Page 59 of 67
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:01 pm
by watt price tully
Bummer Beamer wanted Brisbane.
GWS & we'd be a chance for Boyd who wants the doggies
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:03 pm
by Harvey
Domesticated_Ape wrote:Harvey wrote:Domesticated_Ape wrote:Harvey, I'd actually prefer Crisp and pick 23 to pick 17 alone. I know you said 25, but that would be with North getting 23 for Greenwood.
Give Hine 2 picks in the top 23 and he'll get us 2 good players. The draft is very even this year, so whoever we want at 17 might still be there at 23 and Crisp has a bit to like about him. I care about the player he is now, not what he was when taken at pick 40 in a rookie draft 3 years ago.
Skids - Thanks mate, we do our best
Problem is if we take Crisp it means we need to delist another player on our list to make a spot for him.
So far we've had Maxwell, Ball, Lynch and Clarke retire. We'll also be letting go of Beams and Lumumba so that's 6 spots on our list.
If we take pick 5 + 25, Moore, Greenwood, Varcoe, Crisp and upgrade Frost to the senior list, that's 7 spots and it means we'll need to delist another player. Probably someone like a Ramsay or an Armstrong. It'll effectively be like trading Ramsay or Armstrong for Crisp and even if Crisp shows some promise, I would argue Ramsay or Armstrong has
better potential.
Most likely taking Crisp would be like trading one list clogger for another and personally I'd back our list cloggers to Brisbanes! A Ramsay/Armstrong + pick 17 is more appealing to me than Crisp + 25
Ah, good point!
What are the rules regarding rookies and veterans? Is it possible that we can have an extra listed player if we take less rookies or with Maxy retiring or something? I'm not across this stuff.
The other option might be if Ramsey or someone could agree to be down graded to the rookie list like Gault was.
The club must have a plan if we're considering Crisp. I hope it doesn't involve giving up that pick in the 20's.
Has it been said anywhere that we're actually interested in Crisp? I remember when the Crisp story first emerged, it was talking about Essendon interest being interested. If they can turn 25 into a 17 from Essendon that that would be a decent result. We could even do the 23 to 17 as you said if we pass 25 to North.
That must be of some interest to Essendon? Considering they'll probably be desperate for players next year if half their side is banned. They took Gwilt! If Crisp isn't enough to even get an upgrade from 23 to 17 then it shows us how much Crisp is worth as trade value.
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:04 pm
by blakis
Presti35 wrote:I dont know a lot about Crisp.
I wont hold the fact that he was a rookie selection against him. Some great players have come from those drafts. Including out last premiership captain. (And the last Brownlow medallist).
He's just turned 21 last week, he's 190 in height and seems a bit light at 83kg.
What we HAVE to do is get pick 5 right.
Brisbane had him listed at 89kgs on their website.
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:05 pm
by blakis
Defender wrote:Crisp can't kick, like we need another list clogger who can't kick FFS, we are heading for rock bottom, Buckley has destroyed our club.
Rated in the top 10 at the draft for kicking skills at 83%.
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:07 pm
by blakis
I think this is as good as we'll get out of Brisbane.
They're still cut about losing Karneizis to us last year.
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:08 pm
by swoop42
AN_Inkling wrote:^^Hopefully we find one of them has Ebola. Maybe too harsh. Make it cancer
.
Just kneecap Beams once the trade is signed off by all parties.
The deal looks a whole lot better then.
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:11 pm
by swoop42
Domesticated_Ape wrote:Harvey wrote:Domesticated_Ape wrote:Harvey, I'd actually prefer Crisp and pick 23 to pick 17 alone. I know you said 25, but that would be with North getting 23 for Greenwood.
Give Hine 2 picks in the top 23 and he'll get us 2 good players. The draft is very even this year, so whoever we want at 17 might still be there at 23 and Crisp has a bit to like about him. I care about the player he is now, not what he was when taken at pick 40 in a rookie draft 3 years ago.
Skids - Thanks mate, we do our best
Problem is if we take Crisp it means we need to delist another player on our list to make a spot for him.
So far we've had Maxwell, Ball, Lynch and Clarke retire. We'll also be letting go of Beams and Lumumba so that's 6 spots on our list.
If we take pick 5 + 25, Moore, Greenwood, Varcoe, Crisp and upgrade Frost to the senior list, that's 7 spots and it means we'll need to delist another player. Probably someone like a Ramsay or an Armstrong. It'll effectively be like trading Ramsay or Armstrong for Crisp and even if Crisp shows some promise, I would argue Ramsay or Armstrong has
better potential.
Most likely taking Crisp would be like trading one list clogger for another and personally I'd back our list cloggers to Brisbanes! A Ramsay/Armstrong + pick 17 is more appealing to me than Crisp + 25
Ah, good point!
What are the rules regarding rookies and veterans? Is it possible that we can have an extra listed player if we take less rookies or with Maxy retiring or something? I'm not across this stuff.
The other option might be if Ramsey or someone could agree to be down graded to the rookie list like Gault was.
The club must have a plan if we're considering Crisp. I hope it doesn't involve giving up that pick in the 20's.
It better not.
Give me that pick over Armstrong any day.
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:14 pm
by Wokko
We were running medicals on Crisp so don't think we'll be ontrading him.
http://www.lions.com.au/news/2013-09-10 ... s-honoured
So we've either got 2 guns (Pick 5 and Levi) and a young up and comer if you're a glass half full type or we've got 2 scratch tickets (5 & 25) and a bag of chips.
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:17 pm
by killer
This is an awful trade, we must not back down
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:25 pm
by Breadcrawl
Defender wrote:Crisp can't kick, like we need another list clogger who can't kick FFS, we are heading for rock bottom, Buckley has destroyed our club.
http://www.afl.com.au/video/smart-repla ... ality=high
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:27 pm
by Breadcrawl
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:28 pm
by AN_Inkling
blakis wrote:Defender wrote:Crisp can't kick, like we need another list clogger who can't kick FFS, we are heading for rock bottom, Buckley has destroyed our club.
Rated in the top 10 at the draft for kicking skills at 83%.
And then didn't get drafted
.
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:47 pm
by Museman
AN_Inkling wrote:blakis wrote:Defender wrote:Crisp can't kick, like we need another list clogger who can't kick FFS, we are heading for rock bottom, Buckley has destroyed our club.
Rated in the top 10 at the draft for kicking skills at 83%.
And then didn't get drafted
.
He also went top 10 standing vertical, and apparently top 10 3km time trial
He also won the bushrangers b&f...
Why didn't he get drafted...he rob banks too???
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:50 pm
by Presti35
Elliot didn't get drafted either. Nor was Sharrod Wellingham or Macaffer or Maxwell. Dean Cox, Matt Priddis were passed up too.
Not that Crisp looks like he'll win a brownlow, just that players passed up in the ND can turn into anything.
Sure, we're all not happy that it isnt Aish, but we're just going to have to give the kid a chance.
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:57 pm
by AN_Inkling
^^Elliott wasn't passed in the draft. Fairly sure GWS took him with one of their pre-selections or something. And Crisp was drafted 3-4 years ago.
None of that matters anyway. What is his worth now? If the Lions put him on the market I'd be very surprised if they got more than a 4th rounder. That's the point.
A fairly decent deal for Beams is one we requested last week: 5, 21 and 25. If Crisp is worth close to a 20s pick then it's a decent deal, but I don't think that's the case.