-
LIVE: GWS Giants v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Lions at 65% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 3 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Analysis 2019 List Management Discussion
- Thread starter The Smoking Gun
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
I agree we need to start thinking about it. Always worries me when clubs trade away picks repeatedly to bring in talent. Has the potential to create a hole.
I don't mind seeing this and next years firsts walk out the door for the right players. I welcome it.
It's just that we're now seeing that we don't have to throw the baby..........
We've complied a lot of quality over the past 4 years and may be ready to give those players more say in matters than for us simply to pile on 4 to 5 players of that magical 22-26 age profile.
Last 4 years - Weitering, Mckay, CCurnow, Cuningham, SPS, Fisher, Dow, O'Brien, Walsh & Stocker.
And then players taken from those drafts and now playing for us - Kennedy & Setterfield.
That makes for 11 1st rounders taken in 4 years (Fisher is the outlier in that group) and 11 players that one can argue, form our starting 22 squad.
11 1st rounders in 4 years. No other team would come close to this and we'd need to go back to the formative GWS & GC, just to get close.
If we have the opportunity to sell those picks for players that make us immediately better, then do it.
We still have scope to look for diamonds in the rough later, rather than to just take on more senior bodies...because they happen to be senior.
- Apr 20, 2006
- 9,513
- 12,819
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Unless you are trading multiple picks for one player you should be less likely to
Yep no argument here.
One thing I will say not reaely on topic is that the "first rounder" myth bugs me.
Once a player is traded, his worth/value is the picks that he was traded for. Kennedy did not cost a first round pick (neither did Setters), so when the media says "Carlton has 15 top 10 picks" or whatever nonsense that is, that's just silly. Lang was also a first round pick, but we traded peanuts for him.
Similarly, if we get Papley aka "Papsmear" this year by trading pick 10 or 11, his worth is high, despite being drafted in the rookie list.
#endrant
P.s. to be clear, nothing against you. Just bugs me when the media use the number of players we have playing for us originally drafted in early rounds to call us shit. We didn't draft them you muppets! Everyone gets 1 first round pick per year. If you have more first rounders on your list, it's because you traded for them.
Just for a thought experiment forgot what our list age profile is right now.
In an ideal world for every season you follow what is the distribution of players from each age you would like to see on the list each season to be a perpetual premiership contender?
For example it is a week before round one each season. Ideally how many 18 years olds are on list to have yourself invested in future seasons well in advance ?
How many 19 year olds ?
How many 20 year olds ? etc etc... all the way up to age 32 ???
Curious as to what the average supporter of my own club thinks in this regards, or if they think about it at all.
In an ideal world for every season you follow what is the distribution of players from each age you would like to see on the list each season to be a perpetual premiership contender?
For example it is a week before round one each season. Ideally how many 18 years olds are on list to have yourself invested in future seasons well in advance ?
How many 19 year olds ?
How many 20 year olds ? etc etc... all the way up to age 32 ???
Curious as to what the average supporter of my own club thinks in this regards, or if they think about it at all.
Great question.
1. Starting Point
Well that seems easy! If you're contending, don't you want all players in their prime? 8 players 24, 8 players 25, 8 players 26, 8 players 27, 8 players 28. Boom, that right there is 40 players, all in that 24-28 bracket.
2. Salary Cap
But then again, each player's contracts are likely to balloon if they're all in their prime years at once. The key would be to find some salary-cap friendly contracts by having youths that perform well (like Walsh) and veterans who have taken a pay cut but still contribute for their role (hopefully Daisy and Simpson)
When you're contending, I'd still say it's better to have the core of the best 26ish players in that age range, with 2 youngsters and 2 vets. The rest should be a mix of cheap players who can fill gaps for injuries (i.e. Phillips/Lobbe) or youngsters with high upside, who can develop on the list long term (i.e. TDK, Lebois). Although of course, these wouldn't pan out.
3. Run in Waves
Finally, I think it's stronger to do it in waves. At the end of the day, it's unlikely you'll perpetually contend in an era of equalisation and AFL shenanigans. If you build something special like Geelong's core have, just keep doing hwat you can to keep adding talent around that core.
Well the cost of having all in their prime is your list is only existing for the now which I think is unrealistic and means no planning for future.
I personally believe players from age 23 to 30 is the prime of their careers on average. Before 23 probably still working on a few things in development and playing consistently. After 30 just in general more wear and tear for veteran footballers.
But I do no think you need 40 players in the prime years age bracket each season. I would have thought the average premiership team uses around 32 to 34 players in a premiership season. 40 is overkill. Plus if you got 8 players all in same birth year, chances are if they are all aged 26, 27 or 28, you salary cap will be in strife if you got eight 26 year olds, eight 27 year olds and eight 28 year olds as an example. Four years down the track where would that list likely be?
My question is about how would you have list set up to be equally able to be a premiership contender each season and what is the age distribution of such an ideal list.
Thanks for answering though as interesting how extreme you would go in the prime years age bracket.
I actually agree with you lol. My answer was built in 3 stages. Just showing how I approached the question to reach the conclusion.
My conclusion was: "When you're contending, I'd still say it's better to have the core of the best 26ish players in that age range, with 2 youngsters and 2 vets. The rest should be a mix of cheap players who can fill gaps for injuries (i.e. Phillips/Lobbe) or youngsters with high upside, who can develop on the list long term (i.e. TDK, Lebois). Although of course, these wouldn't pan out. "
I.e. - best 26 players should be 22 players in the 24-28 range. 2 30+ yr olds. 2 18-20 yr olds.
The rest should be mix of cheap vets or young prospects.
I also challenged myself to answer it too as the exact question only gave to myself about ten minutes before posting to hear other thoughts.
At the moment I got a number for each age from 18 to 32 and as an example I got from age 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 and 29, four players for each of those ages on the list. I got less for the other age groups and the least of just one 32 year old and age 31 and 18 the only ages with just two players in the age year.
Isn't Cuningham out of contract this year? I don't recall anything about him signing an extension.
It might be out of our hands as to whether or not we trade him. Maybe Cunners for Papley will end up being the trade. Obviously with a draft pick or 2 on top
edit: I just looked it up and yeah he is out of contract. A young guy not re-signing this late in the season isn't normally a positive sign that he'll stick around.
It might be out of our hands as to whether or not we trade him. Maybe Cunners for Papley will end up being the trade. Obviously with a draft pick or 2 on top
edit: I just looked it up and yeah he is out of contract. A young guy not re-signing this late in the season isn't normally a positive sign that he'll stick around.
Cuningham and Silvagni will probably sign new contracts around similar time.
Pretty sure Cuningham was quite a late signing last time as well. Be interesting to know whether it's club or player related.
- Apr 20, 2006
- 9,513
- 12,819
- AFL Club
- Carlton
He done it last time too so it may just be his agent which is fair enough. A couple of good games at the backend of the year and he might be worth an extra $50k.
Great question:
I would say the core group should be in the 23-27 age range, the rest of the numbers should be based on talent/performance for spots, no matter the age of that player. Then continue to embrace the draft (best available) and creative trading (needs/bang for your buck, aka Newman)
If we are chasing good senior players (no doubt that we are) then perhaps we might not want to sign guys up too early for salary cap management purposes.
I would think that we would want to keep Cuningham but you just never know, clubs might be chasing him and perhaps he gets squeezed out. If this starts to happen it might spell an early end for some of our older players which would be a shame.
No doubts player managers want to see their clients play some good footy then sign up, Cuningham hasn't done that and is struggling to get out there but there is time.
Questions whether Papley is worth our first pick, I think he is. He's a good player and he's contracted so we should expect to play top price. I think being a young high quality player who is already developed, he is genuinely worth a really good pick. The number of our pick could change a few things though. If Adelaide drop right off and it ends up being a really high pick that means we can probably get something else out of Sydney, fringe player or later pick or perhaps a picks swap in our favor. If Adelaide surge up the ladder then the possibility that we add something to the trade becomes very real.
I wouldn't mind if we traded most of our picks really, just depends who we can get. I think though, it is important to keep a first round pick for next year, at some point in time we are going to have to land a top end centerman.
I would think that we would want to keep Cuningham but you just never know, clubs might be chasing him and perhaps he gets squeezed out. If this starts to happen it might spell an early end for some of our older players which would be a shame.
No doubts player managers want to see their clients play some good footy then sign up, Cuningham hasn't done that and is struggling to get out there but there is time.
Questions whether Papley is worth our first pick, I think he is. He's a good player and he's contracted so we should expect to play top price. I think being a young high quality player who is already developed, he is genuinely worth a really good pick. The number of our pick could change a few things though. If Adelaide drop right off and it ends up being a really high pick that means we can probably get something else out of Sydney, fringe player or later pick or perhaps a picks swap in our favor. If Adelaide surge up the ladder then the possibility that we add something to the trade becomes very real.
I wouldn't mind if we traded most of our picks really, just depends who we can get. I think though, it is important to keep a first round pick for next year, at some point in time we are going to have to land a top end centerman.
I agree with you on O'Brien and our ruck stocks, for me it should be our number 1 priority
But I wouldn't call Papley a big standard player
- Aug 22, 2014
- 13,831
- 50,252
- AFL Club
- Carlton
I think it's less about chasing players in that age group for the sake of "experience", but more being a bit more targeted with filling areas of need.
The core of the list - KPP's and midfielders - should all be hitting their straps in the next year or two. So if we have niche roles that need to be filled from a team balance perspective, we should be looking to bring in guys with exposed form who will be able to contribute for 5+ years.
Need a small forward? Don't grab an 18yo, don't grab a 30yo, find someone in the 22-26yo range who is a known quantity but with plenty of time on their side.
Need a second ruckman? Ditto.
Need a small defender? Ditto.
Need some outside pace? Ditto.
If we do that in the next one or two off-seasons, then the next few drafts can be about building depth behind those slightly older blokes and developing it so it's ready to step up as the others decline.
This
If he gets another year he has to play forward IMO.
Defence needs to start settling for the future and playing together and as a group. Absolutely vital for our future
Why does it have to be one or the other.
Criteria should be fill a role, fill age profile, quality person and improve our list.
It's not either/or. It's both.
We have gaps on our list that we need to fill. The players capable of filling these gaps will generally have experience.
But we won't be bringing in experienced players for the sake of their experience.
Which is exactly what I claimed.
Let's use all our resources to target premium players and not worry so much about topping up with more 22-26 year olds thereafter, just for age profile.
We're done with that process for now, as the class of '15 and '16 are now senior players. They don't require further babying and the groups drafted in '17 & '18 look to be quite capable of holding their own.
After we've utilised our main picks for targeted players and reeled in a FA or maybe 2, there's no need to keep seeking experience for players that don't make for starting best 22. i.e. No more Mullet's, Shaw's, Fasolo's, O'Sheas, Smedts, Langs, Palmers, Gorringes etc simply because they have experience.
I now don't mind should we take some youth that have time or their side to make good.
i.e. Release Agresta to make good for players that don't cost, nor simply fit into an age profile.
cfc4life
Cancelled
- Sep 16, 2007
- 3,409
- 4,641
- AFL Club
- Carlton
You've got a real vendetta against Mitch.
- Status
Similar threads
