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

Remove this Banner Ad

PlayerOriginal ClubTrade/FANew ClubResult
Isaac CummingGWSUFAAdelaideEnd of Round 1 Compo (pick 21) to GWS
Josh BattleSt KildaUFAHawthornRound 1 Compo (Pick 8) to St.Kilda
Tom CampbellSt KildaDFAMelbourneNo Compensation
Harry PerrymanGWSUFACollingwoodRound 1 Compo (Pick 16) to GWS
Elliott HimmelbergAdelaideUFAGold CoastNo Compensation
Nick HaynesGWSUFACarltonNo Compensation
Alex Neal-BullenMelbourneTradeAdelaideRound 2 Pick (28) to Melbourne
Jack DarlingWest CoastTradeNorth MelbourneRound 4 pick (68) to WCE
Jack GrahamRichmondUFAWest CoastEnd of Round 2 Compo (Pick 42) to Richmond

 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Their list is the oldest in the comp. Pendles, Sidey, Howe, Elliot, WHE, Mitchell, Cox, Crisp are all best 22 that still contribute and they would all be on very reasonable deals i imagin. The players who would be or will be on big money are most likely JDG, Moore, Daicos x 2, Quaynor, Hill and possibly Maynard. They could definitely fit in Houston and Perryman, especially with Noble going out. Mcstay was brought in on a very reasonable deal and players like Lipinksi, Cameron and Frampton were discards from other clubs on cheap deals.
I have no doubt they could fit them in.

It’s more so of the “sign on bonus” where part of the deal is heavily front ended and I can’t imagine the Pies offering anywhere near what us or the Blues did.

Pies has been caught out before with Treloar, Grundy and Stephenson too.
 
Sydney didn’t have Parker in their best 22 and when he finally made his way back in through other players being injured, they played hm as a defensive forward on tall defenders.

I’d like Parker at North, but if the Swans are being difficult I’d like North to offer whatever pick they think he’s trade currency is and move on. No games. Don’t get desperate. This deal should’ve been really straight forward.
Yep, let the list team at Cola explain why a 290 gamer wasn't granted his wish to play for another 3 years on good coin.

**** them campaigners

On SM-G991B using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Houston thing is interesting.

He's definitely been going to the Dees, then Carlton, now Collingwood, all within a few weeks.

Fact is we have currency that outweighs any other club.

Still reckon its either us or he stays, with staying probably the most likely outcome.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I’d love to know what actual response behind closed doors Caleb Daniel has told our list management team

Has given nothing to the media

But is clearly still stringing us along
 
Houston thing is interesting.

He's definitely been going to the Dees, then Carlton, now Collingwood, all within a few weeks.

Fact is we have currency that outweighs any other club.

Still reckon its either us or he stays, with staying probably the most likely outcome.
Its the way its always been.

Pretty clear to me that the journos have only been listening to the list managers of Carlton and Collingwood, and maybe Houston's management, when the real concern is Port.
 
Trading wise it is a good deal for Collingwood, the question needs to be how they can replace Noble and Richards, both fairly modest players, with Perryman and Houston who will presumably both be on upwards of 800k per year, and still remain under the salary cap?
Didn't they have a decent amount of cap space as they are planning on a heap of their old veterans retiring in the next 1-2 years?

It's an all or nothing play, if they have a bad year and Perryman doesn't elevate to his salary it could really bad for them but I think they will be hard to beat in the next 1-2 years.

Personally I hope they crash and burn and go full Richmond.
 
I mostly agree that the rounds should be locked in, but FA compo is a necessary evil. Otherwise, you get the big teams raiding the little teams forever and ever.
Free agency is supposed to let players control where they go and not depend on their club to make a deal. It is not - at least officially - intended to facilitate ‘attractive’ clubs to pick up players for free.

The simple answer is to make the destination club cough up the compensation pick(s). Just work out the point value of the compo and then transfer picks as if it were a trade. Or deduct points from the destination club.
This is such an obvious solution to all the current issues it suggests there are “other” reasons it’s not implemented.
 
IF : Caleb Daniel hasn't got the cojone's to declare he want's a trade out of Bulldog's.

THEN : He can stay there and be Bevo's part time, bench warming sub.
 
Houston thing is interesting.

He's definitely been going to the Dees, then Carlton, now Collingwood, all within a few weeks.

Fact is we have currency that outweighs any other club.

Still reckon its either us or he stays, with staying probably the most likely outcome.
No way :D. He'll be at Collingwood or Carlton.

He doesn't want to come to us and Port Adelaide despite what they've said won't keep him on the list. Collingwood with pick 13 and maybe something else to sweeten it will be enough.
 
What 2 top 10 picks for a pick 2?

Pretty similar to splitting pick 2 for pick 6 and 13

It's not though as bombers could finish top 8... so then it's a 11-14. We can all say they are crap and their list is crap yes but with that same list they were in the top 2 and top 4 for parts of last ssn.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Its like waiting for the girl you fancy to pick between you and your best mate.Sorry wouldnt give her the time of day.
 
Free agency is supposed to let players control where they go and not depend on their club to make a deal. It is not - at least officially - intended to facilitate ‘attractive’ clubs to pick up players for free.

The simple answer is to make the destination club cough up the compensation pick(s). Just work out the point value of the compo and then transfer picks as if it were a trade. Or deduct points from the destination club.
This is such an obvious solution to all the current issues it suggests there are “other” reasons it’s not implemented.
I’ve said this 100 times.

Free Agency in its current form is just a mechanism for big clubs to take talent for cap space (which is questionable with under the table deals) and remain at the top end of the ladder.

If you start making the acquiring club give up draft capital then watch the silly deals come to an end and clubs be more thoughtful about who they want to bring in.

The argument for Free Agency was to give players the freedom to move. This doesn’t stop movement it just means that the big clubs will have to give fair value and the capital sourced from the acquisition goes to the club losing the Free Agent, which doesn’t further compromise the draft.

The big question is would have Hawthorn given Battle that deal if they had to cough up the equivalent of a top 10 pick? I would have thought the answer was no.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I was all for Houston but **** him and **** port. Hope the campaigner ends up like that dickhead Tim Kelly, demanded to be traded to W.A but only would accept west coast. We've given the player's too much power.
 
I’ve said this 100 times.

Free Agency in its current form is just a mechanism for big clubs to take talent for cap space (which is questionable with under the table deals) and remain at the top end of the ladder.

If you start making the acquiring club give up draft capital then watch the silly deals come to an end and clubs be more thoughtful about who they want to bring in.

The argument for Free Agency was to give players the freedom to move. This doesn’t stop movement it just means that the big clubs will have to fair value and the capital sourced from the acquisition goes to the club losing the Free Agent, which doesn’t further compromise the draft.

The big question is would have Hawthorn given Battle that deal if they had to cough up the equivalent of a top 10 pick? I would have thought the answer was no.
The problem would be the players association.
They want the big deals.
This would stop them
 
Its like waiting for the girl you fancy to pick between you and your best mate.Sorry wouldnt give her the time of day.
It really isn’t. It’s like offering a job to a good candidate and getting sad they don’t sign up on the spot.
 
I'm coming around to the idea that if we want to rise up the ladder we need to stop worrying about drafting and trading so much and focus in the short term on getting our accounting department up to scratch. We seem to lag well behind the other clubs in fiscal creativity.
Like every year when we play on the gc take our players out for a good time and have them enjoy it.
Hopefully the next pick 6 and 13 deal for rioli will be ours.
Only half joking
 
The problem would be the players association.
They want the big deals.
This would stop them
**** em.

Their complaint was that the system restricted player movement. Making the change to have the acquiring club give up the capital doesn’t impact that.

All it does is make clubs accountable for bringing in Free Agents.

At the moment you just have big clubs attracting the lion share of FA’s for stuff all. All they have to do is give up cap space, which is farcical when you consider the under the table shit that goes on at some of these clubs.
 
They are though - for them pick 6 is far more valuable as currency for trading for experienced players than it is selecting 18 year old from the draft pool
You clearly graduated cum laude from the Alan Bond school of Negotiations.

What it is worth to them is only half the equation, too wit, if one were looking to buy a car that gave them $20,000 worth of value or utility, but the market value was only $10,000, they'd be a damn fool to pay $20,000.

It's the same principle here, draft picks may be worthless to GC but that doesn't mean they need to be pissing them away without realizing their true value.

Of course, there could be another latent variable at play encouraging such shenanigans...
 
The smart solution would be for the AFL to simplify the Academy/FS picks - you want a player drafted in Round 1? That costs a Round 1 pick (any pick). You want two players drafted in Round 1? That's two Round 1 picks? You don't have them? Bad luck.

This would stop all the junk picks being used in a much cleaner way, and it would stop the first round of the draft blowing out into the 30s which is a real chance with all the FS/Academy and FA compo picks. Sure, you'd get teams like GC trading back to pick 17/18, but at least they wouldn't be throwing them away like they do now.

But that's a very simple solution, and the AFL like to needlessly complicate things.
There's probably an argument to be made that you need to use your natural round 1 pick in the first instance (ie. don't trade out of rd 1 if you want a free hit player).
 

Remove this Banner Ad

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

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top