List Mgmt. 2024 Trade Thread - No.1

[austinnn]

Part of me hopes Steele leaves.
Not because I want him gone. But because he deserves a bit of success.
You know the bloke who has played injured the majority of the last 2 and a half year.
The bloke who went back onto the field and played a quarter with a ****ed collarbone. But yeah he doesn't lead by example.

That's certainly one type of leadership and I don't disqualify it at all. But it takes more than playing hurt and occasionally playing well to lead a team to greatness. And also like you, I think he deserves success and I think the Saints have broken him a little bit.

 

[tomjoad]

Webster, Ross probably not. But think Membrey can get you a 2nd rounder maybe?

A couple of years ago he'd get us a mid to end of 2nd. Now, we'd end up paying him to play elsewhere ala Billings.

 

[austinnn]

So let me get this straight; The Punter is advocating a Steady As She Goes approach, and The Steadier is advocating a punt?

 

[gringo2011]

His baby photos drenched in Saints gear would be a bit unusual if he was planning on walking.

I thought he was a Hawks fan?

 

[gringo2011]

A couple of years ago he'd get us a mid to end of 2nd. Now, we'd end up paying him to play elsewhere ala Billings.

Unless someone like North wants to blow those priority picks that they have to trade on a lead up forward. Would actually suit them.

 

[FlyingSledghamer]

If there's a few clubs chasing Battle as a UFA, how much do you think he's being offered?

 

[The_Steadier]

Who’s matching if someone offers 1 million a season ?.

WIth the salary cap going up ~25% it's not as crazy money as it sounds

 

[The_Steadier]

There are only 9 restricted free agents listed in that article, Battle isn't one of them. Saints don't have any this year.

I stand corrected- he's obviously not currently in the top 25% of our players in terms of current wage- so he's a UFA.

 

[Saint Shags]

If there's a few clubs chasing Battle as a UFA, how much do you think he's being offered?

Money will be part of the equation but 1m is not out of the equation with the new CBA. Years will be the big one. At 25 a contract of more than 5 years wouldn't be far out of the equation.

 

[puntking]

Just his manager trying to get more cash out of saints

 

[Yawkey way]

WIth the salary cap going up ~25% it's not as crazy money as it sounds

I’m not paying battle the sort of money that’s just crazy imo.

 

[gringo2011]

I’m not paying battle the sort of money that’s just crazy imo.

If another club offers him $1million x 4 we could probably get away with $800k x 6. It tends get a you a bit of discount being the holding club. Front load it up and so we are paying him less in the last couple of years.

 

[DougalHoward]

I thought he was a Hawks fan?

He just had a kid

 

[gringo2011]

He just had a kid

Oh right, I thought it was Josh as a baby.

 

[WhiskySaint]

I think my preferred draft solution would be that if you miss finals you get two cracks at the first round….

So finish last you get picks 1&11 then 2&12 ect…. Finish 8th and your first pick is 21.
This I think would work, bottom clubs could rebuild twice as fast.


I like father sons so I’d keep that the same, but academies start from 21 onwards and you need a pick within 10 to match. Time would be given to trade in if you didn’t have the pick.

 

[TheJackal]

Oh right, I thought it was Josh as a baby.

Sorry mate, on one of his recent insta posts you'll see his kid and partner covered in St Kilda stuff. Saints instagram page shared it not long ago.

 

[TheJackal]

I think my preferred draft solution would be that if you miss finals you get two cracks at the first round….

So finish last you get picks 1&11 then 2&12 ect…. Finish 8th and your first pick is 21.
This I think would work, bottom clubs could rebuild twice as fast.


I like father sons so I’d keep that the same, but academies start from 21 onwards and you need a pick within 10 to match. Time would be given to trade in if you didn’t have the pick.

Don't hate the idea, but it needs tweaking, no way I'd be comfortable getting pick 21 by finishing 8th. Perhaps an extra second rounder or similar, but your suggestion is too big of a gap between what 8th and 9th receives.

I've often entertained ideas around lotteries, especially during the times when tanking was a thing. But teams that are as bad as North desperately need pick 1 so again, it wouldn't work.

The academy suggestions are spot on.

 

[WhiskySaint]

Don't hate the idea, but it needs tweaking, no way I'd be comfortable getting pick 21 by finishing 8th. Perhaps an extra second rounder or similar, but your suggestion is too big of a gap between what 8th and 9th receives.

I've often entertained ideas around lotteries, especially during the times when tanking was a thing. But teams that are as bad as North desperately need pick 1 so again, it wouldn't work.

The academy suggestions are spot on.

Strangely I like the gap between 8th and 9th, it’s the perfect line to prevent tanking. Give up playing finals and get two good picks…. Seems a tough choice.

To me the gap promotes volatility, all the talent for the bottom clubs and just as importantly not much at the top. Yeah it would suck finishing 8th, but pretty soon you’re getting churned into picks again or you’re climbing to contend.

 

[ULTIMATE_WARRIOR]

I think my preferred draft solution would be that if you miss finals you get two cracks at the first round….

So finish last you get picks 1&11 then 2&12 ect…. Finish 8th and your first pick is 21.
This I think would work, bottom clubs could rebuild twice as fast.


I like father sons so I’d keep that the same, but academies start from 21 onwards and you need a pick within 10 to match. Time would be given to trade in if you didn’t have the pick.

Funnily enough I too have always advocated this idea. And I’m surprised to see someone else come up with it as well.

It’s just far too hard to rebuild a side within reasonable time with 1 first round draft pick.

I’d also enforce that bottom 10 clubs could only trade a maximum of 1 of those 2 first rounders. And future pick swaps would be for the second of those 2 first rounders.

 

[L_W_P]

Don't hate the idea, but it needs tweaking, no way I'd be comfortable getting pick 21 by finishing 8th. Perhaps an extra second rounder or similar, but your suggestion is too big of a gap between what 8th and 9th receives.

I've often entertained ideas around lotteries, especially during the times when tanking was a thing. But teams that are as bad as North desperately need pick 1 so again, it wouldn't work.

The academy suggestions are spot on.

Lotteries also don't stop tanking. If anything, they encourage it.

The NBA is full of teams that are deliberately non-competetive because they want to load up on lottery picks for 3-4 years in a row.

 

[L_W_P]

The issue with the draft is that expanding from 16 teams to 18 (and soon 20) means the space betwen picks gets larger.

Pick 1 is great but then your 2nd pick isn't until pick 21. So if you don't absolutely nail pick 1 you're in trouble again.

The other issue is the salary floor.

North paying 95% of the cap while the Giants, Swans, Dees and Blues are paying 100-105% is a joke. There's way more than $1.5m of talent on those lists when compared to North.

The Roos should be able to pay 75-80% of the cap and bank more of their salary for a longer time. Currently teams can bank 5% each year for up to 2 years.

Imagine if North could bank 20% for 5 years? Load up on their draft picks and then at the end of this year they can go buy Lukosious, Battle and Yeo and also bring in Heppell and Luke Parker

26

Luke Parker

Age

32

Ht

183cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

24.2

5star

K

12.6

5star

HB

11.6

5star

M

3.8

4star

T

5.6

5star

CL

5.8

5star

D

22.1

5star

K

12.3

5star

HB

9.9

5star

M

3.9

4star

T

5.0

5star

CL

5.5

5star

D

21.2

5star

K

11.4

4star

HB

9.8

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

8.0

5star

CL

5.2

5star

as playing coaches.

Would be an instant rebound.

 

[wannabewinner]

The issue with the draft is that expanding from 16 teams to 18 (and soon 20) means the space betwen picks gets larger.

Pick 1 is great but then your 2nd pick isn't until pick 21. So if you don't absolutely nail pick 1 you're in trouble again.

The other issue is the salary floor.

North paying 95% of the cap while the Giants, Swans, Dees and Blues are paying 100-105% is a joke. There's way more than $1.5m of talent on those lists when compared to North.

The Roos should be able to pay 75-80% of the cap and bank more of their salary for a longer time. Currently teams can bank 5% each year for up to 2 years.

Imagine if North could bank 20% for 5 years? Load up on their draft picks and then at the end of this year they can go buy Lukosious, Battle and Yeo and also bring in Heppell and Luke Parker as playing coaches.

Would be an instant rebound.

AFLPA is what’s unlikely to budge from a 95% floor.

 

[The_Steadier]

How good would steele look in a better team?

He started this year looking fit and was playing exceptionally (looking like his former top 5 brownlow best).

Looks annoyed and potentially hobbled by injury again though.

I reckon he'd be up for a move (if we really are doing another rebuild around the core who are currently 25 and under).

He's under contract- so we could play hardball with any suitors... as such I reckon it isn't insane to think we could get a top 10 pick for him.

Tom mitchell (pre brownlow) went to the hawks for pick 14- steele at this point is worth more than mitchell was then.

 

[L_W_P]

Mitchell went to the Hawks when he was what 23? 24?

Steele will be 29 next year and coming off back to back injury affected seasons. Not sure we'd get much for him TBH.

Cats might be keen if Danger retires. Port might ask the question if they lose Wines but they wouldn't give us more for Steele than they get for a Brownlow medalist...

None of the other top teams realy need him.

If we are selling a player then I'd look at Roma. Multiple clubs would be keen and you'd get something decent back.

Grab a VFL ruck to fill the gap while the mids develop and then goshopping in a couple of years when the squad is ready.

 

[SteeleSaints]

AFLPA is what’s unlikely to budge from a 95% floor.

I can understand that players get drafted or forced to clubs they dont chose, hence the AFPA wanting the players paid similiarly. But the down side is that the 95% hard bar causes these same players from ever experiencing club bounce back and some never play finals. Someone smarter than myself needs to come up with a better agreement than what the AFPA / AFL currently have, to give the perenial lower clubs a fighting chance of bouncing back quicker.

Weve seen even with priority draft picks it still takes clubs years for club to recover and reap the benefits. Surely the AFL & players dont want such an unequal competition. The AFPA are a union they have a charter to get the best results for their players which I gather vote on these decisions, but other solutions to the 95% TPP simply have to be found and implemented or these cycles will be repeated.

The AFL have just had a forum with all the clubs re father sons/acadamies etc about giving clubs more flexbility. Thats great and Im sure the smarter clubs will really benefit from any changes. The issue being is it is all based around draft picks which as we know the strength of draft years changes significanty between years. Look at the draft years of Clark/Coffield or Allison for the Saints, both as a collective were very poor drafts and a vast difference from other draft years. The one constant is the value of the $$$, if clubs had flexbility in managing their salary caps they would be much better off IMO.