List Mgmt. List Management 2023-24

[RangaInTeal]

With our inclusions and lack of draft capital next year, I think grab as much talent to ride out 3-4 years as possible. Lord may slide, the Falcons captain looks to push deep, as others have mentioned Collard may slide, Moir surely taken before we get a look at 73 but strange things happen, Visintini Jnr should be at the back end.

I would be shaking hands with Scooter, Raz and Hayes Monday Morning, offering Hayes a rookie contract along with Fantasia if they can get through Preseason training injury free while running their best times, greatest distances and lifting heavier than they ever have previously.

 

[Long live PAFC]

So what have we got available at the moment?

Main list outs: Jonas, Duursma, ?Lycett, Bonner, ?Hayes, ?Fantasia

Rookie list: Dumont, ?Teakle

Cat Bs: Barkla

So Narkle takes one of those rookie spots. We are minus a main list spot with the four in and three out. Decisions pending on three. If those three go we have two remaining main list spots, one new at the ND and two rookie upgrades and we are still sort a main list spot.

Wonder if we move Clurey to the rookie list? Or Scully or Marshall to the rookie list? Or Boak to the veteran list if it comes in?

Any interest Ryan Clarke

4

Ryan Clarke

Age

27

Ht

186cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.8

5star

K

9.1

4star

HB

9.7

5star

M

3.4

3star

T

2.2

4star

G

0.2

2star

D

18.5

4star

K

8.8

4star

HB

9.8

5star

M

1.8

2star

T

2.5

3star

G

0.3

3star

D

19.6

5star

K

7.0

3star

HB

12.6

5star

M

2.4

3star

T

2.2

4star

G

0.0

1star

, 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

? Any other DFAs we should/could look at?

 

[PA88]

Soldo, Sweet, Hayes, Dixon, Lord, Scully, Ratagolea, Aliir, T Marshall, K Marshall, Thatcher, Lycett

Clurey, McKenzie, Finlayson, McCallum, Burton

The reserves will be problematic.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Asked for an exemption based on what? Just because they're the Crows and they should be entitled to it? He's already playing AFL games FFS.

He never should have been a Category B in the first place, let alone be deserving of an extension of his Category B status.

 

[philthy05]

Not over pay for players?

What did people honestly think we could get Sav and Soldo for? I think must people thought Sav worth a pick in the 25-35 range. Soldo we overpaid but it’s not a huge cost. Sweet we got for what’s about right, maybe slight overs. BZT for Duurs is unders for us but not by heaps - what does Duurs net us in picks, maybe 25-35 going on what other wingers have been traded for. BZT probably worth 30-40. For perspective, the pies picked up Schulz for a first rounder. And the draft hands of the Hawks, Tigers, Cats, Freo and Saints are crap considering where those lists are at.

And I reckon Handy might be a Hinkley fan, just seems to really back the bloke.

As to this BS about not drafting or developing talls, well it’s interesting how Hinkley doesn’t back or develop talls and yet played Teakle over Lycett. Just cause he doesn’t play your choice of tall… Besides the talls at Collingwood, Dees, Cats were all home grown and they didn’t trade in what they needed at all. Gees a tall father son or academy grad or generation talent would be nice. Maybe we don’t trade or draft em, just need to get all the old 100+ gamers into the sack and start producing!

And Clurey, Pasini and Hayes got zero interest through the trade period. Considering we needed picks, I’m sure we would have been happy for them to go. Sweet played the same number of games as Hayes, also out of contract, lots of clubs desperate for rucks, Sweet had interest but Hayes…? Same with Pas and Cluz, not even a token offer of a fourth or fifth rounder.

Our list management isn’t perfect but think it’s actually pretty good and I think they did what we needed them to do.

Of course we overpaid for players.

We’re told every year that the team losing uncontracted players loses out in trades, doesn’t have the power etc but this year somehow the script was flipped thanks to a club that wants to play nice guys at the table and was desperate due to our position.

What’s done is done, and it was done because of the position we put ourselves in.

We’ve made our immediate 22 stronger but at a cost, and we’ve again shown a weak underbelly at the trade table.

I’ve said before that every team we come up against will stand off against us knowing we will fold and I was 100% correct.

Also, lol at using the teakle cluster**** as some sort of example of Hinkley developing players.

There are things that are just true.

Port overpaid at the trade table

We’re in the mess of having to overpay cause Hinkley has neglected to develop some positions

Denying these things might as well say the sky isn’t blue.

 

[RossFC]

Soldo, Sweet, Hayes, Dixon, Lord, Scully, Ratagolea, Aliir, T Marshall, K Marshall, Thatcher, Lycett

Clurey, McKenzie, Finlayson, McCallum, Burton

The reserves will be problematic.

Lycett and Hayes will get cut.

Magpies will probs have Sweet in the ruck, Scully and Georgiades (post ACL) up forward, Visentini as a fwd/ruck, then McKenzie, Clurey, K.Marshall as key defenders. Pasini can play on medium sized players.

 

[Scodges]

Of course we overpaid for players.

We’re told every year that the team losing uncontracted players loses out in trades, doesn’t have the power etc but this year somehow the script was flipped thanks to a club that wants to play nice guys at the table and was desperate due to our position.



What’s done is done, and it was done because of the position we put ourselves in.

We’ve made our immediate 22 stronger but at a cost, and we’ve again shown a weak underbelly at the trade table.

I’ve said before that every team we come up against will stand off against us knowing we will fold and I was 100% correct.

Also, lol at using the teakle cluster* as some sort of example of Hinkley developing players.


There are things that are just true.

Port overpaid at the trade table

We’re in the mess of having to overpay cause Hinkley has neglected to develop some positions

Denying these things might as well say the sky isn’t blue.

A few clubs have not done any trades at all, like Fremantle for example. They’ve lost players, yet brought in none. At least we’re going after what we need & that we have players nominating us cause we seem to make deals happen, whether they be overs or unders.
Imagine going into 24 with the same list & bloody coach !

On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Coobk001]

I can't yet find the rule for the number of rookies you can promote instead of using 3 draft picks. It has to be at least 1, that much is clear, but could 2 count is what I'd like to know.

 

[TeeKray]

How stupidly complicated are list number rules lol, should just be 'have this many players, full stop'.

 

[It Just Is]

How stupidly complicated are list number rules lol, should just be 'have this many players, full stop'.

I don’t understand why there needs to be list sizes in a salary cap league.

If West Coast next year wanted to spend $1m of salary cap having 10 extra rookies and mature aged options wouldn’t that be a good thing?

 

[thundercloud]

Of course we overpaid for players.

We’re told every year that the team losing uncontracted players loses out in trades, doesn’t have the power etc but this year somehow the script was flipped thanks to a club that wants to play nice guys at the table and was desperate due to our position.



What’s done is done, and it was done because of the position we put ourselves in.

We’ve made our immediate 22 stronger but at a cost, and we’ve again shown a weak underbelly at the trade table.

I’ve said before that every team we come up against will stand off against us knowing we will fold and I was 100% correct.

Also, lol at using the teakle cluster* as some sort of example of Hinkley developing players.


There are things that are just true.

Port overpaid at the trade table

We’re in the mess of having to overpay cause Hinkley has neglected to develop some positions

Denying these things might as well say the sky isn’t blue.

The sky has different shades of blue, trade table met obvious needs and imo we played a hand of average cards well. The shade of blue will to be measured by the impact of the trades during the footy season.

 

[Peninsula Boy]

There is nothing wrong with cashing in draft capital for trades and to build the list around our young midfield stars of Rozee, Butters and Horne-Francis.

Filling in holes of the 22 is what good clubs do.

If we kept next year's first rounder, I would give us an A or A+ for the trading period.
As we didn't, I would give us a B- or C+.

We did the right thing, got the players in, not the best players ever, and for overs.

The main concern is that the grab for trades is more to keep Kenny Average his job when his next contract roles around and the trade for Soldo seems to indicate that as it is one of the most lopsided trades I've seen in a while.

In 2017, we traded 31 for Jack Watts and picked up in FA Rockliff, Motlop and McKenzie. It didn't really help.

The other element of the poor trading period is not so much the trades themselves but that the list management and especially the coaching staff didn't see this coming. I guess the idea that a coaching staff develop players is now hard to find down at Alberton so we will have to continue to play overs and trade up.

 

[Peter Wallis]

I believe you can promote 2 and just draft one which makes sense given that you only have pick 73 as your noted pick. I guess McEntee & Williams are the logical promotions.

 

[Long live PAFC]

Of course we overpaid for players.

We’re told every year that the team losing uncontracted players loses out in trades, doesn’t have the power etc but this year somehow the script was flipped thanks to a club that wants to play nice guys at the table and was desperate due to our position.



What’s done is done, and it was done because of the position we put ourselves in.

We’ve made our immediate 22 stronger but at a cost, and we’ve again shown a weak underbelly at the trade table.

I’ve said before that every team we come up against will stand off against us knowing we will fold and I was 100% correct.

Also, lol at using the teakle cluster* as some sort of example of Hinkley developing players.


There are things that are just true.

Port overpaid at the trade table

We’re in the mess of having to overpay cause Hinkley has neglected to develop some positions

Denying these things might as well say the sky isn’t blue.

Wasn’t Teakle a young developing tall? You and I might agree that Hayes is and was better but you can’t deny that Hinkley played Teakle, a young developing tall. Doesn’t that count as trying to develop a ruck/tall? Or does it not count cause it wasn’t the right one, the one we wanted?

Most people agreed Sav was worth a pick in the 20-30 range. That’s what we put out there and stuck too. Geelong wanted more. Is that overpaying?
Most felt that Sweet was around the 40-55 mark - that’s what we paid.
Soldo was an overpay, probably worth a third rounder and we gave a second rounder. But he was in contract and one of the better rucks that was semi available.
BZT was worth a third rounder. Duursma a second rounder (that’s the going rate for wingers, particularly those with an average year and have been held back by injuries). So we got BZT and some fourth rounders for Duurs - isn’t that about right?

Sure it would be nice if we could have paid our crap draft hand or walk them to the draft but those picks weren’t getting it done and keeping players, managers and other clubs on side is important.

 

[Coobk001]

I don’t understand why there needs to be list sizes in a salary cap league.

If West Coast next year wanted to spend $1m of salary cap having 10 extra rookies and mature aged options wouldn’t that be a good thing?

Good point I've never thought of. When you add to it that you need to meet a minimum payment, despite how poor your list is and it makes it seem more ridiculous. I just can't believe an absolutely trash list like WC would be paying 95%, it puts them at a massive disadvantage for when they get better and actually need to manage paying quality players.

 

[Coobk001]

I believe you can promote 2 and just draft one which makes sense given that you only have pick 73 as your noted pick. I guess McEntee & Williams are the logical promotions.

If we could it would be a good result for us. Would prefer not to be wasting space on pick 112. If every other club has passed by the time our required pick 73 comes along, it would be hilarious that Geelong then have the 2 last picks of the draft, which they held out for on the Ratagolea trade.

 

[Boak10]

Thoughts on Jeremy Sharp as a DFA?
Fills a potential need on the wing, haven’t seen him play for a while but early days he looked like he had some potential.

 

[Orange crush]

There was a whole lot of nothing on the trade table this year. You guys didn’t get any world beaters but as a whole I think trey will offer a fair bit structurally to your team. Soldo competes hard, and BZT and Sav give you height and size down back …. That could be all it takes to get over the line

 

[240volt]

Thoughts on Jeremy Sharp as a DFA?
Fills a potential need on the wing, haven’t seen him play for a while but early days he looked like he had some potential.

I believe he wants to return home (Perth) and is keen to play for the Dockers.

 

[VineValerian]

I believe you can promote 2 and just draft one which makes sense given that you only have pick 73 as your noted pick. I guess McEntee & Williams are the logical promotions.

 

[It Just Is]

Thoughts on Jeremy Sharp as a DFA?
Fills a potential need on the wing, haven’t seen him play for a while but early days he looked like he had some potential.

Remember when Gold Coast traded a future mid-first round (#11) compensation pick to Geelong for a pick in the late 20’s so they could draft this guy.

 

[PortPortPort]

There was a whole lot of nothing on the trade table this year. You guys didn’t get any world beaters but as a whole I think trey will offer a fair bit structurally to your team. Soldo competes hard, and BZT and Sav give you height and size down back …. That could be all it takes to get over the line

We ain't doing next year's draft either.

 

[all seeing eye]

Thoughts on Jeremy Sharp as a DFA?
Fills a potential need on the wing, haven’t seen him play for a while but early days he looked like he had some potential.

Was really keen on him during U18s year, but like Hately they haven't been able to take that promise to next level. Nice run and carry type , maybe a wingman, but think he's going back west.

 

[Brian McGee]

This is going to be unpopular but I think it’s important to keep Fantasia on, especially if it’s only a rookie contract. He still has the most upside of all of our smalls. Likely to hardly play but still worth the risk.

Lycett and hayes will both leave. We have just stacked our defender ranks but Gould would be worth a shot as depth, as would hately. Both would be better for a year than picking at the back end of this draft, and would strengthen the Maggies to ensure they are competitive.

 

[Handyandy]

Has any club in draft history gone after 2 mature rucks? Plus 2 mature kpds?
Seems strange.
Seems to indicate gross mismanagement
Reeks of desperation