, rocca etc would all be on bloody good money already and guys like cloke, tarks, neon, clement etc etc would all be entitled to expect some sort of pay increase over the next 2-3 yrs. the resigning (id imagine anyway) of nicky davis will cost us a fair bit too. essendon ended up giving a bloke like hardwick away to ease the pressure on their salary cap. if we need to resort to that to get pavlich id rather keep the tight, improving unit we have already,reward them for their efforts and hope to see their continual development over the next 5-8 yrs.

paulie · Joined: 26 Feb 2002 Location: victoria

I think you have hit the nail on the head ramjet21.I think we are better off prewtty much going with the list we have at the moment.Sure there will be probally a few players delisted or traded at the end of the season but i don't think we need to trade our draft picks for Pavlich.As I don't really think we could fit him in without giving away a pretty good player ourselves.

Lisey_JarrodMolloyrox · Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 1:51 pm

Yeah i don't think we need him. Our team is fantastic now with lots of young players showing what they can do. So I am pretty happy all up with our team and don't think we need him. I am also confused along with others why they are discussing it now. We are nearly half way through the footy season. So what's the point! Oh well.

Love always, Alyssa xoxo
*~LiSeY~*
*~Molloy is my baby and nobody else's! lol~*

Magpies_rule19 · Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 3:58 pm

good question??? i was thinking the same!!!!
if i find out anything i'll tell you!!!

Magpies_rule19 · Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 4:02 pm

and i dont think we need him we have a great young side!!!!!
but it is nice to what is happening at the club!!!
like i was dying to know if Nick was staying with us!!!!!!!

Brown26 · Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 5:02 pm

Pavlich would be value plus - he's a great young player - but it would mean cummings molloy rocca pavelich tarrant fraser - TOO TALL!!! but cummings could go, molloy/rocca down back... there rea possibilities. Rocca/Tarrant/Pavelich/Molloy would be an indefensible forward line for sure.

Pies for Premiers 2002, 3, 4, 5, 6....

Presti35 · Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 5:13 pm

why is it that when a players contract is up or he wants to go to another club, that the club they want to go to or the club that is after him is always collingwood??!!
no doubt, pavlich is a good young defensive player, but like you guys keep saying, its not even half way through 2002 season yet and the team we have now is best kept and not split up, and besides who would you want to lose to get him??
i guess lepitch will be coming to collingwood aswell, i mean his contract is up at the end of 2002!!

Who loves ya Presti?
WE DO!
Lets Go Elvis Preslygiacomo

ramjet21 · Joined: 31 Mar 2002 Location: perth

at this rate it looks like we'll have pavlich, lepershit(leppitsch) and matty richardson in black and white next year. talk this early in the season is pointless. im more interested in what they will do with cummings - he's on a performance based contract for this year only. if he continues to struggle with injury and only plays perhaps a further 6-8 games, what do we do? his efforts have been good but he's paid to kick goals.

MarkT · Joined: 07 Aug 2001 Location: Melb

Isn't it fantastic. Just like the old days. Even early in the year thet are talking up our "recriuts". It's a sure sign that we are back in town. Every uncontracted player is heading to Vic. Park if you believe the papers. Managers know we are a desired destination and that other clubs don't want to see us get decent players. Talk up a move to Collingwood and give your contract negitiations a boost.

Of all the palyers talked about, Pavelic would be a great pickup. He is a key position player and has huge talent. He would be worth trading a few fringe players like Steinfort & Scottland, plus Cummings and a first round draft choice for. Quality key position players are the most valuable commodity on a clubs list. A goal to goal line of Pavelic, Cloke, Buckley, Rocca, Tarrant has a nice premiership ring to it.

Having said that, he aint gonna be at Vic. Park next year. He will either saty at Freeo or move home to SA. I'd love to be proved wrong on that though.