List Mgmt. 2024 Trade & List Management Thread - Part 3

[giantroo]

Spoiler: 2024 Draft Picks

 

[Topparoo]

Isn'

Am I the only one who finds it weird that the three people in charge of our list management, Brady, Will, and Todd, are all ex-footballers?

Wouldn't we be better off getting people qualified for these roles?

Isn't that an advantage?

 

[Hatchy1992]

Am I the only one who finds it weird that the three people in charge of our list management, Brady, Will, and Todd, are all ex-footballers?

Wouldn't we be better off getting people qualified for these roles?

I think Todd has demonstrated that he's more than capable at performing his designated role.

 

[perplexed]

Isn'

Isn't that an advantage?

No

 

[perplexed]

I think Todd has demonstrated that he's more than capable at performing his designated role.

How so? Our results went backwards this year.

 

[Hatchy1992]

How so? Our results went backwards this year.

Look at the way he and Jan dealt with the TT saga for one.
I'm not just looking at his time at North, I'm also looking at his hawthorn tenure too.

 

[perplexed]

Look at the way he and Jan dealt with the TT saga for one.
I'm not just looking at his time at North, I'm also looking at his hawthorn tenure too.

He is extremely good at dealing with the off-field stuff, I like that. I can listen to any one of his press conferences and feel reassured, bordering on hypnotised.

But I would like there to be some clear direction to our list management. They just look confused.

 

[Passmore]

Of all the AFL excuses for things, that one is the most reasonable.

It's not like it's important or anything.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

 

[archereleven]

He is extremely good at dealing with the off-field stuff, I like that. I can listen to any one of his press conferences and feel reassured, bordering on hypnotised.

But I would like there to be some clear direction to our list management. They just look confused.

Do you want Noble back at the club?

He's 'qualified'

On SM-G991B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Passmore]

Isn'

Isn't that an advantage?

Dunno. There might be a tertiary course?

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

 

[hilly]

Plenty of non ex-footballers doing well in list management.

 

[NMFC TID]

Time for Belly to come back? He always drove a good bargain for Freo. Good operator

 

[The Talent Scout]

I Can’t help falling in love with the above post

"Wise men say, only fool's rush in"

 

[chubbspeterson]

Am I the only one who finds it weird that the three people in charge of our list management, Brady, Will, and Todd, are all ex-footballers?

Wouldn't we be better off getting people qualified for these roles?

Plenty of recruiters/list managers are ex-footballers like Sam Power, SOS, Roughy, Jason Cripps and Matt Rosa.
Not sure you are ever really qualified as such. You just get given a chance by a team in recruiting like Thursfield under Hartley, Brady at WCE or Jason Taylor under Bevo's old man at Saints, then Pies, then Dees.
You work you way into the head recruiting or list management role, but it's largely about the door opening for you imo.

 

[perplexed]

Plenty of recruiters/list managers are ex-footballers like Sam Power, SOS, Roughy, Jason Cripps and Matt Rosa.
Not sure you are ever really qualified as such. You just get given a chance by a team in recruiting like Thursfield under Hartley, Brady at WCE or Jason Taylor under Bevo's old man at Saints, then Pies, then Dees.
You work you way into the head recruiting or list management role, but it's largely about the door opening for you imo.

I agree that it gets you a foot in the door, but it isn't particularly helpful for the role. In our group we are missing some important skills for the role which is why we always struggle with negotiations and managing list numbers. Every trade or drafting decision seems to be made independently and without an overall strategy.

This trade period the job should have been really easy: split down pick 2 to fill the obvious gaps in the list and trade in a couple of players whilst leaving our F1 for next year. Yet, we have somehow traded out a pick we wanted to use and maneuvered ourselves into the weakest possible negotiating position despite holding the most valuable asset up for trade.

Hopefully we can pull a rabbit out of the hat, but it isn't looking very promising at the moment.

 

[koshari]

Am I the only one who finds it weird that the three people in charge of our list management, Brady, Will, and Todd, are all ex-footballers?

Wouldn't we be better off getting people qualified for these roles?

Dodoros available

 

[koshari]

Plenty of recruiters/list managers are ex-footballers like Sam Power, SOS, Roughy, Jason Cripps and Matt Rosa.
Not sure you are ever really qualified as such. You just get given a chance by a team in recruiting like Thursfield under Hartley, Brady at WCE or Jason Taylor under Bevo's old man at Saints, then Pies, then Dees.
You work you way into the head recruiting or list management role, but it's largely about the door opening for you imo.

We had an academia recruitment option in luff, dare say i dont have to add any more.

 

[Chip Scab1]

I agree that it gets you a foot in the door, but it isn't particularly helpful for the role. In our group we are missing some important skills for the role which is why we always struggle with negotiations and managing list numbers. Every trade or drafting decision seems to be made independently and without an overall strategy.

This trade period the job should have been really easy: split down pick 2 to fill the obvious gaps in the list and trade in a couple of players whilst leaving our F1 for next year. Yet, we have somehow traded out a pick we wanted to use and maneuvered ourselves into the weakest possible negotiating position despite holding the most valuable asset up for trade.

Hopefully we can pull a rabbit out of the hat, but it isn't looking very promising at the moment.

Excellent summary. I'll hold fire and judge at the end of the eon (as we all should), but you summed up how I'm thinking succinctly (at half time), without having access to all the information.

 

[Tas]

I don't have a huge issue what we paid for either Parker or Daniel, given they were still contracted, I just felt we should have pushed it into 2025 picks. We need KPPs far more than the Dogs or Swans do, these picks in 2024 should have held far more value for us than the other two clubs.

I think the first three picks this year should have been off the table and if we couldn't get a deal done with a future pick then the club should have said oh well, we tried. I think a major factor was Clarkson getting involved and chasing Daniel and Parker, the other clubs would have known that when Clarkson gets involved, he wants the deals done so we lost a significant part of our haggling hand, the threat to walk away.

So they just had to hold firm and we folded. This is the pitfall of getting someone like Clarkson actively involved in the recruitment process. It compromises the ability of the people who have to haggle deals to have all the tools at their disposal to get the best outcome. So I am not blaming Rawlings for these deals. I doubt Swans or Dogs felt we would walk away from what they asked, and we didn't.

As to splitting pick 2, it may still happen come draft night, you dont really need to get these deals done during the trade period if it doesn't involve any player movement. It just may not happen if there isn't strong demand for moving up the order. If clubs in the 3-6 range do not really have a preference in terms of which of the top 6 players they will get then they have no incentive to move up. It would have been something easier to do if we were prepared to move into the middle part of the first round.

 

[Merlin007]

I don't have a huge issue what we paid for either Parker or Daniel, given they were still contracted, I just felt we should have pushed it into 2025 picks. We need KPPs far more than the Dogs or Swans do, these picks in 2024 should have held far more value for us than the other two clubs.

I think the first three picks this year should have been off the table and if we couldn't get a deal done with a future pick then the club should have said oh well, we tried. I think a major factor was Clarkson getting involved and chasing Daniel and Parker, the other clubs would have known that when Clarkson gets involved, he wants the deals done so we lost a significant part of our haggling hand, the threat to walk away.

So they just had to hold firm and we folded. This is the pitfall of getting someone like Clarkson actively involved in the recruitment process. It compromises the ability of the people who have to haggle deals to have all the tools at their disposal to get the best outcome. So I am not blaming Rawlings for these deals. I doubt Swans or Dogs felt we would walk away from what they asked, and we didn't.

As to splitting pick 2, it may still happen come draft night, you dont really need to get these deals done during the trade period if it doesn't involve any player movement. It just may not happen if there isn't strong demand for moving up the order. If clubs in the 3-6 range do not really have a preference in terms of which of the top 6 players they will get then they have no incentive to move up. It would have been something easier to do if we were prepared to move into the middle part of the first round.

Good post. The only thing I would say about Clarkson's involvement is that he is a bona fide selling point (for example, hard to imagine Luke Parker falling over himself to play for David Noble), so if he gets involved as a marketing asset it then follows the club has to honour the approach. The result is as you describe - difficult to walk away, so you pay a bit more (esp. for Daniel)

 

[Merlin007]

I agree that it gets you a foot in the door, but it isn't particularly helpful for the role. In our group we are missing some important skills for the role which is why we always struggle with negotiations and managing list numbers. Every trade or drafting decision seems to be made independently and without an overall strategy.

This trade period the job should have been really easy: split down pick 2 to fill the obvious gaps in the list and trade in a couple of players whilst leaving our F1 for next year. Yet, we have somehow traded out a pick we wanted to use and maneuvered ourselves into the weakest possible negotiating position despite holding the most valuable asset up for trade.

Hopefully we can pull a rabbit out of the hat, but it isn't looking very promising at the moment.

such as?

 

[Johnny99]

How so? Our results went backwards this year.

Yeah. But that was always a possibility when you lose 1000 games of experience. Lol

 

[Shinboner1]

I don't have a huge issue what we paid for either Parker or Daniel, given they were still contracted, I just felt we should have pushed it into 2025 picks. We need KPPs far more than the Dogs or Swans do, these picks in 2024 should have held far more value for us than the other two clubs.

I think the first three picks this year should have been off the table and if we couldn't get a deal done with a future pick then the club should have said oh well, we tried. I think a major factor was Clarkson getting involved and chasing Daniel and Parker, the other clubs would have known that when Clarkson gets involved, he wants the deals done so we lost a significant part of our haggling hand, the threat to walk away.

So they just had to hold firm and we folded. This is the pitfall of getting someone like Clarkson actively involved in the recruitment process. It compromises the ability of the people who have to haggle deals to have all the tools at their disposal to get the best outcome. So I am not blaming Rawlings for these deals. I doubt Swans or Dogs felt we would walk away from what they asked, and we didn't.

As to splitting pick 2, it may still happen come draft night, you dont really need to get these deals done during the trade period if it doesn't involve any player movement. It just may not happen if there isn't strong demand for moving up the order. If clubs in the 3-6 range do not really have a preference in terms of which of the top 6 players they will get then they have no incentive to move up. It would have been something easier to do if we were prepared to move into the middle part of the first round.

We wouldn't have been able to get Parker or Daniel without spending this year's picks

 

[pupstar]

Good post. The only thing I would say about Clarkson's involvement is that he is a bona fide selling point (for example, hard to imagine Luke Parker falling over himself to play for David Noble), so if he gets involved as a marketing asset it then follows the club has to honour the approach. The result is as you describe - difficult to walk away, so you pay a bit more (esp. for Daniel)

Just maybe we did get the best out come. We needed maturity and got the best that was available With the bonus of potential good small forward for virtually a 2nd round pick with still plenty of scope to haggle with pick 2 and future 1st if we choose. I have no doubt we did the right thing long term at a good cost.

 

[krakouers]

Time for Belly to come back? He always drove a good bargain for Freo. Good operator

Not leaving on good terms, smart guy but leaving poorly

 

[Colby Cheer Squad]

Am I the only one who finds it weird that the three people in charge of our list management, Brady, Will, and Todd, are all ex-footballers?

Wouldn't we be better off getting people qualified for these roles?

Is there a list management school somewhere? Can you earn a degree in recruiting? Perhaps a masters in trade week? A PhD in Category B?