Mark McVeigh - Sydney 2004

[Steve]

Stevens has 17 weeks to show something more. It'd be a shame to lose a very talented player, but if he can't convince Roos that he can lift his intensity and workrate, it's hard to see how we can carry him.

Especially in a forward line that contains:

Davis
Nicks
O'Loughlin

I can't see the merit in going for a player like Staker personally though - how many tall defenders can you be grooming for a KP role:

Saddington
LRT
Powell
Hunt
James

Staker too?

We need quality young midfielders more than a 6th back-up key defender.

[robbieando]

Steve,

Some of those want make the grade, so it might be worthwhile having as many as possible. Hunt and LRT could play forward, so I think we could fit them in

[DST]

Steve,

I agree with you in principle, but if you take the player for player swap for Stevens/Stacker this leaves our early draft picks for young midfielders.

I certainly would like to see 6 young talls on the list, if Stacker slots in down back then this releases Hunt & Powell to try as forwards.

Also lets us use Saddington on a wing or half back as well which I am an advocate on.

Now if we could offload a Nicks/Mcpherson etc for a McVeigh we would be travelling very well for player management.

DST

[Newbie]

LRT is groomed to be a key backman. Cant see him playing as a forward. We do lack another strong body backman though. I believe we were looking to draft one last year but none left for our next pick (after McVeigh).

We simply have no room for Stevens in our forward with Davis, Hall and O'Loughlin. He might prosper in a new environment, a trade for Stevens might be a win for him, personally. If Brent Staker could be that strong body backman, it might be a win-win situation for all involved.

BTW, did anyone notice in the chat script of Craig Bolton's interview. He mentioned that he might move up forward in the second half of the season. If so, it is clear that Roos is planning to shift out both Nicks and Stevens.

[Newbie]

On Hunt,

He is groomed to play forward. I dont know what is his playing style. If he could take a pack mark, he might just be the one we need.

[Steve]

Originally posted by robbieando
Some of those want make the grade, so it might be worthwhile having as many as possible.

I just think that is a 'nothing' position for the club to take with respect to its list.

There's comes a point where you just have to back what you've got. But if it is decided what you've got is no good, then replace it. Not keep adding to that department until you eventually get a hit.

I think it's almost lazy to hoard groups of similar players just b/c you're not confident about any of their credentials. I reckon put some pressure on yourself to recruit and/or develop exactly what you need, not have 6 of each and consider it a bonus if 1 comes through.

At this rate half our list will be made up of designated key defenders and half-back flankers. If lists were unlimited, then why not be grooming as many key defenders as possible. But with a maximum of 40, the more spots you fill with certain types of players, the more you're taking away from depth in other areas.

The higher WCE finish this year, the better chance of us doing a package with Stevens for their first pick. There isn't much on their list (that they would be prepared to relinquish) that we need.

Hopefully all this is academic and Stevens shows the club how much he wants to be a successful player (assuming that is what he wants).

[Jude4eva]

As much as i want mark mcveigh in sydney but a swap for jude is a joke cos mcveigh isnt as good a crummer than jude. if u watch the games on tv jude is in the bottom of nearly every pack. mcveigh os soft he doesnt have the toughness of jude

mcveigh for jude = bad deal for sydney

[Red]

Mark is an excellent kick into the F50. I'm sure Hall would like him as much as Lloyd does now. He also lead the tackle count on Anzac day -- only a couple less than Kirk (from memory) -- against much better opposition.

But he is more of a receiver than Jude is. Jude together with Mark (in the Swans) would be great for us. Maybe the Dons would be interested in Fozzie instead? Or a possible 3-way deal with one of the Adelaide teams?

[thommoone]

Well if it is true that C Bolton will be playing up forward later in the year, this could be very goo!
1) he is a great kick!
2)Nicks might be gone, maybe a trade for M McVeigh
3)This means that the youngsters MUST be filing in the back line!

If this is true, than....

[Charlie]

Err... ah... one question.

I've seen the names Seymour, McPherson and Nicks mentioned as possible trade bait... despite these players regularly being derided as not good enough for our list.

If they're not good enough for us, why would anybody else think they're good enough???

[thommoone]

Maybe they need a change of scenery or a new position???

[Ajn]

McVeigh for our second pick, we've already got the talented brother!
Seymour to Brisbane....please!
Stevens, only for a good midfielder!
Bolton's here to stay

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Mike_B
Yeah, but if we don't have anyone getting the ball, who cares how good anyone's disposal is?!?!?!?

Plenty of other players are able to get the ball - look at our last qtr on Friday - Kirk, Williams, Schneider, Crouch, Cresswell, Maxfield... also able to get the ball.

[robbieando]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Plenty of other players are able to get the ball - look at our last qtr on Friday - Kirk, Williams, Schneider, Crouch, Cresswell, Maxfield... also able to get the ball.

Williams, Maxfield and Cresswell are not going to be here in 3 years time are they. Pretty bare lot now isn't it

[omnipotent]

My mail is that if Mal Michael goes anywhere it will be back to Melbourne; he is actually keen to return there and eventually wants to re-settle there.