List Mgmt. 2024 List Mismanagement and Trading

[Eddie Murphy]

Gollant was drafted as a very slow burn given he was a matchstick and only came into the elite pathway via the Calder Cannons half way through his draft year, it was made very clear by our recruiters at the time. There's something there worth persevering with because we doný have a heap of tall depth unless we trade or draft some in. I think at this point I'd keep him over Himmelberg anyhow.

We should definitely be trying to retain both (unless we bring in Luko). Burgess is the obvious dead weight.

 

[Danger in Texas]

You wont get 2 and 22 for 6 and f1. It will be 6 and f1 outright..its too much of a drop so while it was a great sugar hit a win today, a win in the showdown now might really cost us longer term in terms of missing THAT player we really covet and need

Not necessarily, particularly in this draft

If North sees something they like that should be available at 6, they would heavily consider it. WCE traded 2 for 8 and 12 in a similar type of deal, a couple of years back

As I stated, I’m not too fussed if we fall behind the Saints, the gap between 1 and 10 is pretty minimal this year IMO. It’s more that I can see the club being willing to move the world for Draper if they rate him super highly (mainly due to there being no go-home factor, I don’t think they’d take that kind of risk for a VIC-based player)

 

[Soggy2112]

I think today has shown that

A) if ROB can get back to his previous form he’s a perfectly good ruck option.

B) English isn’t worth the money it would take to land him.

 

[Mutineer]

Neither have talent required for AFL level.

Happy for Gollant to be given another game next week, but it really would amount to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Who would he replace? Not a lot of point in resting Tex at this point, given that his career potentially has just 2 games left after today.

Have you officially given Lachie the Vader "kiss of death" ?

B.O.G. Neil Kerley Medalist.

 

[Eddie Murphy]

I think today has shown that

A) if ROB can get back to his previous form he’s a perfectly good ruck option.

B) English isn’t worth the money it would take to land him.

ROB in a contract year is probably a fine 1st team ruck. That said, some genuine depth and competition for the spot is still needed, hopefully Henry Smith

 

[FR0GGY]

Why are we even thinking of Luko. The bloke has been tried all over the park and still can't find a position. He would come with his huge contract so if we wanted him I would offer pick 60 for him. Having said that I still don't want him or his contract.

Because chances are he’ll excel back here!

 

[FR0GGY]

I think today has shown that

A) if ROB can get back to his previous form he’s a perfectly good ruck option.

B) English isn’t worth the money it would take to land him.

Probably shouldn’t base things off 1 game, if we did, we are playing off in the granny.

 

[ABAB]

I think today has shown that

A) if ROB can get back to his previous form he’s a perfectly good ruck option.

B) English isn’t worth the money it would take to land him.

Very big if, he has shown this type of once off performance in the last few years that he is back to his 2020 form but went back to being shit for a long time.

 

[Vader]

What you don't get is all clubs need decent depth and given his age Gollant should be retained.

I'm sorry... did you just use "Gollant" and "decent depth" in the same sentence?

 

[WeeBlake]

I'm sorry... did you just use "Gollant" and "decent depth" in the same sentence?

He is decent depth, even a critic can see that

 

[Vader]

Gollant was drafted as a very slow burn given he was a matchstick and only came into the elite pathway via the Calder Cannons half way through his draft year, it was made very clear by our recruiters at the time. There's something there worth persevering with because we don't have a heap of tall depth unless we trade or draft some in. I think at this point I'd keep him over Himmelberg anyhow.

This is his 5th season. There's "slow burn" and there's Gollant. At this rate his kindling might just catch by the time he celebrates his 40th birthday.

Many of us here are critical that the club is too slow to cut players who have no chance of making it - and rightly so. Gollant is one such player. He's out of contract, and all indications are that his time on Adelaide's list is coming to a close.

 

[Vader]

We should definitely be trying to retain both (unless we bring in Luko). Burgess is the obvious dead weight.

Both Gollant & Burgess are dead weight. There is no difference.

 

[Vader]

Have you officially given Lachie the Vader "kiss of death" ?

B.O.G. Neil Kerley Medalist.

View attachment 2076565

... and Mitch Grigg is a Magarey Medallist. Both are good, or better than good, SANFL footballers. Neither have any place on an AFL list.

 

[Vader]

He is decent depth, even a critic can see that

Not at AFL level, he isn't. Looks to have a strong future at SANFL level though.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Not at AFL level, he isn't. Looks to have a strong future at SANFL level though.

Yeah he is, but you are blind.

 

[Mutineer]

Not at AFL level, he isn't. Looks to have a strong future at SANFL level though.

Do you actually understand what AFL depth is?

 

[Vader]

Do you actually understand what AFL depth is?

Yes... and Gollant isn't it. The fact that we chose to play Borlase in the forward line, ahead of both Gollant & Burgess, speaks volumes about how far he is from being "decent depth".

 

[Eddie Murphy]

Yes... and Gollant isn't it. The fact that we chose to play Borlase in the forward line, ahead of both Gollant & Burgess, speaks volumes about how far he is from being "decent depth".

Our team selections, especially during that dark period, should not be any gauge of a player’s talent. We’re realistically retaining one for depth, Gollant is clearly superior if for no other reason than he’s younger.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Yes... and Gollant isn't it. The fact that we chose to play Borlase in the forward line, ahead of both Gollant & Burgess, speaks volumes about how far he is from being "decent depth".

So you would pick Borlase over Gollant as a forward?

Feel free to compare their records as forwards...

 

[dogs105]

Gollant has talent, and is a very good mark

 

[spenze]

If the decision was made to cut both of them I wouldn't lose sleep. I like Gollant as a player but it just starting to look like he won't have a career now.

 

[Vader]

Our team selections, especially during that dark period, should not be any gauge of a player’s talent. We’re realistically retaining one for depth, Gollant is clearly superior if for no other reason than he’s younger.

That's not a reason for anything.

 

[Vader]

So you would pick Borlase over Gollant as a forward?

Feel free to compare their records as forwards...

Has Borlase played as a forward at SANFL level? Borlase's record as a forward at AFL level is no worse (and no better) than Gollant's. Both have been ****ing awful.

 

[Chances Are]

Depends which draft pick he comes with

!st rounder and we take on his contract ala Jack Bowes.

 

[Danger in Texas]

I get what Vader’s saying, you have to be at least somewhat capable of performing at AFL level to be ‘decent depth’ (eg Himmelberg and Borlase)

We haven’t really seen that from Gollant in recent times. If Burgess is in fact OOC I’d absolutely delist him and keep Gollant, but realistically neither have an AFL future, so I wouldn’t care if we got rid of either one of them this year (though we need to keep one for ‘break glass’ purposes)

If we do keep Gollant though, I’d be interested to see him together with the more nimble Fog/RT around him, rather than Tex (who is still incredibly skilled, but is basically Rutten athletically these days). Gollant is not athletically gifted, so Tex isn’t a good partnership with him. It’s possible he could be more effective with better complimentary KPFs? I’m doubtful though