Is Jaeger Worth the Trouble?

[st.byron]

Yeah, no problem with that.

Depending on what we offer (if anything), there is definitely risk involved. No doubt.


My response is purely regarding the suggestion that 10 clubs are going to go nuts and offer the world for O'Meara without bothering to find out about his condition.

I don't agree with that.

I don't think anyone's suggesting people wont be paying a high price without medical checks. But I think people are saying, me included, that all the medical opinion in the world has less currency than the fact he hasn't played for two years and needed more surgery when he did play half a game. You can have all the 'experts' in the world saying he's good to go, but the facts suggests otherwise.

[Johnny Member]

Yeah, no problem with that.

Depending on what we offer (if anything), there is definitely risk involved. No doubt.


My response is purely regarding the suggestion that 10 clubs are going to go nuts and offer the world for O'Meara without bothering to find out about his condition.

I don't agree with that.

I don't think anyone's suggesting people wont be paying a high price without medical checks. But I think people are saying, me included, that all the medical opinion in the world has less currency than the fact he hasn't played for two years and needed more surgery when he did play half a game. You can have all the 'experts' in the world saying he's good to go, but the facts suggests otherwise.

Don't entirely agree.

But that's not what I was arguing.

I was arguing two points - firstly that at some point we're going to need to make a play and take risks in order to get star players/s to the club. We must if we to be a genuine flag threat.
And secondly that to suggest us or any club would be negligent in regards to O'Meara is naive. Stupid even.


In regards to your post though, I don't really agree. Depending on the nature of his injuries, which only a traied professional can assess - he could be no bigger risk than anyone else.

Missing 2 years of footy due to two different injuries doesn't automatically mean you're 'injury prone' and that you'll always be injured. It doesn't neccessarily even increase the likelihood of missing more footy.

[samoht]

His condition is "injury prone" and, if not that, then: "not durable". 2 knees and a patella ... you can't help asking what's next (even if he's over these injuries)?
He's a risk...
The other risk is opportunity risk in not picking up the next Bontompelli.... a classy player with the required durability. We're not sure that Jaeger has this - more likely he hasn't.

[maverick]

Joel Smith anyone?

[Dr Spaceman]

Yeah, no problem with that.

Depending on what we offer (if anything), there is definitely risk involved. No doubt.


My response is purely regarding the suggestion that 10 clubs are going to go nuts and offer the world for O'Meara without bothering to find out about his condition.

I don't agree with that.

I don't think anyone's suggesting people wont be paying a high price without medical checks. But I think people are saying, me included, that all the medical opinion in the world has less currency than the fact he hasn't played for two years and needed more surgery when he did play half a game. You can have all the 'experts' in the world saying he's good to go, but the facts suggests otherwise.

Will cost a fortune in draft picks/players.

Will cost a fortune in salary cap.

Even on most optimistic outcome he's probably not right to go round 1.

And from there the pressure grows; and grows.

On player and on club.

Happy to pass.

[st.byron]

Yeah, no problem with that.

Depending on what we offer (if anything), there is definitely risk involved. No doubt.


My response is purely regarding the suggestion that 10 clubs are going to go nuts and offer the world for O'Meara without bothering to find out about his condition.

I don't agree with that.

I don't think anyone's suggesting people wont be paying a high price without medical checks. But I think people are saying, me included, that all the medical opinion in the world has less currency than the fact he hasn't played for two years and needed more surgery when he did play half a game. You can have all the 'experts' in the world saying he's good to go, but the facts suggests otherwise.

Don't entirely agree.

But that's not what I was arguing.

I was arguing two points - firstly that at some point we're going to need to make a play and take risks in order to get star players/s to the club. We must if we to be a genuine flag threat.
And secondly that to suggest us or any club would be negligent in regards to O'Meara is naive. Stupid even.


In regards to your post though, I don't really agree. Depending on the nature of his injuries, which only a traied professional can assess - he could be no bigger risk than anyone else.

Missing 2 years of footy due to two different injuries doesn't automatically mean you're 'injury prone' and that you'll always be injured. It doesn't neccessarily even increase the likelihood of missing more footy.

No bigger risk than anyone else??? When he hasn't played for two years due to an injury that is known to be tough to recover from. I don't understand at all how you can argue that. The facts say otherwise.

And it doesn't increase the likelihood of missing more footy???? Would you say that Freeman is at greater risk of hammy injuries than other players? Or not?

[supersaints]

Pass for me... Risk versus reward in small doses only. Percentage says the more you gamble, the more you loose. We've taken enough punts on Freeman. One injury risky player is enough. Target others at better value ...me thinks

[Johnny Member]

Yeah, no problem with that.

Depending on what we offer (if anything), there is definitely risk involved. No doubt.


My response is purely regarding the suggestion that 10 clubs are going to go nuts and offer the world for O'Meara without bothering to find out about his condition.

I don't agree with that.

I don't think anyone's suggesting people wont be paying a high price without medical checks. But I think people are saying, me included, that all the medical opinion in the world has less currency than the fact he hasn't played for two years and needed more surgery when he did play half a game. You can have all the 'experts' in the world saying he's good to go, but the facts suggests otherwise.

Don't entirely agree.

But that's not what I was arguing.

I was arguing two points - firstly that at some point we're going to need to make a play and take risks in order to get star players/s to the club. We must if we to be a genuine flag threat.
And secondly that to suggest us or any club would be negligent in regards to O'Meara is naive. Stupid even.


In regards to your post though, I don't really agree. Depending on the nature of his injuries, which only a traied professional can assess - he could be no bigger risk than anyone else.

Missing 2 years of footy due to two different injuries doesn't automatically mean you're 'injury prone' and that you'll always be injured. It doesn't neccessarily even increase the likelihood of missing more footy.

No bigger risk than anyone else??? When he hasn't played for two years due to an injury that is known to be tough to recover from. I don't understand at all how you can argue that. The facts say otherwise.

And it doesn't increase the likelihood of missing more footy???? Would you say that Freeman is at greater risk of hammy injuries than other players? Or not?

If you get kicked in the knee and do a PCL and miss 6 weeks, then stand in a sprinkler hole in your return and roll your other ankle and miss another 4 weeks - When you come back you are no more likely than the next bloke to miss games through injury.

But, if you have recurring hamstring issues - It's much more likely you'll miss more footy due to the nature of that type of injury.


That's my point.


The type and extent of the injury is the relevant but. Not how much footy you've missed.

And that's obviously what the medical staff would determine.

[skeptic]

Costs heaps to get
Demands a large salary impacting the salary cap
Is a large risk medically

Those are facts

Why is this a risk worth taking?

[WellardSaint]

One risky character is enough. Freeman.
And don't say "he came cheap" or some such thing.
We should be after players that can spend a whole season on the field, and not in rehab.

[jonesy]

What about Stephen May....

[WellardSaint]

What about Stephen May....

is he a suns player? I know nothing about him,
except I saw a pic of him throttling Mav during our last encounter.
Mav was surprisingly flaccid and had arms down by his sides in a passive submissive pose.
Totally unlike the normally hard-arsed rugged warrior that we know him to be.

https://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl ... mrc&uact=8

[jonesy]

What about Stephen May....

is he a suns player? I know nothing about him,
except I saw a pic of him throttling Mav during our last encounter.
Mav was surprisingly flaccid and had arms down by his sides in a passive submissive pose.
Totally unlike the normally hard-arsed rugged warrior that we know him to be.

https://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl ... mrc&uact=8

Yep, tough, One of the best backman in the game , is unhappy apparently

[evertonfc]

I'd do it for Armitage.

[Freebird]

One risky character is enough. Freeman.
And don't say "he came cheap" or some such thing.
We should be after players that can spend a whole season on the field, and not in rehab.

We will be an average side if we do not get some gun potentially all Australian players/mids in the side..the reward is greater than the risk..especially O'Meara

[skeptic]

One risky character is enough. Freeman.
And don't say "he came cheap" or some such thing.
We should be after players that can spend a whole season on the field, and not in rehab.

We will be an average side if we do not get some gun potentially all Australian players/mids in the side..the reward is greater than the risk..especially O'Meara

Is it?

When has he had an excellent season?

What is the indication that he is about to have one?

We'll be an average side if we give up loads to get players that can't live up to the hype

[Freebird]

How many of our 1st round draft picks have we selected wisely in the last 15 years?

When a gun comes along I'm willing to take the risk.

[st.byron]

How many of our 1st round draft picks have we selected wisely in the last 15 years?

When a gun comes along I'm willing to take the risk.

Freebird I can see that you reckon JOM is worth the risk, but it's a massive risk.

Him being a gun is not guaranteed. He was. But is he still?
No guarantee of that whatsoever. Totally unknown if :
A. He'll ever get back to playing regularly.
B. If he'll be as good as he was.

[The Recruit]

Even though I've said no thanks previously, I reckon we'll make a big play for JOM because if right he's an absolute gun.

I know he has just had another op on his knee, but its not unusual that players may need a quick clean up/out after such a major op.

Possible trade options would be either Arnitage or Dustan and Lonie as steak knives.

this comment is garbage

[ctqs]

I don't like the idea of trading away high picks on speculative players. We haven't had a great track record over the last decade or so of doing that and it could hurt us a few years from now when the colts we could've drafted would be finding their feet. Let's focus on getting the next Jade Gresham.

[stkfc1]

I don't like the idea of trading away high picks on speculative players. We haven't had a great track record over the last decade or so of doing that and it could hurt us a few years from now when the colts we could've drafted would be finding their feet. Let's focus on getting the next Jade Gresham.

Spot on. Suns have said they want 2 first rounders unless you're willing to part with a gun player. So unless someone's desperate to go there or there's someone we're willing to trade, it will cost us a pick in next years draft. Next year is being touted as a "super draft". We can't afford to miss out on a gun for someone who's got so many questions over them. Makes no sense.

[skeptic]

You don't sell the farm for speculation. He ain't Ablett Jnr in his prime

[older saint]

The real curve ball here is his knee. If he had played some footy for the last 2 years a no brainer and worth 2 picks as pre knees was head towards Judd type start to career.

Patella's can be a long term , career shortening injury .

I trust the medical staff to turnover every stone to come to an informed conclusion regarding his durability .
Form there that should answer yea for no, as if durable he is a jet, which we do not have.
What pick 10 gets us will also be factored in

[saintbob]

I'd do it for Armitage.

+1

[Johnny Member]

You don't sell the farm for speculation. He ain't Ablett Jnr in his prime

Tim Watson said that he could well become the best midfielder EVER. Such was his impact in his first year.


The issue isn't whether he's any good or not. Make no mistake, he is a legitimate superstar.

The issue is whether he'll ever fully recover from injuries, and what we have to wager on that happening.