List Mgmt. 2024 List Management thread - Trade Targets

What is the maximum (walk away point) you would pay for Bolton.

  • 9 OR 10

    Votes: 13 7.5%
  • 9 & 25

    Votes: 33 19.0%
  • 9 & 17

    Votes: 85 48.9%
  • 9 & F1

    Votes: 18 10.3%
  • 9 & 10

    Votes: 22 12.6%
  • 9, 10 & 17

    Votes: 3 1.7%

  • Total voters
    174

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sturt will kick 30+ if he plays 20+ games next year. Treacy should also be in the 30+ goal club if he stays as a forward and isn’t dragged into the second ruck role.
Jackson should hit the 30+ goals too if he doesn't have to ruck for 7 or so games like this year.
 
Sturt will kick 30+ if he plays 20+ games next year. Treacy should also be in the 30+ goal club if he stays as a forward and isn’t dragged into the second ruck role.

I want Sturt to chase and tackle like Schultz does! Will earn himself a 4 year deal if he cracks 30 too
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I want Sturt to chase and tackle like Schultz does! Will earn himself a 4 year deal if he cracks 30 too
Sturt doesn't have to pick up his average goals per game too much to catch Schultz (1.21 vs 1.43), about an extra goal across 2 or 3 games. Of course he'd have to exceed it by a margin to cover some of the gap.

Tackles is where there's a big discrepancy. Schultz averaged 4.13 tackles per game last season, while Sturt just 1.21 tackles. It's a big feature of Schultz's game. It'll be an enduring image of Schultz doing a gut-busting sprint, to close down the space of a shocked opposition player thinking they could exit defence and instead be swallowed up ball and all in a Lachie tackle. Sturt probably got a few goals from those efforts, as no doubt did quite a few others.
 
I think we are 4 goals per game from being a top 4 team.

Losing Schultz hurts because now it’s 6 goals per game.

We need to kick another 3 goals and 3 goals less in defense.

Statistically we were around 300 points short of a Collingwood for the season which is only around 13 points a game.

We were around 350 points less than Brisbane or around 15 points a game. No one scored more than Brisbane.

It’s more like two and half goals a game to be the best (not top 4) and probably around four goals a game with the loss of Schultz.

I honestly still think at least 1-1.5 of these goals come from the midfield. To have just over a goal a game from non-forwards last year was pathetic tbh. That’s with Brayshaw getting 11 goals (approx 0.5 a game) by himself too.

Mathematically we’re closer than we all think. The harsh reality is that gap is going to be very hard to close.
 
I think Sharp's long kicking could be very handy. Backing Freddy and Sturt to use their pace out the back in transition.

Sharp hasn't been playing at Suns, but has a similar record to Liam until this year and was taken in the same draft. His running ability is top notch also.
 
Draft is 20 percent wa. We favour wa players.

Yeah but they have ten clubs. Each year they actually have a smaller pool to pick from at the draft than we or the South Australian clubs do.
Just a random example I just ran through the Carlton list and got a figure of 16 Victorians actually drafted by Carlton. That's only 2 more than us for WA players.
 
Yeah but they have ten clubs. Each year they actually have a smaller pool to pick from at the draft than we or the South Australian clubs do.
Just a random example I just ran through the Carlton list and got a figure of 16 Victorians actually drafted by Carlton. That's only 2 more than us for WA players.
Carlton are probably a bad example as they are notoriously bad at developing their own players and trading in ready made talent.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Yeah but they have ten clubs. Each year they actually have a smaller pool to pick from at the draft than we or the South Australian clubs do.
Just a random example I just ran through the Carlton list and got a figure of 16 Victorians actually drafted by Carlton. That's only 2 more than us for WA players.
If the draft is 50% Victorian, 15% WA, 15% SA, 20% QLD and NSW (roughly correct) than on average assuming no bias then that is how your draft would end up over 10 years.

Assuming it is easier to keep local players, then the Victorian clubs would be advantaged by a retention bonus as they draft a higher percentage of local talent.

I am talking averages, with out looking at any team list.
 
12 Months ago I would have argued a Liam Henry for Jeremy Sharp swap was a fair deal. Fast forward to 12 months later and Henry has been traded for essentially a F2 and Sharp has been delisted..
GC really dropped the ball with Sharp imo, insisting on a 2nd rounder just 12 months ago has shown to be a ridiculous (almost arrogant) ask for a non best 22 player that they obviously had no intention of giving playing time to. His running capacity and long boot will be an excellent addition as a DFA/Rookie pickup.
 
If the draft is 50% Victorian, 15% WA, 15% SA, 20% QLD and NSW (roughly correct) than on average assuming no bias then that is how your draft would end up over 10 years.

Assuming it is easier to keep local players, then the Victorian clubs would be advantaged by a retention bonus as they draft a higher percentage of local talent.

I am talking averages, with out looking at any team list.
The discussion was about a bonus for retaining players first drafted for a club. As things stand such a rule would not advantage the Victorian clubs, it would advantage the South Australian clubs and particularly advantage us in WA.
Your percentages are wrong. WA and SA are just over 15% each but all the other states and territories excluding Victoria contribute only 13% of the the pool. As it stands 55% of all current AFL players are from Victoria. Victorian players are actually over-represented compared to the state population % of the footy playing pool. Presumably as the result of a slight selection bias in favour of local. WA is actually under represented on the same metric. But whether its 50 or 55, that's still less per head than we get. That's 5.5% of the pool for each Victorian club, but for us, west coke, port and the crows its 8% each.


AFL player origin at the beginning of this season:
VICSAWANSW/ACTQLDTASNTOTHER
55%​
16%​
16%​
4%​
4%​
2%​
1%​
2%​
 
The discussion was about a bonus for retaining players first drafted for a club. As things stand such a rule would not advantage the Victorian clubs, it would advantage the South Australian clubs and particularly advantage us in WA.
Your percentages are wrong. WA and SA are just over 15% each but all the other states and territories excluding Victoria contribute only 13% of the the pool. As it stands 55% of all current AFL players are from Victoria. Victorian players are actually over-represented compared to the state population % of the footy playing pool. Presumably as the result of a slight selection bias in favour of local. WA is actually under represented on the same metric. But whether its 50 or 55, that's still less per head than we get. That's 5.5% of the pool for each Victorian club, but for us, west coke, port and the crows its 8% each.


AFL player origin at the beginning of this season:
VICSAWANSW/ACTQLDTASNTOTHER
55%​
16%​
16%​
4%​
4%​
2%​
1%​
2%​

The victorian team gets a higher percentage of local players through the draft.

Local players are easier to keep at the club.

The percentage of the pool per team is irrelevant.

Happy to agree to disagree
 
Last edited:
If we take more marks up the ground we won't get as many repeat defensive fifty entries and we will have more fast entries into our own attacking 50.

It will turn very fast. Until our forwards can mark more we need to be dominant at clearances. Once they can, we continue that.
You put too much priority on the contested marks. There are others facets of the game that are just as important such as defensive rebounding and clearances. A good team will have one of these, an elite team will have two or three. This year we sucked at all three despite having the list profile to succeed at all three. If we become too reliant on air dominance that will become our exploit.
 
You put too much priority on the contested marks. There are others facets of the game that are just as important such as defensive rebounding and clearances. A good team will have one of these, an elite team will have two or three. This year we sucked at all three despite having the list profile to succeed at all three. If we become too reliant on air dominance that will become our exploit.

You'll notice when it starts happening that we are very good at winning the ball back but what we are missing is the link up mark between the arcs so the ball doesn't come back quite as fast.

We are quite good at getting the ball out of defense, but we don't have the player on the end of it to capture and lock in the field position.
 
If Sharp can replace Henry's output, and let's not get too lofty about what that was, then it could be a huge win. But it's more likely that Sharp isn't even to Henry's level.

I would like for Jeremy to win the time trials in preseason.
I think of him like a Menagola type. Gun runner who hasn't gone hard enough in the contest yet to make it at AFL. I hope getting delisted is the kick up the backside for him and he doesn't need to do a WAFL season first to flick the switch.
 
You'll notice when it starts happening that we are very good at winning the ball back but what we are missing is the link up mark between the arcs so the ball doesn't come back quite as fast.

We are quite good at getting the ball out of defense, but we don't have the player on the end of it to capture and lock in the field position.
I disagree that we are good at getting it out of defence but I appreciate the alternative opinion. Just look at how we use Ryan for the kick out. If you want to see an elite rebounding side see how the Giants do it. That's the style I want to adopt because it is timeless and very hard to counter if you have the right players to execute it (which we do).
 
I think of him like a Menagola type. Gun runner
 
I think of him like a Menagola type. Gun runner who hasn't gone hard enough in the contest yet to make it at AFL. I hope getting delisted is the kick up the backside for him and he doesn't need to do a WAFL season first to flick the switch.
He'd have to get his body right first to be able to fill that role. Either it was mutually decided that that won't be his role at Gold Coast or it's a him issue, coz he's hardly put on any weight since his draft year. The run and carry types are usually better off staying a bit slender, but there's probably a middle ground to be had, especially coz apart from being slender he's got the chops to be an intercepting winger.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top