Mega merged trading thread

[Damien]

Can't agree about the forward option Damien. He was tried on numerous occasions this year up forward and was less than impressive. It's the reason they didn't bring him into the seniors to play that role.

I feel for Seabs because without this ridiculous sub rule he's in our best 22 as the 2nd ruck.

Provides a target, didn't play enough games for it to work or not in my opinion, but in anycase, seems like he wont be here to try again anyway!!

[Bas]

The competiton history is littered with players who have played good footy in their first handful of games and been declared the next best thing by hopeful fans, only to fail to go on with it. Until Gunston has played a couple of solid seasons of senior footy, it isn't really possible to get a grasp of the level of player he might become.

It seems this can be applied to the perception that some have on RWO in saying that Pyke is much better than Seaby.

I still think it is a big gamble to trade Seaby because we have nothing in long term back up if Mummy gets injured.

[alison.z]

Could that mean we are possibly looking to give Currie another year? It would be hard to imagine having Mummy and Pyke as the only recognised ruckmen on our list with the chance of injuries and even changes to the sub rule in the future - he's obviously going to be a lot cheaper and more content to playing reserves than Seaby?

[Primmy]

I hope for Seabs sake that he can find a home that can a) use him, and b) give him the love. You can normally tell at a B&F what is going on without words. Seabs was sitting down. Myke was standing up and chatting. Bevo had a big grin on his face (I know.....unheard of, but ..... I was there and I saw it....shocked the hell out of me).

[chuckie]

One of the reasons that Seaby didn't work as a forward, was our slowness in getting the ball down there, he was competing against two or three opponents everytime he went near the ball as was the case with any other tall option we played.
Looking at Geelong during the final series they stopprd doing all those handballs that they use to out of their backline and moved the ball forward by foot which resulted in getting the ball in their forward line so much quicker to more one on one contests resulting in blokes like Hawkins, West, Ottens and Pods taking a lot more marks than usual.
Maybe if we were more direct we could have played him more.

[Steve]

You can understand Seaby wanting to move on, and if we got an OK trade, it's probably a good result. We have other deficencies to address, and having him in reserve would be somewhat of a luxury we most likely don't need.

Things change quickly though, and if Mummy has any significant injuries, we'll struggle with Pyke as our No.1. Which is a concern given the workload Mummy has had (and will continue to have), the way he plays, and the knee problems over the past 2 years.

It's hard to see much else happening for us trade-wise (other than Armstrong). We have ordinary picks I can't see any of our fringe players creating massive interest elsewhere. Best bet might be for a mid-range player at a club needing salary cap relief, doing a deal closer to the deadline. Maybe a Clinton Young, Farren Ray or Shannon Byrnes - I doubt we can do any better via a trade or the draft this year. More likely we'd wait for delistings and consider one of those in the draft (I'd prefer us trying a small forward from one of the state leagues personally).

[S120]

A bloke on another site told me that he's mates with the other Currie to have played with us (Paul) and he said Dan has a place at the Swans if a decent trade can't be found for him (take that with as many grains of salt as necessary but he seemed legit). I can't imagine any club would give us anything of real value for him, so given that info, he'll stay with us.

Fair enough too. We can't go into 2012 with just 2 senior ruckmen. Currie had a good year in the 2's and will surely get a shot in 2012 if he stays fit and White/Pyke can't wrap up the 2nd ruck/forward spot.

[Bas]

Currie would have no trade value. However with Seaby now destined to go and TWR are saying the deal should be done this afternoon then the combination of Seaby going and the GWS draft, it will probably give Currie another year on the list.

I don't have a problem with this and hopefully the kid can make firsts next season.

Interesting that there is no news on Bevan. I would have thought the he may have been of value to at least GWS.

[AnnieH]

Have the Hawks stuffed us up yet????
It's coming ... I'm waiting.

[swansrob]

Have the Hawks stuffed us up yet????
It's coming ... I'm waiting.

Maybe we should make an offer to Buddy for the combined salaries of Bolton, Bradshaw and Kennelly? Though he could well be making more than that already...

[Damien]

GWS now have picks 1,2,3,4,5,7,9,10,11,13,14 & 20. Yikes

Hate to see their salary cap pressures in a few years haha.

[707]

Swans have shown interest in Irishman Tommy Walsh, while Port 'close' to securing Seaby

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-new...012-1ll88.html

Tommy Walsh was a team mate of Tadgh's in Ireland. I'd be happy to help out St.Kilda's salary cap problem and give him a try.

[Bas]

GWS now have picks 1,2,3,4,5,7,9,10,11,13,14 & 20. Yikes

Hate to see their salary cap pressures in a few years haha.

Well, if they have great players that cause salary cap problems then they will have outstanding trade value as well.

If anything, they do have the potential in 5 years time to be outplaying the Swans and the Swans becomes the poorer on-field of the two.

The Swans should be making a move to get a few of these picks now.

GWS as now traded their pick this year with Fremantle, which can use the original on-traded pick which Fremantle had, in the next 5 years.

Still laughing?

[Big Al]

Provides a target, didn't play enough games for it to work or not in my opinion, but in anycase, seems like he wont be here to try again anyway!!

He definitely played enough games to assess his worth as a ruck/forward. If he can't provide a decent target in the NEAFL how was he going to do it in the seniors.

[Big Al]

One of the reasons that Seaby didn't work as a forward, was our slowness in getting the ball down there, he was competing against two or three opponents everytime he went near the ball as was the case with any other tall option we played.
Looking at Geelong during the final series they stopprd doing all those handballs that they use to out of their backline and moved the ball forward by foot which resulted in getting the ball in their forward line so much quicker to more one on one contests resulting in blokes like Hawkins, West, Ottens and Pods taking a lot more marks than usual.
Maybe if we were more direct we could have played him more.

We moved the ball pretty quickly in the NEAFL and he still wasn't great forward. There is a reason the coaching staff did not use him in the seniors as the 2nd ruck.