Luke McGuane

[Punxsutawney Phil]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

Not necessarily. You can't state that for sure. They may be trying to build their trade value with the aim of trading 1 or 2 both of Thursfield/McGuane at the end of the year and not destroy it by dropping them to the 2's from the 15th placed team in the AFL. They may been trying to try them in different positions ie up forward to see if they can add another string to their bow because they think there's better options up back for the future. They may have not played Gourdis yet because they have seen enough improvement in the 2's to keep him on as a rookie for another year or upgrade him to the senior list at the end of the year and that's why they're taking it slow with him.

I don't buy this "play them in the seniors to build their trade value" line. I think clubs now with their recruiting armies would see through that. I would certainly hope our recruiters do.

 

[Flukey]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

You could mount an argument that playing Luke actually reduces his trade value. Poor bugger.

 

[Barnzy]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

You could mount an argument that playing Luke actually reduces his trade value. Poor bugger.

:hihi

 

[Tigers of Old]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

I'd definitely float McGuane and Thursfield at the trade table. Moore too for that matter.
Don't think any are indispensable and all would have varying currency.

 

[Scoop]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

I'd definitely float McGuane and Thursfield at the trade table. Moore too for that matter.
Don't think any are indispensable and all would have varying currency.

Agree. McGuane is the classic list clogger, no better today then three years ago. Making the same stupid mistakes and has not gotten any smarter on the ground.

A must to be upgraded. Top of the list to be replaced for mine. I have no doubt that Dimma is building the team form the back half to provide a springboard and outlet to make up for lack of true forwards bar Jack. Having McGuane in there slowing things down and stopping the flow is counter productive to everything we are trying to do. Moving him forward was a sign of desperate times and rightly making sure their is no chance of him playing forward. How many times did he bring his man over to fly up with Jack? Just so stupid and something that I am sure that was not part of the plan. Griffiths played this role so well in the weeks he was in. At 19 he has more footballing IQ then Luke will ever have.

Ship to Sydney to try and get Bret Meredith to Punt Rd. Just get him out.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

Agree. McGuane is the classic list clogger, no better today then three years ago. Making the same stupid mistakes and has not gotten any smarter on the ground.

Disagree that he hasn't improved at all but he's has tapered off.
I like Luke's courage but if we get a decent draft pick for him I'd trade him without a second thought.
Need to do better than McGuane to become a top side. Astbury is a good replacement.

 

[Barnzy]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

Agree. McGuane is the classic list clogger, no better today then three years ago. Making the same stupid mistakes and has not gotten any smarter on the ground.

A must to be upgraded. Top of the list to be replaced for mine. I have no doubt that Dimma is building the team form the back half to provide a springboard and outlet to make up for lack of true forwards bar Jack. Having McGuane in there slowing things down and stopping the flow is counter productive to everything we are trying to do. Moving him forward was a sign of desperate times and rightly making sure their is no chance of him playing forward. How many times did he bring his man over to fly up with Jack? Just so stupid and something that I am sure that was not part of the plan. Griffiths played this role so well in the weeks he was in. At 19 he has more footballing IQ then Luke will ever have.

Ship to Sydney to try and get Bret Meredith to Punt Rd. Just get him out.

Harsh but fair, SCOOP.

CC re-siging him for another 3 years last year, was it? :rofl :shakehead :brickwall

Won't make it easy to trade him with that contract. Well done, CC.

 

[Flukey]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

At best a depth player.

 

[Baloo]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

Not necessarily. You can't state that for sure.

Of course I can't state that for sure, but turning opinion into fact seems to be the way of things these days.

I can only look at how Beavis and Co have handled things this year and then try to use that knowledge to decipher what's happening today.

To date, if Beavis wanted a player to learn something new, he would send them back to Coburg to learn it. Tuck, Morton and now Bling as examples.

Beavis has never been worried about bringing a kid in to get them used to what it takes to be a senior player. Normally gives them 3 games at least. Dea, Webberley's first outing, Hicks will be on game 3 this week.

Post was brought into the team a few weeks ago but dropped straight after. Looking at how Beavis operates, he other feels Post is not ready yet or needs to work on things at Coburg before he gets another gig.

We're at a situation where we need another target upfront, well, decoy target to give Jack some breathing space.

What do we know ? Griffiths is out. Astbury is doing his apprenticeship down back and it's clear Beavis wants to keep him there for now. Post hasn't made the grade. Gourdis is doing his apprenticeship as a backman at Coburg so isn't in the picture for that tall forward slot.

So we're left with moving our established defenders upfront. Willy T and Luke sharing the duties. I do think it's more because we don't have any other viable solution as opposed to testing out whether these two boys have what it takes to make it as a swingman. If Beavis really wanted them to learn the forward craft, he'd send them back to Coburg to learn how to do it. He's not, so I can only assume this isn't a long term plan but just a stop gap.

If either of Luke or Willy were definitely out the door at seasons end than they would have been dropped by now and Gourdis would have been given a shot in the Seniors. I have no doubt we'll sniff to see if there is a healthy interest in Luke or Willy (or many other players for that matter), but unless it's a good trade they will remain with us.

So my belief is simply that playing Luke & Willy up forward these two weeks is not a reflection on what the football department think of these two players as defenders, it's mainly to plug a hole we have in the team at the moment. We have no one else at the moment so tese guys are doing the team thing and playing out of position. What we have found out is that neither of them is a forward, but we knew that all along.

 

[Barnzy]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

If either of Luke or Willy were definitely out the door at seasons end than they would have been dropped by now and Gourdis would have been given a shot in the Seniors.

Not if they don't want to kill any trade value they have been dropping them to the 2's from the 2nd worst team in the AFL. Wouldn't look great. Just because Gourdis hasn't been given a shot doesn't mean they aren't happy with him or don't rate him.

I have no doubt we'll sniff to see if there is a healthy interest in Luke or Willy

Agree.

So mliey bef is simply that playing Luke & Willy up forward these two weeks is not a reflection on what the football department think of these two players as defenders, it's mainly to plug a hole we have in the team at the moment.

Disagree. If they wanted to plug holes they would send Morton back there to give us some relief as we clearly lack goal kickers. Clearly not what they want to achieve. They're developing players. To me it looks like they want to see if those 2 can add another string to their bow or not.

 

[Baloo]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

Not if they don't want to kill any trade value they have been dropping them to the 2's from the 2nd worst team in the AFL. Wouldn't look great. Just because Gourdis hasn't been given a shot doesn't mean they aren't happy with him or don't rate him.

You don't think that by now all the teams recruiting staff haven't earmarked who they would like and at what price ? You think dropping them to the 2nds for a couple of weeks will change their draft value at this stage of the season ? Really ? Not many teams are as unprofessional as the RFC used to be.

Disagree. If they wanted to plug holes they would send Morton back there to give us some relief as we clearly lack goal kickers. Clearly not what they want to achieve.

Morton has only just come back into the squad after learning a new role and doing well. Surely for development reasons they want to keep him there working on it. It's the same reason they are keeping Astbury back in defence.

They're developing players. To me it looks like they want to see if those 2 can add another string to their bow or not.

Not to me. They are filling in gaps with 3 games to go. When Beavis and co have wanted a player to add another string to their bow, he's always sent them back to Coburg to develop it. Why would he do things differently now ?

 

[Barnzy]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

You don't think that by now all the teams recruiting staff haven't earmarked who they would like and at what price ? You think dropping them to the 2nds for a couple of weeks will change their draft value at this stage of the season ? Really ? Not many teams are as unprofessional as the RFC used to be.

So you think dropping players from the 15th placed team won't affect their trade value one bit? That quite odd. I'm tipping if one or both of these 2 go out of the team over the next few weeks it will be through 'leg' not omit.

Morton has only just come back into the squad after learning a new role and doing well. Surely for development reasons they want to keep him there working on it. It's the same reason they are keeping Astbury back in defence.
Not to me. They are filling in gaps with 3 games to go. When Beavis and co have wanted a player to add another string to their bow, he's always sent them back to Coburg to develop it. Why would he do things differently now ?

Exactly. For development reasons they will leave Morton as a midfielder to try and get him to develop a new string to his bow. If they wanted to plug holes like you suggest then they would send him back to the forward line as we clearly lack goal kickers. Obviously that's not their intent. It's not about now, rather the future. That leads me to believe they're trying to add to Thursfield and McGuane's games rather than just "plug holes". Why would they want to add to their games? Well, they have already seen Astbury come in and nearly overtake McGuane in 1 season, Gourdis has been good all year for Coburg and is ready to come in. Pressure for spots for the future and these are the 2 they would be replaced if they don't improve.

 

[Baloo]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

So you think dropping players from the 15th placed team won't affect their trade value one bit? That quite odd. I'm tipping if one or both of these 2 go out of the team over the next few weeks it will be through 'leg' not omit.

At this stage of the season ? No.

Exactly. For development reasons they will leave Morton as a midfielder to try and get him to develop a new string to his bow. If they wanted to plug holes like you suggest then they would send him back to the forward line as we clearly lack goal kickers. Obviously that's not their intent. It's not about now, rather the future. That leads me to believe they're trying to add to Thursfield and McGuane's games rather than just "plug holes". Why would they want to add to their games? Well, they have already seen Astbury come in and nearly overtake McGuane in 1 season, Gourdis has been good all year for Coburg and is ready to come in. Pressure for spots for the future and these are the 2 they would be replaced if they don't improve.

Can you grasp the idea that there are some players who they want to remain where they are for developmental reasons (Morton, Astbury, Post) and others who don't need development, they are established players in their role, and they are the ones being used to plug the holes at the moment ?

According to some Gourdis has been ready to come in since the NAB match against the Hawks. If he was really that ready he would have had games by now.

It would be very bad list management to get rid of an established senior defender because you have an elevated rookie doing ok in Coburg but still hasn't had a game in the Seniors. You really think we'd be doing that ? Or is that what you'd like to think we were doing ?

 

[Barnzy]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

Can you grasp the idea that there are some players who they want to remain where they are for developmental reasons (Morton, Astbury, Post) and others who don't need development, they are established players in their role, and they are the ones being used to plug the holes at the moment ?

Yes, but if they were going to plug holes, especially up forward, they would bring Polak with his big body. That's his purpose on the list. Obviously they don't want to do that. I think they were/are experimenting.

It would be very bad list management to get rid of an established senior defender because you have an elevated rookie doing ok in Coburg but still hasn't had a game in the Seniors. You really think we'd be doing that ? Or is that what you'd like to think we were doing ?

Not really. We know Thursfield and McGuane both have deficiencies, they would too. If we could get a pick for one of them that's decent enough they might view that as a win. Certain kids pushing up to take their spots now would just add to that. Just because they're senior players doesn't make them safe, if they aren't good enough to take us forward then so be it. Who knows what their plans are but I'd be very, very surprised if it include all 3 of Thursfield, McGuane and Moore.

 

[Baloo]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

Yes, but if they were going to plug holes, especially up forward, they would bring Polak with his big body. That's his purpose on the list. Obviously they don't want to do that. I think they were/are experimenting.

That hits to the head Polak has copped this year would make bringing him in a very difficult decision. I wouldn't risk it especially if he's already on the delist list as I suspect he is.

Not really. We know Thursfield and McGuane both have deficiencies, they would too. If we could get a pick for one of them that's decent enough they might view that as a win. Certain kids pushing up to take their spots now would just add to that. Just because they're senior players doesn't make them safe, if they aren't good enough to take us forward then so be it. Who knows what their plans are but I'd be very, very surprised if it include all 3 of Thursfield, McGuane and Moore.

Sorry, but I'm gobsmacked that you think it makes sense to trade or delist a regular senior defender in favour of a promoted rookie who hasn't even been given a single AFL game yet while other promotees around him have. Gourdis has a lot of fans around here and while I'm all for giving kids a shot, the fact he hasn't had a single game yet is telling.

 

[Barnzy]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

Sorry, but I'm gobsmacked that you think it makes sense to trade or delist a regular senior defender in favour of a promoted rookie who hasn't even been given a single AFL game yet while other promotees around him have.

Sorry, but when did I say they would be traded just because of Gourdis improvement alone? If they aren't good enough to take us forward long-term then no doubt they should be traded. Look at the amount of defenders we have on our list, we have surplus to our needs regardless of quality. One or 2 should be traded off, would just be smart list management. I'm tipping one of Thursfield or McGuane given their deficiencies or maybe even Moore but I doubt it. Certainly can't trade a kid with little to no currency.

Gourdis has a lot of fans around here and while I'm all for giving kids a shot, the fact he hasn't had a single game yet is telling.

Not telling at all. Newett pumps him up nearly weekly on EOTT, DH pumped him up the other week publicly. You think they would
be doing that if they don't rate him? If he was fighting tooth and nail for a spot on the list next year then they would've already given him a number of games ala Silvester the other year and the fact this is a development year. They might give a few games towards the end of the year but obviously they seen enough improvement to think he will be a player of the future and to keep him for another year on the rookie list or upgrade him to the senior list. I would bet a million dollars he won't be delisted.

 

[Barnzy]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

Also, I forgot Rance. Good chance they might try and trade him IMO.

 

[Baloo]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

Sorry, but when did I say they would be traded just because of Gourdis improvement alone? If they aren't good enough to take us forward long-term then no doubt they should be traded no doubt. Look at the amount of defenders we have on our list, we have surplus to our needs regardless of quality. One or 2 should be traded off, would just be smart list management. I'm tipping one of Thursfield or McGuane given their deficiencies or maybe even Moore but I doubt it. Certainly can't trade a kid with little to no currency.

Post #493. I said it would be bad list management to get rid of a senior player in favour of an untested elevated rookie in Gourdis. You replied with "Not Really".

Not telling at all. Newett pumps him up nearly weekly on EOTT, DH pumped him up the other week publicly. You think they would
be doing that if they don't rate him? If he was fighting tooth and nail for a spot on the list next year then they would've already given him a number of games ala Silvester the other year and the fact this is a development year. They might give a few games towards the end of the year but obviously they seen enough improvement to think he will be a player of the future and to keep him for another year on the rookie list or upgrade him to the senior list. I would bet a million dollars he won't be delisted.

Words are cheap. To date he hasn't been given a run. No one knows if Gourdis will make it as an AFL player. He may have reached his peak as a good VFL grade player. Whatever the reason he hasn't played a game, I find it telling that during this year, where it was a complete rebuild and focus on blooding new players, that Gourdis to date hasn't been given a single game. You don't find that strange ?

 

[Barnzy]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

Post #493. I said it would be bad list management to get rid of a senior player in favour of an untested elevated rookie in Gourdis. You replied with "Not Really".

Sorry I was replying more to "It would be very bad list management to get rid of an established senior defender ".
I should've quoted it better. As you can see in my reasons in that post I wouldn't base it just off Gourdis's form.

Words are cheap. To date he hasn't been given a run. No one knows if Gourdis will make it as an AFL player. He may have reached his peak as a good VFL grade player. Whatever the reason he hasn't played a game, I find it telling that during this year, where it was a complete rebuild and focus on blooding new players, that Gourdis to date hasn't been given a single game. You don't find that strange ?

So now DH's words are cheap because they don't suit your argument?

I found it strange at first given his form at Coburg but then when I thought about it it's not that strange. I already explained above and gave my reasons. He obviously still has a couple of things to work on and they don't want to rush his development. That would mean his spot is very safe.

 

[Baloo]

Re: Luke McGuane = Guts

So now DH's words are cheap because they don't suit your argument?

Words have always been cheap when pumping up players at Coburg. Actually, any seconds team, not just RFCs.