Rumour 2024 Rumours and Speculation Part 3

[1990crow]

Can def see Nank squeezed out of the 22 with a healthy list. Something has to give with 4 new players that will all be demanding starting spots.

Yep, but his potential should see him eventually become permanent replacing players like Sholl, Laird, and dare I say it Hinge.

 

[Scorpus]

We finished bottom 4 last year. There should be plenty of turnover in the 22 and very few spots should be safe

 

[Crow till I die]

Yep, but his potential should see him eventually become permanent replacing players like Sholl, Laird, and dare I say it Hinge.

Assuming none of the players really regress (excluding Tex, Smith as senior veteran players), Sholl, if he keeps up his good form may be one we look to strategically allow to explore options to get some extra draft collateral. we are covered in his position quite well and is he plays next year like last, he will have decent value. We may have one or 2 others who are in a similar position - maybe its time to start making hay by being strategic in trading out to trade up so to speak

 

[1990crow]

Assuming none of the players really regress (excluding Tex, Smith as senior veteran players), Sholl, if he keeps up his good form may be one we look to strategically allow to explore options to get some extra draft collateral. we are covered in his position quite well and is he plays next year like last, he will have decent value. We may have one or 2 others who are in a similar position - maybe its time to start making hay by being strategic in trading out to trade up so to speak

Sholl and Berry should be trade bait.

 

[Golumless]

Id be surprised if Nank was on the chopping block given who else we potentially have on it.

Delist Nank, Taylor and Bond next year?
What planet are you on ?
We have a dozen players we would delist before one of those guys goes.
Nankervis is close to best 22

We are clearly not looking to delist Nankervis, the guy played 20 straight games from R4 until season’s end

Taylor’s a wait-and-see, but I suspect if he isn’t on our list next year, he’ll definitely be on another team’s list in VIC

Bond I’d keep around for the niche role he plays, but the 1-year contract isn’t exactly a guarantee of one’s future

A year is a very long time in football, and being out of contract is a dangerous time for anyone not in the best 22.

The main worry for Nankervis is if Cummings and Hinge put up big numbers, Milera finds form (and both parties don't look at FA) and Oscar Ryan booms as a prospect. Especially if Nank doesn't fire a shot in the early part of the season. It's unlikely we'll pull the trigger this year, but you get a situation where we need an extra list spot and those things happen, we may look at Nank as expendable. The good news for Nank is destiny is in his own hand, but he needs to kick on this year.

I think it's likely we delist Taylor and Bond at the end of the year. Bond does a niche role, but with Michaelanny we may opt to just not have it (and considering we only gave him a year after a pretty hot run, I doubt we're too keen on the idea of Bond as a locked in best 22 member at this point) and Taylor is just in no-mans-land as a prospect with Draper coming in and Edwards being in a position to also challenge for a best 22 spot.

 

[LoBu]

The Bond decision is non-urgent. It's only 3 months since they re-signed him to a 12-month contract extension, and the Crows haven't played a game since. If they rated him highly then surely they would have given him longer.

He may well get another contract, but I doubt they would be looking to re-sign him in the first half of the year.

I wonder if they offered a longer contract for minimum chips, could be that after his end to the season that Bond backs himself to be worth more?

Just speculating.

 

[Danger in Texas]

Sholl and Berry should be trade bait.

I don’t mind Sholl in the 22 if he performs like he did last year (especially as he seemed to turn himself into a bit of a goal-kicker), but also wouldn’t be unhappy if he’s overtaken by younger players

Berry should’ve been traded this off-season

 

[GreyCrow]

Assuming none of the players really regress (excluding Tex, Smith as senior veteran players), Sholl, if he keeps up his good form may be one we look to strategically allow to explore options to get some extra draft collateral. we are covered in his position quite well and is he plays next year like last, he will have decent value. We may have one or 2 others who are in a similar position - maybe its time to start making hay by being strategic in trading out to trade up so to speak

This is the AFC - the Adelaide Family Club

Once in you cant leave

 

[Vader]

I wonder if they offered a longer contract for minimum chips, could be that after his end to the season that Bond backs himself to be worth more?

Just speculating.

Would take balls of steel to refuse a multi-year contract in his situation. Possible... but highly unlikely.

 

[StickerMan]

This is the AFC - the Adelaide Family Club

Once in you cant leave

Kinda like the Australian Cricket XI

 

[Vader]

I suspect what happened with Bond is that they were considering delisting him, and decided to give him a shot at the big time, to give them a few more data points before making their final decision. Bond did OK - surprisingly well, so they decided not to delist him. Instead, they offered him a 12-month contract.

In giving him a 12-month contract, they are saying that they saw just enough in him - not enough to have the confidence to offer him a longer contract - but enough to keep him out of the immediate delist pile.

He will need to keep improving if he is to survive the 2025 killing season. The ball is now in his court - he has to justify the faith they showed by keeping him on. Do that, and he could yet survive. Fail to do so, and it is very easy to see him on the delist pile in October next year.

 

[Crow till I die]

This is the AFC - the Adelaide Family Club

Once in you cant leave

Sounds a bit like one of the UK's very best dark comedy slogans - The league of Gentlemen (and my long term avatar is in the picture below )

 

[Cromulant]

A year is a very long time in football, and being out of contract is a dangerous time for anyone not in the best 22.

The main worry for Nankervis is if Cummings and Hinge put up big numbers, Milera finds form (and both parties don't look at FA) and Oscar Ryan booms as a prospect. Especially if Nank doesn't fire a shot in the early part of the season. It's unlikely we'll pull the trigger this year, but you get a situation where we need an extra list spot and those things happen, we may look at Nank as expendable. The good news for Nank is destiny is in his own hand, but he needs to kick on this year.

I think it's likely we delist Taylor and Bond at the end of the year. Bond does a niche role, but with Michaelanny we may opt to just not have it (and considering we only gave him a year after a pretty hot run, I doubt we're too keen on the idea of Bond as a locked in best 22 member at this point) and Taylor is just in no-mans-land as a prospect with Draper coming in and Edwards being in a position to also challenge for a best 22 spot.

Bond does have the added bonus of playing in a position where we lack depth. Small forwards have done numbers on us for a while now, and teams are looking for more than one.

I cant see him as a "likely" delist at all.

Taylor is a possibility but even then I reckon theres a few in front of him.

 

[cmndstab]

The thing is, we're now at the stage where even if we leave out all of the Murphy, Smith, Laird and Crouch type senior players, AND put Walker out to pasture, AND don't bring back the likes of Milera, Jones, Schoenberg, etc, we still have more than 22 players who fall into either the bucket of "talented youth" or "currently performing senior player".

Keays, Curtin, Thilthorpe, Rachele, N. Murray, Dawson, Soligo, Michalanney, Taylor, Hinge, Rankine, Worrell, Peatling, Nankervis, Neal-Bullen, Dowling, Fogarty, Draper, Bond, O'Brien, Cumming, and Keane is already 22 players, without even getting to the likes of Pedlar, Ryan, Edwards, T. Murray, Welsh, Cook.

As we continue to bring in more talent, and (hopefully) get rid of the list-cloggers, we are going to end up in a situation where genuinely talented youth simply won't fit into the side.

 

[GreyCrow]

The thing is, we're now at the stage where even if we leave out all of the Murphy, Smith, Laird and Crouch type senior players, AND put Walker out to pasture, AND don't bring back the likes of Milera, Jones, Schoenberg, etc, we still have more than 22 players who fall into either the bucket of "talented youth" or "currently performing senior player".

Keays, Curtin, Thilthorpe, Rachele, N. Murray, Dawson, Soligo, Michalanney, Taylor, Hinge, Rankine, Worrell, Peatling, Nankervis, Neal-Bullen, Dowling, Fogarty, Draper, Bond, O'Brien, Cumming, and Keane is already 22 players, without even getting to the likes of Pedlar, Ryan, Edwards, T. Murray, Welsh, Cook.

As we continue to bring in more talent, and (hopefully) get rid of the list-cloggers, we are going to end up in a situation where genuinely talented youth simply won't fit into the side.

And the clever strategy is to decide/hope who has value and who is not going to attract offers

 

[cmndstab]

And the clever strategy is to decide/hope who has value and who is not going to attract offers

Definitely, and furthermore, it should change the way we approach the draft/trade period. Previously there was such a dearth of talent on our list that we needed to take lots of swings at talent. But if we have 25-30 above average players on the list already, there's no point adding several more above average players. Instead we should go all-in on getting 1 or 2 elite talents per year. Package draft picks together to move up in the first round, or offer trades to convert two good players into one great player, etc.

If all goes well we should be able to switch from replenish mode into upgrade mode.

 

[tinman]

I suspect what happened with Bond is that they were considering delisting him, and decided to give him a shot at the big time, to give them a few more data points before making their final decision. Bond did OK - surprisingly well, so they decided not to delist him. Instead, they offered him a 12-month contract.

In giving him a 12-month contract, they are saying that they saw just enough in him - not enough to have the confidence to offer him a longer contract - but enough to keep him out of the immediate delist pile.

He will need to keep improving if he is to survive the 2025 killing season. The ball is now in his court - he has to justify the faith they showed by keeping him on. Do that, and he could yet survive. Fail to do so, and it is very easy to see him on the delist pile in October next year.

I don't disagree with any of this. Just mystified why we would give Borlase two years and Bond one.

Bond still with plenty of improvement in him whereas Borlase I think what you see is what you get. He has a limited ceiling.

I get these guys play different positions but I just hate where guys get delisted because they are out of contract and they have performed better than guys with a contract. List needs a factor of course.

It's a tough business.

 

[spenze]

Sholl and Berry should be trade bait.

Berry would struggle to make Glenelgs best 22 next year

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Glenelg are entering the AFL

20th team and will get rid of the bye

 

[cleanhands]

Glenelg are entering the AFL

20th team and will get rid of the bye

Won’t have to alter their salary cap either

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Won’t have to alter their salary cap either

And Richmond are letting them wear their traditional strip just to troll Port

 

[cleanhands]

And Richmond are letting them wear their traditional strip just to troll Port

Zeez Kochie would burst a blood vessel

 

[Vader]

I don't disagree with any of this. Just mystified why we would give Borlase two years and Bond one.

Bond still with plenty of improvement in him whereas Borlase I think what you see is what you get. He has a limited ceiling.

I get these guys play different positions but I just hate where guys get delisted because they are out of contract and they have performed better than guys with a contract. List needs a factor of course.

It's a tough business.

Put simply, Borlase has shown more, is more consistent, and is in an area of greater need.

I concur that Borlase has a low ceiling, but I'm not convinced that Bond's ceiling is any higher (if it's even as high as Borlase's).

 

[skam85]

Put simply, Borlase has shown more, is more consistent, and is in an area of greater need.

Zero of this sentence is true

 

[hippyhippy]

Zero of this sentence is true

I think borlase will only ever be a backup... Hes not good enough for the main team unless he improves alot at this stage. But if thats the role hes happy with then i think it would suit him. Some players will only ever be role players.