Official THE RUMOUR MILL - Player Signings/Transfers ONLY!!!!

[Sparkles]

I know what you mean, I like him, but we need to let some of these middle tier players go, we have too many. Give the younger guys on cheaper coin a go.

Yeah, I agree. You look at how electric Mam, Walsh and the like are at such a young age. Surely we have someone in the ranks who is on the cusp of breaking out.

I guess the only fear for us is that we probably don't quite have a settled enough squad to support a young guys' development through to that level. You look at how much easier it is for Penrith to ease new guys in each season, or the Broncos forwards laying such a great platform. We're definitely not there yet.

 

[bort]

I know what you mean, I like him, but we need to let some of these middle tier players go, we have too many. Give the younger guys on cheaper coin a go.

It’s not really a ‘give guys a go’ league, is it?
How confident are you that other teams younger players are just being given a go, and not that they’ve earned their opportunity?

If he’s being offered a starting gig then yes me too. Sucks that we’d lose him but it wouldn’t be right for us to stand in his way considering we have Dykes, Iro, Atkinson and Stonestreet all ready to step up in the outside backs if we need them too.

One 18th man cameo between them last season, who says they are all ready to step up?

If there is a benefit to us releasing Tracey it’s worth considering.
Does the extra he costs go towards a beneficial signing?
That’s a reason to release him, not because we have other worse outside backs available too.

Yeah, I agree. You look at how electric Mam, Walsh and the like are at such a young age. Surely we have someone in the ranks who is on the cusp of breaking out.

I’d also questions where this NRL ready youngster is currently, if not already in our squad.
If they are Mam or Walsh why haven’t we found a top 30 spot for them already so they need Tracey’s? If they are only just ready for top 30 next season is it worth losing Tracey who is a valuable NRL contributor?
If they are in our top 30 already why does Tracey need to leave?

 

[BurgoShark]

Yeah, I agree. You look at how electric Mam, Walsh and the like are at such a young age. Surely we have someone in the ranks who is on the cusp of breaking out.

I guess the only fear for us is that we probably don't quite have a settled enough squad to support a young guys' development through to that level. You look at how much easier it is for Penrith to ease new guys in each season, or the Broncos forwards laying such a great platform. We're definitely not there yet.

Mam and Walsh are the exception. Not the rule. Both showed they were a level above in Q Cup at 18.

The Sharks don’t have anyone at that level. SS has promise but still struggles defusing kicks and defensively. He was pretty awful in the final Flegg game.

 

[MrDravid]

Man and Walsh are the exception. Not the rule. Both showed they were a level above in Q Cup at 18.

The Sharks don’t have anyone at that level. SS has promise but still struggles defusing kicks and defensively. He was pretty awful in the final Flegg game.

Also, Walsh has just finished his 3rd season of first grade... not like he only just appeared out of Cup this year.

 

[bort]

Mam and Walsh are the exception. Not the rule. Both showed they were a level above in Q Cup at 18.

The Sharks don’t have anyone at that level. SS has promise but still struggles defusing kicks and defensively. He was pretty awful in the final Flegg game.

But maybe if we give him a go? Literally nothing to lose

 

[Sparkles]

Mam and Walsh are the exception. Not the rule. Both showed they were a level above in Q Cup at 18.

The Sharks don’t have anyone at that level. SS has promise but still struggles defusing kicks and defensively. He was pretty awful in the final Flegg game.

I get that they're exceptional, but my point was more that age shouldn't define readiness to move into the top squad.
I'm really not over the lower grades, have you see the stand out NRL rookies stand out in reggies before being promoted? I wonder if it's a benchmark level we're looking for them to hit (ideally, sure) or if it's more nurturing promising talent through exposure to first grade.
And I said 'if it's more'... don't give me that it's a bit of both

 

[Sparkles]

It’s not really a ‘give guys a go’ league, is it?
How confident are you that other teams younger players are just being given a go, and not that they’ve earned their opportunity?


One 18th man cameo between them last season, who says they are all ready to step up?

If there is a benefit to us releasing Tracey it’s worth considering.
Does the extra he costs go towards a beneficial signing?
That’s a reason to release him, not because we have other worse outside backs available too.


I’d also questions where this NRL ready youngster is currently, if not already in our squad.
If they are Mam or Walsh why haven’t we found a top 30 spot for them already so they need Tracey’s? If they are only just ready for top 30 next season is it worth losing Tracey who is a valuable NRL contributor?
If they are in our top 30 already why does Tracey need to leave?

Yeah, re @BurgoShark's reply. Maybe we'll blood someone in the hopes of them turning into a first grade superstar.
There's always the possibility of a surprise signing, too

 

[BurgoShark]

I get that they're exceptional, but my point was more that age shouldn't define readiness to move into the top squad.

Agreed.

I'm really not over the lower grades, have you see the stand out NRL rookies stand out in reggies before being promoted?

Since I see a lot more Q Cup than NSW Cup, I can mostly only talk about the Qld teams and the Storm here.

The short answer is yes.

Using Brisbane as an example, outside of Reynolds their team is mostly comprised of guys who either dominated Cup or at least played 20-30 games there first to show they could handle it. Only players I can think of who completely jumped the queue were Fiifta and Dearden, and they have both had some growing pains while in the NRL.

I wonder if it's a benchmark level we're looking for them to hit (ideally, sure) or if it's more nurturing promising talent through exposure to first grade.
And I said 'if it's more'... don't give me that it's a bit of both

This is a different answer for halves vs backs vs forwards.... so yeah, a bit of both

Forwards need to build their bodies without sacrificing their motor, and perform as well against men as they did against 20yo kids (hit and maintain baseline).

For dominant backs, nurturing through exposure seems like the preferred path. Ramien was a player who spent very little time in Cup, and was given time to iron out his mistakes in fg. Same for Xerri.

For halves, I'd say it's closer to the forwards (hit a baseline), but then you get things like Flanno Jr being the coach's son, or Reece Walsh demanding to play fg or he'll leave... and that f*cks everything up.

 

[bort]

Make statements in Cup* and you’ll get opportunities.
Make the most of those and you’ll earn a spot.

Don’t forget coach sees top 30 players most days of the week and knows way more about where they are at than their Flegg highlights package says.

*without glaring deficiencies like unfortunately Iro has shown so far (defence)

 

[Sparkles]

Agreed.


Since I see a lot more Q Cup than NSW Cup, I can mostly only talk about the Qld teams and the Storm here.

The short answer is yes.

Using Brisbane as an example, outside of Reynolds their team is mostly comprised of guys who either dominated Cup or at least played 20-30 games there first to show they could handle it. Only players I can think of who completely jumped the queue were Fiifta and Dearden, and they have both had some growing pains while in the NRL.

Interesting... cheers. It feels like it's different in most other clubs. Maybe it's a handover from being the only club in QLD and having such a big pool to draw on? Seems to work for them.

This is a different answer for halves vs backs vs forwards.... so yeah, a bit of both

Forwards need to build their bodies without sacrificing their motor, and perform as well against men as they did against 20yo kids (hit and maintain baseline).

For dominant backs, nurturing through exposure seems like the preferred path. Ramien was a player who spent very little time in Cup, and was given time to iron out his mistakes in fg. Same for Xerri.

For halves, I'd say it's closer to the forwards (hit a baseline), but then you get things like Flanno Jr being the coach's son, or Reece Walsh demanding to play fg or he'll leave... and that f*cks everything up.

Yep, good points. I suppose it's also a lot easier to ease a forward in as you have the option of a 15 min bench spot available.
Still seems the key is to have a fantastic pack to take the pressure off the backs and give them a platform to perform.

 

[BurgoShark]

Interesting... cheers. It feels like it's different in most other clubs. Maybe it's a handover from being the only club in QLD and having such a big pool to draw on? Seems to work for them.

Yep, good points. I suppose it's also a lot easier to ease a forward in as you have the option of a 15 min bench spot available.
Still seems the key is to have a fantastic pack to take the pressure off the backs and give them a platform to perform.

Yeah - the “expose to NRL” thing is much easier with a 10-15 minute forward than an 80 minute player.

Not just the Broncos btw. Storm team have almost all come through the same way - especially their spine (and the spine players who they don’t have anymore).

It's definitely not different at Cronulla...

Ramien is the only Sharks top 30 player from 2023 who started at the club and didn't spend at least one full season either playing only in Cup and/or being shuffled up and down between grades.

 

[bort]

Consider also when it comes to someone like a winger who may be a gun finisher.
They might get only one or two chances to even try and show that skillset in a game.
Conversely they may have to take like 10 kicks and bunch a hitups and get tested out defensively half a dozen times.

That is a bit more attractive to nurture through if you're a strong side, or if you don't have a choice (injury, or couldn't afford to retain someone).
Letting Katoa walk because we know SS's name and he could be anything is a decent chance of backfiring, for example.

Another example, Marzhew had a great season but at 26 played almost half his career games this season, despite being much hyped for years.
Even the Titans who (seem to) favour attack over defence didn't trust him out there for years and were willing to trade him.

 

[Sparkles]

Yeah - the “expose to NRL” thing is much easier with a 10-15 minute forward than an 80 minute player.

Not just the Broncos btw. Storm team have almost all come through the same way - especially their spine (and the spine players who they don’t have anymore).

It's definitely not different at Cronulla...

Ramien is the only Sharks top 30 player from 2023 who started at the club and didn't spend at least one full season either playing only in Cup and/or being shuffled up and down between grades.

Is one full season too short a period here? You could reasonably consider 'young' for first grade anyone 21<

 

[bort]

Is one full season too short a period here? You could reasonably consider 'young' for first grade anyone 21>

The NRL Rookie of the Year nominees were
21 (Bula), 21 (Taruva), 25 (Warbrick)

A 'Top 10' list had
24 (Hazelton), 23 (Te Whare), 23 (Hands), 20 (I Katoa), 21 (Turuva), 26 (Hosking), 25 (Warbrick), 21 (Bula), 21 (AKP), 21 (Preston)
For an average age of 22.5

Not sure what I want anyone to do with that information other than consider if someone is 19/20/21 they are still younger than the average age of the best NRL rookies of 2023, so the prospect of them not being ready yet isn't that outrageous. If at 21 you aren't quite at the level of the best rookies an extra season or two until you make it isn't necessarily career destroying.

At 22 Adam Dykes will be a respectable age to support that when he wins 2024 Rookie of the Year.

 

[BurgoShark]

The NRL Rookie of the Year nominees were
21 (Bula), 21 (Taruva), 25 (Warbrick)

A 'Top 10' list had
24 (Hazelton), 23 (Te Whare), 23 (Hands), 20 (I Katoa), 21 (Turuva), 26 (Hosking), 25 (Warbrick), 21 (Bula), 21 (AKP), 21 (Preston)
For an average age of 22.5

Not sure what I want anyone to do with that information other than consider if someone is 19/20/21 they are still younger than the average age of the best NRL rookies of 2023, so the prospect of them not being ready yet isn't that outrageous. If at 21 you aren't quite at the level of the best rookies an extra season or two until you make it isn't necessarily career destroying.

At 22 Adam Dykes will be a respectable age to support that when he wins 2024 Rookie of the Year.

I’m glad he will finally get the respect he deserves!

 

[bort]

I’m glad he will finally get the respect he deserves!

That's Kade's nickname...

 

[BurgoShark]

Is one full season too short a period here? You could reasonably consider 'young' for first grade anyone 21<

It could be.

Nikora played exactly one season, and had his ups and downs - but Bomber obviously thought the time was right.

 

[BurgoShark]

That's Kade's nickname...

Must have been a confusing household to grow up in.

 

[bort]

Must have been a confusing household to grow up in.

It was okay because Adam went by 'dad' although that can be uncommon in a Dykes household

 

[Sharkfox]

Fitz first offseason signing