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.
The 'here for the next decade' is Dockeroo's criteria I don't understand. It would rule Cox out of your list for example, and possibly Darcy. It may contain Sturt and Delean for all we know at this stage of their careers given our needs.
I just took it to mean here for the long haul. I doubt Cox/Darcy will be smashing it at 35-36 years old.

There's only 1 David Mundy.
 
Yeah look I used a decade as a round number but I’m talking about long term players really, be that 8 years, 10 years whatever, as default best 22 players when they are available. I’m probably actually overstating that number of players to be honest over that longish timeframe.

The only players on our list now from 2014 are Fyfe, Walters, Taberner and Pearce. Lachie Neale is the only other player on that list still playing footy. The other 39 or so players are no longer playing AFL footy.
But we were pretty mature then, I hear you say?

Fine. I took a quick look at what would be a relatively old team now, (Collingwood) and compared their list in 2014 to now.
Pendlebury, Elliott and Sidebottom are the only three that remain today. Adams and Grundy and Jarrod Witts (randomly) are still playing elsewhere. The rest are all gone out of the league.

So when I say decade, probably 7 years is more realistic for that core of 10 or 12 i mentioned to carry the club.
 
Yeah look I used a decade as a round number but I’m talking about long term players really, be that 8 years, 10 years whatever, as default best 22 players when they are available. I’m probably actually overstating that number of players to be honest over that longish timeframe.

The only players on our list now from 2014 are Fyfe, Walters, Taberner and Pearce. Lachie Neale is the only other player on that list still playing footy. The other 39 or so players are no longer playing AFL footy.
But we were pretty mature then, I hear you say?

Fine. I took a quick look at what would be a relatively old team now, (Collingwood) and compared their list in 2014 to now.
Pendlebury, Elliott and Sidebottom are the only three that remain today. Adams and Grundy and Jarrod Witts (randomly) are still playing elsewhere. The rest are all gone out of the league.

So when I say decade, probably 7 years is more realistic for that core of 10 or 12 i mentioned to carry the club.
At 7 years you could almost include Luke Ryan. He'll still be going around at 33.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Paracleet

Here is the father son qualification for fathers born between 1964 to 1982, also featuring how many have qualified from 1964 to present and how many are currently still in the sides as of the end of 2023.

View attachment 1863464

So a reflection that anyone born before about 1968 would have to play well into their 30’s in order to play 100 games for us, our poor list decisions early on and the eternal quest for a big trade (Tarrant trade alone arguably cost us 4x F/S qualifications).

Does our position comparatively improve if we look at say 1972-1990? Or do we still lag well into the future for F/S quals?

Edit: Actually just re-read the plot and understand my question is already answered.

So really the eternal quest for a big trade is probably what kills us in this stat.
 
Last edited:
We won't. They have more players entering the son making age range than we do.

Is there a relevance to using 1964? I vaguely remember it being about age of father and age at which AFL players generally have kids.

That skews the stat significantly against us as the only player to qualify for us in the 60’s is Kickett, Geelong for example have 20+ players in that decade.

Would we potentially catch Geelong at the end of 2025 though using 1972-2023?Geelong only have 2 players who can possibly qualify over the next 2 years but we potentially have 8.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

We won't. They have more players entering the son making age range than we do.
We will as you need to move the 1964 mark forward over the next decade as they aren't producing anymore while more get added from the back end of our stable years. Geelong topping up so much lately might also slow them down eventually.

It's very interesting though. Melbourne has the most opportunity but I can't think of any off the top of my head that have had a big impact.
 
I have high expectations for Walker, always have, but gee why couldn't this wait a few games into next year to make sure he can get back to play at the same level before giving him a longterm contract. This is no trivial injury

 
Walker obviously very highly rated by coaches just based on where he was in doig before injury.

But surely you wait a little bit to see how he recovers from his knee before comitting long term?
 
You would think there would be a clause in the contract regarding the knee.
A very good reason for him to ensure he rehabs it well.
 
I have high expectations for Walker, always have, but gee why couldn't this wait a few games into next year to make sure he can get back to play at the same level before giving him a longterm contract. This is no trivial injury

So you want it both ways now? You want us to stop letting blokes go but complain when we sign longer term deals?
 
I have only been to training twice this year. Both times for about 30 minutes. However I did park near the rehab group.
Walker is moving beautifully. They had him doing some side movement drills, he was running freely and he has has put on some muscle.
This! He’s obviously been meticulous in his rehab and training, which must have given the list management team the impression he was going to recover well, they would have had a lot of input from the S&C team before they handed him the 4 year deal.
 
Walker has the potential to be the best back pocket in the game. A niche but useful thing to have. Blokes with the athletic traits to blanket smalls with actual offensive and defensive ability don't grow on trees.
It's not that niche if the opposition have a top tier small forward/s.

I don't reckon we win the 2015 QF if Smith plays.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top