List Mgmt. 2022 List Management and Trading Thread - Part 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Updated list position

1669782556976.png

And 2024 as it stands

1669783458008-png.1564958
 
Last edited:
He's re-signed with Glenelg now, so I'd say he had contingency plans in place.
Any AFL player who's in limbo during Oct/Nov period would have those plans lined up

Still feels like he was expecting more of an opportunity at AFL level, nonetheless
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The entire AFL industry thought that Crouch would be traded.

That’s not true. Where did that come from???

  • No one wanted him for free the year before
  • We contracted him and he continued to decline
  • we offered him around (who knows how we might have offered to sweeten the pot) and no takers

How does that get spun into the whole industry expected him to be traded.

And besides why take him mid year on a 6th month deal, if it was dependent on end of year list moves. That doesn’t even make sense
 
So what's that? Maybe 60 people who follow the SANFL?

Its an absolute, complete irrelevance.
That's why Nicks, Kelly, even Silvers kept bringing up the success of the SANFL side at every opportunity.
 
Of course it makes a difference.

If someone traded for Crouch, we had a list spot and a need.

Now we don't. It's just common sense.

That makes no sense common or otherwise.

If true - it’s plainly not - why take him mid year on a 1/2 year deal - for something happening end of year

The timeline of your narrative doesn’t work
 
Doesn't explain why he was still training with us earlier this week, though
Probably working through what we wanted to do with the Seedsman LTI spot.

Can't imagine we now think retaining another mature bodies mid is the best use of it.

I don't understand why we're getting so outraged about this? The guy signed a six month contract, it didn't get extended.

If we made some promises to him, that's probably a bit rough. But I don't think clubs do that. You constantly hear draftees say they're not given promises.
 
Last edited:
Probably working through what we wanted to do with the Seedsman LTI spot.

Can't imagine we now think retaining another mature bodies mid is the best use of it.

I don't understand why we're getting so outraged about this? The guy signed a six month contract, it didn't get extended.

If we made some promises to him, that's probably a bit rough. But I don't think clubs do that. You constantly heat draftees say they're not given promises.
You thinking a ruckman for the LTI spot created or key back?

what happened to highmore? was he re-rookied or in limbo?
 
You thinking a ruckman for the LTI spot created or key back?

what happened to highmore? was he re-rookied or in limbo?
We need another key position player, even moreso if McAsey quits.

We have enough ruck coverage, but we are thin for key position depth.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

That makes no sense common or otherwise.

If true - it’s plainly not - why take him mid year on a 1/2 year deal - for something happening end of year

The timeline of your narrative doesn’t work

Of course it does.

Are you actually arguing that you think we drafted Turner to win a reserves flag?

If you are, say it.

I'm saying we drafted Turner on a six month deal instead of Carmichael on 18 months because we wanted flexibility. Our intention was always to hold him for another year, but circumstances changed. That's why we wanted flexibility.
 
That's why Nicks, Kelly, even Silvers kept bringing up the success of the SANFL side at every opportunity.
Because the juniors were playing well. It was a good sign for the future.

It's still the reserves team.

Richmond probably talked up the success of their VFL team, except I wouldn't know because I don't care that much about their reserves comp.
 
Of course it does.

Are you actually arguing that you think we drafted Turner to win a reserves flag?

If you are, say it.

I'm saying we drafted Turner on a six month deal instead of Carmichael on 18 months because we wanted flexibility. Our intention was always to hold him for another year, but circumstances changed. That's why we wanted flexibility.

I don’t think any circumstances changed.

And yes, I do think weakening Glenelg and boosting our chances played a part. As bush league as that would be, yes, I think it was a factor
 
I don’t think any circumstances changed.

And yes, I do think weakening Glenelg and boosting our chances played a part. As bush league as that would be, yes, I think it was a factor
Okay.

I don't think we would ever draft to try and win a reserves flag. I don't think any AFL team would, even Port (as much as we've claimed that in the past).

If folks want to believe that, go ahead. It just doesn't stack up to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top