List Mgmt. 2023 List Management

[DangerousD]

Which say something different to what I initially queried.


I asked you to show me where anyone who would know, has said we have maxed out our salary cap.

Which is what you originally said.

Is there anything?



Why wouldn’t I focus on the part I queried specifically?



Yes. All are forced to pay somewhat similar amounts.

The salary cap isn’t new. There is a ceiling and a floor.


Didn’t he also say we focussed on the draft last year but also brought in Acres?

If after our CEO said last year managing our cap will be a challenge and after months and months of the media telling us we have a cap squeeze and our CEO now is saying we have list management issues, if you don’t want to acknowledge this means we have a problem that’s up to you.

I see and read the above and I think our cap is maxed out, our CEO isn’t going to use these terms. Time will tell.

And yes we brought in Acres, who by all reports is on $350,000 per year, $50,000 under the AFL average

 

[Jeremias]

If after our CEO said last year managing our cap will be a challenge and after months and months of the media telling us we have a cap squeeze and our CEO now is saying we have list management issues, if you don’t want to acknowledge this means we have a problem that’s up to you.

I see and read the above and I think our cap is maxed out, our CEO isn’t going to use these terms. Time will tell.

And yes we brought in Acres, who by all reports is on $350,000 per year, $50,000 under the AFL average

Again, where did Cook say we are maxed out on our cap?

Cook simply said we have a list management issue, as is the case for most clubs across the competition.

I reckon you've simply misinterpreted. Or you're putting far too much emphasis on what journalists who make up shit for clicks are putting down on paper.

 

[Monty1978]

Based on my figures which I am sure are a long way off reality, but with Dow 450, Lob 300, Fog, 350, Marchbank 350, Cunners 250, Ed 250 all who are likely to be gone at seasons end, if they are replaced with a grad on $150k we get back $900k.

Lob is contracted for next year and basing what payments a player is on will available for a new player doesn’t work like that. Example Austin might havebe banking on us delisting Fogarty after last year so cripps might be taking that money in 2024 as part of the salary cap

 

[Wickzki]

It’s the sort of list you would see at one of the top sides so it’s abit of a worry in our situation.

It's not too dissimilar to the shallow list the Crows had before they embarked on their rebuild after at least losing in a GF.

If after our CEO said last year managing our cap will be a challenge and after months and months of the media telling us we have a cap squeeze and our CEO now is saying we have list management issues, if you don’t want to acknowledge this means we have a problem that’s up to you.

I see and read the above and I think our cap is maxed out, our CEO isn’t going to use these terms. Time will tell.

And yes we brought in Acres, who by all reports is on $350,000 per year, $50,000 under the AFL average

We have a number of perceived A graders who were all coming out of contract at about the same time (within a couple of seasons) all of who we want(ed) to retain. This is a list management challenge.

I don't believe we have the 700k+ that TDK may have been offered elsewhere (for a single player) but simply stating that we have a list management challenge doesn't necessarily mean we're up against the cap.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

It's not too dissimilar to the shallow list the Crows had before they embarked on their rebuild after at least losing in a GF.



We have a number of perceived A graders who were all coming out of contract at about the same time (within a couple of seasons) all of who we want(ed) to retain. This is a list management challenge.

I don't believe we have the 700k+ that TDK may have been offered elsewhere (for a single player) but simply stating that we have a list management challenge doesn't necessarily mean we're up against the cap.

Probably fairly similar to Collingwood’s atm too

 

[Wickzki]

Probably fairly similar to Collingwood’s atm too

They're in much better shape when it comes to players younger than Walsh.

They traded into draft and got lucky that the top 3 let Daicos slide

 

[Arr0w]

Our cap is tight like most clubs, but nothing that isn't manageable

We will have more cap space end of this year, than end of last year

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

View attachment 1690542


They're in much better shape when it comes to players younger than Walsh.

They traded into draft and got lucky that the top 3 let Daicos slide

Very few proven players. They have Daicos then a couple of role playing forwards who are best 22.

They have a lot like Kemp, Hollands, Cowan, Durdin, Motlop etc who may or may not become good players but have still done nothing at AFL level.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

View attachment 1690542


They're in much better shape when it comes to players younger than Walsh.

They traded into draft and got lucky that the top 3 let Daicos slide

Pies were gifted a #1 pick as a father son who happens to be the best young player since Judd. His brother would also have been a top 20 pick , both Daicos boys are likely All Australians this year.. the father son advantage if it falls your way is often the difference. All premiership teams have significant player/players who have come via father son.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

Pies were gifted a #1 pick as a father son who happens to be the best young player since Judd. His brother would also have been a top 20 pick , both Daicos boys are likely All Australians this year.. the father son advantage if it falls your way is often the difference. All premiership teams have significant player/players who have come via father son.

Done well with Quaynor and Moore too

 

[Bletch]

Pies were gifted a #1 pick as a father son who happens to be the best young player since Judd. His brother would also have been a top 20 pick , both Daicos boys are likely All Australians this year.. the father son advantage if it falls your way is often the difference. All premiership teams have significant player/players who have come via father son.

Just as the Geelong dynasty was built on the Ablett/Hawkins/Scarlett acquisitions.

 

[Wickzki]

Pies were gifted a #1 pick as a father son who happens to be the best young player since Judd. His brother would also have been a top 20 pick , both Daicos boys are likely All Australians this year.. the father son advantage if it falls your way is often the difference. All premiership teams have significant player/players who have come via father son.

Josh Daicos was taken at pick 56

It still stuns me that picks 2 and 3 passed on Nick. Would've changed Collingwood's draft hand by memory.

Very few proven players. They have Daicos then a couple of role playing forwards who are best 22

They have a lot like Kemp, Hollands, Cowan, Durdin, Motlop etc who may or may not become good players but have still done nothing at AFL level.

You're underestimating their youth
.
Of the 12 players younger than Sam Walsh that we have they combine for a total of 98 games. We have 3 who have played double digit games (Durdin, Motlop, Honey).

If the 16 players younger than Sam Walsh on their list they combine for 180 games. 7 have been selected to double digit games. Three of them (Daicos, McCreery and Ginnivan) have played more than any of ours

Regardless, it doesn't change the facts that we need better youth coming through before to correct our list balance and that the club is aware of the issue and working to that end

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

Josh Daicos was taken at pick 56

It still stuns me that picks 2 and 3 passed on Nick. Would've changed Collingwood's draft hand by memory.



You're underestimating their youth
.
Of the 12 players younger than Sam Walsh that we have they combine for a total of 98 games. We have 3 who have played double digit games (Durdin, Motlop, Honey).

If the 16 players younger than Sam Walsh on their list they combine for 180 games. 7 have been selected to double digit games. Three of them (Daicos, McCreery and Ginnivan) have played more than any of ours

Regardless, it doesn't change the facts that we need better youth coming through before to correct our list balance and that the club is aware of the issue and working to that end

Yes but that’s still only three best 22 players with two being role players. I mean Dow, LOB, Setters, SPS etc getting a heap of games at that age didn’t make us any better.
I don’t know if any player outside of Walsh and Daicos would’ve been in the best ten players on the ground in a game this season. Aside from Daicos I look at their young players (the same with ours) and for any of them to become an A grader would be a surprise.

 

[DangerousD]

I see and read the above and I think our cap is maxed out, our CEO isn’t going to use these terms. Time will tell.

Again, where did Cook say we are maxed out on our cap?

You said “we are maxed out cap wise” and when asked to substantiate, you then proceeded to provide 2 Cook interviews in which he didn’t state that at all.

Read the top quote and then your direct response underneath.

I clearly stated ‘I think our cap is maxed out’ and our CEO isn’t going to use those terms.

See the bottom quote attached where you have acknowledged that I said our cap was maxed out, which you asked to substantiate, which I did by attaching two interviews where the CEO said we have list management issues.

Again if you don’t think this means we have salary cap issues, that up to you. I do.

I reckon you've simply misinterpreted. Or you're putting far too much emphasis on what journalists who make up s**t for clicks are putting down on paper.

I think you have your head in the sand.

Im not putting much emphasis on journalists who make up s**t, I’m putting emphasis on our CEOs comments.

 

[Accidental genius]

the guv, jack martin

19

Jack Martin

Age

29

Ht

186cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.2

4star

K

10.0

4star

HB

6.3

4star

M

4.9

5star

T

3.7

5star

G

0.9

4star

D

14.9

4star

K

7.9

3star

HB

7.0

4star

M

4.3

4star

T

3.6

4star

G

1.1

5star

D

8.2

2star

K

4.6

2star

HB

3.6

3star

M

1.8

2star

T

2.0

4star

G

0.6

3star

and Williams (so far) trades have worked out badly for us. No luck at all.

Just watching front bar and Burgoyne is on. Apparently hawks risked trading him while he was under knee surgery. Goes on to play 250 more games and 3 flags.

We desperately need some luck nailing a couple of trades. Players that comes in and make immediate impact.

 

[DangerousD]

We have a number of perceived A graders who were all coming out of contract at about the same time (within a couple of seasons) all of who we want(ed) to retain. This is a list management challenge.

I don't believe we have the 700k+ that TDK may have been offered elsewhere (for a single player) but simply stating that we have a list management challenge doesn't necessarily mean we're up against the cap.

We all hope that the players we retained are worth the contracts they signed and maybe if we are tight cap wise it’s temporary, time will tell, a big worry for me is, a club who hasn’t played finals in 10 years shouldn’t be tight cap wise.

Clubs above us, with stronger lists had enough $$$$ to target ready made players they needed, the premier even had money to take on a dud contract to get them pick 7, something that we couldn’t afford to do.

We will see what happens.

 

[Jeremias]

I clearly stated ‘I think our cap is maxed out’ and our CEO isn’t going to use those terms.

Oh I see now. Yes you're right you weren't attributing that specific wording to our CEO.

Even alluding to it though is, I think, erroneous.

Again if you don’t think this means we have salary cap issues, that up to you. I do.

I guess it depends on how one defines 'issues'.

List management issues =/= salary cap issues. They may be closely related but there is a difference between the two.

I think you have your head in the sand.

Maybe. Over which issue specifically?

Im not putting much emphasis on journalists who make up s**t, I’m putting emphasis on our CEOs comments.

So then why mention them twice?

 

[Wickzki]

We all hope that the players we retained are worth the contracts they signed and maybe if we are tight cap wise it’s temporary, time will tell, a big worry for me is, a club who hasn’t played finals in 10 years shouldn’t be tight cap wise.

See, although I don't necessarily believe that we do have cap issues I disagree with this

This theory has been proven false many times before.

The AFL salary cap system actively punishes clubs who have been down and out as long as what we have and champions clubs like Geelong that have sustained periods of success.

This is because although you can bank cap space for future years the AFL still requires clubs to be within a certain minimum percentage of the salary cap.

Inevitably what happens is the more likely a team is to contend win a premiership the more likely a player is to take a discount to either stay at the club or to join it. However, the opposite also is true. If you're a club who hasn't had success for an extended period of time the more you have to pay to retain your players and to lure them from other clubs.

If you name a player that we've acquired from another club in recent years you'll find that we paid a premium price for it to happen. We've had some luck in re-signing our players but we're also rumored to have paid overs on some earlier in their careers (or so ITK have posted here and elsewhere). We've also paid our B and C graders premiums too while other clubs have occasionally refused to believing they could replace them from within already or via the draft, etc

Just because we've been poor for so long doesn't mean we shouldn't be working within a tight budget. We have yet to be blessed with the type of success required to maximize cap potential like a few other clubs in this tine that always have the ability to eke in another.

 

[gbatman]

I would not be surprised if we are paying the most of our salary cap, what we play a player this year is what we don't have to pay them next year, you would want to work it so you pay 100% of your cap every year so it opens up in future seasons. Does not indicate cap pressure, means we are getting payments out of the way while we can.

You pay under, it's a missed opportunity to fulfil a players salary, you don't carry those credits into the next season, you're best to pay as much of the cap as you can.

 

[DangerousD]

So then why mention them twice?

Because it adds weight to how I perceive Cooks comments, on their own I don’t give them much thought, after Cooks Comments, I think they have more truth.

I guess it depends on how one defines 'issues'.

List management issues =/= salary cap issues. They may be closely related but there is a difference between the two.

We have taken a long time to get here but all is good, you take Cooks comments and everything else and have your opinion and I have mine.

We will see how things pan out and hopefully we can continue to strengthen the side in various ways moving forward.

 

[4flagsin5yrs]

Pretty clear that the following will be goneski end of 2023:

1. Ed Curnow - great servant Ed has been.
2. Paddy Dow

15

Paddy Dow

Age

25

Ht

184cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.1

4star

K

7.0

3star

HB

7.1

4star

M

2.1

2star

T

2.9

4star

CL

2.6

4star

D

7.0

1star

K

4.0

1star

HB

3.0

2star

M

3.0

3star

T

2.0

3star

CL

0.0

1star

D

12.4

4star

K

5.8

3star

HB

6.6

4star

M

1.6

2star

T

2.8

5star

CL

2.6

5star

- good luck to you Paddy.
3. Sam Philp

34

Sam Philp

Age

23

Ht

186cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

7.0

2star

K

4.0

2star

HB

3.0

3star

M

0.5

1star

T

1.5

3star

G

0.5

3star

D

7.0

1star

K

4.0

1star

HB

3.0

2star

M

0.5

1star

T

1.5

2star

G

0.5

4star

D

7.0

2star

K

4.0

2star

HB

3.0

3star

M

0.5

1star

T

1.5

4star

G

0.5

3star

- unlucky.
4. One of Marchbank and McGovern.
5. Fog.
6. Honey.


And possibly, by way of trade or other:
1. TDK
2. Fisher
3. Cuningham.
4. Carroll.
5. Plowman.
6. JSOS.

How does that not relieve any potential salary cap issues and allow us to pick up a quality HF?

When many of the replacements will be young draftees....

 

[Juddernaut08]

Pretty clear that the following will be goneski end of 2023:

1. Ed Curnow - great servant Ed has been.
2. Paddy Dow - good luck to you Paddy.
3. Sam Philp - unlucky.
4. One of Marchbank and McGovern.
5. Fog.
6. Honey.


And possibly, by way of trade or other:
1. TDK
2. Fisher
3. Cuningham.
4. Carroll.
5. Plowman.
6. JSOS.

How does that not relieve any potential salary cap issues and allow us to pick up a quality HF?

When many of the replacements will be young draftees....

What are you assuming in terms of other player salaries? Eg if TDK doesn't leave...probably add another $300k+ per year.

Out of the top 6 that you've said are goneski, only Paddy would be on huge coin. (I don't think McGovern leaves).

I'm not saying we won't have space - just that your analysis doesn't show much at all really.

 

[Juddernaut08]

Oh I see now. Yes you're right you weren't attributing that specific wording to our CEO.

Even alluding to it though is, I think, erroneous.


I guess it depends on how one defines 'issues'.

List management issues =/= salary cap issues. They may be closely related but there is a difference between the two.


Maybe. Over which issue specifically?


So then why mention them twice?

Think you and DangerousD have gotten as close to agreeing as you'll get. End of the day there's noise in the media about a tight cap, and at the very least our CEO's comments are consistent with that.

Not sure what you're trying to achieve here by dragging it out.

 

[bradfisher14]

Not sure why anyone would run with the tight cap narrative. The AFL have strict rules in place that force every team (regardless of talent or ladder position) to pay extremely close to the cap limit. It's not like the NBA where you can hold over large amounts of cap space year after year in the hope that a star player will want to come to you. Our cap system is like a tight rope.

 

[marcmurphy3]

It's pretty obvious we have a very tight cap. Yeah the media exaggerates but we have signed a lot of players on big long term contracts over the last few years. More then other clubs. Doesn't take much logic to deduce that we don't have a lot of room to move. Not an ideal position to be in if you aren't even challenging.

Now that doesn't mean we are completely stuck. There are always ways to create more flexibility. Just depends how desperate we are and what we need to bring in.

I personally think we have more then enough stars to challenge so the shortage of funds isn't a huge issue. You cant have stars in every position. We just need our stars to actually play to their potential. Role players we should still be able to afford to recruit if we are short somewhere.

I'm happy with the strategy of hitting the draft for a few years. After that we will have flexibility again to pursue high end out of contract players. Also best for our age profile. I do think we need to trade a couple of surplus players to boost our picks in line with this approach. TDK the most obvious if we can get at least a mid first for him or a late first and change.