Trading talk thread

[Plugger46]

1 million for 3 years for Seaby is a joke.

Glad we are (potentially) getting Seaby. Think he is in a very similar position as to when we got Jolly.

So, you're happy to get him but you think $1M over 3 years is too much?

I'm nowhere near as convinced. Seaby's played a lot more footy than Jolly had and I'm not all that keen on what I've seen.

[Plugger46]

I'd take that article with a grain of salt

As if the Lions have already agreed to trade their 3rd rounder for Raines,
they are still in the finals FFS

It's very unlikely that any trade deals would be organised yet.

Correct. No quotes from anyone. Clearly just Greg Denham just making things up as usual.

[Mr Magoo]

I would have thought lovett would suit our requirements more than Seaby unless they intend to not use currie as a ruckmen.

If seaby wants opportunities , playing second fiddle to Darren Jolly is not my idea of an opportunity but I guess its better than no afl games at all.

Surely Hawthorn or someone with no decent ruckmem where the opportunity would be as first ruckmen is a better fit.

[Primmy]

I would have thought lovett would suit our requirements more than Seaby unless they intend to not use currie as a ruckmen.

If seaby wants opportunities , playing second fiddle to Darren Jolly is not my idea of an opportunity but I guess its better than no afl games at all.

Surely Hawthorn or someone with no decent ruckmem where the opportunity would be as first ruckmen is a better fit.

Maybe he just wants out of W.A. And sees the Swans as being a team of integrity he can relate to?

The game is so fast these days perhaps being second ruckman is not such a bad thing as he can get tutoring from the best in the business (I am having a seniors moment, but you know who I mean). Its not an ideal position to have one ruckman for the whole game. They wear out and break.

We do not have a tutored backup ruckman who is ready to go. I have said in the past that I think they are tailoring Curry to a KPP rather than just rucking, and we will get a massive bloke for the back line in the future. Jako is going to make a fair ruckman one day, but not for some time yet, maybe two years. So that's a big gap in anyones business. And Pyke is a stopgap player at present. We need a backup for Jolls NOW. He was worn to the woof by Rnd 22.

IF it is Seaby we are aiming for, I don't have a big issue with it. After all, Big Ted wasn't rated - come to think of it neither was Jolly, and wasn't that a mistake Melbourne made! We were able to fit them into our mix very well indeed. Why not make the most of, and improve the stock - gawd I sound like a horse trainer!!

[Captain]

So, you're happy to get him but you think $1M over 3 years is too much?

Yes.

[laughingnome]

Glad we are (potentially) getting Seaby. Think he is in a very similar position as to when we got Jolly.

Jolly was 22 when he came to Sydney, and left Melbourne because he couldn't get off the bench with Jeff White rucking all day.

Seaby is 25, 26 in May next year, and compares unfavourably to Cox, Gardiner and Lynch. The biggest criticism of him isn't his rucking but his lack of an engine. Around the ground he just can't keep up. That was chiefly why he spent so much of this year in the WAFL. We have Jolly like the Eagles have Cox, and I'm sure we can find one of White, LRT, Pyke or Currie to ruck for 5 minutes a quarter rather then bring in another suspect tall.

I remain a long way from convinced he is worth anything more then a notional draft pick, and even that removes another player from our list.

[Brettb]

Jolly was 22 when he came to Sydney, and left Melbourne because he couldn't get off the bench with Jeff White rucking all day.

Seaby is 25, 26 in May next year, and compares unfavourably to Cox, Gardiner and Lynch. The biggest criticism of him isn't his rucking but his lack of an engine. Around the ground he just can't keep up. That was chiefly why he spent so much of this year in the WAFL. We have Jolly like the Eagles have Cox, and I'm sure we can find one of White, LRT, Pyke or Currie to ruck for 5 minutes a quarter rather then bring in another suspect tall.

I remain a long way from convinced he is worth anything more then a notional draft pick, and even that removes another player from our list.

Hi all,

Long time reader first time poster.

The above quote doesn't make a great deal of sense to me.

First of all White is a Full Forward, he should only ruck inside 50, he is not a ruckman and is best utilized up forward. Similiar theory applies to LRT, he is a key defender and is required there.

Your age theory also doesn't stack up, Seaby is 25, also the same age as Pyke, but let's be honest, Pyke is not AFL standard (yet). Seaby (at the same age as Pyke) offers so much more it's not funny. He has the ability to gather possesions around the ground, take a mark and drift forward and kick a goal, as evident in his 20+ hit out and possesion games in the WAFL.

Look, he's not the greatest ruckman going around but he offers a helluva lot more than Mike Pyke come game day.

[Triple B]

We do not have a tutored backup ruckman who is ready to go. I have said in the past that I think they are tailoring Curry to a KPP rather than just rucking, and we will get a massive bloke for the back line in the future.

Primmy, that's twice you've mentioned Currie as possibly being groomed as a backline player.

What gives you that idea?

[caj23]

Primmy, that's twice you've mentioned Currie as possibly being groomed as a backline player.

What gives you that idea?

Not going to happen.

Robbie Campbell at Hawthorn is the only player in the league of that height playing a key back position, and only because he is extremely mobile and they are desparate back there.

Currie is a natural ruckman who might be able to play forward as well, but he will not be able to play CHB or FB at senior level. I don't even think he has played back in the Canberra League.

[hammo]

I have said in the past that I think they are tailoring Curry to a KPP rather than just rucking, and we will get a massive bloke for the back line in the future.

Is this your opinion? I've read absolutely no press or seen anything in the reserves to suggest Currie is being groomed as a defender. There are reasons why ruckmen don't make good defenders and it's usually down to their lack of speed, especially off the mark.

Currie himself says he's a ruckman who can play forward.

?That?s one thing that?s correlated with that solid month of footy ? my work rate, leading up and playing at centre half-forward and being a consistent option up to the wings.

?It?s definitely a great asset to have as well as being a competent ruckman. If you can push forward and kick goals and be a dangerous forward, it?s definitely a string to your bow that can be a massive positive.?

Currie can taste his debut - Official AFL Website of the Sydney Swans Football Club

[Captain]

Hi all,

Long time reader first time poster.

The above quote doesn't make a great deal of sense to me.

First of all White is a Full Forward, he should only ruck inside 50, he is not a ruckman and is best utilized up forward. Similiar theory applies to LRT, he is a key defender and is required there.

Your age theory also doesn't stack up, Seaby is 25, also the same age as Pyke, but let's be honest, Pyke is not AFL standard (yet). Seaby (at the same age as Pyke) offers so much more it's not funny. He has the ability to gather possesions around the ground, take a mark and drift forward and kick a goal, as evident in his 20+ hit out and possesion games in the WAFL.

Look, he's not the greatest ruckman going around but he offers a helluva lot more than Mike Pyke come game day.

Agree with everything you have said. Totally spot on.

[ScottH]

Agree with everything you have said. Totally spot on.

Me too.

Sensible and sane posting on RWO, unheard of!!

[AnnieH]

Hi all,

Long time reader first time poster.

The above quote doesn't make a great deal of sense to me.

First of all White is a Full Forward, he should only ruck inside 50, he is not a ruckman and is best utilized up forward. Similiar theory applies to LRT, he is a key defender and is required there.

Your age theory also doesn't stack up, Seaby is 25, also the same age as Pyke, but let's be honest, Pyke is not AFL standard (yet). Seaby (at the same age as Pyke) offers so much more it's not funny. He has the ability to gather possesions around the ground, take a mark and drift forward and kick a goal, as evident in his 20+ hit out and possesion games in the WAFL.

Look, he's not the greatest ruckman going around but he offers a helluva lot more than Mike Pyke come game day.

Nice of you to break your silence.
Welcome.

[stellation]

I'm not a giant Seaby fan at all, but I have to admit that I don't think that circa 3 years @ $300k is completely outside the realms of an appropriate amount to pay someone if they prove to be a solid backup ruckman that is in his prime (so assuming he plays every game, can give Jolly a longer rest than he's been getting etc.).

I'm pretty sure that's the same length and a few dollars less than Jude's last contract, for example.

[laughingnome]

Hi all,

Long time reader first time poster.

The above quote doesn't make a great deal of sense to me.

First of all White is a Full Forward, he should only ruck inside 50, he is not a ruckman and is best utilized up forward. Similiar theory applies to LRT, he is a key defender and is required there.

Your age theory also doesn't stack up, Seaby is 25, also the same age as Pyke, but let's be honest, Pyke is not AFL standard (yet). Seaby (at the same age as Pyke) offers so much more it's not funny. He has the ability to gather possesions around the ground, take a mark and drift forward and kick a goal, as evident in his 20+ hit out and possesion games in the WAFL.

Look, he's not the greatest ruckman going around but he offers a helluva lot more than Mike Pyke come game day.

I was trying to point to the reason why Seaby spent so much time in the WAFL this year: Lynch. Lynch is a forward but rucked well all year backing up big Cox. Carrying a second ruckman like Seaby who offered little value around the park wasn't on Worsfold's agenda, and it shouldn't be ours. As for the comparison to Pyke, one has been playing for years and won't get any better in terms of spacial awareness or engine power, whereas Pyke is an unknown quality - the guy's still learning the game. A hearty preperation for next year and he'll leave Seaby in the dust.

Then there's the idea that we have to trade for Seaby. We have to give up something for him, and I don't like the thought of that if he won't be needed after 6 months. It seems to be a very myopic decision to chase the country sandgroper.