List Mgmt. 2023 Trade Thread - Part I

[George]

 

[tim_saints]

If nas and gresham go- the likes of billings and zac jones arent going to be running around at sandy.

You have missed my point entirely.

I said if nas and/or gresh leave; we'd be idiots not to be looking at bringing in experienced ready to fire (in finals) guys into the best 22, not 18 year old draftees.

I also said- forget the names amon and wingard.
They are just examples because i think they would come for virtually free trade wise, and would be gettable I reckon.

The main point is that just like we did with dempster and schnider- the hawks did with lake and dew, like the tigers did with prestia, like the cats did with smith etc etc etc etc.... it can make a massive difference to your flag hopes if you bring in ready to fire experienced players

I get your point I just don’t think Amon or Wingard are very good? That’s more my point
Dempster, Schneider, Lake, Dew, Smith were all good players
I reckon there’s probably 10 Karl Amon types every draft and we have an abundance of HF types that I think if not better already, will be much better than someone like a Wingard moving forward.

I totally agree you can’t go hard one way all youth, you need experience (e.g. Cordy this year) but if we are at the point where we are challenging and need a couple experienced players to take us over the top, there’s gotta be better than Amon who I’m pretty sure is on 700 a year at the hawks and Wingard who’s constantly injured and past his best footy

 

[Sab22]

If nas and gresham go- the likes of billings and zac jones arent going to be running around at sandy.

You have missed my point entirely.

I said if nas and/or gresh leave; we'd be idiots not to be looking at bringing in experienced ready to fire (in finals) guys into the best 22, not 18 year old draftees.

I also said- forget the names amon and wingard.
They are just examples because i think they would come for virtually free trade wise, and would be gettable I reckon.

The main point is that just like we did with dempster and schnider- the hawks did with lake and dew, like the tigers did with prestia, like the cats did with smith etc etc etc etc.... it can make a massive difference to your flag hopes if you bring in ready to fire experienced players

It would make senses to go for ready made players end of 2024. I think this year and next year should purely be development of young players.

We made the mistake of Hill, Howard, Jones, Crouch, Ryder. Jumped the gun too early.

There’s lot of unfulfilled potential in our list, we need to utilise the drafts, and set us to contend for 5-10 years rather than look for quick success.

Ross said it best, it’s a long process.

 

[Joffaboy]

It would make senses to go for ready made players end of 2024. I think this year and next year should purely be development of young players.

We made the mistake of Hill, Howard, Jones, Crouch, Ryder. Jumped the gun too early.

There’s lot of unfulfilled potential in our list, we need to utilise the drafts, and set us to contend for 5-10 years rather than look for quick success.

Ross said it best, it’s a long process.

Rubbish about the established players, Hill, Howard, Butler, Crouch and Higgins were excellent on the weekend.
Cost us a first in a couple of seconds in 2019, Crouch was a FA, Higgins a second.
Absolute myth we 'jumped the gun' it's demonstrably incorrect.

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[bird_man]

It would make senses to go for ready made players end of 2024. I think this year and next year should purely be development of young players.

We made the mistake of Hill, Howard, Jones, Crouch, Ryder. Jumped the gun too early.

There’s lot of unfulfilled potential in our list, we need to utilise the drafts, and set us to contend for 5-10 years rather than look for quick success.

Ross said it best, it’s a long process.

Hill is the only the one that really cost us

Crouch was free and very important to where we are at now

Howard didn't cost the world and we were desperate for a key defender

Ryder was basically thrown in for free

Higgins was just a few years into his career so almost like a draftee

Jones's body has let him down but we got him and Byrnes for Bruce, who is back to playing defence (Very poorly) for the Dogs

I terms of this year, I've got no issue with trading out picks, so long as it's for young players. There really isn't a lot of difference in an 18 year old or a 21 year old, othr than you probably know a lot more about the kid that is already in an AFL environment

 

[gringo2011]

Rubbish about the established players, Hill, Howard, Butler, Crouch and Higgins were excellent on the weekend.
Cost us a first in a couple of seconds in 2019, Crouch was a FA, Higgins a second.
Absolute myth we 'jumped the gun' it's demonstrably incorrect.

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

I think it's a fair argument. Probably should have built through the draft first. It's 3 years into their St Kilda careers and we have been disappointing. I think even the club has acknowledged they were on the wrong track. It's worked out to get us a few wins but it might take us longer to get to a top of the ladder sustainable side because of it.

It is what it is and you can't change it but you can acknowledge it. There is a reason that clubs build up through the draft and then top up with established talent for needs. If you don't have the old guys keeping you middling you get better access to the prime picks so you make the rebuild quicker.

Higgins you aren't buying a finished article at least, that makes more sense where you get a young player who hasn't got anywhere near their peak who isn't getting opportunity.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Hill is the only the one that really cost us

Crouch was free and very important to where we are at now

Howard didn't cost the world and we were desperate for a key defender

Ryder was basically thrown in for free

Higgins was just a few years into his career so almost like a draftee

Jones's body has let him down but we got him and Byrnes for Bruce, who is back to playing defence (Very poorly) for the Dogs

I terms of this year, I've got no issue with trading out picks, so long as it's for young players. There really isn't a lot of difference in an 18 year old or a 21 year old, othr than you probably know a lot more about the kid that is already in an AFL environment

Someone should have told the Dogs, that Bruce was a defender when we first got him, and out of sheer desperation tried him in the forward line.

 

[gringo2011]

Hill is the only the one that really cost us

Crouch was free and very important to where we are at now

Howard didn't cost the world and we were desperate for a key defender

Ryder was basically thrown in for free

Higgins was just a few years into his career so almost like a draftee

Jones's body has let him down but we got him and Byrnes for Bruce, who is back to playing defence (Very poorly) for the Dogs

I terms of this year, I've got no issue with trading out picks, so long as it's for young players. There really isn't a lot of difference in an 18 year old or a 21 year old, othr than you probably know a lot more about the kid that is already in an AFL environment

It's cost us playing kids and draft capital or trades. Ryder was great but we are at the end of his career and we are in exactly the same spot as we were when he came as far as rucks go.

As far as Howard goes, we could have picked up a kid and played him for 3 years until he became a good defender for example.

If we win a premiership or go top 4 this season it will make it a lot better outcome but if we are still in that 5th to 12th sort of range and still stuck middling it will be hard to argue that it was good management.

I still think our best chance at improvement comes from our kids and youth. Those older guys are all good enough but the boost we get this year will be because we are getting value from guys like Clark, King, Coffied, Byrnes, Owens, Windy etc.

List management is going to be interesting under Lyon. If we get a bounce under a new coach and it drops away next year and we've topped up based on that it will be poor management. If we top up and still get stuck in no-man's land it will be really bad. Sos is now the most important person at the club, I hope he gets it right.

It easy to get drunk on a few wins but it's a long season.

 

[bird_man]

It's cost us playing kids and draft capital or trades. Ryder was great but we are at the end of his career and we are in exactly the same spot as we were when he came as far as rucks go.

As far as Howard goes, we could have picked up a kid and played him for 3 years until he became a good defender for example.

If we win a premiership or go top 4 this season it will make it a lot better outcome but if we are still in that 5th to 12th sort of range and still stuck middling it will be hard to argue that it was good management.

I still think our best chance at improvement comes from our kids and youth. Those older guys are all good enough but the boost we get this year will be because we are getting value from guys like Clark, King, Coffied, Byrnes, Owens, Windy etc.

List management is going to be interesting under Lyon. If we get a bounce under a new coach and it drops away next year and we've topped up based on that it will be poor management. If we top up and still get stuck in no-man's land it will be really bad. Sos is now the most important person at the club, I hope he gets it right.

It easy to get drunk on a few wins but it's a long season.

Ryder cost us no draft capital. He was basically thrown into that trade for nothing.

Howard was 23 when we got him. Still very young for a key position player. We could have taken the chances of grabbing a key defender in the draft and not taken him, but why?

He's been a servicible player and it's probably a 50-50 at best you'd find a better player in the draft.

We could have developed a kid in the role and come out 3 years later with another Hugh Goddard.

Our defence has been really good over the last 12 months, no complaints from me. And we also have a couple of key defenders developing below them.

The Hill trade us the only one I really look back on with regrets. Unfortunately it's a decent sized blunder. If we had have used that draft capital on bringing in a star at pick 6 things look a lot different.

 

[gringo2011]

Ryder cost us no draft capital. He was basically thrown into that trade for nothing.

Howard was 23 when we got him. Still very young for a key position player. We could have taken the chances of grabbing a key defender in the draft and not taken him, but why?

He's been a servicible player and it's probably a 50-50 at best you'd find a better player in the draft.

We could have developed a kid in the role and come out 3 years later with another Hugh Goddard.

Our defence has been really good over the last 12 months, no complaints from me. And we also have a couple of key defenders developing below them.

The Hill trade us the only one I really look back on with regrets. Unfortunately it's a decent sized blunder. If we had have used that draft capital on bringing in a star at pick 6 things look a lot different.

Ryder cost us developing someone else though. It’s all history now but until we are in a position to win a flag we haven’t done anything to deserve celebrating. We have high standards under Lyon at least. I don’t think he’s happy with middling.

 

[Joffaboy]

I think it's a fair argument. Probably should have built through the draft first. It's 3 years into their St Kilda careers and we have been disappointing. I think even the club has acknowledged they were on the wrong track. It's worked out to get us a few wins but it might take us longer to get to a top of the ladder sustainable side because of it.

It is what it is and you can't change it but you can acknowledge it. There is a reason that clubs build up through the draft and then top up with established talent for needs. If you don't have the old guys keeping you middling you get better access to the prime picks so you make the rebuild quicker.

Higgins you aren't buying a finished article at least, that makes more sense where you get a young player who hasn't got anywhere near their peak who isn't getting opportunity.

So we use a couple of draft picks instead of picking up 7 established players to go with a list that had holes all through it?

You wanted us to look like 21 and 22 North Melbourne with everything that brings, poor crowds, plummeting membership, decent players leaving?
It was a sound move and acknowledged to be correct in the review.

I know it's the hill you will die on, but it is demonstrably proven yo be untrue.

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[gringo2011]

So we use a couple of draft picks instead of picking up 7 established players to go with a list that had holes all through it?

You wanted us to look like 21 and 22 North Melbourne with everything that brings, poor crowds, plummeting membership, decent players leaving?
It was a sound move and acknowledged to be correct in the review.

I know it's the hill you will die on, but it is demonstrably proven yo be untrue.

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

Lucky you're not a detective. I'd say we haven't proven anything yet. We had no-one at games as it was. The club has demonstrably ****ed drafting and trades up for years. If we win a flag in the next few years and those guys play a huge part in it you probably have some evidence.

 

[bergholt]

Dempster, Schneider, Lake, Dew, Smith were all good players

Hindsight bias. Lake and Smith were good but not the others.

Dempster was a nothing player who was in and out of the Swans side and then in and out of our side when he got here. Played mostly as a tagger until 2011 when we sent him back.

Schneider was a streaky small forward who barely averaged a goal a game.

Dew was just OK and had retired and been out of the game for a year when the Hawks lured him back.

All of them looked similar calibre (or worse) than Amon and Wingard.

 

[bird_man]

Ryder cost us developing someone else though. It’s all history now but until we are in a position to win a flag we haven’t done anything to deserve celebrating. We have high standards under Lyon at least. I don’t think he’s happy with middling.

I’m not celebrating anything, just pointing out not every move was a bad one.

More than happy to criticise the mistakes we did make.

 

[Joffaboy]

Lucky you're not a detective. I'd say we haven't proven anything yet. We had no-one at games as it was. The club has demonstrably ****ed drafting and trades up for years. If we win a flag in the next few years and those guys play a huge part in it you probably have some evidence.

The evidence is my eyeballs. Butler and Higgins won us the game on the weekend on the back of the best game Hill as played at the club and probably since his time at the Hawks.
Howard is our most effective kick going at 88% DE.
If you can't see the influence Paddy Ryder had on the club and the young players, I feel sorry for you.
Crouch cost us nothing and is playing excellent in an under football.
In 2019 we had holes everywhere because of terrible drafting and trading. We had to stabilise the list.
We had to start building through the draft, got King and Bytel in 2018, 5 oven ready AFL players plus Ryan Byrne in 19, Callum Wilkie in the rookie draft.
Then in 20 we got Crouch for free, Higgins a second rounder and Alisson who looks a bust.
So apart from Jones who is an injury bust and Ryder who has retired the other 5 are first 22, Wilkie is an AA, and Byrnes is playing excellent football. Alison is ordinary and Bytel has not cemented his spot.

Maybe we should have picked a kid instead of Stocker and Wood as well.

If we went down your path, we would have been bottom 4 still, terrible crowds, membership going south and Lyon wouldn't have touched us with a barge pole.
A couple of speculated picks would not have put us on the road to success, quite the opposite. And you always talk about our terrible drafting, what make you think we would have got the right kids, not a swag of Alison's?
Gallagher did his job, gave us a base and now SoS and Ross will finish the job.

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[The_Steadier]

set us to contend for 5-10 years

Again a noble sentiment- but we are trying to win a flag.
The aim isnt to 'not be crap for a long time'.

I know that one feeds into the other- as in the longer you are 'in contention' means (in theory) the liklihood of winning a flag increases.

But equally- you need to acknowledge that going to the draft is NOT a risk free path.

Doing that- while the bulk of the best 22 and almost all our very best players are 26+ IS risky.

It risks us missing our flag window.

Because in 4 years time- guys like crouch ross steele hill marshall sinclair wilkie howard gresham etc etc will be over 30 and most likely no longer elite.

So even IF (and its still a massive IF) any/all of the likes of winghager, owens, pou etc become elite in 4 years time.... we are still no closer to a flag than now.

 

[Winmar2Lockett]

Ryder cost us no draft capital. He was basically thrown into that trade for nothing.

Howard was 23 when we got him. Still very young for a key position player. We could have taken the chances of grabbing a key defender in the draft and not taken him, but why?

He's been a servicible player and it's probably a 50-50 at best you'd find a better player in the draft.

We could have developed a kid in the role and come out 3 years later with another Hugh Goddard.

Our defence has been really good over the last 12 months, no complaints from me. And we also have a couple of key defenders developing below them.

The Hill trade us the only one I really look back on with regrets. Unfortunately it's a decent sized blunder. If we had have used that draft capital on bringing in a star at pick 6 things look a lot different.

People conveniently forget that we turned 1 pick into Hill, Howard and Ryder.

I can't believe people watch Brad Hill play & regret that we have him on our list. It's not a blunder in any stretch.. he is a star now that he has a fair dinkum coach!

Dayne Beams for 2 x 1st rounders, Bryce Gibbs for the same... hell even Stocker for a future 1st... now they're blunders!

 

[Sully111]

All I know is the list looks better than it has in a long time. Someone did something right to get us there.

 

[The Punter]

I think the Hill commentary before AND after Lyon's arrival is overstated. He's better, but not hugely better, but he wasn't that bad to begin with.

 

[Sun Ra]

I think the Hill commentary before AND after Lyon's arrival is overstated. He's better, but not hugely better, but he wasn't that bad to begin with.

Under Ratts he did tend to go missing on occasions, get lost and panic at half back.
I think he looks a lot better playing within a predictable disciplined system / game plan.

 

[The_Steadier]

I get your point I just don’t think Amon or Wingard are very good? That’s more my point

I think your judgement of actual onfield performance is being clouded by you also thinking about the potential of players too.

Amon has objectively outperformed nas this year on field- and is very likely to continue to do so for the next couple of years.

Of course- the fact that nas is still so young and inexperienced means nas is the far more exciting prospect- but it's important to recognise that actual on field performances to date only make up a small part of what makes nas exciting.

Amon is a thoroughly decent player that is better than nas now- and likely to remain so for the next couple of years (especially in terms of consistency and in terms of performing in big games).


Same applies with wingard- sure he's been injured and inconsistent.
But gresham hasn't?

Wingard isnt perfect but his best is just as good (if not better?) than anything gresh has produced.

Keep in mind- i suggested amon and wingard because I reckon they would basically come for free as salary dumps.

So if nas and gresh left and we got them:
1. we effectively lose nothing in terms of on field performance in the next few years.
2. we keep our draft picks (and RFA compo for gresh, and whatever we get for nas)

That then allows us to throw draft picks at the likes of gold coast for maxs brother and/or bringing in more elite kids etc .

 

[bergholt]

All I know is the list looks better than it has in a long time. Someone did something right to get us there.

Should have heard what we were saying about it last year after round 6 when we were 5-1!

 

[Ducky Tie]

I think the Hill commentary before AND after Lyon's arrival is overstated. He's better, but not hugely better, but he wasn't that bad to begin with.

Agree. He's playing well and isn't making many mistakes which he is sometimes prone to, but he's played pretty solid footy for a couple of years now. Glad we have him.

 

[Winmar2Lockett]

I think your judgement of actual onfield performance is being clouded by you also thinking about the potential of players too.

Amon has objectively outperformed nas this year on field- and is very likely to continue to do so for the next couple of years.

Of course- the fact that nas is still so young and inexperienced means nas is the far more exciting prospect- but it's important to recognise that actual on field performances to date only make up a small part of what makes nas exciting.

Amon is a thoroughly decent player that is better than nas now- and likely to remain so for the next couple of years (especially in terms of consistency and in terms of performing in big games).


Same applies with wingard- sure he's been injured and inconsistent.
But gresham hasn't?

Wingard isnt perfect but his best is just as good (if not better?) than anything gresh has produced.

Keep in mind- i suggested amon and wingard because I reckon they would basically come for free as salary dumps.

So if nas and gresh left and we got them:
1. we effectively lose nothing in terms of on field performance in the next few years.
2. we keep our draft picks (and RFA compo for gresh, and whatever we get for nas)

That then allows us to throw draft picks at the likes of gold coast for maxs brother and/or bringing in more elite kids etc .

What makes you think that Hawthorn will be offering up Amon & Wingard for nothing?

They'd want draft capital, especially if they're eating some significant salary for a few years (both are on ridiculous $ for their output). They have no need to for us to take the TPP space on their behalf, which would usually see good players move on for a late pick. They've already take a heap off their cap by flicking Jaegar & Mitchell.

I cannot see how you think those two cover a potential loss of Nas & Gresh... Amon is a GOP & Wingard is cooked. Will do a few arsey things occasionally but his best is a long way behind him.

Another case of talking down guys on our list & massively overrating opposition players IMO.

 

[Sully111]

Should have heard what we were saying about it last year after round 6 when we were 5-1!

Yep

I didn't think our list was the problem last year either.

Thought we won't know where our list is at until we get a decent coach. That's clearly happened now so happy days.

 

[Sully111]

Somebody tell me why we can't win a flag with this list and this coaching group.