List Mgmt. 2022 List Management: Draft, Trade and FA

[Joao]

You're overrating draft picks (late teens draft picks). We have drafted better than anyone since 2016. We can't fit first/high second round draft picks into the side and we have one of the 6-youngest lists in the competition (the others except for Sydney are mostly basket cases facing years of rebuilding). If we don't recruit Jackson now there won't be a similar opportunity for years. Rankine, along with all the other players on wish lists on these boards, was/is never coming to Fremantle.

Jackson being the only talent available isn't a good reason to trade for him. I don't think he fits based on his ordinary forward craft and the fact that the rest of our lines function great most of the time. We had 69 inside 50s on the weekend and took 6 marks i50.
History is littered with super athelitic guys that never fully come on. I don't know why everything thinks he is a sure thing.

Our forward line is ****. The 12th best this year (100 pts behind the next worst in the 8, the pies who have Mihocek and nobody else playing KPF) and only just ahead of 13th, the Bombers who are only 2 points behind for the season. It's head in the sand stuff to think that anybody on our list (outside of Amiss and possibly Sturt with his finger out) is changing that.

It's also not true to say you can't find quality forwards or mid/forwards with teen picks or less. Off the top of my head.
Butters
Bailey
Hayward
Bolton (pick ~28)
Pickett
Fogarty
Fritsch (~30)

You underrate draft picks. Literally ~99% of players are drafted and a good portion of those don't come from the top 10. You take two top 18 picks that a forwards and there is a good chance at least one becomes a quality player.

I know I am backing our drafting over our recruiting (using first rounders) 10/10. I don't understand why you would change a recruiting strategy that we all agree has been working amazingly (only trading using later picks). We get draft picks every year. Keep using them and if we have too many good players we can do what GWS does and palm them off for more first rounders so we never have to bottom out.

 

[pK75]

Logue - I think this will all come down to where he sees himself in our lineup. Obviously money talks too, but he seems a loyal type of bloke, team orientated etc. If our club has said we see you as excess to our preferred back 7 but someone we wish to develop as a forward then he may grasp that opportunity on less pay. He also fits straight in should we have an injury to a tall back 7 player. BUT if he feels he's a defensive first player and a club has come with a cheque book and promise to bolster their back 7, then that may be hard to not accept.

I find him very hard to place in our line up. He's not best back 7 if everyone fits. I personally don't view him as a forward, although he's been impressive so far in that unknown role. So in a silly sort of way he's not best 22 despite demanding it... yes I know, that doesn't make sense.

I think he's the best insurance player of probably all clubs.

In all seriousness if Taberner, Lobb and Fyfe were all genuinely fit to play as forwards, Logue is the one getting dropped.

Anyway, I actually hope he signs. He's been very reliable this year. If he goes, It won't bother me that it means Amiss and Treacy get more looks.

If some talls in our backline get injured, and Logue has left, well that will suck.

Spot on post, the problem we have with Logue is as soon as we decided to play Chapman as the 3rd tall who can also play on mid/small forwards there was no room for Logue. If all our forwards are fit there’s no room there for him either. His best attribute this year has been his versatility which we’ve exploited by playing his as a defensive forward and more recently a forward/ruck. He is quite honestly the best 23rd player in the league but that doesn’t guarantee him a starting position every week or the pay check that goes with it.
For me the answer is to move him back to the backline and move Chapman up the ground. I’d like to see Chapman on a wing in acres spot, but not sure he has the endurance to do that yet, his passing into the forward line is always superb.

 

[Superkoops]

Think Belly an J-Lo could lay out to Logue that Chapman has midfield/wing on his horizon and if defence is his preferred area the role will be there for him.
Same with the forward line, Lobb/Tabs/Fyfe are old, leaving or injured and a spot could be his if he wants to make it his.

Honestly not worried with Logue, he has everything he needs here, the management team are not idiots and will clearly see the value of Logue and pay him what he is worth. If he's been given the godfather offer for long term contract elsewhere, well then there is nothing we can do about it anyway.

Acres is the one player i'd be okay with getting 'squeezed' out from the Jackson trade. Henry/Johnson/Worner waiting in the wings to step into his position. Looks like the role of our wingers are straight forward roles that don't require much footy 'smarts'. Just a lot of gut running and mentality to keep your width and get deep into attack and defence. Think the club see's this and are not going to budge on paying Acres top dollar for 1/3 good seasons witht he 1 being in his final year.

Good call. I’d rather keep Acres and we should offer 2 years instead of one. But if he is squeezed out as you say due to chasing big name like Jackson and a forward then so be it.

What I’m seeing in the WAFL is a player, Liam Henry who has put in a good development year and may well push Acres out to a different role. The way I see it is NOD and Henry as long term wingers. Obviously need depth and seems Tucker is a good chance to be gone and as such Acres who can play other roles like half forward is worth at the right price hanging onto.

I think the club will see the value and come good with a better offer. If the delay has seen Col Young go chase a better offer then I can deal with this.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

I don't necessarily disagree. I suppose I was arguing that draft picks - especially double-digit draft picks - are overrated at our stage of development, i.e, six years of largely nailing drafts. My other point is that trading is opportunity-based - we'd all love to add Fogarty, Pickett and Rankine to our list but that ain't happening. So we settle for bringing in a high first round draft pick who has performed to that level and is about to feature in his second big dance.

Yeah, I agree, it’s just something I’ve said before “draft picks are overrated” but in reflection, isn’t really correct.

I do think we are saved in the Jackson trade by the fact we are a good team now. While it’s dumb, what you give up is pretty reliant on what you have and two teens picks for Jackson is a good result. I know we’d be absolutely pissed on getting pick 15 and 15 for Serong

 

[Purple Jesus]

- Tom Hird

vfl.aflmstats.com

If his name was Tom Smith would you want him?

Maybe he's a late bloomer?

 

[Taylor]

Luke Jackson

9

Luke Jackson

Age

22

Ht

199cm

Wt

102kg

Pos.

F/R

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.3

2star

K

3.3

1star

HB

5.0

4star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

3star

G

0.3

3star

D

8.3

2star

K

3.3

1star

HB

5.0

3star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

2star

G

0.3

3star

D

8.3

3star

K

3.3

2star

HB

5.0

4star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

3star

G

0.3

3star

was pick #3. Would you trade your pick #15 and #15 for pick number #3? Yes of course you would, and maybe you'd get an AFL player out of it. You'd expect to but Paddy Dow

15

Paddy Dow

Age

24

Ht

184cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.1

4star

K

7.0

3star

HB

7.1

4star

M

2.1

2star

T

2.9

4star

CL

2.6

4star

D

7.0

1star

K

4.0

1star

HB

3.0

2star

M

3.0

3star

T

2.0

3star

CL

0.0

1star

D

12.4

4star

K

5.8

3star

HB

6.6

4star

M

1.6

2star

T

2.8

5star

CL

2.6

5star

was also pick #3.

Now if you have pick #3 would you trade it for pick #15 and #16? Hell no. You'd tell them to headbutt the wall.

 

[Joao]

Luke Jackson was pick #3. Would you trade your pick #15 and #15 for pick number #3? Yes of course you would, and maybe you'd get an AFL player out of it. You'd expect to but Paddy Dow was also pick #3.

Now if you have pick #3 would you trade it for pick #15 and #16? Hell no. You'd tell them to headbutt the wall.

No doubt, but I wouldn't then and still wouldn't take Jackson at 3 this year if he was in this draft.

 

[Superkoops]

Luke Jackson was pick #3. Would you trade your pick #15 and #15 for pick number #3? Yes of course you would, and maybe you'd get an AFL player out of it. You'd expect to but Paddy Dow was also pick #3.

Now if you have pick #3 would you trade it for pick #15 and #16? Hell no. You'd tell them to headbutt the wall.

Not sure of your point here when it comes to Jackson. I get what your saying about draft picks being over rated and user choice error.

Fact is Jackson based on projected talent will command high cost trade.

Paddy Wack Dow is likely 3rd round draft Pick similar range to the pick we were tossed for Jesse Hogan for different reasons.

 

[_007_]

I think you have to add Ryan into that mix. Plus, you are kicking out one of Chapman, Walker or Young to make it happen.

I dont think all of Logue, Ryan, Cox and Pearce are a good mix. I'd personally argue any of 3 of the 4 are as good as eachother but seem to have defnitively decided the Ryan / Cox / Pearce combo is the best

Real uncool thing to say but I view Ryan as the fourth wheel.

 

[sherrif]

Yes that's possible. To be fair, I don't think Logue leaves, but then I didn't think Neale would either.

You can't teach Rankine's innate ability any more than you can teach Jackson's. There is a reason why after 13 years in the system that Jamie Cripps isn't as good as Eddie Betts was.

As Snuffaluphagus knows, I don't think Jackson is generational. The best comparison I've heard is Blicavs. Whilst he is a good player and you'd be happy to have him, I wouldn't give up two years worth of first rounders and 700k pa when we have boatloads of young talent to sign up in future and a C grade forward line that's in dire need of proper quality, especially since Sturt seems like he can't be bothered to chase and tackle every week.

I don't really care what we do with 2nd rounders onwards, but I am not trading first rounders unless its a no-brainer (like Petracca/Bolton asking to come west). I have Jackson a long way off that. Lets wait until he is the player most of you think he is going to be. I'll happily pay a premium then.

Jackson is 100% a generational talent. Those saying otherwise aren't comparing him to what other ruckman are normally doing at 20 years of age and he plays a roaming forward role well already too. He's just not as good close to goal. In the last 4 weeks he's got back to his best. The quality of his taps is at times staggeringly good and he compares favourably to pretty much any other 20 year old ruck in recent history with English.
Here is his highlights from a recent game. He's an absolute gun.




This is his highlights from Round 15.

 

[Taylor]

Not sure of your point here when it comes to Jackson. I get what your saying about draft picks being over rated and user choice error.

Fact is Jackson based on projected talent will command high cost trade.

Paddy Wack Dow is likely 3rd round draft Pick similar range to the pick we were tossed for Jesse Hogan for different reasons.

The point I'm making is that in my opinion you're bypassing the Dow risk, you know you're buying a player, there isn't any risk with Jackson that isn't also there with any other player on the list.

Melbourne using a pick #3 on Jackson will have paid infinitely more for him than Freo will by the end of it all. No matter how they spin it. They aren't getting a top five pick for Jackson without something magical happening in trade week.

 

[Cobbler]

Spot on post, the problem we have with Logue is as soon as we decided to play Chapman as the 3rd tall who can also play on mid/small forwards there was no room for Logue. If all our forwards are fit there’s no room there for him either. His best attribute this year has been his versatility which we’ve exploited by playing his as a defensive forward and more recently a forward/ruck. He is quite honestly the best 23rd player in the league but that doesn’t guarantee him a starting position every week or the pay check that goes with it.
For me the answer is to move him back to the backline and move Chapman up the ground. I’d like to see Chapman on a wing in acres spot, but not sure he has the endurance to do that yet, his passing into the forward line is always superb.

100% agree. The other thing the club would need to be mindful of is forward thinking. 3-4 years from now, which is the length Logue is seeking.

As much as many love and defend Logue where does he fit in 3 years?

Pearce will still be there. Our back 7 is young.

In the front half we will have lost Lobb, Fyfe and likely Taberner. So, for that reason he becomes valuable. But we’ll also have Jackson and developing talls in Amiss and Treacy.

I can easily see him being squeezed out as early as next season. But more valuable 3 years from now when Fyfe and Taberner are done.

 

[Purple Jesus]

Jackson is 100% a generational talent. Those saying otherwise aren't comparing him to what other ruckman are normally doing at 20 years of age and he plays a roaming forward role well already too. He's just not as good close to goal. In the last 4 weeks he's got back to his best. The quality of his taps is at times staggeringly good and he compares favourably to pretty much any other 20 year old ruck in recent history with English.
Here is his highlights from a recent game. He's an absolute gun.




This is his highlights from Round 15.

TBH I'm not seeing anything in that that screams MUST GET to me.

 

[_007_]

Jackson is 100% a generational talent. Those saying otherwise aren't comparing him to what other ruckman are normally doing at 20 years of age and he plays a roaming forward role well already too. He's just not as good close to goal. In the last 4 weeks he's got back to his best. The quality of his taps is at times staggeringly good and he compares favourably to pretty much any other 20 year old ruck in recent history with English.
Here is his highlights from a recent game. He's an absolute gun.




This is his highlights from Round 15.

3.5 minutes of handballs. Couple good taps. A good goal. Lots of good athleticism. Not anything close to worth a mil a year though.

 

[TheMcManusNose]

Yes that's possible. To be fair, I don't think Logue leaves, but then I didn't think Neale would either.

You can't teach Rankine's innate ability any more than you can teach Jackson's. There is a reason why after 13 years in the system that Jamie Cripps isn't as good as Eddie Betts was.

As Snuffaluphagus knows, I don't think Jackson is generational. The best comparison I've heard is Blicavs. Whilst he is a good player and you'd be happy to have him, I wouldn't give up two years worth of first rounders and 700k pa when we have boatloads of young talent to sign up in future and a C grade forward line that's in dire need of proper quality, especially since Sturt seems like he can't be bothered to chase and tackle every week.

I don't really care what we do with 2nd rounders onwards, but I am not trading first rounders unless its a no-brainer (like Petracca/Bolton asking to come west). I have Jackson a long way off that. Lets wait until he is the player most of you think he is going to be. I'll happily pay a premium then.

I am with you on the forward line thing. I would rather use the picks on forwards; tall, medium and small than Jackson. We have a very good ruck - what does having more than one of those actually get you, what does it add?

This year we're the 2nd best defensive team and the 12th best offensive team. We're top 8 in terms of clearances (notoriously don't correlate with good teams) and contested posessions. I don't even really need to say that, everyone here knows that our defence is awesome, our midfield is very good and our forward line is a bunch of ****ing potatoes compared to the rest of the top 8. Forgoing the 2x1sts minimum that Jackson costs us is saying that you're content with the current forwards on our list for the next 3-4 years when you view it in the context of not having a 2nd or 3rd this year too.

I think he's going to make us only slightly better in an area we're already quite good at and the cost will prevent us making much improvement in an area we're really bad at.

There are two scenarios where i'm ok with paying for Jackson:
a) Lobb leaves and the price for him covers at least half of Jackson
b) Darcy wants out at some point in the near future

with a) being by far the most likely.

 

[Taylor]

I hope we play Carlton twice next season so that Jackson can tag Cripps, beat him at the contest and tackle him into the ground every chance he gets. Hopefully putting a bit of elbow into the back of Cripps.

And I'll be the most smug person here saying "told you he is a clearance mid".

Which of our midfielders would outbody Jackson to win the ground ball? He is enormous and clean below his knees. Our half backs will be the least accountable players on the field when there is a stoppage with Jackson roving, ready for the handball backwards and into the corridor for them to fly past and send it inside fifty.

That doesn't even take into account the marking option on transition that a 2m tall player will be matched up on a regularly sickening 6ft tall common mid.

 

[Joao]

Jackson is 100% a generational talent. Those saying otherwise aren't comparing him to what other ruckman are normally doing at 20 years of age and he plays a roaming forward role well already too. He's just not as good close to goal. In the last 4 weeks he's got back to his best. The quality of his taps is at times staggeringly good and he compares favourably to pretty much any other 20 year old ruck in recent history with English.
Here is his highlights from a recent game. He's an absolute gun.




This is his highlights from Round 15.

I've watch plenty of him. He can play and I think at the very least (and I have said this before) will be a top 6 ruckman. That doesn't automatically mean generational just because he does it at 20. Darcy did well at 18/19 for a ruck but I doubt he'll be generational either. Also, what that highlights package doesn't show you is Big O having a similarly big day out. Had some stupid number of clearances that day. Even if he is generational, I think he'll most likely be a generational ruckman, which is literally the last position I would choose to have a generational player in (well maybe second last after back pocket).

He spends a decent time forward and doesn't kick goals. The only thing I'll say though is that I can see a world where we have Jackson, Amiss and Treacy as our KPFs being highly effective because they are all good (or better) ground level pressure players. When you add all the smalls that could be dynamite. Not sure if that is the plan though and I still think you need forward quality for the days where the pressure isn't max.

So if he's not guaranteed generational, which you couldn't possibly claim yet, we're in the situation where we have two probably top 4/6 ruckman (the position that premiership sides have notoriously not had top quality in most years) chewing up $1.5m per season, the 12th worst forward line in the comp wasting the best defense and a top 4 midfield and two years out of the first round to do anything about it.

It baffles me that so many think this is a lay down. At the very least you have to acknowledge the forward line issues, issues that we lose our best method of fixing for two years. If we didn't have Darcy and Meek was rolling out every week, its would be a totally different conversation.

 

[Joao]

I am with you on the forward line thing. I would rather use the picks on forwards; tall, medium and small than Jackson. We have a very good ruck - what does having more than one of those actually get you, what does it add?

This year we're the 2nd best defensive team and the 12th best offensive team. We're top 8 in terms of clearances (notoriously don't correlate with good teams) and contested posessions. I don't even really need to say that, everyone here knows that our defence is awesome, our midfield is very good and our forward line is a bunch of ******* potatoes compared to the rest of the top 8. Forgoing the 2x1sts minimum that Jackson costs us is saying that you're content with the current forwards on our list for the next 3-4 years when you view it in the context of not having a 2nd or 3rd this year too.

I think he's going to make us only slightly better in an area we're already quite good at and the cost will prevent us making much improvement in an area we're really bad at.

There are two scenarios where i'm ok with paying for Jackson:
a) Lobb leaves and the price for him covers at least half of Jackson
b) Darcy wants out at some point in the near future

with a) being by far the most likely.

100%

I hope we play Carlton twice next season so that Jackson can tag Cripps, beat him at the contest and tackle him into the ground every chance he gets. Hopefully putting a bit of elbow into the back of Cripps.

And I'll be the most smug person here saying "told you he is a clearance mid".

Which of our midfielders would outbody Jackson to win the ground ball? He is enormous and clean below his knees. Our half backs will be the least accountable players on the field when there is a stoppage with Jackson roving, ready for the handball backwards and into the corridor for them to fly past and send it inside fifty.

Jackson looks good roving as the ruckman because the 205cm dude he is playing against can't bend over like he can. If he starts as a midfielder, he'll have their biggest mid standing next to him every stoppage. Its the whole point, his point of difference is that for someone 200cm tall, he gets down well and will outcompete every other 200cm+ player doing that. So thats fine if you are going to play him in the ruck and are willing to concede a lot of taps to the much bigger ruckman, but he is still only doing that for 30% of the game because Darcy forward more than 20% is a complete waste of his ability.

 

[TheMcManusNose]

Jackson is 100% a generational talent. Those saying otherwise aren't comparing him to what other ruckman are normally doing at 20 years of age and he plays a roaming forward role well already too. He's just not as good close to goal. In the last 4 weeks he's got back to his best. The quality of his taps is at times staggeringly good and he compares favourably to pretty much any other 20 year old ruck in recent history with English.
Here is his highlights from a recent game. He's an absolute gun.




This is his highlights from Round 15.

I agree he is better than any other ruck i've seen at the same age.

If we play him in his best position where does Darcy play and does that make us a better team? While I do see the argument of getting quality when it is guaranteed to you, it is a firm no from me.

 

[Taylor]

100%


Jackson looks good roving as the ruckman because the 205cm dude he is playing against can't bend over like he can. If he starts as a midfielder, he'll have their biggest mid standing next to him every stoppage. Its the whole point, his point of difference is that for someone 200cm tall, he gets down well and will outcompete every other 200cm+ player doing that. So thats fine if you are going to play him in the ruck and are willing to concede a lot of taps to the much bigger ruckman, but he is still only doing that for 30% of the game because Darcy forward more than 20% is a complete waste of his ability.

I think you can play Jackson as a rover and Darcy in the ruck

 

[Scham]

Good call. I’d rather keep Acres and we should offer 2 years instead of one. But if he is squeezed out as you say due to chasing big name like Jackson and a forward then so be it.

What I’m seeing in the WAFL is a player, Liam Henry who has put in a good development year and may well push Acres out to a different role. The way I see it is NOD and Henry as long term wingers. Obviously need depth and seems Tucker is a good chance to be gone and as such Acres who can play other roles like half forward is worth at the right price hanging onto.

I think the club will see the value and come good with a better offer. If the delay has seen Col Young go chase a better offer then I can deal with this.

Worner projects as a better wingman than Henry imo.

 

[Joao]

I think you can play Jackson as a rover and Darcy in the ruck

Sure he could, but I don't think he is a generational midfield talent so why are we bothering? We're back to overstacking an area that is already healthy.

I don't know how else to get the message through. We won 15.5 games this year and still managed to kick under 50 points like 4 times, including one under 40.

Freo
--------
Defense A++
Midfield A
Forwards

 

[Descent]

Not all inside 50s are created equally. Part of the reason our forward line often looks mediocre is that, by the time it gets there, they’re competing with 18 opposition players. Jackson generates high quality clearances, allowing the ball to enter the forward 50 with speed. Rankine is not a gun small forward if he can’t find any space, Fritsch does his best work in small pack contests, Stengle is benefiting from Geelong’s incredible rebounding from defence. What happens up the ground has a huge impact on how much you can get out of your forward line. When we were dominating clearances against Melbourne, our forward line looked like the best in the competition.

 

[Taylor]

Sure he could, but I don't think he is a generational midfield talent so why are we bothering? We're back to overstacking an area that is already healthy.

I don't know how else to get the message through. We won 15.5 games this year and still managed to kick under 50 points like 4 times, including one under 40.

Freo
--------
Defense A++
Midfield A
Forwards

I see the point you're making, I think the games where we haven't scored have been primarily because we have been beaten in the middle. The second St Kilda game is a good example of the four seasons in a day of our year on this subject. I'd prefer we don't need to build our game off ball movement from half back like we were doing at the start of the season, then we moved into scoring from stoppages and couldn't transition the footy and I put that primarily down to our midfielders not being as dominant as I'd like.

I don't think we will be able to replace Taberner and Lobb with the value of our two first picks and the trade price for Lobb.

 

[Hazelsnuts]

I don't necessarily disagree. I suppose I was arguing that draft picks - especially double-digit draft picks - are overrated at our stage of development, i.e, six years of largely nailing drafts. My other point is that trading is opportunity-based - we'd all love to add Fogarty, Pickett and Rankine to our list but that ain't happening. So we settle for bringing in a high first round draft pick who has performed to that level and is about to feature in his second big dance.

Spot on - 2x 1st round picks that will be both in the 14-18 range for a talent like Jackson who is essentially a hybrid mid-ruck-ruck rover, can mark around the ground and break lines.
No fckn brainer, now is the time to top up with a player like him for a couple of picks in the teens.
No forwards available that you would give be or would get with that kind of currency and no standout KPF’s in this years draft that would step up in 2 years when we have another 1st rounder should we give up this years and next.