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

 

[go_the_dockers]

MSD.

Who do we want and what do we need?

Small or medium forward.

Good leap, good mark, provide good pressure and good when the ball hits the ground.

 

[Taylor]

I think this is partly true but I don't agree fully. It's still fundamentally saying the players are to blame. If only they could take a mark....

I have been racking my brains trying to come up with a logical explanation or unifying theme for how we play and I propose the following: The Jlo obsession with turnover.

Though I am sure what Jlo wants is players getting out the back for cheap goals as his main avenue to goal, I think this could be fundamentally based on his obsession with turnover as a prime determinant of outcome in the AFL game.

Last year the big change in our game, what turned us into a contender, was becoming the #1 team for points from turnover differential. So it's important and no doubt something every coach talks about. But I think this may now become our obsession and trying to capitalise on this as our strength has become our weakness, as commonly happens with obsessions

Hear me out and tell me if this makes any sense.

He's obsessed with not conceding turnovers, so the players are scared to do anything that will risk generating his number one hate and are taking easy options with the ball to make it someone else's problem

He's obsessed with trying to generate them, so he sets up his whole team with that as the primary goal, He plays forwards that generate pressure as their number one role, rather than scoring goals. Why do you think Banfield is perpetually picked over Sturt? Wingmen are picked for their defensive workrate and potential wingers like Worner are being played as defenders at Peel tto learn to generate turnover.

And then when we actually have the ball moving forward, he doesn't want separation and one on ones, because you can lose those and that's risking turnover. He wants the ball bombed in to multiple talls that all fly for the same ball to bring it to ground so we don't concede a turnover through an intercept mark, and instead of having enough crumbers there at their feet and guys running goalside he has a quota set back to again prevent gettiing caught out on turnover. Does "repeat entries" sound familiar? He would much rather have the ball kicked into I50 ten times and hope something happens to snag a goal than risk enough capital to try and score but have it come out quickly the other way if we don't.

He loves the idea of scoring goals by generating a defensive turnover and having guys run forward for cheapies out the back. Loves it. And under no circumstances wants it happening to us. Hates it. so he's built a whole game plan around it.

I don't know if this is true, there might be big holes in my logic, but somehting has to explain why a seemingly intelligent coach would set his teams up like this. He must be trying to achieve something by it and I thnk it's the points from turnover differential world title. It's not working. And it's why our skill errors seem to be magnified in their impact, since we can't afford them if your primary goal is to avoid turnover.

I would like our talls to take more marks but I am not convinces that is the 'entire problem' that you think it is.

I like that perspective but I'll also raise another point. I don't think we are pressing as much as we have before, I don't think the players are covering as much ground. Certainly not the extent that I notice St Kilda doing it, and it's all well and good for them to earn the wins with that - but we ran out of steam last season at the end of the year partly because we ran off our own feet.

I'd also argue, in addition to your point, that all clubs are trying to score on turnover and generate forward half turnovers - they almost always result in a score against because they are usually one football action away from the score - where as the aggressive kick into the corridor requires the mark, the kick, the mark, the kick and then potentially the mark and kick again to score, each time resulting in a chance to stuff it up.

There are about fifteen times a quarter where your opposition will give the ball back to you and you'll send the same back to them. Most of them are blocked off but ultimately the team that turns them into scores the most wins the premiership.

Think of the highest level of tennis. Very few games are decided by the serve, but the elite player can win games against lesser opponents with the serve game alone - that's stoppage play. At the elite level it's about unforced errors and the player who has less of them wins. That's the turnovers.

It makes sense to build a game plan around controlling the turnover game, it makes sense to kick the ball inside fifty to an easier to defend position should you miss the kick/mark. The balance is going to be key. You can't afford for a 12 point turnaround because you chose to kick it sideways to the 30m out straight in front target over the 25m out on the angle target in the pocket and your marking target in the corridor fumbled the mark. Better to kick one point than have them kick a goal running it on the rebound.

It doesn't make for aggressive football but it should result in more wins. Unless you don't take any risks and fart arse around with the ball until turning it over because you don't have marks up the field.

We are our best when we take the game on in the corridor and keep the defenders set behind the ball for the turnover.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Pickett would cost us next year's first rounder, North's second and probably involves us finding another second rounder from somewhere. He's worth just as much as Jackson.

We can this say goodbye to any chance of improving other areas of our list without significantly weakening it elsewhere.

I'd rather keep the good players we have and see what we can do with the draft picks we have left. That may or may not include trading in slightly cheaper options.

Alternatively, if we continue to be shit and we somehow get Pickett, Melbourne can take our future 1st and that's that. If this years future 1st was deemed to be a pick 15 plus in negotiations then next years future 1st can be deemed to be wherever we finish this year. If Adelaide can strongarm Sydney into excepting a Melbourne future 1st for Dawson then our future 1st if we are shit this year is enough for Pickett

 

[Taylor]

So you mean a mature WAFL/VFL midfielder that is AFL ready? These guys make unicorns look common.

He doesn't exist outside of an AFL list. Our best hope for that role is Matthew Johnson.

 

[Demons09]

Well there was a train on…

 

[Ge3ks]

we ran out of steam last season at the end of the year partly because we ran off our own feet.

Oh that's what we're doing then. Saving our energy for the finals.


...that we won't make. Masterstroke by Jlo.

 

[freo1997]

Well there was a train on…

Stubbs??

He needs to show more at WAFL level.

 

[Midnite65]

MSD.

Who do we want and what do we need?

Wingman with exceptional speed and big tank

 

[freo1997]

Any crumbing fwds at VFL level?

 

[Ge3ks]

Kinda BS that the WAFL season starts so late, and the MSD is so early. Double whammy for us.

 

[Alfonz]

MSD.

Who do we want and what do we need?

I'd say the club has kept it open as cover for injuries. If that doesn't happen then I'm doubtful we even use our pick.

They will probably keep monitoring Stubbs at Perth to play as a medium forward. Needs to do more than the 1st round stats.

Most of the VFL leading goalkickers seem to be on lists already or AFL rejects.

 

[tonygeeks]

If we can't win the mark we want to play like we did against the Eagles where we spoil it to the boundary for a stoppage, but we need to be on top of them for that not to be painful.

It all starts at the contest and clearance game. If we win that, we can stop trying to mark between the flank and centre where a turnover will kill us and play for a stoppage.

But we want the marks out of the talls and the problem goes away entirely.

WTF does all this have to do with list management ?

Might be time to switch to decaf

 

[Polo342]

I don't think that means what you think it means.

Woops I will edit it. I mean Cheque book

 

[Polo342]

Nice dream… how do they get them?

Well id be willing to let some talent go. Erasmus maybe. Cant keep going on the path we are going. We would be able to get one of those with the picks we have already but would definetly take more to get a second.

 

[Taylor]

WTF does all this have to do with list management ?

Might be time to switch to decaf

I'm torn between giving you the "if you don't know, I'm not going to explain it to you" answer in the similar tone you gave me - and just saying that game plan and list capability are so inherently linked that you can't discuss one without the other.

Should we draft twenty Dustin Martins? Yes. But now we have to change the game style.

 

[Superkoops]

Oh nothing wrong with it I agree. I have seen FWD lines like ours win premierships. Trying to fit Jackson as a Fwd is tough, as he isn’t that experienced there.


Coaching/Gameplan is holding the list back.

LJ is not there yet. He will also never be sole KPF as I said above but will spend some time in the forward line, so needs to do better at making/impacting a contest (ie bringing the ball to ground) and taking the odd contested mark. Otherwise he will spend time in ruck and as a ruck rover (or roving half forward type). New players take time to adjust - same goes for JOM who hasn’t been nearly as bad as some have believed. He isn’t gelling as well in the centre at the moment.

I agree with snuff. We have the pieces there - esp. backs and mids. There are so many in the mid and backs that are wildly out of form. Take Will Brodie for example. I called his dropping and he went back and worked his arse off on Fri. Those out of form need to turn at around. Watching Geelong and comments by Ling I think it was, around hard work will help turn around the form and he was right. Dangerfield, Holmes, and Stengel were highlighted examples of their increased work rate and effort in the third term. The Freo boys need to get to work. Game plan needs a tweak but it sucks when there is no dare and as Valentine said yesterday just kicking or handballing to someone else so that it is there problem isn’t the answer.

I can’t see us making the eight but we can give it a shake and come close.

 

[freo1997]

LJ is not there yet. He will also never be sole KPF as I said above but will spend some time in the forward line, so needs to do better at making/impacting a contest (ie bringing the ball to ground) and taking the odd contested mark. Otherwise he will spend time in ruck and as a ruck rover (or roving half forward type). New players take time to adjust - same goes for JOM who hasn’t been nearly as bad as some have believed. He isn’t gelling as well in the centre at the moment.

I agree with snuff. We have the pieces there - esp. backs and mids. There are so many in the mid and backs that are wildly out of form. Take Will Brodie for example. I called his dropping and he went back and worked his arse off on Fri. Those out of form need to turn at around. Watching Geelong and comments by Ling I think it was, around hard work will help turn around the form and he was right. Dangerfield, Holmes, and Stengel were highlighted examples of their increased work rate and effort in the third term. The Freo boys need to get to work. Game plan needs a tweak but it sucks when there is no dare and as Valentine said yesterday just kicking or handballing to someone else so that it is there problem isn’t the answer.

I can’t see us making the eight but we can give it a shake and come close.

For JL and Bells sake we have to come close.

 

[Superkoops]

Alternatively, if we continue to be s**t and we somehow get Pickett, Melbourne can take our future 1st and that's that. If this years future 1st was deemed to be a pick 15 plus in negotiations then next years future 1st can be deemed to be wherever we finish this year. If Adelaide can strongarm Sydney into excepting a Melbourne future 1st for Dawson then our future 1st if we are s**t this year is enough for Pickett

I doubt will play out. I’m keen on Pickett and I believe he won’t cost as much as LJ and certainly not as much as Naughton. Can’t see Darcy going to Bulldogs. They are well stocked for big men and grabbed one of ours who is showing this year that he is playing better as ruck. Anyway trading Darcy to club that already has a number 1 ruck (English) and plenty of other options. Naughton would cost all forms of arms, legs, liver, heart, spleen and kidneys. We just don’t have the trade capital to do this and I honestly could believe that we would trade out so much capital a year after doing so for LJ. Pickett or Georgiades at a more reasonable price maybe.

 

[freo1997]

Done with recruiting big names. Just develop or find diamonds in the rough at state level.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

I doubt will play out. I’m keen on Pickett and I believe he won’t cost as much as LJ and certainly not as much as Naughton. Can’t see Darcy going to Bulldogs. They are well stocked for big men and grabbed one of ours who is showing this year that he is playing better as ruck. Anyway trading Darcy to club that already has a number 1 ruck (English) and plenty of other options. Naughton would cost all forms of arms, legs, liver, heart, spleen and kidneys. We just don’t have the trade capital to do this and I honestly could believe that we would trade out so much capital a year after doing so for LJ. Pickett or Georgiades at a more reasonable price maybe.

I think Darcy would go to a third club if it happened and the capital on traded to Dogs. It definitely sounds stupid farfetched but trade period often throws up a bunch of crazy shit. Definitely not something for people to hang their hat on

 

[Joao]

End of the day we've bled Lobb, Acres, Logue, Meek, Tucker (three of which are WA players). Then got in Jackson and a packet of chips.

Why do we not have a first-round draft pick next year? Yeah we got in Jackson, but still lost 5 decent players. People are apologetic for them, but drafting is a multi-year exercise, not a reactive process. They should have known the situation of all 5 well in advance and that they didn't, and therefore squeeze what they could is a damning indictment.

End of the day, Fremantle's admin is deplorable and their nepotistic purple circle has caught up with them.

Remember everyone, Cox will leave for Adelaide for high picks as will Serong and Young eventually to Victoria - Brayshaw will stay and be the next Mundy / Pav as is tradition. Maybe just maybe, we can actually create a genuine core of WA talent to rely on. Everyone here clowns on Peter Sumich and yes he's an oaf, but so far... everything he said has more or less come true, and likely the people who didn't want to hear it Bell et. al. froze him out.

I think we have made the WA switch already as evidenced by like 80% of our last 10 draft picks being from WA.

Probably the thing that is more disappointing than anything is losing pick 6 in that draft. It would have got us one of the Kings. (More than likely Max).

B.King and Rozee at 5 and 6 almost certainly.

MSD.

Who do we want and what do we need?

If we have pick 1 - 3 then best talent. If we are picking 4-8 then just some bloke that might become good C/B grade depth.

Alternatively, if we continue to be s**t and we somehow get Pickett, Melbourne can take our future 1st and that's that. If this years future 1st was deemed to be a pick 15 plus in negotiations then next years future 1st can be deemed to be wherever we finish this year. If Adelaide can strongarm Sydney into excepting a Melbourne future 1st for Dawson then our future 1st if we are s**t this year is enough for Pickett

Yes, should put this in the positivity thread. Will be a ****tonne easy to "win" at the trade table this year if we are bottom 4-6. Ranges our 2024 1st much higher and brings in the PSD (doubly so if we finish below the eagles).

 

[Superkoops]

I'd say the club has kept it open as cover for injuries. If that doesn't happen then I'm doubtful we even use our pick.

They will probably keep monitoring Stubbs at Perth to play as a medium forward. Needs to do more than the 1st round stats.

Most of the VFL leading goalkickers seem to be on lists already or AFL rejects.

I really hope we do. The only silver lining to a bad start is an earlier MSD pick. Hopefully we move up the ladder a bit with a few wins but adding a player after round 10 in a position of need (ie mid tall forward or good small forward) would be the way to go. VFL has been playing for quite a few rounds and we will get two full months of WAFL.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Yes, should put this in the positivity thread. Will be a ****tonne easy to "win" at the trade table this year if we are bottom 4-6. Ranges our 2024 1st much higher and brings in the PSD (doubly so if we finish below the eagles).

If nothing else, I want Pickett because SURELY that's not a trade we can **** up. Surely, if there's a time for another Weller, take it or leave moment, it's avoiding bending over for Melbourne AGAIN when all chips are in our corner...

 

[Joao]

If nothing else, I want Pickett because SURELY that's not a trade we can * up. Surely, if there's a time for another Weller, take it or leave moment, it's avoiding bending over for Melbourne when all chips are in our corner...

No way I'm backing us in a Dees trade. They'll find a way to **** us.

Pickett probably retire on the plane ride over or something.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

No way I'm backing us in a Dees trade. They'll find a way to **** us.

Pickett probably retire on the plane ride over or something.

I'm still like, trying to come to terms with how weak we were in those Jackson negotiations. Like, IF he comes on like people think and IF we have another good year then best case scenario, Melbourne would have been stiffed but like, no more than we were stiffed on Langdon and Hogan. Why in the **** did we cave. We should have another two 2nds this year, our own, and one back from Melbourne for the two firsts. We could actually work with that hand for this year.

Bell just bends over to whatever Melbourne demand. ****ing bizarre