List Mgmt. 2016 Draft, Trading and Free Agency Thread

[Clems Knee]

GWS can **** off and die

Thanks for the link.
I don't think GWS are going away, so that's a wasted emotion Lach.

I also think it's a reasonable article. From what the article says, I don't think Jarrod Brander will be eligible for the academy. His parents have a home in Victoria which they live in a fair bit, and he has been going to school in Geelong for the whole of high school (not just the last two years).

Based on how Fremantle were denied Category B indigenous players for their academy, there is no way that GWS should keep him. At least Brander's family had a choice to educate him in NSW or Victoria. The schools in the Kimberley are not comparable.

I actually think Marshall had a better claim to being in the Giants academy than this fellow, and the AFL denied him. Will be surprised and disappointed if they are allowed to.

 

[tonygeeks]

I would add some pros and cons to your two choices, and add a third choice.
My additions in bold in your quote above.

The third choice is:
Plan for a bounce and sustained success. Fix the preseason problems, and improve gameplay next year to increase the number of wins. Have our stars back on the park. But turn over at least a third of our list in two years to bring in faster or smarter (but not older) players through the draft and careful trading.
Lose half of the foot soldiers this year along with the players who didn't show enough to press for games, and the other half next year, and replace them with players traded in over two years such as McCarthy, Hill, a ruckman, another defender, and players picked up in the draft.
This works because the foot soldiers provide valuable experience and mature bodies and a couple are needed in the team for wins, but too many and we become easy prey.

Advantages: Most of the Pros of both of your choices and avoids most of the cons.

Get what your saying but there's a lot of teams trying to do exactly that , not sure the 50c each way method is doable
Oh and when I said ex superstars I meant ex after we trade them


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Scham]

Plays off the back, not really forward. He's back in town.
He's a good kick I saw in his draft year.
Tank not sure. #1 in agility test at combine and high on kicking too.

Was compared to Byron Pickett in his draft year IIRC. But I seem to remember there were a few knocks on him too but can't remember what they were. Could've been his tank.

But tbh, if he couldn't get a game at Carlton with their list quality, it's concerning.

 

[free at last]

Another option is to buck the trend. Let Lyon do his thing and continue with cluster ball. All teams are moving to open play, small whippets that can run forever. Continue to build beasts and smash the opposition into submission. Play to your strengths.

A game plan aimed at matching it with GWS will be handy...

 

[rgauci]

Was compared to Byron Pickett in his draft year IIRC. But I seem to remember there were a few knocks on him too but can't remember what they were. Could've been his tank.

But tbh, if he couldn't get a game at Carlton with their list quality, it's concerning.

Personally I don't think he's suited to the modern game. Short, no tank, too physical.

 

[Taylor]

It doesn't matter how talented you are if the game is at the other end of the field.

 

[Clems Knee]

Get what your saying but there's a lot of teams trying to do exactly that , not sure the 50c each way method is doable
Oh and when I said ex superstars I meant ex after we trade them


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Option 1 -quick top up
Option 2 - long rebuild
Option 3 - bounce back and sustain success

Adelaide (3)- didn't bottom out, traded in a few forwards, and backed their draft.
Brisbane (2)- going the long rebuild route. No thanks.
Carlton (2)- went the long rebuild route, but multiple pick no. 1s haven't helped yet.
Collingwood (3) - not really working, but club had a problem with culture that they had to address.
Essendon (drug cheats) - their option is not advisable.
Geelong (3) - didn't bottom out. Great trade period and good drafting.
Gold Coast - need to decide. Go the long rebuild or try to supplement their academy picks with imported stars and role players?
GWS - don't have to think about this for a while.
Hawthorn (1) - they just keep topping up with good trades, but drafting has been poor. Helps that they are the destination club.
Melbourne (2) - went the long rebuild route, but they still haven't done anything, and now they are getting a new coach.
North Melbourne (1 over last few years) - now biting them, as their older trade ins are on there way out, along with their high draft picks from years ago.
Richmond (2 then 1 last two years) - the long rebuild route never even got them a finals win, and the top ups were Sylvia quality.
Port Adelaide (2 then stalled like Richmond when they got ahead of themselves)
St. Kilda (2) - after Watters gutted the culture of the saints, they are now going for a long rebuild, but only Montagna and Riewoldt have stuck around for it. Still haven't done anything (yet).
Sydney (3) - have an advantage. Brought in stars, benefitted most from academy (then rules became fairer) traded judiciously, and are introducing young draftees successfully.
Western Bulldogs (2) but with at least three father-sons, and some great drafting.
West Coast (3 then 1 last year) some trading of young expats into the club and ok drafting gave them a surprise grand final. So they tried to top up last year and went nowhere. List needs a lot of work in the midfield.


I was hoping you didn't mean trade Fyfe for a bag of picks.

 

[meima]

Just trade walters then . After fyfe i think the most valuable asset now interm of form is sonny.

 

[Paracleet]

Another option is to buck the trend. Let Lyon do his thing and continue with cluster ball. All teams are moving to open play, small whippets that can run forever. Continue to build beasts and smash the opposition into submission. Play to your strengths.

I agree with this strongly. We shouldn't be trying to raze our list with the idea of rebuilding ourselves like Hawthorn or GWS where its just spread like lighting from back half turn overs. Our strength is inside midfield, we have two of the top eight or ten inside midfielders in the comp, including the best one. Blakely has shown signs his inside game (at least) could rise to elite levels and Mundy is still a good player. Our revised game plan should still be based on this (hence a better than decent ruckman is imperative. Teams like the two above don't need their ruckman winning clear taps, he just has to prevent the oppositions ruckman from doing so)
By all means let us add pace and footskill, but no more so than you would under any circumstance were your window had passed and you were turning the list over. I.E. When choosing between two players of approximately equal abilities, take the one that is faster or a better kick.

There are already signs that the game slowed down across the season from the frenetic opening few weeks, when we got continually smashed on the rebound, with transition (Cameron almost had a conniption when we kicked 2 goals from kick-ins in the 1st at GWS) getting harder and the number of stoppages going back up again. I think it would be folly to assume the game is going to remain open; coaches livelihoods depend on slowing it down. If you can't win, don't get smashed, it's the golden rule. God after we had broken our duck for the season we go no coverage at all as we pootled along losing games by between 3 to 5 goals. Loose to Sydney, WC, GWS and the Crows by a combined 274 points and suddenly it's 'Sack Lyon' 'Fyfe to leave' and 'Ballas garble farble warble West Coast!'.

 

[wayToGo_]

I'd be very surprised if were entertaining the idea of trading any of our young elite players. I don't disagree to be competitive we will need to get better at selling off our valuable assets but for where we are now, I think trading these guys would be a mistake.

Fyfe - the best player in the AFL and shown potential as being one of the best leaders in the league. His high discipline approach is exactly what clubs will need and what we need in our future captain.

Hill - if we let him go we are foregoing the ability to get Brad Hill at the same time. Neither is elite but both are very good in the roles they play and their classy kicking is something we need more of not less of.

Walters - Ross has indicated numerous times he is future leadership material. With Pav leaving he'll now lead our forward line. Let him go and there is no-one with any experience/leadership there.

Neale - has already become the best first possession winner in the league and will be even more important once Sandi retires. His disposal is just as good as any of those high disposal winning inside mids imo. Also leadership potential.

Bennell - we got him for a steal both for pick value and probably salary level. He's not going anywhere else.

These guys shouldn't be going anywhere because they are worth more to us than we'll get for them on the trade table. And with any luck we'll get back to being competitive because of them being at our core.

Alongside we need to be building trade value with our youngsters and be a little patient. Sheridan, Weller, Tucker, Balic and Crozier could all be worth a pretty penny in a year or two. All of these guys should be able to land us at least one 1st round draft pick. Our goal should be to increase their value as much as possible. That way we can trade out a couple and have the currency to put two more quality youngsters on the list as replacements.

List management is a lot of economics imo. If you can build value in your youngsters, whilst retaining your core then you can be competitive and continually top up your list with quality. What we probably don't want is too many stagnating depth players who hang around until they are no longer worth anything. For the most part a player should be part of the core (for competitiveness) and/or building trade value for the future.

 

[tonygeeks]

Option 1 -quick top up
Option 2 - long rebuild
Option 3 - bounce back and sustain success

Adelaide (3)- didn't bottom out, traded in a few forwards, and backed their draft.
Brisbane (2)- going the long rebuild route. No thanks.
Carlton (2)- went the long rebuild route, but multiple pick no. 1s haven't helped yet.
Collingwood (3) - not really working, but club had a problem with culture that they had to address.
Essendon (drug cheats) - their option is not advisable.
Geelong (3) - didn't bottom out. Great trade period and good drafting.
Gold Coast - need to decide. Go the long rebuild or try to supplement their academy picks with imported stars and role players?
GWS - don't have to think about this for a while.
Hawthorn (1) - they just keep topping up with good trades, but drafting has been poor. Helps that they are the destination club.
Melbourne (2) - went the long rebuild route, but they still haven't done anything, and now they are getting a new coach.
North Melbourne (1 over last few years) - now biting them, as their older trade ins are on there way out, along with their high draft picks from years ago.
Richmond (2 then 1 last two years) - the long rebuild route never even got them a finals win, and the top ups were Sylvia quality.
Port Adelaide (2 then stalled like Richmond when they got ahead of themselves)
St. Kilda (2) - after Watters gutted the culture of the saints, they are now going for a long rebuild, but only Montagna and Riewoldt have stuck around for it. Still haven't done anything (yet).
Sydney (3) - have an advantage. Brought in stars, benefitted most from academy (then rules became fairer) traded judiciously, and are introducing young draftees successfully.
Western Bulldogs (2) but with at least three father-sons, and some great drafting.
West Coast (3 then 1 last year) some trading of young expats into the club and ok drafting gave them a surprise grand final. So they tried to top up last year and went nowhere. List needs a lot of work in the midfield.


I was hoping you didn't mean trade Fyfe for a bag of picks.

Nice work you've nailed them I'd say but the lack of outright success by the 2's could be affected by the compromised drafting of the last 6 yrs


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Alfonz]

I reckon the long/full rebuild is something to avoid at all costs. As that list above shows, the likes of Melbourne, Saints, Carlton, Brisbane ... stuff being like that. Yet people act like we need to languish at the bottom for years, turf out all our good older players, and collect draft picks like they are magic beans.

I'm quite bullish on our list going into 2017. I think we can definitely make the finals. Maybe not contend, but we should be aiming for a return to the top in a few years, with our youngsters having a few more years and finals experience under their belt. I don't think we have to do anything crazy. And I don't think bringing in a young KPF like McCarthy is a "quick top up".

 

[Purpletown]

Ross is talking the long game approach but Freo will obviously pull the trigger towards a faster build up IF in the next two to three years 1. Players on the list develop better than expected 2. We draft some very good players who get up to AFL standard reasonably quickly 3. We manage to improve areas of weakness like key forwards, key backs and ruckmen 4. We manage to trade in some players who add plenty to the team. The situation needs to be reviewed and tweaked as the rebuild or what ever it's called progresses rather than be set in stone now.

My opinion is that we should back ourselves to do well in all the above fields while holding onto all our best players who are 25 or younger. The coach is locked in for the rebuild and the cream of the playing group are a vital part of any long term plans, why trade out your best assets for unknown draftees who may or may not develop into decent players?

As others have mentioned earlier in this thread the brave new world of free wheeling gung ho footy has come to a screaming halt because coaches don't like getting into shoot outs that may cost them games.

No team is going to match GW$ or GC for sheer talent in the foreseeable future so negating type players who can blunt the talent advantage those sides have will still have a place going forward imo.

 

[nurries]

I reckon the long/full rebuild is something to avoid at all costs. As that list above shows, the likes of Melbourne, Saints, Carlton, Brisbane ... stuff being like that. Yet people act like we need to languish at the bottom for years, turf out all our good older players, and collect draft picks like they are magic beans.

I'm quite bullish on our list going into 2017. I think we can definitely make the finals. Maybe not contend, but we should be aiming for a return to the top in a few years, with our youngsters having a few more years and finals experience under their belt. I don't think we have to do anything crazy. And I don't think bringing in a young KPF like McCarthy is a "quick top up".

Geelong showed you can bring in 4-5 players (Elites such as Danger helps!!) and contend pretty quickly. They basically just refreshed the top agers on their list apart from a few and replaced with players around their mid 20's in their prime. We don't have the core list Geelong has but I think 2-3 years re-building if done right should have us contending around the 4th year

 

[theGav56]

Nice work you've nailed them I'd say but the lack of outright success by the 2's could be affected by the compromised drafting of the last 6 yrs

Are we out of the compromised draft situation? Now we have Academies, and we have situation where the GCS and GWS are able to continually cycle into the first round, including into future years. I expect that within the next 5 years we will not see any draft where those clubs do not have access to a highly rated Academy player or 2, and also have access to multiple first round picks.

On another note, with this year and next years drafts being touted as being deep, it is a perfect time rebuild. Young players are also entering the AFL with a greater capacity to have an early impact, and while this is normally not Lyon's style clearly he has shifted his thinking given the situation the club is in.

 

[PapaJ]

Are we out of the compromised draft situation? Now we have Academies, and we have situation where the GCS and GWS are able to continually cycle into the first round, including into future years. I expect that within the next 5 years we will not see any draft where those clubs do not have access to a highly rated Academy player or 2, and also have access to multiple first round picks.

On another note, with this year and next years drafts being touted as being deep, it is a perfect time rebuild. Young players are also entering the AFL with a greater capacity to have an early impact, and while this is normally not Lyon's style clearly he has shifted his thinking given the situation the club is in.

I don't think we're entirely out of it, and wont be for some time, but compared to what it has been in the past 4-6 years, it's completely different. They will have a few years of recycling top picks as other teams raid them a bit, but it wont be anything like what it has been - the draft becomes a notably easier place to find those gems now.

 

[theGav56]

I think we didn't do as well as we could during the pre-season and in our player development/fitness areas this last season. It needs to be a priority (and I am sure it will be). With the new assistants who came in perhaps there was a bit of lack of clarity about where the team was going, and what the fitness requirements were. This all tracks back to Lyon in the end. I am hoping and expecting greater clarity for players such as Weller, Crozier and Tucker. Potentially we will have a pretty inexperienced defence and attack, and that can be helped by better preparing those groups and for clarity about what individuals need to be doing.

Any of SPS/Brodie/McGrath/etc if drafted could expect game time, but they are going to have minimal impact in their first seasons.

 

[blue shark]

I reckon the long/full rebuild is something to avoid at all costs. As that list above shows, the likes of Melbourne, Saints, Carlton, Brisbane ... stuff being like that. Yet people act like we need to languish at the bottom for years, turf out all our good older players, and collect draft picks like they are magic beans.

I'm quite bullish on our list going into 2017. I think we can definitely make the finals. Maybe not contend, but we should be aiming for a return to the top in a few years, with our youngsters having a few more years and finals experience under their belt. I don't think we have to do anything crazy. And I don't think bringing in a young KPF like McCarthy is a "quick top up".

The club has already stated we are a destination club, I take that as we will have 2-3 players already in the system
wanting in.
I don't mind this as long as we keep a top ten pick, its been too long since we have had one, and we still keep an
eye on the future.
Pretty hard to judge a team like Freo with so many injuries to best 22, all I can say is that the 2017 version could
arguably have our best forward line in history.

 

[Mr Fonebone]

The Egirls have a desperate need for a ruck or two.

Do you think we could gouge a 2nd rounder out of them for Griffen or Hannath?

One can only try.

 

[BigWardy12]

No, they don't have to drop it by that much. They have to shed 120K off their cap this year. It will still be $640K above the regular cap. The big shift in the TPP cap will be from 2019 when they will be at the same level as everybody else, though I read not that long ago that GWS are trying to extend that period out.

You might be referring to the replacement of COLA with the 'rent subsidy' thing. But even with that, GWS are being handled a bit differently from what I remember. They wont have to shed cap space as such, it just means they can't add the 10% 'bonus' to any signings from 2017 on.

Yeah cheers I did read the article wrong. What it said was they will be about 600K over if they didn't make changes. It was an article from 6 months ago though so they would have made a few adjustments. Offloading McCarthy and Marchbank will help sort that out.

 

[theGav56]

A game plan aimed at matching it with GWS will be handy...

That is an arms race mentality that we are always going to lose given the access they have to high end talent. We need to counter the opposition with a more strategic response.

 

[theGav56]

Yeah cheers I did read the article wrong. What it said was they will be about 600K over if they didn't make changes. It was an article from 6 months ago though so they would have made a few adjustments. Offloading McCarthy and Marchbank will help sort that out.

Those would be two of the lowest paid on their list though, even with McCarthy having extended (I can't imagine the extension would have been on big dollars).

 

[BigWardy12]

The Egirls have a desperate need for a ruck or two.

Do you think we could gouge a 2nd rounder out of them for Griffen or Hannath?

One can only try.

If I were them, on the last day of trading and didn't end up with Lobb, I would go as high as a 3rd rounder for Griffin.

 

[go_the_dockers]

The Egirls have a desperate need for a ruck or two.

Do you think we could gouge a 2nd rounder out of them for Griffen or Hannath?

One can only try.

Giving them Hannath and making them play him as there main ruck would be fun enough. Making them pay for him would just be mean, although they did give pick 19 for Redden, and Sinclair for Jetta

 

[MadDocker]

Clarke to WCE giving us a health compo pick. Would laugh myself into a coma.