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

 

[tonygeeks]

Morning rant, as someone who has always been keen on Jackson and who is certain he's going to play for us at a very good level for 10 years, the price we paid was absolutely ridiculous at the time, and looking even more ridiculous now. How in the * we had to pay more on top of the two first round picks is beyond me and reeks of arrogance from Bell. Most realistic fans on here over preseason had us half a chance of sliding back a bit this year either through injury, tougher draw or just non-linear progression and so how the club got bullied into not getting some currency back from two firsts (per like every other trade), but actually doing a 2nd to 3rd round swap in Melbournes favour is ridiculous for an out of contract player

It’s not even that , he’s playing the same as he was for most of last year

I was happy because I thought we’d get away with paying a reasonable price for what we we’re actually seeing

FMD was I wrong , 1 of the things that sent me right over the edge about our off-season

 

[Big Animal]

JL is way too conservative. Throwing things around and bring innovative is worth a try.

exactly. We are currently selecting and playing like we are contending or protecting a lead but we are not. We have all the young talent on the list we need. This season should now be spent working out who plays where best and allow the players to build synergy in their positions. Not this constant removal of young players who make a mistake or two which kills any confidence, yet give senior players a constant free ride. And let them play with a bit of flair. We won last year when let loose to run but now playing a short careful kicking game that is getting annihilated. Walker often initiated that run through the corridor but is now benched due to a few mistakes. Well he won't learn on the bench and we have no run out of the back. Questioning JLo's risk-averse strategy.

 

[Son of a Wizard]

Walker absolutely needs to come back in.

There seems to be a culture of a fear of failure rather that a dare to take the game on.

Stop being so bloody conservative Freo. We need Noddy and Walker and Johnson and Erasmus playing. If things aren't working throw the magnets around. Put Cox forward. Chuck Shultz or Switta in the middle. The days of stagnant complacency are over.

As the great man said DO SOMETHING>>>>>>

 

[wakojako]

exactly. We are currently selecting and playing like we are contending or protecting a lead but we are not. We have all the young talent on the list we need. This season should now be spent working out who plays where best and allow the players to build synergy in their positions. Not this constant removal of young players who make a mistake or two which kills any confidence, yet give senior players a constant free ride. And let them play with a bit of flair. We won last year when let loose to run but now playing a short careful kicking game that is getting annihilated. Walker often initiated that run through the corridor but is now benched due to a few mistakes. Well he won't learn on the bench and we have no run out of the back. Questioning JLo's risk-averse strategy.

Nah we definitely do have run out of the back. I saw Wilson run and gun out of defense multiple times at the game. I haven't seen anyone praise him for it though.

 

[s_wd6]

Nah we definitely do have run out of the back. I saw Wilson run and gun out of defense multiple times at the game. I haven't seen anyone praise him for it though.

He would often look to receive the handball and run. He looked more desperate than anyone to play quickly. Thought he was one of our best. Except Luke Ryan would handball it into his back instead of in front of him a couple times.

 

[Alfonz]

Morning rant, as someone who has always been keen on Jackson and who is certain he's going to play for us at a very good level for 10 years, the price we paid was absolutely ridiculous at the time, and looking even more ridiculous now. How in the * we had to pay more on top of the two first round picks is beyond me and reeks of arrogance from Bell. Most realistic fans on here over preseason had us half a chance of sliding back a bit this year either through injury, tougher draw or just non-linear progression and so how the club got bullied into not getting some currency back from two firsts (per like every other trade), but actually doing a 2nd to 3rd round swap in Melbournes favour is ridiculous for an out of contract player

It's worse than that really, we should never have given up the future 1st. It should only have been 2022 1st, plus a future 2nd to get it over the line, then haggle over 3rds and so forth. That's all Jackson was worth based on being uncontracted and performance to date. The media hype and pressure was ridiculous, but that should be blocked out by Bell.

What makes it even more unpalatable is how Melbourne gave us SFA for Langdon, and swindled us for Hogan, yet Bell still caved in. He should have been out to even the score. Incredibly weak.

What do you reckon we would get if Darcy (a player with more runs on the board) was out of contract and asked for a trade to Geelong last year. Let's pretend their other dealings didn't exist. We would get a future/late 1st, and the media would carry on about how it was a fair deal, and we would then accept it. Bell would probably give them a F3 or F4 back as he does in many trades.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

It's worse than that really, we should never have given up the future 1st. It should only have been 2022 1st, plus a future 2nd to get it over the line, then haggle over 3rds and so forth. That's all Jackson was worth based on being uncontracted and performance to date. The media hype and pressure was ridiculous, but that should be blocked out by Bell.

What makes it even more unpalatable is how Melbourne gave us SFA for Langdon, and swindled us for Hogan, yet Bell still caved in. He should have been out to even the score. Incredibly weak.

What do you reckon we would get if Darcy (a player with more runs on the board) was out of contract and asked for a trade to Geelong last year. Let's pretend their other dealings didn't exist. We would get a future/late 1st, and the media would carry on about how it was a fair deal, and we would then accept it. Bell would probably give them a F3 or F4 back as he does in many trades.

Hmm, I'll disagree to that extent, it was always going to cost a couple of 1st given where we finished last year and we'd have definitely got two first out of Geelong for an out of contract Darcy. Jackson is still a 21 year old pick 3 that won a rising star and is widely acknowledged as a gun with crazy potential. But giving up more on the 2 1sts was ****ing gross when we should have been getting something back to mitigate the risk we fell a bit this year. It was weak trading but I wont agree we would ever get him for what you think we could have

 

[Alfonz]

Hmm, I'll disagree to that extent, it was always going to cost a couple of 1st given where we finished last year and we'd have definitely got two first out of Geelong for an out of contract Darcy. Jackson is still a 21 year old pick 3 that won a rising star and is widely acknowledged as a gun with crazy potential. But giving up more on the 2 1sts was ******* gross when we should have been getting something back to mitigate the risk we fell a bit this year. It was weak trading but I wont agree we would ever get him for what you think we could have

Geelong gave up the equivalent of pick 7 for Jeremy Cameron, proven superstar AA key forward. There have been plenty of other deals where a proven uncontracted player goes in that vicinity of pick 5-10.

For Jackson, the 2022 1st and 2023 2nd would have been the equivalent of pick 8 (if we win the premiership), pick 6 (finish 8th), pick 5 (current position). For an unproven player out of contract it would have been more than fair. I would have been asking for a 3rd or 4th back to be honest. The media hyperbole spun it a very different way though.

These scenarios don't involve the ultra high end picks which carry a premium, so I think it is fair to use the points system.

 

[apuchar]

Geelong gave up the equivalent of pick 7 for Jeremy Cameron, proven superstar AA key forward. There have been plenty of other deals where a proven uncontracted player goes in that vicinity of pick 5-10.

For Jackson, the 2022 1st and 2023 2nd would have been the equivalent of pick 8 (if we win the premiership), pick 6 (finish 8th), pick 5 (current position). For an unproven player out of contract it would have been more than fair. I would have been asking for a 3rd or 4th back to be honest. The media hyperbole spun it a very different way though.

These scenarios don't involve the ultra high end picks which carry a premium, so I think it is fair to use the points system.

Depends on what he becomes as to whether it is worth the price pick wise. Geelong already knew.

 

[trentjac]

Who cares what we gave up for Jackson. We would have used the pick on a half back flanker and overlooked a natural full forward.

 

[freo_leo29]

If we somehow convinced cox to go forward I wouldn't play Hamling

Hughes can go into defense and play tall, or ask chappy Ryan young to play taller

Hammer is done imo

 

[heypenny]

As long as we don't sh*t the bed this season and finish bottom 4, I'm still okay with the Jackson trade. As much as he's been disappointing, you can still see the talent and the athleticism. I remember Freo supporters ragging on Natanui early in his career. No marks, lost on the field, very little possessions etc. However deep down, everyone knew the talent was there and it was just a matter of time before it would click.

I think the same thing will happen with Jackson. I can very easily see him playing 10+ years, and over 200 games for us.

 

[Square Peg]

I'm going to post again what I said immediately after trade period ended last year and I haven't seen anything over the first two rounds to make me think I am a total idiot.

My overall impression of trade week was it could have been better it could have been worse.

Positives
1. Corbett on the cheap, could be a bargain and ultra low risk. Good strategy
2. Not pissing away Norths F2 on Sharp, glad we held firm there.
3. Although I wanted to hold Lobb to his contract for another year for the short term benefit, the return we got was fair, we've already seen his best and I never have to watch him squib it in the ruck again.

Neutral/who the hell knows
1. Jackson. So many variables as to whether this turns out to be a success. In the short term if we drop to finish 10th next year, certainly possible, the price looks high. In the intermediate term, how much does he impact games, and can he withstand the scrutiny that will come when he delivers those low stat games that will be part of his life as an impact player?
2. Acres, we got unders but we're behind the eight ball with him uncontracted. He could be a late bloomer and an absolute steal for Carlton, he could be injured, soft and a bust. Time will tell. Genuine 50-50 for me.

Negatives
1. Logue. We buggered this from start to finish, no point going over it all again. Clear list management fail.
2. Meek and 2nd v OMeara and 4th. I'm sceptical and concerned we'll be looking back on this in a couple of years and shaking our heads, it's just not congruent with our strategy over the past few years to bring in a banged up player past his peak and the price is too much. Hopefully I will be proven wrong

I've no idea how to rate Tucker independently of Logue deal so it's probably another neutral.

 

[heypenny]

I'm going to post again what I said immediately after trade period ended last year and I haven't seen anything over the first two rounds to make me think I am a total idiot.

Although that looks prophetic. It wasn't too far off the general consensus of the board. And we're two games in. A lot of our moves were aimed at benefiting the club in the long term. Let's assess in 2-3 years when we see how Lobb, Logue, Acres, JOM and Jackson are all doing.

 

[Tony_Clifton]

Since we are doing this:

Nay.
Sean Darcy plays 70 % time in the ruck currently. How much competitive advantage do we get from having Jackson ruck the other 30% of the time. Sure Jackson or Darcy can play forward a bit but then you're spending top dollar to play a ruck as an okish forward. Lobb or Darcy Cameron are better forwards.

This whole hybrid mid thing comes across as a weak counterargument to the above. Has it ever worked? The only time I can remember was when Matthew Richardson had a great season on the wing before injuring himself.

Luke Jackson is the opposite of a Moneyball pick. He is what I would describe Jackson as a Connolly/Schwab pick. An overhyped player brought in to generate short term excitement m. A "Moneyball" player is someone with perceived flaws or a questionable background who joined the A's on a small contract, but contributed in a big way.

And another: I have full faith in Cameron Schwab and Chris Connolly delivering the goods. Movers and shakers they are. Just got to get Jackson to be anesthetised during a routine procedure, then we pounce.

Oh and yeah..I'm old. I'm not sure the under 40s will understand the schwabolly references. If it helps they were like the guys running Enron.

 

[Square Peg]

Although that looks prophetic. It wasn't too far off the general consensus of the board. And we're two games in. A lot of our moves were aimed at benefiting the club in the long term. Let's assess in 2-3 years when we see how Lobb, Logue, Acres, JOM and Jackson are all doing.

If a lot of moves were aimed at benefits in the long term the three prelims and a flag by 2025 is a fraud

 

[freo_leo29]

If a lot of moves were aimed at benefits in the long term the three prelims and a flag by 2025 is a fraud

Club overrated our women's team and it's gonna burn them

Women's looked like they were challenging when that was announced, could've carried the men's until like 2025 but now it looks grim

 

[wakojako]

Jacko can clearly take contested marks, just going to have to pump games into him. Maybe spend some time with Coxy and Pearce to get better at positioning and marking:

 

[Rockmelon]

Have had this itching feeling for a while that JUH could be gettable, OOC at the end of 2024 and is good mates with Liam Henry.

I think I read somewhere that he said he liked it over here or would be open to coming here in his draft year? Don’t quote me on that but man he would be a good pairing long term with Amiss

 

[Quazar]

Morning rant, as someone who has always been keen on Jackson and who is certain he's going to play for us at a very good level for 10 years, the price we paid was absolutely ridiculous at the time, and looking even more ridiculous now. How in the * we had to pay more on top of the two first round picks is beyond me and reeks of arrogance from Bell. Most realistic fans on here over preseason had us half a chance of sliding back a bit this year either through injury, tougher draw or just non-linear progression and so how the club got bullied into not getting some currency back from two firsts (per like every other trade), but actually doing a 2nd to 3rd round swap in Melbournes favour is ridiculous for an out of contract player

I was always afraid of this, when it was circulating we were going after him...Lobb out, Jackson in but it was touted for ages he wasn't coming in to replace Lobb, which was obvious for all to see & know; but....what the hell were we thinking?! And how did it solve losing turncoat treacherous bastard Lobb and his poxy 36 goals (which right now we're mostly begging rather sheepishly for!)?!

I dunno, it just seemed such a perplexing trade in/out. I still think Jackson will come good, but it show as hell won't be as a forward or up forward in stints. We have no idea where to play him yet. It's possible, as it stands we've slightly stuffed up the team balance, completely magnified by the midfield's underwhelming performances......yikes

 

[s_wd6]

Jacko can clearly take contested marks, just going to have to pump games into him. Maybe spend some time with Coxy and Pearce to get better at positioning and marking:

Just get him in the forward line with cox

 

[tonygeeks]

Jacko can clearly take contested marks, just going to have to pump games into him. Maybe spend some time with Coxy and Pearce to get better at positioning and marking:

No one wants to hear it but the list of athletic talls who burst onto the scene but never really reach the heights they were projected is pretty long

Daniel Bandy
Kruezer
Jeff White
Kirk Tippett
Rhys Stanley
Corey McKernan

Probably add another 15 too that if I really thought about it

Talls take time is the story but plenty have played by far their best footy in their first couple of years and regressed hard

 

[arsesmart]

No one wants to hear it but the list of athletic talls who burst onto the scene but never really reach the heights they were projected is pretty long

Daniel Bandy
Kruezer
Jeff White
Kirk Tippett
Rhys Stanley
Corey McKernan

Probably add another 15 too that if I really thought about it

Talls take time is the story but plenty have played by far their best footy in their first couple of years and regressed hard

Or is that because early impressions are the ones that stick with us?

Good news is, all those players on that list played 150 games or more. It is also littered with All-Australians, premiership medallions, B&Fs, leading goal kickers, grand finallists etc, so we can only hope.

 

[manpurple]

I understand the theory of drafting best available. And I am sure that somewhere on this board I was even in favour at one stage. However, I find myself in the weird position of believing that drafting mids, wings, half anything, in the first round is more counter productive than people realise. Yes I know you need quality mids. But...

From a trade point of view, trading in KPD's or KPF's is way too expensive. But you can get good quality mids at discount prices. Additionally the mids and halves, are usually quality all the way through to the mid second round. Teams constantly draft quality mids in the 40's.

So Jackson might be a win long term when considering production alone. But we paid sooooo much for him. Two first rounds, never happy with that. I liked our rule from earlier in the rebuild. No R1 trades.

As a side note, we drafted Amiss for long term, wasn't Jackson supposed to the be quick fix? After all his salary is why we don't have Acres or Logue (a reason why we couldn't score on the weekend). It was a bet the farm for a GF kind of play, which might still work, but the odds are getting longer on that.

 

[arsesmart]

I understand the theory of drafting best available. And I am sure that somewhere on this board I was even in favour at one stage. However, I find myself in the weird position of believing that drafting mids, wings, half anything, in the first round is more counter productive than people realise. Yes I know you need quality mids. But...

From a trade point of view, trading in KPD's or KPF's is way too expensive. But you can get good quality mids at discount prices. Additionally the mids and halves, are usually quality all the way through to the mid second round. Teams constantly draft quality mids in the 40's.

So Jackson might be a win long term when considering production alone. But we paid sooooo much for him. Two first rounds, never happy with that. I liked our rule from earlier in the rebuild. No R1 trades.

As a side note, we drafted Amiss for long term, wasn't Jackson supposed to the be quick fix? After all his salary is why we don't have Acres or Logue (a reason why we couldn't score on the weekend). It was a bet the farm for a GF kind of play, which might still work, but the odds are getting longer on that.

21 year olds are not really seen as quick fixes in the AFL. Trades are so often "strike while the iron's hot" affairs and based more on opportunity. He's a futures option for sure. He can make a difference in the shorter term hopefully, but some adjusting time for most players switching to a new club is a pretty typical thing.