List Mgmt. 2024 List Mismanagement and Trading Part 2

[Scorpus]

Why would Clurey agree to be delisted in contract?

They can sign him as a DFA, for free, as soon as Port delist him.

Unless there was some advantage for West Coast getting him as a DFA it makes no sense why he wasn't just traded for a junk pick in contract

 

[crows dude]

Port delisting and paying out Clurey despite him having a contract for 2025 is exactly what we should be doing to at least one player

He’s quit looking for other opportunities though. He’s seperate to the 3 delisted

 

[Danger in Texas]

Unless there was some advantage for West Coast getting him as a DFA it makes no sense why he wasn't just traded for a junk pick in contract

Maybe WCE were still tossing up whether to keep Rotham or bring in Clurey? Timing would be right as both have been delisted in the past 24 hours

 

[Mutineer]

He’s quit looking for other opportunities though. He’s seperate to the 3 delisted

He's quit knowing he has a home elsewhere, likely the Weagles?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Why would Clurey agree to be delisted in contract?

He doesn't have to agree, as Port can just make the decision to pay him out... unless another club like West Coast pick him up & pay part of his salary.

 

[Danger in Texas]

He doesn't have to agree, as Port can just make the decision to pay him out... unless another club like West Coast pick him up & pay part of his salary.

Sounds like it was initiated by Clurey, at least

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Sounds like it was initiated by Clurey, at least

Fair chance as I was expecting Clurey to be traded to West Coast for a nominal pick.

 

[rabidcrow]

I think there's four options:

1. We draft Welsh in the ND
2. We pick him as a rookie and upgrade Borlase or T. Murray (we need to make three picks and we'll use one of them to upgrade Keane)
3. Smith retires and focuses on playing, leading and mentoring in the SANFL, we trade up in the ND and pick Welsh as a rookie
4. We don't pick Welsh at all and trade up in the ND

#3 is the most desirable scenario, but #1 is the most likely.

I think we are reading too much into Reid’s comments. We picked Tyler a long way out - even to the point of getting permission for him to plate for us all year. He kicked 8 in his only under 18 game (I think it was his only one) and kicked 5 in one of his later Sanfl games

And there is no doubt we would have our development guys working with him all year

Its all ducks and drakes - we don’t have any draft capital, we don’t want to use more than we have too so playing in it down to discourage a bid

But everything we have done for the last year a bit screams we are picking him regardless - the rest is noise


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[DJ75]

Sounds like it was initiated by Clurey, at least

Wouldn't surprise me if it's just more Port spin. Nothing they do is honest.

 

[GROTTO]

Its all ducks and drakes - we don’t have any draft capital, we don’t want to use more than we have too so playing in it down to discourage a bid

But everything we have done for the last year a bit screams we are picking him regardless - the rest is noise

Port could "elect" to pick him at 13 or 29?

 

[Cromulant]

Port could "elect" to pick him at 13 or 29?

Can't see it.

We wont match a bid and they'll be left with a player they don't want.

 

[Crow-eater]

It's unlikely, given the draft picks we have left. It's possible - but unlikely. It is, however, looking increasingly likely that they may choose to take him in the RD instead.

There's not really an option for us to take him in the RD is there? Unless we upgrade 2 rookies?

 

[FR0GGY]

They have to pay any difference between Port's 2025 salary and his Weagle 2025 salary, assuming the Weagles are paying him less than Port were.

Why’s that, if port delist him surely it’s his good luck and they have to pay him.
Then what west coast do is up to them?

 

[Vader]

There's not really an option for us to take him in the RD is there? Unless we upgrade 2 rookies?

As you yourself noted - all we need to do is upgrade 2 rookies.

 

[Crow-eater]

As you yourself noted - all we need to do is upgrade 2 rookies.

Guess we'll find out at our next list lodgement what the plan is. We'll need to say we're upgrading before the draft, yes?

 

[Vader]

Why’s that, if port delist him surely it’s his good luck and they have to pay him.
Then what west coast do is up to them?

It's called "Unjust Enrichment" - basically getting paid twice for the same job. It's covered in detail in Section 12 of the AFLPA CBA, on pages 107-8.

Port are only responsible for that part of their contract with Clurey that is not already covered by his payments from the Weagles.

You can read all about it here:
https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/do...3-e9615831d56b/2023-2027-AFL-and-AFLW-CBA.pdf

 

[DJ75]

It's called "Unjust Enrichment" - basically getting paid twice for the same job. It's covered in detail in Section 12 of the AFLPA CBA, on pages 107-8.

Port are only responsible for that part of their contract with Clurey that is not already covered by his payments from the Weagles.

You can read all about it here:
https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/do...3-e9615831d56b/2023-2027-AFL-and-AFLW-CBA.pdf

'Unjust enrichment' - I know a few people like that

 

[Mutineer]

Sounds like it was initiated by Clurey, at least

Hun has Narkle going to Freo and by the sounds Clurey to the Weagles.

Narkle joined Port Adelaide in the mid-season draft last year and played 16 games for the Power, including all three finals this year.

The small forward will reportedly join Fremantle, while Clurey was linked with West Coast during the trade period.

 

[whattagun07]

Port's delistings show everyone once again, that Geelong's discards are never any good.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Port's delistings show everyone once again, that Geelong's discards are never any good.

They still have Esava...

 

[Eddie Murphy]

Ever thought they may want to stagger the departures, over 2-3 years, rather than having to recruit 10+ replacements in a single season?

The club only has so many draft resources (i.e. picks), and there's only so many players you can attract for free via Free Agency. We don't really want to be making picks in the 7th, 8th & 9th rounds of the draft, simply because we delisted too many players at the same time.

It’s not about offering them one year so they can be delisted at the end of it, it’s about offering one year so we have the flexibility to do it if we want to.

Borlase and Berry may very well justify the two years by the end of it, but if they’re not attracting any other interest (this was how the point re: Berry started) what do we have to lose extending them year by year?

And if players like Borlase and Strachan were getting more than one year elsewhere, I hope we seriously considered if another DFA/cheap trade target/draftee would be better off occupying the list spot over them (in the case of Strachan we can pretty confidently say they would).

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

We'd have to upgrade Toby Murray which is a little unusual given his time on the list so far

We won't be upgrading 2 rookies.

Keane will be the only upgrade.

We will pick Welsh... can't believe how many got sucked into Reid being non-committal because he doesn't want other clubs to know our thinking.

However, we should be delisting a player like Burgess to give ourselves as option of trading back into the draft if there is a slider we like... but I doubt we will.

 

[Scorpus]

We won't be upgrading 2 rookies.

Keane will be the only upgrade.

We will pick Welsh... can't believe how many got sucked into Reid being non-committal because he doesn't want other clubs to know our thinking.

However, we should be delisting a player like Burgess to give ourselves as option of trading back into the draft if there is a slider we like... but I doubt we will.

I was wrong anyway because Borlase and Keane are both rookies still too

 

[whattagun07]

They still have Esava...

he has 4 more years on his contract