#17,#11 Dayne Beams

woodys_world69 · Post by **woodys_world69** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 12:17 pm

Damien wrote:Langdon to Freo, Neale to Brisbane, Beams to Collingwood.

Lol now ur dreaming. Langdon for Neale? Lol
No way free would settle for that

swoop42 · Post by **swoop42** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 12:26 pm

AN_Inkling wrote:Midfield is an area of need. It's where we lost the GF.

Why would Brisbane trade him? Same reason we did: because he doesn't want to be there (assuming reports are true)

Beams will be 29 next year but we are in the Premiership window. He was very good this season so bringing him in would make sense. There are some questions to be asked, but all in all the reasons why we'd be interested are obvious.

I'd argue we would have won the GF if we simply played Reid or Moore ahead of Aish.

We certainly would have won with May.

AN_Inkling · Post by **AN_Inkling** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 12:33 pm

^^Not sure. Our defence did well in the last despite the Eagles being dominant for forward 50 entries. Do we look to defend against dominant entries or look to improve so that they don't have so many? The latter makes more sense to me.

Also, let's not forget that we had an injury hit defence this year where our midfield was largely intact. There is natural improvement left in defence, not so much in the middle. The Eagles midfield beat us 3 for 3. This idea that we have the best midifield in the comp and don't need to look at improvement is nonsense to me.

Edit: our forwards against their supposedly better backs actually outperformed their forwards. They just had less opportunity (15 less inside 50s). Look at how we dominated when our mids were actually on top in the first. So our defence did a good job and so did our forwards, it was our mids who failed. Our first priority should be evening up the general play, not the end result in defence.

mudlark · Post by **mudlark** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 12:33 pm

3rd degree wrote:Josh Smith and Oxley to Brisbane , Beams to the Pies sounds fair to me.

Hell yeah.Give 'em Broomhead as well.

Post by **Pies2016** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:05 pm

AN_Inkling wrote:^^Not sure. Our defence did well in the last despite the Eagles being dominant for forward 50 entries. Do we look to defend against dominant entries or look to improve so that they don't have so many? The latter makes more sense to me.

Also, let's not forget that we had an injury hit defence this year where our midfield was largely intact. There is natural improvement left in defence, not so much in the middle. The Eagles midfield beat us 3 for 3. This idea that we have the best midifield in the comp and don't need to look at improvement is nonsense to me.

Tend to agree. After all, your defence only comes into play when you are being beaten in the midfield. I think our defence is sound ( with Langdon on the list ) but an extra mid fielder increases our flexibility in all areas.

As for Beams, I have no problem if the trade reads as unders, otherwise invest in a 10 year mid via the draft ( and they will still be there in the high teens ) And F W I W, Quaynor was playing mid field towards the end of the season anyway.

PyreneesPie · Post by **PyreneesPie** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:07 pm

Wokko wrote: Sounds like more Barrett bullshit. Why do we keep listening to that flog?

There's always seems to be a lot of Barrett bullshit floating around. Don't know how he manages to keep being employed.

Johnno75 · Post by **Johnno75** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:09 pm

PyreneesPie · Post by **PyreneesPie** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:10 pm

AN_Inkling wrote:^^Not sure. Our defence did well in the last despite the Eagles being dominant for forward 50 entries. Do we look to defend against dominant entries or look to improve so that they don't have so many? The latter makes more sense to me.

Also, let's not forget that we had an injury hit defence this year where our midfield was largely intact. There is natural improvement left in defence, not so much in the middle. The Eagles midfield beat us 3 for 3. This idea that we have the best midifield in the comp and don't need to look at improvement is nonsense to me.

Edit: our forwards against their supposedly better backs actually outperformed their forwards. They just had less opportunity (15 less inside 50s). Look at how we dominated when our mids were actually on top in the first. So our defence did a good job and so did our forwards, it was our mids who failed. Our first priority should be evening up the general play, not the end result in defence.

Sounds logical to me.

Mr Miyagi · Post by **Mr Miyagi** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:33 pm

The Herald-Sun's selling a lot of papers with the Beams trade story. wink wink

swoop42 · Post by **swoop42** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:39 pm

Aish wasn't in the side as a midfielder so had no bearing on it's performance.

With the simple step of replacing one small defender in Aish with Reid however it would have given us a fall back position and the coverage required in defence should we fail to win the midfield battle which exposed us to the marking power of Kennedy, Darling and Vardy.

Alas that is exactly what unfolded.

We didn't lose the midfield contest due to lack of numbers we lost it because Sidebottom was tagged out of the game, Grundy gathered half his usual amount of possessions, Pendlebury was well below the standard he has set and the impact of Treloar and Phillips was minimal in comparison to the stats column of each.

Beams would improve us in an area of the ground which is already our greatest strength but if we lose Langdon in the process then I don't think I'd be all to confident relying on the aging Dunn and Goldsack and 3 time ACL victim Scharenberg to provide us with much defensive improvement in 2019.

Damien · Post by **Damien** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:42 pm

qldmagpie67 · Post by **qldmagpie67** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 2:16 pm

^^^
Damien you are way off the mark there mate
Beams reason for leaving was and is justified
Did you miss the part about his father passing earlier this year ?
If that isn't proof enough the reason he gave for leaving to be with a sick father then your a hard man to convince
Beams not attending the copeland was very poor
I've told him so face to face
I've said it before he got some very poor advice from a person in authority at the club at the time and made a massive error in judgement
Dayne didn't want to leave the club in the first place it was his loyalty to his father and wanting to spend time with him that made the decision for him
At the moment this is all media speculation
Beams has t come out and asked for trade
My understanding of the situation is as follows (and I haven't spoken to him difficult about it yet)
He was asked a question by a journalist whether returning to Victoria appealed to him. He answered yeah it sure does Kellie (his wife) is from Victoria and we've just had a second child and she's missing her family and there support. My mum lives in Victoria as well so we have both sets of grand parents there and that support would be great for both of us.
He never said he wanted a trade he was referring to returning at some stage be that this year or 2 years time is what the debate is now surrounding
Honestly he wouldn't get the same financial windfall here he gets there we simply wouldn't have the cap space

qldmagpie67 · Post by **qldmagpie67** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:00 pm

Mr Miyagi · Post by **Mr Miyagi** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:02 pm

The Herald-Sun's ambulance chaser is selling clickbait.

Post by **WhyPhilWhy?** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:17 pm

Pies4shaw wrote:We may never win a flag with him on our list..

We already have.

This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.

#17,#11 Dayne Beams