List Mgmt. 2024 Draft & Trade Hypotheticals

[Ticky009]

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Oof. Power have made an offer to Perryman - dammit! Herald Sun journalist Jon Ralph reported on Fox Footy’s On the Couch the Power have tabled Perryman a six-year deal worth as much as $850,000 per season — with GWS and Hawthorn’s offers not said to be as fruitful

How on earth do port think he’s fixing their key issues?

 

[ashep]

All in on Stringer. Has game breaking talent and there is nothing like a shot at a flag to encourage a player to toe the line.

If he does play up we have a strong enough culture to withstand it and if he fails to perform we go with the forward line we have today. If he spurs Logan and Joel onto greater heights then that's great too.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

All in on Stringer. Has game breaking talent and there is nothing like a shot at a flag to encourage a player to toe the line.

If he does play up we have a strong enough culture to withstand it and if he fails to perform we go with the forward line we have today. If he spurs Logan and Joel onto greater heights then that's great too.

I’m with you but many on here won’t agree. Would depend on the price though that’s the only thing I’ll say.

 

[BloodySwan]

Oof. Power have made an offer to Perryman - dammit! Herald Sun journalist Jon Ralph reported on Fox Footy’s On the Couch the Power have tabled Perryman a six-year deal worth as much as $850,000 per season — with GWS and Hawthorn’s offers not said to be as fruitful

That is an insane offer for Perryman. Surely it's not real? A few Port boys being underpaid if they have that cash for Perryman

 

[zyzzbruh]

All in on Stringer. Has game breaking talent and there is nothing like a shot at a flag to encourage a player to toe the line.

If he does play up we have a strong enough culture to withstand it and if he fails to perform we go with the forward line we have today. If he spurs Logan and Joel onto greater heights then that's great too.

His personal issues are long in the past. He is actually a very humble, mature bloke nowadays according to recent first hand encounters.

And I think his maligned reputation comes down to those past issues and the fact that he's that annoying opposition player people love to hate but would deep down love to have. People think a 40+ goal season wasn't enough, like C'mon the bloke is a gun.

 

[Membling]

Hard pass on Stringer.

Already struggles on the defensive side as it is in the forward line. Not what we need

 

[Bandicoot]

Wouldn’t be the worst if we lose Sheldrick. Ready to go inside mid who can play minutes forward if need be. Not saying let’s pay an arm and a leg but if it’s a who cares 4th rounder that we wouldn’t use why not.

We need to keep Sheldrick, full stop. He will be a gun.

 

[caesar88]

What does our club seem to have against small players who can win a ball at ground level in the front half???

 

[Bandicoot]

Mitch Cleary was on AFL Trade Radio launch and on it, they mentioned Collingwood is in on Stringer, only days after Cleary himself said they weren't.
Guessing they didn't have much content and went full rumour mode.

I wouldn't be unhappy with Stringer. He would certainly give us more of a marking target than Amartey is at the moment.
It's not as if we would be paying him big bucks. Probably no more than a 2 year deal @ $500K per year.

 

[Bandicoot]

What does our club seem to have against small players who can win a ball at ground level in the front half???

Well, we did recently take one with our first pick. Problem is he seems to be better at wrestling than footy.

 

[Adnico26Parker]

I wouldn't be unhappy with Stringer. He would certainly give us more of a marking target than Amartey is at the moment.
It's not as if we would be paying him big bucks. Probably no more than a 2 year deal @ $500K per year.

He wants more than that

 

[Bandicoot]

He wants more than that

He wants two years. Guaranteed $1M is far better than the guaranteed $400K Essendon is offering.

 

[Adnico26Parker]

He wants two years. Guaranteed $1M is far better than the guaranteed $400K Essendon is offering.

The $400k is not correct, he wants $600k+ for 2 years

 

[Membling]

I would say a player who can lead, bash a pack and take a mark is exactly what we need... Amartey and his fairy like attempts at marking would not be in the team right now if we had stringer.

Six contested marks this year for Stringer.

Amartey 21
Logan 21
Mclean 32

He is not a bash a pack player. He can lead sure. But seen enough of his work off ball to be less than enamoured.

Additionally wrong side of 30 and requesting 600k plus.

 

[KingV23]

Matthew Kennedy has been given the green light to look elsewhere. Is he a player we should look at?

On SM-A515F using BigFooty.com mobile app

He has the worst inside 50 efficiency in the league the last time I saw.

 

[SwansLifer]

The $400k is not correct, he wants $600k+ for 2 years

And this is the biggest problem. We aren't getting him at a bargain price for that. It's always almost with Stringer. At the end of the day I would stay well clear.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

We need to keep Sheldrick, full stop. He will be a gun.

I don’t disagree but he’s not a bloke that’s going to wait 3 years to get a go.

 

[ashep]

Valid concerns about overpaying Stringer but if paying him $600k doesn't have a material impact in terms of pushing anyone out, then i don't think it's outrageous.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Valid concerns about overpaying Stringer but if paying him $600k doesn't have a material impact in terms of pushing anyone out, then i don't think it's outrageous.

Would be all to do with price and the amount we’d give up for him. People are forgetting how good his first half a season was this year- was a dead moral AA at the turn was pathetic after but that to me doesn’t scream a bloke cooked. I tend to push off field stuff aside and trust the club can make a call there. However on the footy side he’s worth a discussion at least depending on price

 

[caesar88]

Well, we did recently take one with our first pick. Problem is he seems to be better at wrestling than footy.

It seems that way, but I think we need to persist down that route. It feels like the one clear and glaring weakness in a team that is otherwise stacked on every line.

The momentum in literally every final so far has been with the team that's had the best ground level game inside their forward 50. It just doesn't seem like we see it as a massive priority based on team selection, recruiting etc.

Although I do acknowledge it's hard to assess it fairly when we're not exactly overflowing with options in that area, but maybe that is part of the problem.

 

[Bloods86]

It seems that way, but I think we need to persist down that route. It feels like the one clear and glaring weakness in a team that is otherwise stacked on every line.

The momentum in literally every final so far has been with the team that's had the best ground level game inside their forward 50. It just doesn't seem like we see it as a massive priority based on team selection, recruiting etc.

Although I do acknowledge it's hard to assess it fairly when we're not exactly overflowing with options in that area.

I think Konstanty, Hanily and partly Magor over the last 2 years are an attempt to recruit small/medium forwards capable of pressure. Magor was a medium forward/inside mid, though hasn't been used there much.

Hanily has shown some promise, Cleary and Campbell I think have as well. Cleary probably has sights on the midfield but could give us a few years of fwd service.

We'll see what happens with Campbell this week, but it's also worth noting that we can bring more small forwards in, but that doesn't mean we'll play them in our 3 KPF, Hayward, Papley + resting mids structure. If Parker goes I think it opens the door though (given he appears to have taken Wicks spot, if not role).

I'd put it behind small defender and KPDs on our list of draft priorities anyhow.

 

[caesar88]

I think Konstanty, Hanily and partly Magor over the last 2 years are an attempt to recruit small/medium forwards capable of pressure. Magor was a medium forward/inside mid, though hasn't been used there much.

Hanily has shown some promise, Cleary and Campbell I think have as well. Cleary probably has sights on the midfield but could give us a few years of fwd service.

We'll see what happens with Campbell this week, but it's also worth noting that we can bring more small forwards in, but that doesn't mean we'll play them in our 3 KPF, Hayward, Papley + resting mids structure. If Parker goes I think it opens the door though.

I'd put it behind small defender and KPDs on our list of draft priorities anyhow.

If we aren't gonna play them then because we can't fit them into our structure, then that just speaks to my problem.

I just really feel like our lack of a forward 50 ground ball game could really cost us. Which I realise sounds incredibly silly, considering we're literally two wins away from a premiership, and we finished top of the ladder and are going into a prelim final having won four games in a row. But it just feels like the teams that win those ground balls and pressure best inside 50 seem to capitalise on their momentum the most, and if anything, the game is trending even further in that direction.

I do think a sacrifice needs to be made somewhere, either with a tall, or a flanker, or a resting mid, to get at least one dangerous ground level player into the forward line. I really think it will be worth it.

 

[bedford]

Personally, I don’t think Mitchell will be on the list next year

He will be on before Konstanty

 

[Bloods86]

If we aren't gonna play them then because we can't fit them into our structure, then that just speaks to my problem.

I just really feel like our lack of a forward 50 ground ball game could really cost us. Which I realise sounds incredibly silly, considering we're literally two wins away from a premiership, and we finished top of the ladder and are going into a prelim final having won four games in a row. But it just feels like the teams that win those ground balls and pressure best inside 50 seem to capitalise on their momentum the most, and if anything, the game is trending even further in that direction.

I do think a sacrifice needs to be made somewhere, either with a tall, or a flanker, or a resting mid, to get at least one dangerous ground level player into the forward line. I really think it will be worth it.

Yeah I just think the recruiting team have been looking at this.

I've been advocating for Campbell up forward for years, and think we should have kept one of him or Cleary in the 22 in the QF. Campbell should be given another opportunity at half forward this week.

I think Parker and Adams when playing have taken the remaining fwd spot (especially with Wicks out), though Parker has justified it in a few games. For me, Parker if in, needs to be performing in the midfield as well, and Adams needs to be a main mid or out of the team. For the short term anyway, as I said we may see this spot open back up if Parker moves on.

 

[Wheresbuddy]

I can see both Parker and Adams being overtaken by Sheldrick and Cleary in 2025. Indeed, if we are looking for improvement in our list overall, that's what we would be hoping for.

Parker I'm not too worried about given he has only a year to go (if he stays) and also has the runs on the board as a club legend.

Adams concerning still has 2 years to run and very much already looks like a fringe player. I don't think it would be unreasonable to think we would be paying him in excess if 1mil for the next 2 years. That's money that could go towards retaining Sheldrick and / or towards Chad's next contract. We could even use it for Stringer (not that I'd want to). I feel for him because I suspect we signed him not expecting Heeney to become the best mid in the game or JJ becoming a regular best 22 player so quickly. But there's no room for sentiment, especially given he is such a recent signing. If he's not looking already, I'd be making it clear to him that he's free to look around..............