Analysis 2017 List Management Discussion

[HARKER]

Yeah I have been paying attention and building a list is not just names on a piece of paper.

You need to be a club that makes players feel welcome and required and not just chucked out because of their date of birth. You want to attract good players but if you are chucking out your long serving captain who is still performing at a very high level because he may not be around in 4 years time for a potential draft pick then I think that is bad management.

No one should be chucked out simply because of their birth date. That would be somewhat obvious.

You do have to play the list to advantage, as we found to be the case with Tuohy last year.
Tuohy wanted to stay, but he got himself extra money, a longer contract than we may have given and all considered he seems to be pretty happy right now.
Who would want that outcome reversed now? Not Tuohy, nor the GFC, nor Marchbank or the CFC.

The only thing that's clouding our minds for now, is that we're talking about a club captain. Anything else, or is that enough?
Would the captaincy from underneath be that far inferior that we shouldn't even think about it?
Would the list be worse off, leading into a what seems to be a great period for us without the players we're talking about and with the ones we are?

We shouldn't be afraid of change and to manufacture a smooth transition for all concerned to bring us up the ladder quicker and for longer, should the right situation come about or to be manufactured.

 

[sosos]

No one is afraid of change. But it would need to be a monstrous deal benefiting Carlton so far and above what it is literally worth for them to even consider it.

 

[HARKER]

No one is afraid of change. But it would need to be a monstrous deal benefiting Carlton so far and above what it is literally worth for them to even consider it.

But we're not talking about deals when it comes to some names.
We've simply stone-walled any notion of it, for not particularly good reasons and in some cases for no reason at all.

We may be able to do that here, but I'd be very disappointed in the CFC should they do the same. That would not serve our primary interest; The Club.

 

[No1Suspect]

Depending on final positions, I wonder if Saints would trade their 2018 1st round pick and ~#9 for our #2/3 this year.

We use Saints 2018 1st for Hopper while maintaining 2x top 10 picks. If the Saints fancy their prospects next year and we like someone in that range, could be beneficial for both clubs.

If Kelly re-signs id be more than happy to do something like this and id be keep bryce. Whether the aints bite is another thing... if they dont land anyone with their supposedly fort knox sized war chest i can actually see them going backwards next year.. could be a smart move...

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

No offense intended but if you think the pies would willingly trade Pendlebury or even consider willingly trading him then you are completely delusional my friend
Sometimes there are times when you just dont go there even in football ....

So how are the pies travelling?
They have made a few howlers over recent years.. What the pies are doing or not doing has no bearing on whether they're clever or not

 

[Stamos]

The only thing that's clouding our minds for now, is that we're talking about a club captain. Anything else, or is that enough?
Would the captaincy from underneath be that far inferior that we shouldn't even think about it?
Would the list be worse off, leading into a what seems to be a great period for us without the players we're talking about and with the ones we are?

We shouldn't be afraid of change and to manufacture a smooth transition for all concerned to bring us up the ladder quicker and for longer, should the right situation come about or to be manufactured.

I don't think it's the captaincy, and I don't think it's clouding people's minds.
Tuohy was a very different story, because although he had currency, he was replaceable (very much in the Henderson/Yarran/Menzel/Bell category), and he didn't effect the senior core.

After the massive (and brilliant) list changes over the last 2 off-seasons, we are left with only 4 senior players who have currency, and it sounds quite likely that 2 may depart. A 3rd would really set us back, and not in go back to go forward manner.

I think people are hugely underestimating how much the development of the younger players is fast-tracked and strengthened by the fact that they are playing in a competitive team, that is having some great wins. Take Murphy (or Gibbs) out of our team this year, and we're 0-11, instead of 4-7, we would have had some much worse losses, and the narrative of the club would be very different.

Wether or not Murphy is still playing when we are in Premiership mode (and I certainly think he can be), I think we get there faster with him in the team, captain or not. I see him in a different category to Riewoldt, who I think is paper over the cracks at St Kilda.

 

[FoeverBlues]

I don't think it's the captaincy, and I don't think it's clouding people's minds.
Tuohy was a very different story, because although he had currency, he was replaceable (very much in the Henderson/Yarran/Menzel/Bell category), and he didn't effect the senior core.

After the massive (and brilliant) list changes over the last 2 off-seasons, we are left with only 4 senior players who have currency, and it sounds quite likely that 2 may depart. A 3rd would really set us back, and not in go back to go forward manner.

I think people are hugely underestimating how much the development of the younger players is fast-tracked and strengthened by the fact that they are playing in a competitive team, that is having some great wins. Take Murphy (or Gibbs) out of our team this year, and we're 0-11, instead of 4-7, we would have had some much worse losses, and the narrative of the club would be very different.

Wether or not Murphy is still playing when we are in Premiership mode (and I certainly think he can be), I think we get there faster with him in the team, captain or not. I see him in a different category to Riewoldt, who I think is paper over the cracks at St Kilda.

Great write up.

Trade players who want out or short term replaceble, keep Murphys and Kruezers who bled Blues and the pillars of our future.

0-11 make it harder for players, boards and coaches to beleive and buy into Bolt coaching methods.

 

[blueboy25]

I think people are hugely underestimating how much the development of the younger players is fast-tracked and strengthened by the fact that they are playing in a competitive team, that is having some great wins. Take Murphy (or Gibbs) out of our team this year, and we're 0-11, instead of 4-7, we would have had some much worse losses, and the narrative of the club would be very different.

Exactly and it seems we are more than likely to lose Gibbs, so you chuck in Murphy as well and it leaves our weak midfield looking a lot weaker. We may chuck in a hopper or a Kelly but lets see how they go without the strong midfield support that GWS have.

If SOS is the list and trade guru that most think he should be able to get the right deals done without chucking out our captain.

 

[RoyalParade]

Talk of Murphy and kruezer being traded is ludicrous....unless they request a trade.

The Gibbs talk is realistic as he may still be looking to be traded. Should get Adelaide's first pick plus a 2nd/3rd round selection. IF he wants to stay...fantastic, he adds a lot to the group.

The Casboult talk is realistic because his manager has said he will test the waters. Depending on the offer we could be compensated an early 3rd round selection.

Leaves us with a lot of options to offer for Kelly and/or hopper. Remembering we can't give up future picks due to forecast very strong draft.

Spot on drake.

 

[FoeverBlues]

We are not going to be defined by our hits or misses after our next trade period.

We as a club wont get too high on Kelley and Hooper for Gibbs and 2018 first or wont get too low on Gibbs for Hooper trade

 

[HARKER]

I think people are hugely underestimating how much the development of the younger players is fast-tracked and strengthened by the fact that they are playing in a competitive team, that is having some great wins. Take Murphy (or Gibbs) out of our team this year, and we're 0-11, instead of 4-7, we would have had some much worse losses, and the narrative of the club would be very different.

Wether or not Murphy is still playing when we are in Premiership mode (and I certainly think he can be), I think we get there faster with him in the team, captain or not. I see him in a different category to Riewoldt, who I think is paper over the cracks at St Kilda.

No, we wouldn't be.
We wouldn't have been 1 or 2 men down as these type statements seem to suggest and even so, we're not talking about this year but next year.

SOS will do the best he can for us, as that's his job and if it means letting go of Buckley, or trading to advantage.......that's what he must do.

 

[Stamos]

No, we wouldn't be.
We wouldn't have been 1 or 2 men down as these type statements seem to suggest and even so, we're not talking about this year but next year.

I think we would have been. Our wins have been by 15, 23, 19 and 1 point. Our senior guns have been vital in those wins, and I was talking about this season. While I would prefer to keep Gibbs, I am much, much more comfortable with him leaving at the end of this year rather than last year. It would still hurt in the short term for a hopeful long term gain.
But losing both he and Murphy? That would be Full Melbourne Madness.

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

We are not going to be defined by our hits or misses after our next trade period.

We as a club wont get too high on Kelley and Hooper for Gibbs and 2018 first or wont get too low on Gibbs for Hooper trade

Tally up how many games Murphy and Gibbs have in them
Gibbs will play more but across half back for most of those
So is that what were strategically after?
Then work out what Kelly and hopper have potentially in them
Let's talk probability not possibility ok?
Then think what will you get with a pick 3 or 4 in this draft?

Again probability over possibility
On the balance of all this you'd run with the deal and you wouldn't look back
People keep harping on about Murphy and "leadership" it's almost an oxymoron
How many times does Murphy look at passing on the responsibility of taking a shot to somebody else instead of taking it upon himself?

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

The fact that on the surface it seems like we're paying too much is the beauty in this deal
It's pure genius!....
Murphy isn't the family pet.. He's a professional footballer!
We're not putting him down.. Were enhancing our future and moving into a brave new world

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

Yeah I have been paying attention and building a list is not just names on a piece of paper.

You need to be a club that makes players feel welcome and required and not just chucked out because of their date of birth. You want to attract good players but if you are chucking out your long serving captain who is still performing at a very high level because he may not be around in 4 years time for a potential draft pick then I think that is bad management.

You need a ruthless approach to rebuilding a list from mediocre to great
If that means blokes get dropped and play reserves or they're traded it's what you do
Players understand the score
On top of that players get consideration with terms and contracts and trading and drafting is part of the whole thing

 

[RudyBlue]

Anyone got any idea what a Hawthorn favour could look like? Doesn't look like Breust, Gunston or Rioli will be moved on.

Could it be as simple as Hawthorn's 2018 2nd for some later picks this year? 39 and 57?

Trade Gibbs for Adelaide's 1st this year and they upgrade our 2018 3rd to their 2018 2nd.

We could swap our 2018 2nd and Hawthorn's 2018 2nd with Richmond for one of their 1st rounders this year. Or we swap both these 2018 2nds for someone like Sydney's 2018 1st. I think the latter is more likely.

Say we can get both Kelly and Hopper. We send our 2017 1st, Adelaide's 2017 1st and Sydney's 2018 1st to GWS for Kelly and Hopper.

Out: Gibbs, 2017 (1st, 3rd and 4th), 2018 (2nd and 3rd)
In: Kelly, Hopper, Adelaide 2018 2nd

Cas compo can get us back into the 3rd round this year. We retain our 2018 1st rnd pick which we can trade back into the 2017 1st round with, or keep for next year.

 

[gab213]

Judging by everything we hear from the club itself players like Murphy and Kreuzer are very much part of the fabric of the club. They are clearly held up as examples to the other players and are valued in their mentoring roles as much as their on-field roles. Not to mention that they have been our best performed players this year.

Listen to Bolton speak of them and listen to what the younger players have to say about them and I doubt very much the club would ever initiate moving them on. You can't keep putting these guys up as examples of the type of people you want all your players to be and then suddenly get rid of them.

Losing these types of people around the club won't catapult us forward, it would instead have the possibility of undermining everything we are trying to build IMO.

 

[gab213]

You need a ruthless approach to rebuilding a list from mediocre to great
If that means blokes get dropped and play reserves or they're traded it's what you do
Players understand the score
On top of that players get consideration with terms and contracts and trading and drafting is part of the whole thing

How many years did Melbourne's ruthless approach set them back?

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

I don't think it's the captaincy, and I don't think it's clouding people's minds.
Tuohy was a very different story, because although he had currency, he was replaceable (very much in the Henderson/Yarran/Menzel/Bell category), and he didn't effect the senior core.

After the massive (and brilliant) list changes over the last 2 off-seasons, we are left with only 4 senior players who have currency, and it sounds quite likely that 2 may depart. A 3rd would really set us back, and not in go back to go forward manner.

I think people are hugely underestimating how much the development of the younger players is fast-tracked and strengthened by the fact that they are playing in a competitive team, that is having some great wins. Take Murphy (or Gibbs) out of our team this year, and we're 0-11, instead of 4-7, we would have had some much worse losses, and the narrative of the club would be very different.

Wether or not Murphy is still playing when we are in Premiership mode (and I certainly think he can be), I think we get there faster with him in the team, captain or not. I see him in a different category to Riewoldt, who I think is paper over the cracks at St Kilda.

There really is no basis of fact for comments such as these. Its over the top nonsense.

 

[Stamos]

There really is no basis of fact for comments such as these. Its over the top nonsense.

Have you watched our wins? Close games, all of them, with Murphy and Gibbs starring.

 

[DangerousD]

How many years did Melbourne's ruthless approach set them back?

Have you never heard the saying, if at first you don't succeed, dust yourself off and try again or get back on the horse? Just because something doesn't work once doesn't mean it won't work ever or that it's the right way to go about things.

 

[gab213]

Have you never heard the saying, if at first you don't succeed, dust yourself off and try again or get back on the horse? Just because something doesn't work once doesn't mean it won't work ever or that it's the right way to go about things.

I've also heard of learning from mistakes.

 

[F_therest]

Laugh all you want. He's a genuine goal kicking mid, he's a better midfielder than any mid on North's list (including the two who were top ten picks) by every measurable statistic. If you go through past drafts he is better than 75% of the midfielders taken in the top 10. He is also contracted so our hands are not forced, again he is worth a top ten pick.

He's no Dangerfield, but Gibbs is horribly underrated in the footy world.

He'd probably be 'above average' in almost every statistic except maybe speed...great skills, wins contested ball, damaging on the outside & kicks goals.
He is almost the complete package.

Constantly puts up impressive numbers in a team that's done crap over the last 5 years...we all know that playing in a good team makes a player look better since they have more opportunities to receive easy ball and wrack up the numbers...but to do it in a losing team shows you are a gun. Same goes for players like Murphy & Zorko.

 

[Blue__Balls]

How many times does Murphy look at passing on the responsibility of taking a shot to somebody else instead of taking it upon himself?

You need to let this go mate. I'm in the "We could cover the loss of Murphy if we had to" camp, but this statement is completely irrelevant.

Murphy has kicked some ripping goals in recent years. Snaps from the pocket, quick kicks out of congestion etc. If he's passing more often, it will be because we're trying to bring our young forwards into the game as much as possible for their development. Murphy looking in-board for a Silvagni, Curnow, SPS or Cuningham is a sign of quality leadership in a young side. Those guys know that their skipper will honour a lead if he can and trust in them to deliver.

Again - if Murphy decided he wanted to leave for any reason, I believe we could find a way to take advantage of it. But I don't think we should or would proactively try to move him on. He's in peak form and is evidently doing great work off the field too.

 

[Pafloyul]

How many years did Melbourne's ruthless approach set them back?

How much did our soft approach in addition to the Judd trade set us back? People are fine for us to trade two first round draft picks but any talk of trading an aging captain and suddenly the club is going to be set back. I don't care what happened to Melbourne, I haven't looked into it, but I'm sure the circumstances and details were different enough not too apply to us. As for what I think, any thoughts of giving up next year's first rounder reminds me of our arrogance back in 2001 in which we publicly declared that we did things our way at Carlton and that we didn't need to have a strong participation in what was meant to be a good draft. Karma came a year later.