List Mgmt. 2022 List Management and trading thread

[Scorpus]

I saw this format on the West Coast board and thought it might help understand our current list position

 

[Redline]

Huh? No Michalanney?

We better still be taking two picks to the draft. Using our three minimum picks as two rookie upgrades and a sole pick in the 20’s is a terrible move, in my book, when we’re still in a position where we need to keep finding talent

Yeah, I wrote it poorly. They didn't say we wouldn't go to the draft just that we were not pursuing Michaelaney as a father/son and outside Rankine were not going to be trading anyone in

 

[MRB37]

No issue at all getting rankine. Should be a wonderful player for us for the next decade. It would be nice to draft one of the top end mids and get one of the talls in. I quite liked what i saw of michalanney too. So if we grab rankine and thats it, it looks like a missed opportunity to add further talent whilst retaining some players that look like they wont make it

You can't do it all though, you're not getting Rankine and drafting a top end mid unless you dip into next years picks and then you're taking others off the table.

 

[WeedsMullet84]

(Posted on the Jack Bowes

12

Jack Bowes

Age

26

Ht

189cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

D/M

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.3

4star

K

9.7

4star

HB

6.6

4star

M

3.9

4star

T

2.5

4star

MG

318.1

4star

D

18.0

4star

K

11.8

5star

HB

6.3

4star

M

5.4

5star

T

1.1

2star

MG

318.1

4star

D

11.6

3star

K

6.4

3star

HB

5.2

4star

M

2.8

3star

T

2.4

4star

thread, chatting to a Geelong poster)

Who does he get a game ahead of? You’re stacked in the midfield and wing.

Ultimately if he’s looking to be part of a successful playing group, but one where he’s happy to experience significant competition for playing time, Geelong might be his best option.

If he’s looking for guaranteed midfield minutes then Geelong is the last place he should go.

If he’s looking to maximise his earning potential after his guaranteed $1.6m is paid, or when a longer contract is reconstructed, then he will need to agree to be part of Geelongs famously lauded ‘structured’ team salary arrangement, and potentially accept less than ‘market’ value. Victorian supporters/media may not be aware that similar payment structures exist at other interstate clubs, it just media like to portray these as PaYiNg UnDeRs when speaking about these clubs.

Jack Bowes

12

Jack Bowes

Age

26

Ht

189cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

D/M

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.3

4star

K

9.7

4star

HB

6.6

4star

M

3.9

4star

T

2.5

4star

MG

318.1

4star

D

18.0

4star

K

11.8

5star

HB

6.3

4star

M

5.4

5star

T

1.1

2star

MG

318.1

4star

D

11.6

3star

K

6.4

3star

HB

5.2

4star

M

2.8

3star

T

2.4

4star

needs to be super wary of going to a club that simply wants him on the list for the Pick 7 that’s being dangled along side of him. Geelong supporters making out like he’s going to be some crucial cog in the midfield going forward are being disingenuous at best.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[MRB37]

Turning down Michalanney is a bit disappointing though. If he develops into a good player, we are going to have to justify keeping dead wood rather than paying them out and creating a list spot.

I don't think it's down to list spots, we could make the room if we saw him as a priority. The fact we may not be means that we either won't have a pick where he's projecting to go and/or we don't see the value in moving what we need to do to get into that position.

Only time will tell on whether that's a good move or not. Hamish is hit and miss enough that I can't say either way if I'd agree with that potential assessment or not.

 

[Crow till I die]

You can't do it all though, you're not getting Rankine and drafting a top end mid unless you dip into next years picks and then you're taking others off the table.

Thats where a big play for jack bowes would have helped

 

[crow2crow]

Thats where a big play for jack bowes would have helped

they still want something back its not 7 and bowes for free in terms of picks/players

also they are only dangling the pick 7 to take it off the table in us asking it back if we gave them pick 5

 

[Eagleboy2011]

According to SEN
It's Rankine and that's it.
No Michaelaney
We want to keep our picks for next year, possibly get even more if we can but clubs are reluctant to part with future picks.

I had a sense watching C7 news the other night we may keep Borlase on the list.

 

[Danger in Texas]

So what picks are we looking likely to use? Our 2nd and a very late pick, I guess?

 

[crow2crow]

So what picks are we looking likely to use? Our 2nd and a very late pick, I guess?

surely then we try to trade up to get keeler with our second pick

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

According to SEN
It's Rankine and that's it.
No Michaelaney
We want to keep our picks for next year, possibly get even more if we can but clubs are reluctant to part with future picks.

We don’t need to trade in future pick to draft Michalaney

 

[Danger in Texas]

We don’t need to trade in future pick to draft Michalaney

Don’t we currently have 5, 23 and then a pick in the 70s?

 

[Danger in Texas]

surely then we try to trade up to get keeler with our second pick

Actually, if we grab GC’s 2nd, both Keeler and a classy wing/mid/half back could well be possible

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Don’t we currently have 5, 23 and then a pick in the 70s?

We’re trying to trade out players, we won’t need a lot match and it shouldn’t be hard to get a late pick from gc

 

[rabidcrow]

Phew, thought it was a credible rumour but it's only Rendell

All signs point to us not calling his name. The club hasn’t mentioned him at all that I have seen in recent media, no talk of him nominating us and list spots are just not available. This isn’t surprising


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Crow_68]

I'm not sure why this is surprising to people. Lots of people spent years praying for Rankine and we finally got him and the response is "that's all?". I can understand people being a bit impatient or whatever cause we've sucked for a few years now, but there's some clear signs on what they're trying to do and it involves both bringing in more top end youth and hitting for slightly older players to add to the 22 who'll hopefully be able to give us 8-10+ years service.

It's a difficult balancing act to maintain, but with the huge list turnover in the past 2 years the numbers being moved on every year was bound to slow down eventually and the targets become more specific and less speculative through the pure numbers you're bringing in.

We also need to be careful that we are not caught short trying to replace too many players in next year’s trade/draft.

If we assume it’s just Brown, Frampton, Rowe and Davis out the door this year, then for various reasons, we could be having to replace the likes of Seedsman, Tex, Sloane, McPherson, McAsey, Crouch and Hately at the end of 2023.

Relying on a bunch of late picks to replace these list spots is a risky strategy when we could add another one or two this year.

 

[Scorpus]

Yeah, I wrote it poorly. They didn't say we wouldn't go to the draft just that we were not pursuing Michaelaney as a father/son and outside Rankine were not going to be trading anyone in

So from our draft discount players we're going to end up taking Ben Jarman, Jackson Edwards, Borlase and Newchurch but pass on Luke Edwards and Michalanney?

Only our recruiting team would do something like that...

 

[LeftyLuke]

Any interest in Narkle? Didn’t we want him a while back? Probably proven he’s not quite up to it?

We should go after Narkle if gettable.

 

[LeftyLuke]

I had a sense watching C7 news the other night we may keep Borlase on the list.

We may have to as depth. Our key back stocks are thin.

 

[I Lost My Keays]

I’ll be absolutely annoyed if we don’t pick up Michalenney as it’s essentially a free hit.

Get rid of some of the deadwood such as Davis, McPherson, Crouch , Rowe and Turner.

 

[I Lost My Keays]

We should go after Narkle if gettable.

I’d try and get him. He’d add some class in the forwardline

Rankine - TT - Fog
Narkle- Walker - Rachele

 

[Gtowncrow]

We should go after Narkle if gettable.

Delisted today.
We could pick him up as a DFA so no draft capital needed.

I've seen most of his games and he's not a bad player and might sit in the 15-22 range on our current list. This might get lower as our kids mature. I don't see much upside from him as Geelong would have given him every opportunity to fully develop.

Geelong let him go because some of their kids have passed him with one or two more waiting for their chance.

I say pass on Narkle for us but I hope he finds a club.

 

[Sanders]

We should go after Narkle if gettable.

Sweet Jesus no

 

[AFC979810]

I’d try and get him. He’d add some class in the forwardline

Rankine - TT - Fog
Narkle- Walker - Rachele

You want to recruit a 25 year old delisted midfielder who has averaged .4 goals a game over his 5 year career and put him in the forward line?

 

[Thetrader15]

So from our draft discount players we're going to end up taking Ben Jarman, Jackson Edwards, Borlase and Newchurch but pass on Luke Edwards and Michalanney?

Only our recruiting team would do something like that...

Because Luke Edwards has been tearing it up for WC!

All the others were passed by every other club multiple times and taken as rookies. Tells you all you need to know.

I'd be open to nominating Michalanney and taking him as a rookie seeing as we should have plenty of rookie spots.

 

[Crowked]

We won't be making the 8 next year - but the core of the team which will get us there (probably in 2025) is already on our list. They just need time to develop.

Yeh.

****ing hell it’s going to be a long decade.

Our list will get us no where near a premiership.