List Mgmt. 2015 Trade/Free Agency

Remove this Banner Ad

Experimental said:
I kinda put it this way. We were a house build by a shoddy ameteur builder who patched over the structural issues to make the house aesthetically pleasing to the naked eye. That builder was sacked and a professional with years of building experience was hired. The new builder has realised what looked great from the outside is structurally defective and needs huge changes for the house to stand the test of time.

Those who use the house didn't realise the extent of the poor craftsmanship, and the new builder hasn't specifically stated that the building is on the verge of collapsing, but the entire refurbishment is going on from top to bottom. However, the builder's apprentices are useless and he can't do it by himself, so it's going to take a while for the building to be structurally sound for years to come.

Unfortunately, there are some house dwellers who want the old builder back and seem to be content with the building falling down in a few years, rather than standing sound for their kids to use in several years time.

If you like.
Click to expand...

So Guy McKenna was in charge of list management? It's all his fault?

Being an Eagles fan we love McKenna and thought he was hard done by, you would have made finals last year if Ablett did get injured.

Looks like the change of coach and the way it was done has shaken the playing group. Injuries don't help and the Suns have copped a few this season.

It would have been very interesting to see if McKenna was still coaching how the team would have started 2015.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

as of round 5, this is currently how our list breakdown (plus gws & hawks for comparison) stands:

first number is age, second number is number of players on list at that age, last number is total games played for that age group.

gold coast

18 2 wright, garlett (4)
19 2 miller, kk (26)
20 9 leslie, ellis (R), martin, lonergan, lemmens, sumner*, saad (R), herbert (R), cameron (84)
21 5 boston, glenn (R), o'meara, sexton, schade (79)
22 8 swallow, lynch, prestia, bennell, day, hallahan, tape, gorringe (419)
23 6 mckenzie, matera, nicholls, shaw, russell, may (340)
24 3 thompson, hall, dixon (155)
25 3 brooksby (R), hall, smith (63)
26 2 downie (R), harbrow (150)
27 1 stanley (80)
28 1 broughton (R) (107)
29 2 raines (R), rischa (305)
30 2 malceski, ablett (450)

total experience: 2262
* goneskies

gws

18 4 ahern, mckenna, pickett, marchbank (0)
19 3 barrett, steele, finlayson (0)
20 5 corr, whitfield, plowman, williams, kelly, mccarthy (116)
21 10 smith, patton, townsend, tomlinson, sumner, hoskin-elliot, greene, buntine, coniglio, stewart (343)
22 13 haynes, kennedy, schulz (R), lamb, wilson, lobb, shiel, treloar, hampton, cameron, bugg, golds, downie (408)
23 2 scully, phillips (101)
24 1 davis (68)
25 1 ward (125)
26 2 mohr, palmer (143)
27 1 addison (93)
28 2 mumford, griffen (327)
29 1 shaw (195)
30 1 patfull (186)

total experience: 2132

hawks

18 3 langford (R), pittonet, miles (0)
19 6 wilsmore, webster, tatupu (R), howe, miller-lewis (R), hardisty (R) (0)
20 3 heatherley (R), sicily, hartung (10)
21 6 woodward, hill, anderson, o'brien, brand, o'rourke (79)
22 2 langford, litherland (37)
23 2 sheils, gunston (186)
24 5 schoenmakers, breust, grimley (R), ceglar, duryea (243)
25 3 mcevoy, rioli, whitecross (331)
26 4 suckling, frawley, smith, stratton (408)
27 3 simpkin, puopolo, birchall (325)
28 2 roughead, spangher (262)
29 1 lewis (221)
30 2 hale, hodge (473)
31 1 gibson (168)
32 2 mitchell, burgoyne (537)
33 1 lake (233)

total experience: 3513

used hawks as an example as they've been top of the competition for the last however many years. they've been able to spread out experience throughout their list quite nicely. even if say lake and burgoyne retire, they can still make up the experience elsewhere. only real concern might be the lack of games for the under 20's, however at the rate they're tracking they have the ability to wait until they're 20/21 before playing them occasionally.

it's interesting to compare gws to us in terms of age/experience. overall, we're still ahead on total experience. obviously last weekend we had a number of experienced players out, and according to footywire our average games played compared to gws's was 54.2 to 70.8. gws played all around us, yet a fair percentage of their team out on the park was still within the 21-22 age group. this is their "first year" age group, made up of players they drafted either through the draft or as 17 year old selections, and they've still got 23 of them. on the other hand, since we entered the league a year earlier, our "first year" age group is 22-23, yet we've only got 14 left. i'm not really sure what's going on with gws's rookie list, as it seems they've only got 1, but if you disregard our rookie listed players that are a bit older, the top half of both our lists are quite similar in terms of players & experience.

my calculations might be out by a couple digits or whatever. but looking at this, gws have been able to add 1 or 2 high caliber, experienced players over the past couple years that have made an immediate impact (shaw, patfull, griffen, mumford), whereas we've gone after short term such as tom murphy, mcqualter, warnock. broughton has been our only solid recruit (not from the draft) over the past few years (too early to judge malceski).

i don't want anyone who's coming up to finish their career on the gold coast, looking for that one last big paycheck. we need to go after players who will stick around, play regular footy, and actually contribute to our team. clayton's strategy of trading to stretch the age of our list by trading for draft picks isn't a viable option for a new club like ourselves. we need success early to exist. i say put clayton's strategy on the bench this offseason, and go hard after some quality free agents/trade targets.
 
exile said:
as of round 5, this is currently how our list breakdown (plus gws & hawks for comparison) stands:

first number is age, second number is number of players on list at that age, last number is total games played for that age group.

gold coast

18 2 wright, garlett (4)
19 2 miller, kk (26)
20 9 leslie, ellis (R), martin, lonergan, lemmens, sumner*, saad (R), herbert (R), cameron (84)
21 5 boston, glenn (R), o'meara, sexton, schade (79)
22 8 swallow, lynch, prestia, bennell, day, hallahan, tape, gorringe (419)
23 6 mckenzie, matera, nicholls, shaw, russell, may (340)
24 3 thompson, hall, dixon (155)
25 3 brooksby (R), hall, smith (63)
26 2 downie (R), harbrow (150)
27 1 stanley (80)
28 1 broughton (R) (107)
29 2 raines (R), rischa (305)
30 2 malceski, ablett (450)

total experience: 2262
* goneskies

gws

18 4 ahern, mckenna, pickett, marchbank (0)
19 3 barrett, steele, finlayson (0)
20 5 corr, whitfield, plowman, williams, kelly, mccarthy (116)
21 10 smith, patton, townsend, tomlinson, sumner, hoskin-elliot, greene, buntine, coniglio, stewart (343)
22 13 haynes, kennedy, schulz (R), lamb, wilson, lobb, shiel, treloar, hampton, cameron, bugg, golds, downie (408)
23 2 scully, phillips (101)
24 1 davis (68)
25 1 ward (125)
26 2 mohr, palmer (143)
27 1 addison (93)
28 2 mumford, griffen (327)
29 1 shaw (195)
30 1 patfull (186)

total experience: 2132

hawks

18 3 langford (R), pittonet, miles (0)
19 6 wilsmore, webster, tatupu (R), howe, miller-lewis (R), hardisty (R) (0)
20 3 heatherley (R), sicily, hartung (10)
21 6 woodward, hill, anderson, o'brien, brand, o'rourke (79)
22 2 langford, litherland (37)
23 2 sheils, gunston (186)
24 5 schoenmakers, breust, grimley (R), ceglar, duryea (243)
25 3 mcevoy, rioli, whitecross (331)
26 4 suckling, frawley, smith, stratton (408)
27 3 simpkin, puopolo, birchall (325)
28 2 roughead, spangher (262)
29 1 lewis (221)
30 2 hale, hodge (473)
31 1 gibson (168)
32 2 mitchell, burgoyne (537)
33 1 lake (233)

total experience: 3513

used hawks as an example as they've been top of the competition for the last however many years. they've been able to spread out experience throughout their list quite nicely. even if say lake and burgoyne retire, they can still make up the experience elsewhere. only real concern might be the lack of games for the under 20's, however at the rate they're tracking they have the ability to wait until they're 20/21 before playing them occasionally.

it's interesting to compare gws to us in terms of age/experience. overall, we're still ahead on total experience. obviously last weekend we had a number of experienced players out, and according to footywire our average games played compared to gws's was 54.2 to 70.8. gws played all around us, yet a fair percentage of their team out on the park was still within the 21-22 age group. this is their "first year" age group, made up of players they drafted either through the draft or as 17 year old selections, and they've still got 23 of them. on the other hand, since we entered the league a year earlier, our "first year" age group is 22-23, yet we've only got 14 left. i'm not really sure what's going on with gws's rookie list, as it seems they've only got 1, but if you disregard our rookie listed players that are a bit older, the top half of both our lists are quite similar in terms of players & experience.

my calculations might be out by a couple digits or whatever. but looking at this, gws have been able to add 1 or 2 high caliber, experienced players over the past couple years that have made an immediate impact (shaw, patfull, griffen, mumford), whereas we've gone after short term such as tom murphy, mcqualter, warnock. broughton has been our only solid recruit (not from the draft) over the past few years (too early to judge malceski).

i don't want anyone who's coming up to finish their career on the gold coast, looking for that one last big paycheck. we need to go after players who will stick around, play regular footy, and actually contribute to our team. clayton's strategy of trading to stretch the age of our list by trading for draft picks isn't a viable option for a new club like ourselves. we need success early to exist. i say put clayton's strategy on the bench this offseason, and go hard after some quality free agents/trade targets.
Click to expand...
Anyone would think GWS had 48 on their senior list compared to our 38....
 
Ben Drever said:
Suns lack depth.. Being tested. Made drafting mistakes

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl.../story-e6frf3e3-1227326590499?from=public_rss
Click to expand...

Riley Beveridge - give yourself an uppercut. That article was laughable for the lack of understanding of the players you choose to single out. Henry Schade 'durable' and 'question marks over his 'disposal', Jack Leslie 'initially drafted as a ruck'... Clayton said on draft night they wanted to mould him into a defender, focusing on Daniel Gorringe's lack of hit outs when he was playing forward/wing... fox sports find a sports reporter who actually does some research before they put out that inaccurate garbage.
 
OB11 said:
Riley Beveridge - give yourself an uppercut. That article was laughable for the lack of understanding of the players you choose to single out. Henry Schade 'durable' and 'question marks over his 'disposal', Jack Leslie 'initially drafted as a ruck'... Clayton said on draft night they wanted to mould him into a defender, focusing on Daniel Gorringe's lack of hit outs when he was playing forward/wing... fox sports find a sports reporter who actually does some research before they put out that inaccurate garbage.
Click to expand...

Schadey might struggle on a few things on the footy field, but as you will all see this weekend, disposal is not one of them. Beautiful kick!
 
I am curious where Riley Beveridge resides and how many games he has actually seen Schade play in the reserves. Ironically Schade's strength is his decision making and his foot skills. Also Riley I suppose you are aware that Schade has probably the best non preferred kick at the club.

The cynic in me thinks Riley does very little of his own research and just makes comments to justify his position as a AFL journalist. If every journalist was as informed as Gerard Whately then his comments might carry more weight.

I wait in anticipation as to the next gem of an article Riley Beveridge writes.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

So...
Say we want to upgrade Saad and Glenn.
And you must take minimum 3 players from the Draft.
A. We must upgrade them because you can only have 1 nominated rookie and that is Broughton.
So without injuries Glenn and Saad wouldn't be able to play seniors.
Plus. At the end of the year clubs will be circling!!
So since T.Sumner has already quit. Realistically we need minimum 4 senior delistings..
So Hard to pick. Must remember 2 Of the draftees this year will be first rounders.

You'd be thinking
J.Hall
Tape
A.Hall you think wouldn't get a run in our midfield..
And with Matera and Martin Garlett and Touk. We're not needing another small/med forward
Luke Russell? Anyone see him kicking out any1 in our midfield? Or as I stated above.. The half forwards?
And I think maybe it's best to maybe move on 1 of either Smith or Nicholls.

No point having 2 average ruckman clogging our list..
Pick 1 and run with it.
Having plenty of 2M KPP should help us if anything was to happen and with Brooksby on the Rookie list if need be.
That would leave us 1 open spot to trade someone in.

Be an interesting first trading/drafting year with Eade at the helm.
 
Last edited:
Don't forget that upgrading Glenn and Saad count as draft picks, so really we could just use our 2 first rounders and upgrade those 2 and that would be our 4 picks. Or even trade our 2 firsts for a higher pick (depending on where we finish) and still get 3 quality players.

Also, is our list normal size? I always get confused with our and GWS's list sizes.
 
Corkie said:
For me I can see it going a lil but like this.


Out:

Sumner
Gorringe
A.Hall
J.Hall
C.Cameron
S.Tape

All of the above are out of contract & can't see them getting offered an extension.


Upgrade:

Saad
Glenn
+ 3 draft
+ 1 player traded in

6 out, 6 in.
Click to expand...


Agree with all of the above plus I would look to get out another 2 players and possibly trade in another player or use our 3rd round draft pick (45-50) to bring in more young players.

Another player to potentially not offer another contract to is Boston, I like him but if he isn't fair dinkum then would rather move on with a young bloke who is.

Players that may have some trade value at end of year that are under contract:

  • Smith or Nicholls (whoever is not #1 ruck at end of the year - based on Hickey's trade value could net us a low 1st round/ early 2nd round pick)
  • Day (should be worth a 2nd round pick)
  • Russell (don't know if he has any value but if we can move him somewhere while under contract to free up a spot that would be valuable in itself)
Upgrading Saad and Glenn would open up another 2 rookie spots which hopefully Clayton can be just as successful with.
 
Ben Drever said:
I wouldn't mind finding a few more rookie Gems like Saad and Glenn if you don't mind, Mr Scotty Clayton.
Click to expand...

I think a certain Mr Bigun and myself were calling for this 2 or 3 years ago
Certainly the vast majority of outstanding footballers will be outstanding at 17 or 18yoa, but there's a decent chunk of guys that won't come on until their 20's or didn't fit the current recruitment mould at that age
If you pick the Sandover medallist on your list next year you'll get a damn sight more out of him than a dozen Luke Russells guaranteed
 

Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. 2015 Trade/Free Agency

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top