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

 

[FR0GGY]

Any one hear Mark Bickley say on sen this morning that we still have 3 picks

Wasn’t happy with me challenging him. And quoting big footy bloggers that we only had 2. Said he had a call into club but didn’t give any further update

Won’t quote his logic but it was unfounded or simply wrong

We do have 3 picks, we have 2 list spots but we have 3 picks as far as I’m aware.

 

[BigBoSS_Riot]

We do have 3 picks, we have 2 list spots but we have 3 picks as far as I’m aware.

We technically have 4 picks, but I have a sneaking suspicion we might pass on 89.

 

[Mostyn]

Any one hear Mark Bickley

Mark Bickley

Age

55

Ht

178cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

19.4

5star

K

11.7

4star

HB

7.8

5star

M

3.3

3star

T

2.7

4star

No current season stats available

D

21.2

5star

K

11.0

4star

HB

10.2

5star

M

3.2

4star

T

3.8

5star

say on sen this morning that we still have 3 picks

Wasn’t happy with me challenging him. And quoting big footy bloggers that we only had 2. Said he had a call into club but didn’t give any further update

Won’t quote his logic but it was unfounded or simply wrong

Why?

We have 39 of our 42 list positions filled.

Sounds like Buckley was right.

 

[Ciao Giacomo]

Okey dokey... this is a bizarre post!

Yeah, I'm sure most of this board were calling for Keane to play after 2 games... not!

Would you care to make a bet?

Keane’s first SANFL game was on April 1 (ironic) 2023 against the “Magpies” followed by our thumping win over Poort Pear.
The Round 4 changes v Freo thread was started later that day.

On the first two pages of the thread six posters suggested Out Butts, In Keane (MSTop,Haludicidal,Bearded Clam, Golumless, Crowstar and 1990Crow).

Do you want me to list all the posters in the changes threads in April that we’re calling for Keane to replace Butts????

My point is that it was absolutely obvious that Keane, without any preseason, would need time to get to AFL standard. It didnt stop the usual hysteria in the changes thread, get him in, get him in, get him in…………

As it happens I have been and still am a big fan of Keane. I thought we could have tried him a bit earlier but it is a good example of the stupidity of many comments in the changes threads. Yes, I was wrong, it wasn’t after he had played two games in the SANFL, it was after 1 game.

Naturally George Kramer jumps in to say I had made up the drop Butts, bring in Keane pile on and then promptly deletes his post when Dogs105 proves him wrong. It must be frustrating that you can’t delete Dogs105 post which quotes your deleted post. Weak as piss George. Just admit you were so keen to denigrate me that you have once again been proven WRONG.

 

[PoholkMe10]

Why?

We have 38 of our 42 list positions filled.

Sounds like Buckley was right.

2 rookie and 2 main list, max of 38 on main list and we have 36

 

[Vader]

We technically have 4 picks, but I have a sneaking suspicion we might pass on 89.

There's 2 ways of looking at this - but both ways say that you're wrong.

The first way is to realise that the pick 89 is not actually our last pick. We also have 107, 135, 153, 171, and so forth. Just because the journalists only list picks as far as the 4th or 5th rounds, doesn't mean that the later picks aren't available to us - should we have enough senior list vacancies to fill them.

The second way is to realise that we're only allowed to take as many picks into the draft as we have senior list vacancies to fill. Right now, that means we can't take pick #20 into the draft, as we only have 2 vacancies to fill. However, we still have options - either trading to reduce our 2023 ND picks from 3 to 2, delisting/re-drafting a contracted player, or some combination of the two.

 

[Ciao Giacomo]

Butts had been ordinary for a while but he was coming good before his injury

Butts really struggled with his shoulder during pre-season and in the first month of the season. At one stage he seemed to be refusing to spoil using his wonky shoulder and was regularly caught out of position. He did slowly improve so hopefully he is fully fit by the start of 2024.

I expect that we will play Butts, Worrell and Keane as our tall defenders until Murray returns.

 

[BigBoSS_Riot]

There's 2 ways of looking at this - but both ways say that you're wrong.

The first way is to realise that the pick 89 is not actually our last pick. We also have 107, 135, 153, 171, and so forth. Just because the journalists only list picks as far as the 4th or 5th rounds, doesn't mean that the later picks aren't available to us - should we have enough senior list vacancies to fill them.

The second way is to realise that we're only allowed to take as many picks into the draft as we have senior list vacancies to fill. Right now, that means we can't take pick #20 into the draft, as we only have 2 vacancies to fill. However, we still have options - either trading to reduce our 2023 ND picks from 3 to 2, delisting/re-drafting a contracted player, or some combination of the two.

So many words, all of which are saying things I already know, directed at a comment that was blatantly a joke...

 

[FR0GGY]

Butts really struggled with his shoulder during pre-season and in the first month of the season. At one stage he seemed to be refusing to spoil using his wonky shoulder and was regularly caught out of position. He did slowly improve so hopefully he is fully fit by the start of 2024.

I expect that we will play Butts, Worrell and Keane as our tall defenders until Murray returns.

He struggled in 2022 from memory as well.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Would you care to make a bet?

Keane’s first SANFL game was on April 1 (ironic) 2023 against the “Magpies” followed by our thumping win over Poort Pear.
The Round 4 changes v Freo thread was started later that day.

On the first two pages of the thread six posters suggested Out Butts, In Keane (MSTop,Haludicidal,Bearded Clam, Golumless, Crowstar and 1990Crow).

Do you want me to list all the posters in the changes threads in April that we’re calling for Keane to replace Butts????

My point is that it was absolutely obvious that Keane, without any preseason, would need time to get to AFL standard. It didnt stop the usual hysteria in the changes thread, get him in, get him in, get him in…………

As it happens I have been and still am a big fan of Keane. I thought we could have tried him a bit earlier but it is a good example of the stupidity of many comments in the changes threads. Yes, I was wrong, it wasn’t after he had played two games in the SANFL, it was after 1 game.

Naturally George Kramer jumps in to say I had made up the drop Butts, bring in Keane pile on and then promptly deletes his post when Dogs105 proves him wrong. It must be frustrating that you can’t delete Dogs105 post which quotes your deleted post. Weak as piss George. Just admit you were so keen to denigrate me that you have once again been proven WRONG.

A handful of posters doesn't equate to a majority view!

There are always posters who have different views... which is why we are here to debate... but you have a habit of protecting it to be the consensus view based on a few.

I rarely comment on your posts so it's in your head that I'm out to get you. You are WRONG on this!

 

[conVINCEd]

A handful of posters doesn't equate to a majority view!

There are always posters who have different views... which is why we are here to debate... but you have a habit of protecting it to be the consensus view based on a few.

I rarely comment on your posts so it's in your head that I'm out to get you. You are WRONG on this!

The initial claim was that there were comments on this board calling for Keane to replace Butts.

Now proven correct.

Just take the L here, Kane.

 

[Ciao Giacomo]

A handful of posters doesn't equate to a majority view!


I rarely comment on your posts so it's in your head that I'm out to get you. You are WRONG on this!

I referred to George, not you. So, are you saying that you are George Kramer?

A few??? I checked the first two pages of the changes thread for round 4 and the majority of the posters in that sample said;
Out Butts, In Keane.

Dogs 105 checked three pages and even more posters said the same. My simple point was that the opinions of posters on who should or shouldn’t be selected may ”occasionally” not be based on all the information that is available to our coaches.

Do you want me to check all the selection threads in April and express the outcome as a percentage of posters?

 

[Mostyn]

There's 2 ways of looking at this - but both ways say that you're wrong.

The first way is to realise that the pick 89 is not actually our last pick. We also have 107, 135, 153, 171, and so forth. Just because the journalists only list picks as far as the 4th or 5th rounds, doesn't mean that the later picks aren't available to us - should we have enough senior list vacancies to fill them.

The second way is to realise that we're only allowed to take as many picks into the draft as we have senior list vacancies to fill. Right now, that means we can't take pick #20 into the draft, as we only have 2 vacancies to fill. However, we still have options - either trading to reduce our 2023 ND picks from 3 to 2, delisting/re-drafting a contracted player, or some combination of the two.

They can't be wrong about what picks we have and what list vacancies we have.

We haven't gotten to the final list lodgement date yet. He can't be wrong yet because we don't know what our final list is going to be.

Plus, they were joking ...

 

[Mostyn]

A handful of posters doesn't equate to a majority view!

There are always posters who have different views... which is why we are here to debate... but you have a habit of protecting it to be the consensus view based on a few.

I rarely comment on your posts so it's in your head that I'm out to get you. You are WRONG on this!

To be fair, he can't be WRONG because he gave evidence supporting his view.

I don't think Jack ever said every poster - to be honest, I was surprised so many would have been saying.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

To be fair, he can't be WRONG because he gave evidence supporting his view.

I don't think Jack ever said every poster - to be honest, I was surprised so many would have been saying.

He is very wrong that I'm out to get him.

I rarely even quote his posts!

He has a habit of projecting minority views as the consensus... & yes he isn't alone.

Any ways enough on this & time to move on.

 

[1970crow]

Time to get back on topic

Could we gamble on putting Schoenberg on the LTI ..to free up a list spot

I know he's likely to come back late season, but is it worth it ?

That doesn’t free up a list spot.

 

[1970crow]

Butts has had his really promising games as well.

I think we'll know a lot more by the end of the year - but I don't think things are clear yet about who'll end up being the most promising.

Butts started really well and in difficult circumstances and looked like he could be top tier in that role. But he hasn’t really improved meaningfully, so he looks like being an ok KPD but one you’re looking to improve upon and consign to handy depth. I do think injury or carrying injury has hampered him somewhat though.

 

[1970crow]

The initial claim was that there were comments on this board calling for Keane to replace Butts.

Now proven correct.

Just take the L here, Kane.

Actually, that wasn’t the initial claim at all. The initial claim was below. His MO is to make it sound like a groundswell or concensus view, when it’s actually significantly less and/or much more moderate overall. Half of those posts could have been saying Butts looks injured, but that wouldn’t stop AFGM from paraphrasing as he did. But it does make him feel better, so who’s to complain.

Keane - “I had lost all my AFL skills in my 18 month break and I was surprised to play an AFL game this year”.

Bigfooty Selection Thread - “ Butts is f**kin s**t, bring in Keane, he’s looked good in the first two SANFL games”.

I liked the look of the Irishmen from word go and I was/am confident he will become a first choice player.

 

[Ciao Giacomo]

Actually, that wasn’t the initial claim at all. The initial claim was below. His MO is to make it sound like a groundswell or concensus view, when it’s actually significantly less and/or much more moderate overall. Half of those posts could have been saying Butts looks injured, but that wouldn’t stop AFGM from paraphrasing as he did. But it does make him feel better, so who’s to complain.

And the Bored Member from Port Macdonnell naturally joins the party.

Talking of over the top comments, I am still waiting for you to correct your statement that the Crows auditor said that the Crows finances were an “Ongoing Concern*” and subsequently assured us that there was no way that anyone would provide a loan to the AFC for our new club rooms. were you WRONG?

It is so inconvenient when posters are made accountable for their comments, isn’t it?

*I checked the annual report and the auditor stated “The AFC is an ongoing concern” which is statement used by auditors to indicate that the entity is still In existence and…….fortunately we are still an “Ongoing Concern”.

 

[dogs105]

Would you care to make a bet?

Keane’s first SANFL game was on April 1 (ironic) 2023 against the “Magpies” followed by our thumping win over Poort Pear.
The Round 4 changes v Freo thread was started later that day.

On the first two pages of the thread six posters suggested Out Butts, In Keane (MSTop,Haludicidal,Bearded Clam, Golumless, Crowstar and 1990Crow).

Do you want me to list all the posters in the changes threads in April that we’re calling for Keane to replace Butts????

My point is that it was absolutely obvious that Keane, without any preseason, would need time to get to AFL standard. It didnt stop the usual hysteria in the changes thread, get him in, get him in, get him in…………

As it happens I have been and still am a big fan of Keane. I thought we could have tried him a bit earlier but it is a good example of the stupidity of many comments in the changes threads. Yes, I was wrong, it wasn’t after he had played two games in the SANFL, it was after 1 game.

Naturally George Kramer jumps in to say I had made up the drop Butts, bring in Keane pile on and then promptly deletes his post when Dogs105 proves him wrong. It must be frustrating that you can’t delete Dogs105 post which quotes your deleted post. Weak as piss George. Just admit you were so keen to denigrate me that you have once again been proven WRONG.

Sorry, do you want me to delete something??

 

[conVINCEd]

Actually, that wasn’t the initial claim at all. The initial claim was below. His MO is to make it sound like a groundswell or concensus view, when it’s actually significantly less and/or much more moderate overall. Half of those posts could have been saying Butts looks injured, but that wouldn’t stop AFGM from paraphrasing as he did. But it does make him feel better, so who’s to complain.

What I said was factually accurate.

You’re making things up to claim the suggestion was a ‘groundswell or a concensus (sic) view’.

Posts have been produced. Move on.

 

[Ciao Giacomo]

Sorry, do you want me to delete something??

Absolutely not.

You responded to a comment from George Kramer re Butts/Keane. I went looking for George’s original quote and it had “disappeared”. Please retain your post so everyone can observe the fragility of George. No doubt he finds it easier to delete his posts than admit he was wrong.

 

[FR0GGY]

Naturally George Kramer jumps in to say I had made up the drop Butts, bring in Keane pile on and then promptly deletes his post when Dogs105 proves him wrong. It must be frustrating that you can’t delete Dogs105 post which quotes your deleted post. Weak as piss George. Just admit you were so keen to denigrate me that you have once again been proven WRONG.

You might want to issue an apology here.
Mods would have deleted it, he’s not a post deleter.

 

[Sanders]

Hence why you only do it for players who you really don't mind losing, and intend delisting at the end of next season.

Such players don’t exist.

It’s asinine to think we’d carry a player we saw so little chance of development or future success in over another season

We’d not waste a list spot, coaching time and effort etc just to babysit a player for 12 months

It’s just a reheated version of your risible dead man walking theory

There are no players on our list we intend to delist in 12 months time

 

[Ciao Giacomo]

You might want to issue an apology here.
Mods would have deleted it, he’s not a post deleter.

I am happy to offer an apology re George if he confirms that it was deleted by a Mod.

Of course I would expect an apology from George for the original post .