List Mgmt. 2022 Trade Thread - Part III

[stavro#4]

How did Hawthorn or Essendon go with Bowes? They got a meeting. Congratulations. Lots of stuff happens at meetings.

Geelong got into Bowes early because they had Hocking's intel on GC's salary cap mess. Simple.

I think we could have been into Dunkley, Taranto or Hopper a whole lot more. But it would have certainly involved trading out of the top 20 in the draft. We wanted to keep our first so it was De Goey or bust.

The problem from the PR point of view is that we don't play a game for another five months. So the narrative will set in.

And having a problem with another fan's laid-back attitude? I think we should all go and grab a coke and a smile at times.

It’s implied we were late to the golden goose party.

That’s the issue. Not the outcome.

Effectively we became interested when it was announced that pick 7 was the incentive.

We weren’t across the scenario prior to that

 

[stavro#4]

They hammered us over 'culture' when we were playing in consecutive grand finals.
We need the board to background all the afl accredited journalists and Tom Morris someone after they shitcan us. Let them know it's not a one way street.

Eh… I love the club. But if the culture was that good. It would have been sustainable.

Watters (like him or hate him) called it out when he first got there. It was an issue outside of our core group

 

[sunny3193]

Apparently this guy understands that there is a draft period still to come.

 

[SaintyMcSaintface]

View attachment 1535273

Age-wise we are absolutely weighted to contend now

 

[pebblesofsand]

Bowes had pick 7 attached to him, that is what all the drama is about.

Our number 1 Saint of the last 20 years even wanted us to go after this.

See this is where I get confused.

So do you think we should have waited until we knew about Bowes and Pick 7 BEFORE we had a go at De Goey?

Or should we have had a shot at De Goey and said if you don't answer by the end of Round 23, we aren't interested.

What do you think these Twitter Tossers would have said anything about that sort of strategy?

Let me guess how it would have read

"Hopeless Saints throw away chance of AA gun De Goey by stupid timeline requirement. Other recruiters lose complete faith in dealing with Saints"

 

[stavro#4]

Apparently this guy understands that there is a draft period still to come.

It is a numerical calculation based off each players weighting on “afl player ratings”

So Geelong/Melbourne/Sydney/Freo not really moving, is actually good for them.

Port not moving doesn’t factor in the potential growth of JHF

Richmond moving massively is a reflection of the weighting of players they brought in.

It isn’t a great metric to be honest

 

[stavro#4]

Age-wise we are absolutely weighted to contend now

Disagree.

Saint believer can you do the same exercise with everyone a year older to reflect 2023 + throw in 4 draftees and Cordy.

 

[The_Steadier]

Age-wise we are absolutely weighted to contend now

Yep all our best players bar max will be 27+ next year. (Sincs, steele, marshall wilkie, crouch etc)

No excuses.

All of ratts, rath and gags gone by mid year if we aren't on track for finals.

 

[MordySaint]

See this is where I get confused.

So do you think we should have waited until we knew about Bowes and Pick 7 BEFORE we had a go at De Goey?

Or should we have had a shot at De Goey and said if you don't answer by the end of Round 23, we aren't interested.

What do you think these Twitter Tossers would have said anything about that sort of strategy?

Let me guess how it would have read

"Hopeless Saints throw away chance of AA gun De Goey by stupid timeline requirement. Other recruiters lose complete faith in dealing with Saints"

It called Plan B... you always work on plan B while working on plan A. So it plan A fails then you have a chance with plan B.

I can use so many analogies, not putting all your eggs in one basket, risk minimisation, diversifying, giving yourself as many options as possible.

But I'm sure DeGoeys agent told us he was 99% sure that he would sign with us, so don't worry about any other plans.

 

[Saints43]

Eh… I love the club. But if the culture was that good. It would have been sustainable.

Watters (like him or hate him) called it out when he first got there. It was an issue outside of our core group

Not arguing with whether we need hammering or not. Just saying managing the media messaging is another thing we could manage better.

 

[SteeleSaints]

Our extra opportunities will now have to come through the Rookies, this is where we need to have great talent scouts who know what they are doing.

Please St Kilda, no more wasting Rookie picks on washed up veterans under the "leadership" banner.

I totally agree I think we will add another Cat B rookie also, but we need to be very astute in bringing in the very best kids or older state league players we can.

It seems because of our past poor recruiting and/or development programs the club has been reluctant to gamble on players late in drafts. But what we have seen is other clubs take them or they get swooped up in a MSD draft and we miss out. Its time the Saints backed themselves in to identify, recruit and develop players to make the grade.

No more of the 'scatter gun' approach to late recruiting.

 

[Mangus]

Our list is too good to bottom out completely unless we throw the season West Coast style but I expect Port and Gold Coast to go past us next year and Carlton Tigers and Bulldogs to extend the gap. Hawks North WC and GWS to a lesser extent are in rebuild mode, Ess could get their act together under Scott and challenge us as well (certainly found a way to humiliate us the last 2 years). We have AFL quality players all across the park and depth enough to be competitive with most sides

Appears the club have recognised that reality and took a pretty conservative approach which took only baby steps to selling some of our better assets to improve our draft hand and a competitive but not blow you out of the water offer to DeGoey.

Probably the wise strategy given the review and changes happening at the same time. Would have been a disaster to take a big swing and spend all our draft captial/salary cap on a big name or cut a swathe of our better players by trading them off and then hand all that over to Walsh and whoever he decides to change in the footy dept. Who may decide we need to go the complete opposite direction.

Means this period was a bit of a wasted opportunity because we probably are not sure what is the right direction to get back to challenge. To be honest I am equally unsure. We have a decent hand at the draft make that count and play the kids next year and the strategy to get out of this mess might be clearer.

 

[stavro#4]

Some of you won’t be happy

 

[pebblesofsand]

It called Plan B... you always work on plan B while working on plan A. So it plan A fails then you have a chance with plan B.

I can use so many analogies, not putting all your eggs in one basket, risk minimisation, diversifying, giving yourself as many options as possible.

But I'm sure DeGoeys agent told us he was 99% sure that he would sign with us, so don't worry about any other plans.

So many assumptions in there makes it impossible to even begin to answer you.

So I will just say this - James Gallagher, along with every other list manager in the AFL, will have the telephone number of every player management group and would have a fair idea, well before trade times, what players are likely to be available and every list manager would then have started to develop their strategy based around that knowledge.

And every list manager would also know that at the pointy end all things may get thrown up in the air and all their plans may turn to naught. But the bottom line is that you don't trade for trades sake.

Gallagher said we highly unlikely to be a big player because we were focusing on the draft - and what happened?

 

[kernelT]

So basically what a few of us have been saying that we got the list build all wrong
Who has been in charge of that the last 3 years? Move them on

Yep.

That big play for a hill was a massive Hail Mary and counter intuitive to taking Max and building a side around him 5 years down the track.

 

[theprospect]

Some of you won’t be happy

Very fair, honest assessment I think - love the bit re. Lenny Hayes

But we need to make sure he has a ripping year and we’re in a position where both parties are potentially happy to look at a new deal

 

[MordySaint]

So many assumptions in there makes it impossible to even begin to answer you.

So I will just say this - James Gallagher, along with every other list manager in the AFL, will have the telephone number of every player management group and would have a fair idea, well before trade times, what players are likely to be available and every list manager would then have started to develop their strategy based around that knowledge.

And every list manager would also know that at the pointy end all things may get thrown up in the air and all their plans may turn to naught. But the bottom line is that you don't trade for trades sake.

Gallagher said we highly unlikely to be a big player because we were focusing on the draft - and what happened?

Bowes had Pick 7 attached to him, so this would mean we would be focusing more intensely on the draft. Which is exactly what James Gallagher wanted.

The irony is that James Gallagher only became interested late in the trade period and missed out on getting an interview with Bowes.

This information has been reported by the AFL reporters as to what happened.

 

[kernelT]

Some of you won’t be happy

No-one should be happy that we can’t develop a mid taken in the top ten of the draft, to the point where we trade them out for scraps.

 

[MordySaint]

Don't like the sound of this at all.

Was negotiations between Hunter Clark's management and Lethers + Gags on giving him a new start all year. Even before the trade period.

Thought Lethers wasn't involved in this stuff anymore?

 

[Sully111]

Some of you won’t be happy

We should never have entertained trading him.

 

[Joffaboy]

I dont get today's narrative on the forum.

We have been getting from many that we should not have traded for the 5 in 19, then the two in 2020 but instead hit the draft.

Now trading costs draft picks, so we made it known we were after only FA's as we needed to keep our dp's.

We get told that topping up is no good, but in the same breath we are told that we are useless because we didn't go for gops in Lobb, Wiederman, Ratagolea etc. Apart from being more top ups, they would cost dp's.

So we go for DeGoey, sounded fairly close and didn't land, Geelong had insider trading advantage with Hocking going from AFL HQ straight to the club telling them all the GC SC woes. We like Hawks, like Bombers never had a chance.

Back to improving our draft hand, we didn't have much currency. Hill would only have brought SC relief, and maybe a pick 20, Long we actually got overs for, Clark was the only true player we could have traded but North lowballed us and thankfully we held on to our asset. Remains to be seen if we burnt our bridges.

So we get critisised for not trading for gops, but at the same time get critisised for not hitting the draft, which can only be done with dp's, also we get critisised for not hitting the draft earlier although we actually started hitting it in 2021.

So can we get the narrative right? Do we trade for gops (as the good players went to the good teams and cost FRDP's anyway) and weaken our draft hand, or do we not trade for gops and build on what we srtarted last year?

It is impossible to do both (unless of course you are Geelong and have AFL insider information months before any other team did abut GC and their SC woes).

 

[MordySaint]

I dont get today's narrative on the forum.

We have been getting from many that we should not have traded for the 5 in 19, then the two in 2020 but instead hit the draft.

Now trading costs draft picks, so we made it known we were after only FA's as we needed to keep our dp's.

We get told that topping up is no good, but in the same breath we are told that we are useless because we didn't go for gops in Lobb, Wiederman, Ratagolea etc. Apart from being more top ups, they would cost dp's.

So we go for DeGoey, sounded fairly close and didn't land, Geelong had insider trading advantage with Hocking going from AFL HQ straight to the club telling them all the GC SC woes. We like Hawks, like Bombers never had a chance.

Back to improving our draft hand, we didn't have much currency. Hill would only have brought SC relief, and maybe a pick 20, Long we actually got overs for, Clark was the only true player we could have traded but North lowballed us and thankfully we held on to our asset. Remains to be seen if we burnt our bridges.

So we get critisised for not trading for gops, but at the same time get critisised for not hitting the draft, which can only be done with dp's, also we get critisised for not hitting the draft earlier although we actually started hitting it in 2021.

So can we get the narrative right? Do we trade for gops (as the good players went to the good teams) and weaken our draft hand, or do we not trade for gops and build on what we srtarted last year?

It is impossible to do both (unless of course you are Geelong and have AFL insider information months before any other team did abut GC and their SC woes).

Have you read the tweets by Mitch Cleary and the interview of Hunter Clarks manager?

 

[stavro#4]

Wouldn’t surprise me if the clubs plan is to sell one of Clark/NWM for 2 first rounders in 12 months to balance the bottom ends lack of high end talent.

Or if we sell both off the back of good years.

It genuinely sounds like renovating your house as opposed to a knock down rebuild

 

[Joffaboy]

Have you read the tweets by Mitch Cleary and the interview of Hunter Clarks manager?

yes so what is it? It isn't a hard question.

Do we trade for gop's or do we keep our dp's and hit the draft as we did in 2021?

The post was in response to those tweets and the bi polar narrative on the forum. Some think that AFL trading and drafting is quantum mechanics and one thing can be in two places at the same time.

 

[Joffaboy]

Wouldn’t surprise me if the clubs plan is to sell one of Clark/NWM for 2 first rounders in 12 months to balance the bottom ends lack of high end talent.

Or if we sell both off the back of good years.

It genuinely sounds like renovating your house as opposed to a knock down rebuild

And have 3 or 4 first round dp's in the greatest draft in the history of the universe?