List Mgmt. 2023 List Management and Trading (Part 2)

[PeterSalt]

Do you have a link to the article? I can't find anything on Google or the AFL website. Not doubting you, just trying to find the article you referenced.

From the article below:

"For instance, it would have allowed Adelaide to list one of Rory Sloane or Taylor Walker as a veteran for 2024 and opened up another spot on their primary list. The idea was designed to keep veterans in the game without sacrificing a list spot that a youngster may have taken, with the veteran’s full payments still counted in the salary cap."

Roos target pick one, Dee to go on, big Dog to stay

Check out all the latest trade news from around the League

www.afl.com.au

There's a link in the post above

 

[skam85]

Delisting Sloane makes so much more sense than anyone else on our list, because as soon as a player is delisted, they have FA status for the remainder of the career, every time they come out of contract.

McHenry, Hamill, Sholl, Cook (wtf) that have been mentioned are all young. The first three I doubt will ever be anything other than depth, but what if one of them has a career best season and absolutely kills it? It's happened before, as unlikely as it is with that crop. Now we're in a position where a player that is showing huge potential is now a free agent.

Sloane? He's old. One year deal. Knowing us he has six of them left, but even if he somehow has a first-10-games-of-2017 kind of form bubble, nobody other than a couple of clubs would even consider the FA route, and we haven't lost out at all.

It's mind boggling we'd consider anything else other than this.

 

[1970crow]

Sloane wants to do what's best for the club. He may not think being delisted benefits us.

you don't have to be dishonest. You know delisting is only the first step. And you also know that no other club is going to take a player that refuses to talk to them and will just retire if he's not at the AFC.

 

[1970crow]

Delisting Sloane makes so much more sense than anyone else on our list, because as soon as a player is delisted, they have FA status for the remainder of the career, every time they come out of contract.

McHenry, Hamill, Sholl, Cook (wtf) that have been mentioned are all young. The first three I doubt will ever be anything other than depth, but what if one of them has a career best season and absolutely kills it? It's happened before, as unlikely as it is with that crop. Now we're in a position where a player that is showing huge potential is now a free agent.

Sloane? He's old. One year deal. Knowing us he has six of them left, but even if he somehow has a first-10-games-of-2017 kind of form bubble, nobody other than a couple of clubs would even consider the FA route, and we haven't lost out at all.

It's mind boggling we'd consider anything else other than this.

don't forget our coaches couldn't bear the thought of seeing 'omitted' next to his name, so ran a 2 step process to avoid it. So it's not too hard to see why our club can't make the most clear and correct decision.

 

[Vader]

Delisting Sloane makes so much more sense than anyone else on our list, because as soon as a player is delisted, they have FA status for the remainder of the career, every time they come out of contract.

McHenry, Hamill, Sholl, Cook (wtf) that have been mentioned are all young. The first three I doubt will ever be anything other than depth, but what if one of them has a career best season and absolutely kills it? It's happened before, as unlikely as it is with that crop. Now we're in a position where a player that is showing huge potential is now a free agent.

Sloane? He's old. One year deal. Knowing us he has six of them left, but even if he somehow has a first-10-games-of-2017 kind of form bubble, nobody other than a couple of clubs would even consider the FA route, and we haven't lost out at all.

It's mind boggling we'd consider anything else other than this.

I think the service that he's given to the club, well over a decade, including as our Captain, makes it unlikely. Forcing him down this path would be seen as disrespectful, for a player with his history.

I can see the logic in your argument - but this is one case where I think the emotional side will win out over the logical side. Logically, it probably should be Sloane, but I doubt that he will be the player forced out.

I still think it's more likely to be one of the 4 younger players you named. Given Cook's reputation for softness and lack of performance when selected at AFL level, I think it's most likely to be him.

 

[Crow_68]

Would have to be Hamill, at least it should be anyhow.

Bond is the other option.

If we end up trading out 20 on draft night, we can always re-select as part of the main draft.

 

[skam85]

I think the service that he's given to the club, well over a decade, including as our Captain, makes it unlikely. Forcing him down this path would be seen as disrespectful, for a player with his history.

I can see the logic in your argument - but this is one case where I think the emotional side will win out over the logical side. Logically, it probably should be Sloane, but I doubt that he will be the player forced out.

I still think it's more likely to be one of the 4 younger players you named. Given Cook's reputation for softness and lack of performance when selected at AFL level, I think it's most likely to be him.

Sentiment doesn't win flags though

 

[Dangerousfield]

WE have to delist one other player by the last list lodgement in two weeks so we have three vacancies when the AFL do the final allocation of picks.

Pick 20 will extinguish for us if we don't have that third main list vacancy. So someone will certainly be delisted in the next two weeks, but who?

 

[Vader]

Sentiment doesn't win flags though

True... but irrelevant in this case.

Do you really think any of Sholl, McHenry, Hamill, or Cook are likely to be the difference between us winning & losing a flag?

 

[Vader]

WE have to delist one other player by the last list lodgement in two weeks so we have three vacancies when the AFL do the final allocation of picks.

Pick 20 will extinguish for us if we don't have that third main list vacancy. So someone will certainly be delisted in the next two weeks, but who?

Either that, or we will need to reduce our holdings from 3x usable picks to 2x usable picks (via trading), before that last list lodgement.

 

[GROTTO]

Delisting Sloane makes so much more sense than anyone else on our list, because as soon as a player is delisted, they have FA status for the remainder of the career, every time they come out of contract.

It's mind boggling we'd consider anything else other than this.

Wait till next year, if Sloane demonstrates any reasonable form especially late in 2024, he will be demanding a spot on the list in 2025.

 

[1970crow]

Sentiment doesn't win flags though

he's not being, "forced out" either. He's being transitioned to the rookie list under contract.

 

[jenny61_99]

In no particular order:

Port
Dogs
Dons
Cats
Freo

I would have thought Melbourne could be a chance...

 

[GROTTO]

I would have thought Melbourne could be a chance...

I definitely believe if their off field issues escalate, Oliver's issues become worse in 2024 and Petty's drive to come back home increases, they may be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

Petracca is the key here, he carried them last year when Oliver was out despite a malfunctioning forward line.

 

[skam85]

True... but irrelevant in this case.

Do you really think any of Sholl, McHenry, Hamill, or Cook are likely to be the difference between us winning & losing a flag?

It's completely relevant. We're a nice club. Don't want to upset anyone or make 'tough' calls, and this is another in the long list of the same.

Remember what happened when Malcolm Blight came in with a broom and swept out much loved club stalwarts, including club champions?

 

[GROTTO]

It's completely relevant. We're a nice club. Don't want to upset anyone or make 'tough' calls, and this is another in the long list of the same.

Remember what happened when Malcolm Blight came in with a broom and swept out much loved club stalwarts, including club champions?

Blight's actions was also more about how those players in particular were have too much control and say with the team.

 

[Vader]

It's completely relevant. We're a nice club. Don't want to upset anyone or make 'tough' calls, and this is another in the long list of the same.

Remember what happened when Malcolm Blight came in with a broom and swept out much loved club stalwarts, including club champions?

Let me repeat the question: Do you really think any of Sholl, McHenry, Hamill, or Cook are likely to be the difference between us winning & losing a flag?

If your answer is NO (as it should be for anyone with knowledge of these players), then it is irrelevant whether the decision is based on an emotional or logical bases, as the same end result is achieved.

 

[Scorpus]

Let me repeat the question: Do you really think any of Sholl, McHenry, Hamill, or Cook are likely to be the difference between us winning & losing a flag?

If your answer is NO (as it should be for anyone with knowledge of these players), then it is irrelevant whether the decision is based on an emotional or logical bases, as the same end result is achieved.

If they're not relevant to a flag why don't we just fully delist them and not bother with the rookie list move?

Clearly have plenty of salary cap available for the payout

 

[Mostyn]

WE have to delist one other player by the last list lodgement in two weeks so we have three vacancies when the AFL do the final allocation of picks.

Pick 20 will extinguish for us if we don't have that third main list vacancy. So someone will certainly be delisted in the next two weeks, but who?

That's been discussed a fair bit over the last few dozen pages

 

[baldandbroke]

Let me repeat the question: Do you really think any of Sholl, McHenry, Hamill, or Cook are likely to be the difference between us winning & losing a flag?

If your answer is NO (as it should be for anyone with knowledge of these players), then it is irrelevant whether the decision is based on an emotional or logical bases, as the same end result is achieved.

Very strange angle Vader.

For instance, Tex probably gets a NO?

It’s not a quantum answer - there is more to it than that.

 

[Vader]

If they're not relevant to a flag why don't we just fully delist them and not bother with the rookie list move?

Clearly have plenty of salary cap available for the payout

We probably do have that option, but just delisting them for no reason doesn't send a great message to the rest of the playing list.

 

[Vader]

Very strange angle Vader.

For instance, Tex probably gets a NO?

It’s not a quantum answer - there is more to it than that.

Tex gets a Hell YES, provided he's still playing by the time we're a serious contender. That could be as soon as 2025, and it's not impossible to see him still playing then. Tex is the very definition of a difference maker.

 

[Scorpus]

We probably do have that option, but just delisting them for no reason doesn't send a great message to the rest of the playing list.

Well the reason would be that they aren't very good

 

[Vader]

Well the reason would be that they aren't very good

I'm just glad you're not in charge of HR - at the AFC, or anywhere else for that matter.

 

[GreyCrow]

We probably do have that option, but just delisting them for no reason doesn't send a great message to the rest of the playing list.

"Hey Sholly we are going to delist you but don't worry we will pick you up again"

' Why me? '

"Well we had to pick someone and your name came up"

' does that mean another club can pick me up'

" yes but don't worry they won't"

' why not do you think I'm no good? '

" err no"

' what if they do'

";thank you for your service"

 

[dogs105]

I'm not sure that we should have re-signed Sloane.