List Mgmt. 2023 List Management thread

[Snuffaluphagus]

Mod notice after Mr Bob did a lot of annoying work in moving days of posts out of here. As we are heading into offseason, this thread is for 2023 list management only. Getting upset on previous trades can be taken to the vent thread. Lets keep this thread on track in the part of the year it's actually relevant

 

[s_wd6]

If you had a choice between signing Lachie Schultz for four years after this season or trading Schultz and our 2024 second for Hawthorn's 2024 1st - which do you choose?

Keeping schultz easily. Draft picks are overrated for a team that wants to be contending.

 

[Docker82]

If you had a choice between signing Lachie Schultz for four years after this season or trading Schultz and our 2024 second for Hawthorn's 2024 1st - which do you choose?

That trade is so far in our favour it’d never happen anyway. Could easily be Pick 1 for Schultz and Pick 30.

Schultz is a bloody good player imo but that trade in borderline Lachie Weller territory.

Besides Schultz is a free agent if we don’t action the contract trigger. I can’t remember a player being extended less than six months before being traded.

There’s too many reasons that trade wouldn’t happen.

 

[Mags98]

Keeping schultz easily. Draft picks are overrated for a team that wants to be contending.

depends, sure most draft picks are overrated, not pick 1 though. id think most teams in that position do it, if the pick 1 can have a daicos/sheezel/ashcroft impact in their first year, you go for it

 

[Boomer93]

Keeping schultz easily. Draft picks are overrated for a team that wants to be contending.

Im in the draft picks are overrated camp also, but this is so far overs you would have to take the trade.

 

[Taylor]

That trade is so far in our favour it’d never happen anyway. Could easily be Pick 1 for Schultz and Pick 30.

Schultz is a bloody good player imo but that trade in borderline Lachie Weller territory.

Besides Schultz is a free agent if we don’t action the contract trigger. I can’t remember a player being extended less than six months before being traded.

There’s too many reasons that trade wouldn’t happen.

Shache did, and we would trigger the extension so he is under contract this year for the purpose of the trade.

The issue as I see it is that we either commit to Schultz as a best twenty two player, which I think he objectively is now, until he is 30 and put that position to bed for half a decade or we extract the value of Hawthorn seeking to offer a "rest of career" deal to Schultz immediately.

Whether we can upgrade that position is the key to me. Schultz is performing extremely well for a small forward currently.

 

[Joao]

Schultz is great but I'd have a look at Reid if he was on the table.

 

[Mags98]

Shache did, and we would trigger the extension so he is under contract this year for the purpose of the trade.

The issue as I see it is that we either commit to Schultz as a best twenty two player, which I think he objectively is now, until he is 30 and put that position to bed for half a decade or we extract the value of Hawthorn seeking to offer a "rest of career" deal to Schultz immediately.

Whether we can upgrade that position is the key to me. Schultz is performing extremely well for a small forward currently.

if you do trade schultz at least hes a position which has been shown a few times to be able to be filled by young players pretty quickly - pickett, weightman, stephenson, ginnivan, rachelle etc. though you wouldnt want to pick a small forward at pick 1

 

[Ge3ks]

FWIW, I would not consider trading Schultz. Along with his undeniable skill, he brings a dogged intensity that lifts everyone else in the team. He punches well above his weight. Courageous, selfless, and he plays good honest football, without resorting to sniping or flopping for easy frees. He is a leader by example. We need him at the FFC.

 

[Bigger]

Agree. He's fabric.

 

[Taylor]

The assumption needs to be that Melbourne based team offers him such a deal so as to be unable for him to refuse, due to their ability to front load it and then sign him for five years.

Think $700,000 average for five years with a big chunk up front making it closer to $400,000 for the last three years of the deal.

 

[oldgoat]

Agree. He's fabric.

Kevlar fabric

 

[Arkhitect]

Kevlar fabric

Kepler (Bradley) fabric.

 

[Docker82]

Shache did, and we would trigger the extension so he is under contract this year for the purpose of the trade.

The issue as I see it is that we either commit to Schultz as a best twenty two player, which I think he objectively is now, until he is 30 and put that position to bed for half a decade or we extract the value of Hawthorn seeking to offer a "rest of career" deal to Schultz immediately.

Whether we can upgrade that position is the key to me. Schultz is performing extremely well for a small forward currently.

The biggest issue with your post was not that though. It's that the trade isn't even close to realistic so discussing whether we'd do it is pointless.

I wouldn't trade Schultz for a second rounder but realistically no team is offering anything more than that. At best he's the top end of B Grade - in other words he'd still get a game for every team in the league but no team would trade a top ten pick for him.

 

[Taylor]

The biggest issue with your post was not that though. It's that the trade isn't even close to realistic so discussing whether we'd do it is pointless.

I wouldn't trade Schultz for a second rounder but realistically no team is offering anything more than that. At best he's the top end of B Grade - in other words he'd still get a game for every team in the league but no team would trade a top ten pick for him.

A club offering money to a contracted player has a price that comes with it and Schultz is a culture player.

This is why I asked if the club would prefer a four year extension at the end of this season on quite reasonable money, or consent to a well overs trade to allow him to take up an even better deal elsewhere at a club that really, really wants him.

I've mentioned before how closely Schultz compares to Kosi Pickett on a total game impact measurement, add in a contracted status and that we would be upgrading our second round pick into a first round pick - I don't think it's so unreasonable.

What if it's North's R2 PP this year and a contracted Schultz for Hawthorn's 2024 1st round pick?

He's our highest score involvement player this season. Second highest in goal assists. Can that output be replaced either internally or using those picks in trade?

I'm not trying to sell Schultz, but I can see there being a lot of clubs looking to buy.

 

[CapitalA]

North will be back in the finals by 2027. They have heaps of elite young talent despite how s**t they are right now.
Potentially adding Harley Reid to that too this year.
I think it’s zero chance they will be folded.
If they can keep Ben Mckay it will be a decent side soon enough.
I would take their list any day over hawthorn and WC.
LDU
Sheezel
McKay
Larkey
Simpkin
Tom Powell
Bergman
Will Phillips
Josh Goater
Charlie comben
Logue

That’s 11 players that should be good solid AFL level players soon.

Then there is George Wardlaw and brayden George both highly touted that we haven’t seen yet. Paul Curtis as another young player I’ve liked the look of.

Plus all of this years draft picks including possibly Harley Reid.
They only need 3 or 4 of the guys to become guns to rise quickly. We have seen it before with Melbourne demons.

I only see 3-5 players that I rate in that list.

 

[freo_leo29]

If you had a choice between signing Lachie Schultz for four years after this season or trading Schultz and our 2024 second for Hawthorn's 2024 1st - which do you choose?

Hawks 2024 first obviously as that's pick 1


There is 0 chance the hawks do that

 

[freo_leo29]

That trade is so far in our favour it’d never happen anyway. Could easily be Pick 1 for Schultz and Pick 30.

Schultz is a bloody good player imo but that trade in borderline Lachie Weller territory.

Besides Schultz is a free agent if we don’t action the contract trigger. I can’t remember a player being extended less than six months before being traded.

There’s too many reasons that trade wouldn’t happen.

That's not how triggers work, we don't have an option to not action it

If he hits the trigger then he extends automatically

 

[freo_leo29]

A club offering money to a contracted player has a price that comes with it and Schultz is a culture player.

This is why I asked if the club would prefer a four year extension at the end of this season on quite reasonable money, or consent to a well overs trade to allow him to take up an even better deal elsewhere at a club that really, really wants him.

I've mentioned before how closely Schultz compares to Kosi Pickett on a total game impact measurement, add in a contracted status and that we would be upgrading our second round pick into a first round pick - I don't think it's so unreasonable.

What if it's North's R2 PP this year and a contracted Schultz for Hawthorn's 2024 1st round pick?

He's our highest score involvement player this season. Second highest in goal assists. Can that output be replaced either internally or using those picks in trade?

I'm not trying to sell Schultz, but I can see there being a lot of clubs looking to buy.

Noone is buying Schulz with a first rounder


Especially a low placed team, not even if we throw in a 2nd

If they want him so bad they can say "have another year at Freo, try get that premiership, we have 700k a year for you at the end of 2024 and you walk"


Schulz has very little value on the trade table

 

[freo_leo29]

I only see 3-5 players that I rate in that list.

Yeah not the best lost

Should have included zurhaar, Thomas(if he stops being a dropkick) Stephenson (if he continues this years form)

It ain't a great list but you can get atleast 10 quality players from there, they need to keep stocking up though

 

[Sweetback]

Schultz will probably end up a plumber when he retires. He’s 25 now, so has a good five or six years of footy left in him. He’s been on rookie and match payments for much of his time with us. Anyone offering decent coin will get him.

 

[anchor man]

Schultz will probably end up a plumber when he retires. He’s 25 now, so has a good five or six years of footy left in him. He’s been on rookie and match payments for much of his time with us. Anyone offering decent coin will get him.

Hawthorn were after him with I believe a serious offer, but he declined. Stating he was happy to operate on yearly contracts.

 

[pK75]

Schultz will probably end up a plumber when he retires. He’s 25 now, so has a good five or six years of footy left in him. He’s been on rookie and match payments for much of his time with us. Anyone offering decent coin will get him.

I thought the afl changed the rookie list payments so we could pay whatever we wanted for Schultz but the benefit is the first $80k doesn’t count towards the salary cap?
For all we know he could be on $400k per year now but only $320k counts towards the cap. Happy to be corrected, but that’s my understanding.

 

[freo_leo29]

Schultz will probably end up a plumber when he retires. He’s 25 now, so has a good five or six years of footy left in him. He’s been on rookie and match payments for much of his time with us. Anyone offering decent coin will get him.

Schulz is definitely not on a rookie wage for us anymore

Hasn't been for 2 years now, hawks came hard at him and we had to up our offer to keep him


He was on backchat last week (came out today or y'day) and he said he was seriously considering going home when hawks came but he's glad he didn't

There was also an allusion to something happening when he was put on the rookie list, he started by saying they gave him an option but then kind of stopped himself and said "nah I won't go down that path" so maybe the year prior (to him playing 20 games and hawks chasing him) we had told him he was free to look around (when we demoted him) that parts just me inferring though

 

[Taylor]

I thought the afl changed the rookie list payments so we could pay whatever we wanted for Schultz but the benefit is the first $80k doesn’t count towards the salary cap?
For all we know he could be on $400k per year now but only $320k counts towards the cap. Happy to be corrected, but that’s my understanding.

Correct

 

[King Huskii]

I don't deal in hypotheticals