List Mgmt. 2024 GWS Giants List Management - Academy, Free Agent, Trade & Draft

[Ichabod Noodle]

Angove was one that was borderline top 30 for me heading in.

So not as much of a bolter as Fox had him on the night? I saw they had him rated at 58 or something.

You'll notice some of the posts above are very angry with this pick saying we could have easily got him with a much later pick. But if you had him borderline top 30 then would others (apart from fox) have had him there too? Meaning he may not have been available later?

Pick 24 on a 30ish pick is very different & not that much of a stretch to pick 24 on a 50/60ish pick.

 

[BarryAglett]

We are left with 36, 93, 98.
If we don't take Smith with 36, then I'm guessing we match any bid using 93,98 and carry over a deficit?

 

[Mors]

So not as much of a bolter as Fox had him on the night? I saw they had him rated at 58 or something.

I noticed this with Ned Bowman as well, Fox had him rated 89 but he was mentioned multiple times as an option for even our first pick in Cal Twomeys phantom draft.

 

[dlanod]

We are left with 36, 93, 98.
If we don't take Smith with 36, then I'm guessing we match any bid using 93,98 and carry over a deficit?

Any bid after about 55 is free to match because the discount becomes the same as the match value and 93/98 is going to come in. Plus Brisbane has about two whole rounds of picks leftover and going cheap so there's plenty of ways to avoid going into deficit.

 

[Vic pokiesmon]

Freo have apparently been into Angove for 2 years so that's why we possibly went early on Angove...Did anybody think after the end of the season that what we really needed was a key forward especially after we brought in Stringer.Think maybe we all got sucked in by the media who were possibly sucked in by Caruso that we were going tall.Im unsure about Angove but we wait and see but I like the speed and endurance combo he has for the wing role.Angove v Angwin could be confusing but he definitely looks above Angwin from limited highlights I've seen.

 

[Mors]

Freo have apparently been into Angove for 2 years so that's why we possibly went early on Angove...Did anybody think after the end of the season that what we really needed was a key forward especially after we brought in Stringer.Think maybe we all got sucked in by the media who were possibly sucked in by Caruso that we were going tall.Im unsure about Angove but we wait and see but I like the speed and endurance combo he has for the wing role.Angove v Angwin could be confusing but he definitely looks above Angwin from limited highlights I've seen.

Have also heard that north were quite interested in him (albeit at a later pick)

 

[PMBangers]

So not as much of a bolter as Fox had him on the night? I saw they had him rated at 58 or something.

You'll notice some of the posts above are very angry with this pick saying we could have easily got him with a much later pick. But if you had him borderline top 30 then would others (apart from fox) have had him there too? Meaning he may not have been available later?

Pick 24 on a 30ish pick is very different & not that much of a stretch to pick 24 on a 50/60ish pick.

Definitively saying 'bolter' and 'slider' is difficult because ultimately no media outlet knows what a clubs rankings board is, let alone all 18, we'll never really know if every other club had him in a similar range or if no other club saw him as a National Draft selection, but I'd say he would've been 50/50 to get to our next pick personally given his traits are well suited to the modern game, and he's got flexibility to play multiple roles.

I think there's too much focus on 'but we could've gotten better value' when our recruitment team has shown pretty consistently that 'value' isn't a priority when we really want someone draft wise

 

[dlanod]

Definitively saying 'bolter' and 'slider' is difficult because ultimately no media outlet knows what a clubs rankings board is, let alone all 18, we'll never really know if every other club had him in a similar range or if no other club saw him as a National Draft selection, but I'd say he would've been 50/50 to get to our next pick personally given his traits are well suited to the modern game, and he's got flexibility to play multiple roles.

I think there's too much focus on 'but we could've gotten better value' when our recruitment team has shown pretty consistently that 'value' isn't a priority when we really want someone draft wise

Historically we've had similar responses on our board over a "reach" or two but inevitably word comes out from teams picking in the next five or so picks that they'd have been looking at said player too. Bailey and Starcevich both come to mind.

 

[Mors]

Historically we've had similar responses on our board over a "reach" or two but inevitably word comes out from teams picking in the next five or so picks that they'd have been looking at said player too. Bailey and Starcevich both come to mind.

My messages about value were probably too early and reactionary, especially if North wanted a lot back in their trade offer. I trust Caruso and if he says we got all the players we wanted then I am happy with it.

 

[Orange crush]

I think we all need to realize Gws play with a different board to other teams …. No point picking guys who aren’t gonna stay

 

[dlanod]

My messages about value were probably too early and reactionary, especially if North wanted a lot back in their trade offer. I trust Caruso and if he says we got all the players we wanted then I am happy with it.

Look, there's absolutely no harm in asking the question - we took some shocking reaches over the years but it's always hard to tell in the moment. We haven't had a real bust in a while though if you exclude going home.

 

[sydney_gws]

North board seems ... excitable.

Irate even.

Maybe trade them 37 for Richmond's 2025f2.

 

[Giant Pete]

I hope Hannaford is already working on his endurance.
I love his attack on the ball and man.. reminds me a bit of Dangerfield.

 

[sydney_gws]

We are left with 36, 93, 98.
If we don't take Smith with 36, then I'm guessing we match any bid using 93,98 and carry over a deficit?

We can trade 36 for 50, F2 with Geelong, match Smith with 50,93.
Probably much better than that.
36 for 62, Richmond's f2 with North.

 

[Andre the Giant]

Definitively saying 'bolter' and 'slider' is difficult because ultimately no media outlet knows what a clubs rankings board is, let alone all 18, we'll never really know if every other club had him in a similar range or if no other club saw him as a National Draft selection, but I'd say he would've been 50/50 to get to our next pick personally given his traits are well suited to the modern game, and he's got flexibility to play multiple roles.

I think there's too much focus on 'but we could've gotten better value' when our recruitment team has shown pretty consistently that 'value' isn't a priority when we really want someone draft wise

You know I love you but I respectfully disagree on the last point re value.

Whilst we no doubt have to operate with different ideals because a lot of these entitled brats want the AFL trimmings without compromise we still need to be cognisant of value because ultimately that will still enable us to maximise our hand or hands.

For the team to basically operate in a cocoon and seemingly be incongruent to what happens around them we ultimately overpay for players which potentially costs us either now or in the future.

Caruso has made some very good calls and he has also had some bite him in the bum. Sometimes when you get a bad result and get a 2 and done player like Bruhn it can really affect your psychology and sometimes that can exaggerate perceived fear.

I also think he’s still haunted by not taking Butters (who was his favourite) the year we took another early departure in Caldwell based on consensus ranking.

From the people I know in the space they say GWS is definitely a hard sell to kids, not because of the club or the fact it’s Sydney, it’s mainly the fact there is little or no support. When it comes to highly feted kids who carry on like rock stars in their private schools that is a big come down.

That said, I remember when Josh Kelly arrived nearly everybody predicted him leaving in 2 years. Everyone had doubts if Coniglio or in fact any WA guys could be retained, now this hysteria is on the SA kids.

Ultimately you have to back your program and coaches and try to convince them. The Manager’s do instruct them to put some doubt in during interviews if not keen, but let’s face it most 17yo kids fear the unknown.

I actually think our retention is pretty good and we lost so many players more for the set up of having so much competing talent and so many clubs in VIC (especially) picking them off.

I’m not for a second saying we shouldn’t have picked these kids as by the sound they are prototype Kingsley players, but last year we took Gothard very early when we could have easily moved a little further back and got some assets.

This year with the 3rd pick which Caruso himself admitted was early we could have been quite stealthy and done the deal and then move back if we really coveted him.

It’s a bit arrogant to just ignore a system which is designed around strategy. If next year we had Pick 5 and Caruso finds a 180cms smokey defensively minded small that runs both ways, then trade with a desperate club and bank picks.

Also, what happens if we lose a player and there is 1st round compensation? Isn’t it better to position our 1st pick as high as possible to give us a better outcome and greater flexibility?

We have a great list and a great coach so things are still very positive but we have to keep thinking down the road and with Tassie coming soon early selections are not to be sneezed at.

I think we blew a big opportunity.

 

[captainMyCaptain]

 

[Tom14]

We can trade 36 for 50, F2 with Geelong, match Smith with 50,93.

Can I interest you in the following for just pick 36? Lions list management team did their job too well - won't be able to use 8 of these picks lol.

 

[Mors]

Can I interest you in the following for just pick 36? Lions list management team did their job too well - won't be able to use 8 of these picks lol.

View attachment 2171401

Even if we wanted them we can't use them. Not enough list spots

 

[dlanod]

Can I interest you in the following for just pick 36? Lions list management team did their job too well - won't be able to use 8 of these picks lol.

View attachment 2171401

With those you can pick up all seven remaining Smiths in the draft, plus Johnston-Smith and even Goldsmith!

 

[Tom14]

Even if we wanted them we can't use them. Not enough list spots

Yeah don't think anyone will be able to use them for that reason. Pretty funny really.

 

[Tom14]

Historically we've had similar responses on our board over a "reach" or two but inevitably word comes out from teams picking in the next five or so picks that they'd have been looking at said player too. Bailey and Starcevich both come to mind.

Lohmann too. Reckon there was an article the next day about how he was going in the first couple of picks of the second round.

 

[dlanod]

Lohmann too. Reckon there was an article the next day about how he was going in the first couple of picks of the second round.

Thanks, I knew there was a more recent one but I got fixated on recalling the uproar of Tunstill not having a highlights package on Youtube and couldn't get my brain to engage further.

 

[Mors]

Angove in the West Australian

https://archive.md/6dFON

 

[PMBangers]

You know I love you but I respectfully disagree on the last point re value.

Whilst we no doubt have to operate with different ideals because a lot of these entitled brats want the AFL trimmings without compromise we still need to be cognisant of value because ultimately that will still enable us to maximise our hand or hands.

For the team to basically operate in a cocoon and seemingly be incongruent to what happens around them we ultimately overpay for players which potentially costs us either now or in the future.

Caruso has made some very good calls and he has also had some bite him in the bum. Sometimes when you get a bad result and get a 2 and done player like Bruhn it can really affect your psychology and sometimes that can exaggerate perceived fear.

I also think he’s still haunted by not taking Butters (who was his favourite) the year we took another early departure in Caldwell based on consensus ranking.

From the people I know in the space they say GWS is definitely a hard sell to kids, not because of the club or the fact it’s Sydney, it’s mainly the fact there is little or no support. When it comes to highly feted kids who carry on like rock stars in their private schools that is a big come down.

That said, I remember when Josh Kelly arrived nearly everybody predicted him leaving in 2 years. Everyone had doubts if Coniglio or in fact any WA guys could be retained, now this hysteria is on the SA kids.

Ultimately you have to back your program and coaches and try to convince them. The Manager’s do instruct them to put some doubt in during interviews if not keen, but let’s face it most 17yo kids fear the unknown.

I actually think our retention is pretty good and we lost so many players more for the set up of having so much competing talent and so many clubs in VIC (especially) picking them off.

I’m not for a second saying we shouldn’t have picked these kids as by the sound they are prototype Kingsley players, but last year we took Gothard very early when we could have easily moved a little further back and got some assets.

This year with the 3rd pick which Caruso himself admitted was early we could have been quite stealthy and done the deal and then move back if we really coveted him.

It’s a bit arrogant to just ignore a system which is designed around strategy. If next year we had Pick 5 and Caruso finds a 180cms smokey defensively minded small that runs both ways, then trade with a desperate club and bank picks.

Also, what happens if we lose a player and there is 1st round compensation? Isn’t it better to position our 1st pick as high as possible to give us a better outcome and greater flexibility?

We have a great list and a great coach so things are still very positive but we have to keep thinking down the road and with Tassie coming soon early selections are not to be sneezed at.

I think we blew a big opportunity.

I see it as just a balance of risk and reward when trying to maxmise value from a draft perspective, and we seem to lean towards the low risk side of that, which is just what I prefer. I've been involved at two clubs (admittedly in a not so influential capacity) and have seen the consequences of trying to maximise value biting them in the ass because they thought 'we'll get him lower'.

If we're operating with a smaller pool than other clubs, which we've admitted in the past we are, then we're ultimately going to be over paying on occasion in the eyes of others but using Angove as an example, if he's our 12th best player available and after that is our 20th, I'd rather just lock in the higher rated player rather than sick around trying to give ourselves a better hand in the future. I think the introduction of trading picks 2 years in advanced will be of advantage to us as well, gives us more flexibility in moving up if we get to next year and realise there's someone up high we really want, and likewise it'll make trading down easier

 

[sydney_gws]

Can I interest you in the following for just pick 36? Lions list management team did their job too well - won't be able to use 8 of these picks lol.

View attachment 2171401

I think GWS trade 36 for the best f2 we can get, and about pick 50 or so.
Maybe with the Bombers.
I recommend brisbane offering 46,47,49 to North for Richmond's F2.