List Mgmt. 2024 Draft & Trade Hypotheticals

[Ticky009]

 

[Dubai Quacker]

OK draft watchers, who are some small forwards I can hope we call out on draft night and then be disappointed when we pick some flanker whose standout attribute is his endurance instead?

Malakai Champion.

Won't be a high pick, but he's the best of the Sandgroper small forwards.

Of course .... if you don't mind your small forwards a bit taller (190cm-ish) .... Hamish Davis!

 

[Membling]

OK draft watchers, who are some small forwards I can hope we call out on draft night and then be disappointed when we pick some flanker whose standout attribute is his endurance instead?

Berry

But I just do not want to go for a reach at our first.

 

[wolftone57]

They have certainly got to do something and in no small way in the off season. The stakes couldnt be higher surely for Longmire and co - the 22 and 24 swans have a smell of Greg Norman about them.

Well said. I think when you take into account the parts of the game that win big games we only fit one category, scoring off turnovers. But they have to turnover & if you don't pressure them they won't as we saw in the GF. Lions were #1 for Pressure, #3 for Contested Possession, #1 for Clearances, #5 for Stoppages. We did not rate in any of those. We were #16 for Contested Possession & it showed

 

[caesar88]

Berry

But I just do not want to go for a reach at our first.

Would he be a good player?

 

[Kiama Chris]

Yeah, I don't have much confidence in them either. It isn't just the bad starts. We need some players who can win contested possession. Most of our guys get pushed off it. We are great on the outside. But lack that big bodied mid who gets it done. I like Sheldrick, even though he is small, like Rowie, he will fight like the devil to get ball in a contested situation. Rowie, Mills & Sheldrick are the only ones who can. Gulden battles hard but just doesn't have the core strength. I think Blakey, Llloyd or Fox could spend time there but also Roberts & Mitchell. Mitchell is the guy. That hard nut. I think with development from Kirky & Matthews he could be a great addition.

Sheldrick has a low centre of gravity and solid thighs.
Mitchell is, as you say, a decent sized unit and tough, but I believe they are going to test him out as a HBF rather than as a hybrid mid.
Cleary was terrific as a first hands-on mid in the Allies.
Roberts might find his way back in there at some point because he's hard as a too.

 

[caesar88]

Malakai Champion.

Won't be a high pick, but he's the best of the Sandgroper small forwards.

Of course .... if you don't mind your small forwards a bit taller (190cm-ish) .... Hamish Davis!

Were you this ignorant of assignment criteria when you were in school, DQ?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Agree with the Mills call just don't know if moving him from the backline will allow us to keep all of Campbell Lloyd and Florent out of the backline which is a worry

I really don’t care about that you win games in the middle and Mills is in there for me. Wouldn’t play Campbell near the backline small forward or in the VFL

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Yep wer paying the difference between the average salary and his next year . So approx 350-400k

Makes zero difference we would have done our books off him being here. Have to use 95% of the TPP anyway

 

[Kiama Chris]

Would he be a good player?

Looks like he'll go too early for us. Early teens most likely. Kicks goals.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

media suggesting one of the Whitlock boys for us..

Rich probably take one earlier. I like the ide of one of them assuming Hotton isn’t there

 

[Membling]

Would he be a good player?

Yup.

Looks to be around the 12 - 25 range. Coin toss between him and Kako as best small fwd.

Hotton would also be interesting to take as a formerly touted top five prior to ACL. Scored a heap of goals and able to run through the middle.

Gerryn or Faull other options at KPF that could be good at next pick. Could be a very interesting draft

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Berry

But I just do not want to go for a reach at our first.

He won’t get to our pick be gone between 10-16. Wouldn’t be a reach.

 

[wolftone57]

Campbell doesn't worry me, the way the coaches use him does.

Yes I agree here. If I remember rightly he kicked 4 goals basically playing forward pocket in the Futures Match. He is a Mid/Small Forward. Not a HB. He is ok on the wing but not his position.

 

[Membling]

He won’t get to our pick be gone between 10-16. Wouldn’t be a reach.

More so a general statement on not wanting to reach at our pick.

Berry would not be a reach there at all

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Yup.

Looks to be around the 12 - 25 range. Coin toss between him and Kako as best small fwd.

Hotton would also be interesting to take as a formerly touted top five prior to ACL. Scored a heap of goals and able to run through the middle.

Gerryn or Faull other options at KPF that could be good at next pick. Could be a very interesting draft

If Hotton is there I am not thinking twice and calling his name. No1 on my half realistic list that I’ve worked on.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

More so a general statement on not wanting to reach at our pick.

Berry would not be a reach there at all

Oh got ya mate. Yeah the only two I am interested in as smalls are Berry/Hotton with the latter being more a half forward than a SF. Feel he ends as a bonafide mid

 

[Kbroome]

If Hotton is there I am not thinking twice and calling his name. No1 on my half realistic list that I’ve worked on.

Yep but GWS and WB will grab him imo but im guessing your semi realistic means picked up within 5 picks of our first selection and also available to us

 

[wolftone57]

Some very big Debbie downers in this thread. Just because we lost the GF doesn't mean we are shot. You would be surprised how much a 1% difference in something can have a massive flow on effect. I personally have said countless time that 1% change is a forward line restructure and the involvement of Cleary and Sheldrick in 2025. Thats pretty much it

Not just Cleary & Sheldrick. Mitchell, Wicks, Hanily, Buller, Snell, Edwards. We need to develop all our list. I think there is a problem there.

 

[wolftone57]

It's a club

Port Melbourne is a footy club. Glenelg is a footy club. Sydney Swans & every other AFL team is a business. They ceased to be a footy club when they stopped being community friendly. They have no clubrooms, no direct involvement of the members (we don't even elect the Board of an AFL club that is done by an exclusive 'Membership'). Hence, not really a club anymore. I can join Glenelg or Port Melbourne & I as a member have the right to vote on the board. Not in the AFL I don't.

 

[Bandicoot]

Annoyed we're paying any of Parkers contract. North wanted him, they should be taking his whole contract

This is the problem when you back end contracts. Why should North pay all of the last year of his contract when that is significantly higher than his previous years.

 

[Bandicoot]

I interpreted it as we are paying the difference between the 2025 contract at Sydney and the average of the 4 years of his last deal at Sydney (it would be even better if it was the average of the North 3 year deal). But its probably like 100-150k that we have to pay Parker and that is for 2025 only. In the end for Parker's list spot we save roughly 500-600k (when you factor in the new rookie that will fill it). All that money can go to Chad

So many comments here recently have been about Chad not being a part of the centre square unit but actually playing half forward. I wouldn't want to be paying $1M+ for a half forward.

 

[wolftone57]

I don't know why we always put such limitations on how and when a player can improve.

Heeney just went from good but incredibly frustrating player who didn't even finish top 10 in the B&F to winning the thing after the best season of his career and being one of the best players in the comp.... at age 28... with one simple coaching move.

As long as we are constantly looking to maximise our players potential, they can get better no matter where they are at in their careers.

Do I trust that our coaches will always do that, no I do not.

I don't trust the coaches at all. They start to make the right moves then they regress into the same old, same old. These players can't play the old style. They are not that type but when we were not going well, the game plan suddenly became incredibly defensive. It is the reason the game against Port blew out so violently. The players were unsure what to do. There was no onfield leadership & the Coaches were not helping. In fact, the solutions were all wrong. If you are being slaughtered in the middle, you would think you might change things drastically. But they didn't. They just rotated the same lot, threw Heens forward, then as a spare in defence & that was that. What about Roberts, Lloyd & Blakey to the mids. Fox back. Heens one out in the goal square. Campbell back. McDonald to defence is just horrible. If you want to win you have to get the ball in the mids.

Horse has only one plan when things go drastically wrong. Flood. Put extras, lots, behind the ball. It doesn't matter if you can't get the ball past the centre as they have 5 players to one there. He did the same in the GF & they were ready for it, and punished us by kicking short. We only guard space, we do not man up especially when flooding. It is a major flaw in our game. Our coaches have to trust the players one on one. We have to start winning those contests. Our coaches do not trust the players one on one. Heeney yes. Maybe McCartin. But the rest? Nope.

 

[Bandicoot]

Big Mac 27 HO, 12 Disp, 2 marks, 6 tackles in 1.25 games. Ladhams 10 HO, 6 Disp, 2 Marks, 2 tackles in 1 game

Not a lot of difference, except of course HO. Ladhams HO to advantage, 0. Mac 16.

Ladhams was still contracted. Stretch was not.

 

[Bandicoot]

Berry

But I just do not want to go for a reach at our first.

Hopefully this list manager has learnt from the mistakes of his predecessors.

 

[SSwans2011]

Big Mac 27 HO, 12 Disp, 2 marks, 6 tackles in 1.25 games. Ladhams 10 HO, 6 Disp, 2 Marks, 2 tackles in 1 game

Not a lot of difference, except of course HO. Ladhams HO to advantage, 0. Mac 16.

This is very selective. Ladhams played his one game this year in a shellacking where he was second ruck and spent most of the game forward, far away from where the ball was.

McAndrew played as the first ruck in the second of the two games he played last year. In the first of those two games he had 3 touches, 7 hitouts, and was subbed out. So if we're being selective, it works both ways.

Ladhams has also had some very prolific performances as first ruck. With him we have somebody that we know can come straight in next year if Grundy is injured. With McAndrew we had someone that might potentially have eventually been good enough. Unfortunately for him, Green has overtaken him and made him redundant.

Delisting Ladhams and going into next season with Green and McAndrew as our back-up rucks would have been a dumb and risky move IMO.