TalkingCarlton :: View topic - A hypothetical PSD situation

If they are the only 3 players in the PSD, then Thornton is the best player so we take him. It gets harder if it is Thornton vs Polak...

Draft him back and make him earn every cent of his contract. I dont like it but from the choices it is a loaded question

Definitely draft him back and then let him serve penance. The Bullants will need a full-back if we delist Livo.

bluechampion wrote:

Definitely draft him back and then let him serve penance. The Bullants will need a full-back if we delist Livo.

yeah good one......re-draft a player who we have to pay much more than what we were willing to pay to have him play in the ones and punish him by playing him in the twos.....good stuff....

meanwhile there is money that could have gone to luring someone from another club or giving to younger well performing players...

but you're right, lets re-draft him.

extremely high levels of intelligence circulating the main board lately.

bnz wrote:

bluechampion wrote:

Definitely draft him back and then let him serve penance. The Bullants will need a full-back if we delist Livo.

QFT

Pick the best available. Given the 'talent' in most previous PSDs, it would probably be Thornton anyway.

Siegfried wrote:

Pick the best available. Given the 'talent' in most previous PSDs, it would probably be Thornton anyway.

You really think Thornton's better than Notting?

Were is the "Yes, if that's what it takes to not get screwed by Hawthorn" option.

nightcrawler wrote:

Were is the "Yes, if that's what it takes to not get screwed by Hawthorn" option.

a) I didn't think of that
b) that option would be incredibly short-sighted and counter-productive

Author:	Kaptain Kouta [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:34 am ]
Post subject:	A hypothetical PSD situation
Here's the scenario: Thornton walks into the PSD, taking his chances that he may last until pick 6 and being picked up by Hawthorn. At the same time, Tim Notting and Beau McDonald are also taking their chances in the PSD, having walked out on the Lions (This is a possibility at the moment). Should we use our #1 PSD pick on Thornton, a player who clearly doesn't want to be in Navy Blue any more to teach him a lesson (and maybe even let him fester in the Bullants for a good period of the season), which in my view is a particularly negative action to take, and counterproductive in both the long and short term. Or do we cut our losses and go after Notting, a premiership defender, who could walk into any team in the AFL. Or, in a twist, do we disregard the problems in the backline, and hope that the development of Carlos will continue at the rate we saw towards the end of 2006 and go for the ruckman instead?

Author:	showbag [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:41 am ]
Post subject:
If they are the only 3 players in the PSD, then Thornton is the best player so we take him. It gets harder if it is Thornton vs Polak...

Author:	Kaptain Kouta [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:46 am ]
Post subject:
showbag wrote: If they are the only 3 players in the PSD, then Thornton is the best player so we take him. It gets harder if it is Thornton vs Polak... You really think Thornton is better than Notting?

Author:	jimmae [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:03 am ]
Post subject:
Option 2. Hardball! If those are the next best options.

Author:	billc3 [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:13 am ]
Post subject:
comes down to who's the best player in the PSD (and fits our plans)...simple. Lets's wait and see (see below)

TalkingCarlton http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/

A hypothetical PSD situation http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12922	Page 1 of 3

Author:	Kaptain Kouta [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:29 am ]
Post subject:
You know, I could have sworn I put in a "none of the above" option.

Author:	bluehotel [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:29 am ]
Post subject:
Draft him back and make him earn every cent of his contract. I dont like it but from the choices it is a loaded question

Author:	bluechampion [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:35 am ]
Post subject:
Definitely draft him back and then let him serve penance. The Bullants will need a full-back if we delist Livo.

Author:	Wolfe [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:48 am ]
Post subject:
none of the above dont like if a player dosnt want to play for the club and rather target hudson from Adelaide to replace Thornton maybe though play hard ball like the hawks trying to get Thronton do the same as what the Hawks are tryin to do with Everett play hard ball for the trade

Author:	Sniff Wilson [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:51 am ]
Post subject:
bluechampion wrote: Definitely draft him back and then let him serve penance. The Bullants will need a full-back if we delist Livo. yeah good one......re-draft a player who we have to pay much more than what we were willing to pay to have him play in the ones and punish him by playing him in the twos.....good stuff.... meanwhile there is money that could have gone to luring someone from another club or giving to younger well performing players... but you're right, lets re-draft him. extremely high levels of intelligence circulating the main board lately.

Author:	showbag [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 12:03 pm ]
Post subject:
Kaptain Kouta wrote: bnz wrote: bluechampion wrote: Definitely draft him back and then let him serve penance. The Bullants will need a full-back if we delist Livo. yeah good one......re-draft a player who we have to pay much more than what we were willing to pay to have him play in the ones and punish him by playing him in the twos.....good stuff.... meanwhile there is money that could have gone to luring someone from another club or giving to younger well performing players... but you're right, lets re-draft him. extremely high levels of intelligence circulating the main board lately. QFT Had we done this with Campo last year we wouldn't be worried about Thornton walking for nothing this year ... but at least we have McLaren to show for it ... ...so who is going to walk next year for nothing (or less than their worth)? Stevens? Bower? Simpson???

Author:	bigyellowjoint [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 12:36 pm ]
Post subject:
Foot down!

Author:	Siegfried [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 12:49 pm ]
Post subject:
Pick the best available. Given the 'talent' in most previous PSDs, it would probably be Thornton anyway.

Author:	Kaptain Kouta [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 12:50 pm ]
Post subject:
Siegfried wrote: Pick the best available. Given the 'talent' in most previous PSDs, it would probably be Thornton anyway. You really think Thornton's better than Notting?

Page 1 of 3	All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	nightcrawler [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 12:59 pm ]
Post subject:
Were is the "Yes, if that's what it takes to not get screwed by Hawthorn" option.

Author:	Siegfried [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 1:05 pm ]
Post subject:
Kaptain Kouta wrote: Siegfried wrote: Pick the best available. Given the 'talent' in most previous PSDs, it would probably be Thornton anyway. You really think Thornton's better than Notting? 23 year old backman who can play KP (even if it's not his ideal spot) versus a 28 year old mid-range onballer. I'd take Thornton. Imagine Thornton playing second or third tall in a backline, which his ideal position? His upside is significant. Reminds me a bit of a young Peter Dean...time will tell if he reches that level, but I wouldn't be surprised if he did. Even Dean struggled when he was asked to play KP, was always a better flanker/pocket.

Author:	Kaptain Kouta [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 1:08 pm ]
Post subject:
nightcrawler wrote: Were is the "Yes, if that's what it takes to not get screwed by Hawthorn" option. a) I didn't think of that b) that option would be incredibly short-sighted and counter-productive

Author:	nightcrawler [ Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:18 pm ]
Post subject:
Kaptain Kouta wrote: nightcrawler wrote: Were is the "Yes, if that's what it takes to not get screwed by Hawthorn" option. a) I didn't think of that b) that option would be incredibly short-sighted and counter-productive I am sorry but I don't agree. If we didn't have the the 1st pick in the PSD, the Hawks would put pick 24 and a hack on the table and say take it or lose him to the PSD for nothing. Your choice. In our current situation we have the third choice of re-drafting him, and I expect us to use that as leverage to get a fair deal like the ones I have discussed in the "What would you take". You will note that I haven't asked for pick 6 outright or anything absurd like that. Now if the Hawks won't pay a fair price then I expect us to call their bluff and not accept a substandard deal as if we don't have that third option of re-drafting him. It would be negligent not to as far as I am concerned.