Lonie potentially to Bulldogs 7 news

[Saintmatt]

So Bruce last year, Lonie this year. If they pick up Ross next year they can finally sack Beveridge and get Richo in.

Mav as Cho's Senior Assistant Coach at the Dullbogs?

[Yorkeys]

Is Jack taller than C. Daniels, Doggies might be looking for more height in the forward line to support Joshy. Can't blame Jack for trying to eke out more than one year, but I doubt Saints will blink again.

McKenzie can argue that he was messed up by Richardson's coaching - consistently putting him on gun small forwards in weak Saints sides when that clearly is not his go. Dan as far as I can recall has not been given a chance to settle in a position. Of course if Ratts thinks he has nothing to offer, say off half back, then that's that.

Hope Luke stays and the Saints 2021 system has a spot for him. Possibly understudy to the injury prone Dan H (should give him at least 10 games a year); would be a better forward pocket than Jack L wouldn't he, if it came to that.

[repta]

Good luck to him.
He has had a chance and is only a depth player with the Saints.
In relation to keeping him above Kent, Webster, McKenzie ... maybe we can do a Charlie Gardiner and package them all up for one lucky club

[Joffa Burns]

Good luck to him.
He has had a chance and is only a depth player with the Saints.
In relation to keeping him above Kent, Webster, McKenzie ... maybe we can do a Charlie Gardiner and package them all up for one lucky club

Only if they take Hind as well

[damienc]

https://7news.com.au/sport/afl/western- ... -c-1508304

Nothing new, but here it is.

Disappointing we give one year to Lonie but multiple years to Mckenzie, Webster, Hind and Kent.
Perhaps the mistakes of the past are the reason for the one year deal.

I don't blame Lonie for looking elsewhere when he gets a one year offer and the likes of Kent get 3 years on probably a lot more money.

I'd keep Lonie and ditch Kent, Hind & Parker well before him.
Perhaps they'll let him go as he has some trade value while the others would have very little.

Lonie was very good in the elimination final against the dogs and in particular his coolness to hit up two inside passes resulting in critical goals to Ryder & Geary.

Lonies no gun, but he's a decent C grade AFL player and you need these guys on the list even if not a 1st 22 starter he's very capable back up. He's a saints man and very popular at the club and very professional, give him 2 years!

If we get Higgins, we don't need Lonie.

[Joffa Burns]

If we get Higgins, we don't need Lonie.

Agree, but will still need depth and prefer Lonie to Parker, Hind & Kent as permanent forwards and a few others including McKenzie as a general player.

[Ghost Like]

If we get Higgins, we don't need Lonie.

Agree, but will still need depth and prefer Lonie to Parker, Hind & Kent as permanent forwards and a few others including McKenzie as a general player.

I tend to agree. There is never a doubt about Lonie's drive and will, that is his consistency. Unfortunately his body does not allow the skills and plays his mind dreams of.

Hind has the ability to do something amazing but is that because it is amazing or simply an outlier to his average input.

Again, these two are the quintessential examples of two St Kilda players we wish were in the same body.

I think we will lose both, Kent to stay due to his contract. Parker to stay as he may become a project player to be an understudy to Ben Long.

McKenzie should be paid out.

Webster allowed to move to a club of his choice for a future 3rd rounder.

[spert]

Good luck to him- he is a good competitor, but probably just lacks the defensive strength we need in the forward half.

[CURLY]

My issue with Lonie is that for the position he plays he doesn't finish as well as he should. When your a permanent forward you can't miss regulation shots at goal and you certainly can't be one sided.

[Saintmatt]

My issue with Lonie is that for the position he plays he doesn't finish as well as he should. When your a permanent forward you can't miss regulation shots at goal and you certainly can't be one sided.

Yes - very much agree. Also, as a smaller forward you're also judged on how much forward pressure you exert. Lonie - for all is endeavor - is just too light to stick a tackle regularly. Height aside, he simply doesn't possess the body mass to create the ultimate forward pressure (i.e. tackling and dispossessing) regularly enough.

I so hope we can find a way to get Jack Higgins and then jag a pick from the Dullbogs - that'll make me utterly firm.

[Saintmike65]

I like to look at the big picture, at the moment we are a good side and to be a REALLY good side, you ask the question whether Jack Lonie is part of that scenario...my answer is NO.
Contrary to some opinions, Jack Higgins is an upgrade on Lonie, bigger, stronger, more upside, and play help our midfield.

[The OtherThommo]

FWIW, as at yesdee - https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/mck ... 56ce6.html

"The Bulldogs delisted three players on Friday but announced on Saturday they had re-signed unlucky midfielder Lin Jong, who is a tough in and under midfielder who could step into Dunkley's shoes if required. Jong, who resisted the opportunity to join the Gold Coast several years ago, signed a one-year deal.

They will acquire Melbourne's Mitch Hannan and, if he passes a fitness test, Lions ruckman Stefan Martin, but they have no intention of securing St Kilda's small forward Jack Lonie. They had an interest in Essendon's Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti last year and could consider enquiring about his availability if they agree to trade Dunkley."