Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Why would you trade Tarrant for anybody other than another 23 yo superstar KPP?

He is an All Australian and on his day can do almost anything. Additionally a rare breed in that he can win a game off his own boot.

Did North ever think about trading Carey? Do Ess ever think about trading Lloyd? Do Bears ever think about trading Brown? etc etc

The answer is NO!

Thought: Play Taz in the midfield and see who be better, Taz or Judd?

A complete spine and true key position players are hard to find, without them you can't win a premiership - the exception being Collingwood 1990 when we won with Daic's at FF.

The bottom line is that we won't trade any part of our spine and that we have plenty of suitable midfielders already.

What we really need is another utility (i.e. game breaker that can be swung from defence to midfield to forward e.g. Solomon, N. Brown or - I hate to say it - Pike) or bargin pickup like Clement was. Lokan has tried hard, Lonie is trying hard and who know's with a bit of mongrel we just might breed one from within.

Let's get real, very rarely are WIN trades done - the exception being Woey because of Salary cap pressure and Steven's for Carscum becuase he walked out. That said, I wouldn't mind Crawf, providing the price isn't too high.

people have to realise that tarrant plays full forward... he is in the side to kick goals, over his time at collingwood he hasnt been able to kick a decent score throughout a season, (above 80 goals).. we need a goal kicker, tarrant so far isnt playing the position good enough, so i dont know y people are afraid to release him... if he doesnt have a season like matthew lloyd and fraser gehrig of this season (89 & 90 goals).. he isnt a "fantastic" full forward"... Id put tarrant in the same boat as fevola in terms of goal kicking... he can turn it on and play awesome, but this is a rarity, his inconsistency might cost him in the long run...

1998: 3 goals (11 games)
1999: 15 goals (13 games)
2000: 28 goals (19 games)
2001: 53 goals (22 games)
2002: 38 goals (20 games)
2003: 54 goals (25 games)
2004: 36 goals (14 games)

AVG: 1.8 goals a game (i'll let u decide if it is enough for a full forward.)

cheers..

He is not a true FF like a Lloyd, Neitz or Hall. He is a classic CHF who assists far, far more than the other FF's could ever dream of. With the right structure around him (i.e. Davidson, Rocca, C2, Fraser) then his true worth will be recognised.

To be fair, you should add his goal assists to his goals tally for a more accurate guide to his performance. Check his 2003 assists and add them to his 54 goals or whatever.

But the thing is maggies2003, he isn't a full forward - he will become a wingman in the future.

Just like to stuipulate reasons why I think Licurias is untouchable.
1. Bleeds Collingwood Football Club
2. Just signed three year extension, so he CAN'T be traded
3. One of the few in and under ball winners we have
4. On the wrong side of the age bracket
5. Can build a midfield around his 'poor' disposal.

That said, its true that Chris Tarrant isn't in the mold of your traditional forward, nor is he a centre half forward. His build and physique is that of a midfielder come flanker that has superior upper body strength to opponents and a large petrol tank. However, to J26 and crew, don't get so entrenched in the idea that Chris Tarrant will become a wingman. The reason why Collingwood prospered in 02/03 is because Tarrant lead upfield to the ball, then kicked to a contested situation and was there for the incoming ball to the forward line. He was an attacking option. He also creates more assists in his leading and creating of space behind him than most other forwards in the league.

Admittedly his work rate is phenomenal, but he isn't a FF. Ideally, if the coaching team could manage it, you'd have Tarrant on a flank or in a pocket with him attracting the third best defender. For the the past season and a half he has attracted the best defender in the team. The delivery to him is less than exceptional, he rarely gets hit on the lead directly in front, our game plan for the past season has been to have the ball wide, which attracts leads to the pocket, not down the spine, subsequently a poor return in terms of scoring. You have to also ac knowledge that his return is hampered buy having Anthony Rocca in the team, often creating more contested marks and scores heavily from outside 40+ metres, where most other teams would pinpoint a pass to a leading forward, such as GString or Llyod.

All that said, why can't he be traded? If he is going to be a wingman, then trade him for a key position player for crying out loud, after all his return for goal as you put it is far from exceptional. If he is going to be a key positon player and we 'apparently' have an abundance of those, why don't we trade him for another 'midfield' type?

Bottom line is this, Chris Tarrant's upside is what we have right now, this is as good as this kid is gunna get. He is yet to encounter a 'significant' injury, aside from knee op in 2003 end of season, and hampered by a dodgy hammy in 2004, which isn't different to Bucks, Burnsy or to a lesser extent Pebbles' ankle. His body shape won't allow him to play like Lynch, out of the goal square in a wrestle, nor will he fill out like a Llyod in the hips or a GString in the ass, the bloke is as good as he is gunna get. He might sustain that form for another two seasons, but he is never going to kick you 100 in the long turn and his recklessness on and off the field is bound to bite him in the ass.

There are reasons for trading and against trading, both of which i've stated, but he is tradable, believe me, if they get the right deal they wouldn't hesitate.

Again, I would never advocate the thought of purposely going out to the market place and hawking Tazza but 'suitable'trades may benfit us.I dont think we should blindley turn away from being pro-active in an effort to improve the list even if Taz does need to be moved on for Collingwoods benefit.

If Brisbane had not traded Brown and Essendon not traded Lloyd or North Traded Carey, I can only respond to that by saying well all those guys by Tazza's age had contributed significantly to winning a premiership. The failing with us is that Taz has not helped us lift a cup when we had the chance over the last two years. Flipside to Barry Hall , who is someone comparable to Taz in achievement but a different physical beat and you realise that Hall also had to be moved on.

Also the fact that there is debate about what is Taz's true position, ie Wing, CHF, FF, indicates that he has not convincingly cemented a position for himself. Do u here anyone question Lloyd,s, Browns, Carey,s best position. What concenrs me most about Taz is that players like Fevola, & Gherig, have taken surpassed him in achievement.

Where would Tarrant rate when mentioned in the same breath as LLoyd,Brown,Riewoldt,Tredrea,Hall,Fevola,Gherig,Pavlich??
Maybey fifth best???I dont know...I'd love to see Taz make a monkey outta me!!!

Nath wrote:
Would you consider trading Tarrant if the Lions said they'd give Akermanis and Notting?
Would you consider trading Tarrant if Essendon offered Llyod?
Would you consider trading Tarrant if Port Power offered Kane Cornes and whoever?
Would you consider trading Tarrant if St.Kilda offered Koshitzke and Luke Ball?

I'd trade him for the Aka deal and the last deal. In regards to the port deal, it would depend who else we got. I wouldnt trade him for lloyd.

Taz has played at FF because we havent had anyone else to play that position. His style of play has never suited a FF. He doesnt kick as many goals as the Lloyds and Gehrigs but i dont think the coaching staff ever expected him to kick that many.

He is very similar to how Barry Hall played this season and most would agree that Hall has had a wonderful season. Hall has pushed up the ground, led wide and provided an option who can deliver goal assists as well as kick goals - which basically sums up taz's season last year. Hall kicked 70, which i think taz is capable of. The only difference between the 2 is that Hall has uncanny accuracy, whereas Taz's accuracy lets him down at times.

Now whether or not he is trade-able depends. If we really need a traditional full forward, then yes he is tradeable. But i think there are more advantages in keeping him. Rocca, and C2 can play that FF position. I would like to see Taz pushed up the ground more next year so he can play his natural style. Imagine Taz on the Half forward flank wrecking havoc. Even the CHF position is more accustomed to him.

But if the club views Taz as our FF, well its obvious that there are better FF out there then Taz.

Although listed as ff Tarrant really plays the forward line much the same way as Reiwoldt who has kicked 63 goals this year as against Tarrant's 54 last year. If you include goal assists from both, you'd probably find that Tarrant last year was as productive as Reiwoldt this year.

Thus unless you assume that Reiwoldt will get better and Tarrant won't, you would say that at their best, Reiwoldt and Tarrant would be about the same and would both be in the top dozen AFL players. That being the case, why would you trade Tarrant for anyone given that with any new player there is always the risk that they would not fit in with the existing team?

Nath wrote:Just like to stuipulate reasons why I think Licurias is untouchable.
1. Bleeds Collingwood Football Club
2. Just signed three year extension, so he CAN'T be traded
3. One of the few in and under ball winners we have
4. On the wrong side of the age bracket
5. Can build a midfield around his 'poor' disposal.

Couldn't have said it any better. Licca is Collingwood.