List Mgmt. 2024 Trade Thread - No.1

[The Punter]

Not really worth it in a draft without a Harley Reid.

I've been reading up a bit more on this draft. Some are saying the top end is weaker than usual and some of the games have been lack lustre with lots of the best players academy or FS. It looks like it runs deep though with potential all the way through but not much stand out.

Some are saying Jack Whitlock and his brother are like the McKays and Jack looks like he could push up along with Trainor and Shanahan as KPs in the front end of the draft.

The mids that are available are outside or classy mids rather than real extractor bulls at the front end of the draft. The good bulls all sit between late first round and late second round.

It doesn't look like a draft to go all chips in on the first round in.

Does this mean we are allowed to try to win again?

I mean, this is my whole everloving point. Tank in the wrong year and you don't get reward.

How about the ones we already have just play better - an original thought I know.

 

[BrutThough]

Our defence was the best in the league last season and Battle is still rated really highly, hence I cant believe people are eager to see Battle leave. The last thing we need to be doing is losing one of key pillars we need to be building on them. If we lose Battle who takes his place there is not one player proven to be ready to step up and play CHB. The other thing with Battle is he has proven to be pretty resilient since moving to defence.

To answer what others might be thinking -

Shoenmaker is poor defensively still needs time to develop at VFL level,
Van Es injured & still unknown is coming from a long way back,
Cordy is similiar to Campbell only played in case of emergency,
Howard couldnt run out of sight on a dark night and his skills are the worst in the side,
Caminiti doesnt have the composure to play in defence,
Hayes might be our best option but he is still having problems with his knee and I dont know if he is quick enough to play the role.

Top teams dont lose key players they dont have a ready made replacement for!

I dont want to lose him.

But if the rumoured money is even close to correct, I just dont think we can justify matching what some clubs are offering. North and Hawks fans are talking 900k-1mil for him which seems obscene. He's a good player but not 'highest paid at the club' good.

 

[L_W_P]

What's the average wage under the new CBA? About 400k?

A million for Battle seems high now but in 3 years it'll be about right.

If we ask the hard questions;
Who else are we paying on this list in the next 3-5 years?
If we let Battle walk, who are we bringing in with that cash?

 

[gringo2011]

Does this mean we are allowed to try to win again?

I mean, this is my whole everloving point. Tank in the wrong year and you don't get reward.

How about the ones we already have just play better - an original thought I know.

Winning is not a bad idea but think we've left it too late. I want a good pick in a draft even if it's not a superstar draft, there are still good players in it. You just aren't getting a ticket in a $120 million super draw. This one is more like a Wednesday night Tatts with a $1.2 million prize pool. Win it and it will change your life just the scale is a bit different.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Does this mean we are allowed to try to win again?

I mean, this is my whole everloving point. Tank in the wrong year and you don't get reward.

How about the ones we already have just play better - an original thought I know.

Oh you think we're tanking.

My thoughts are we are just rubbish and where we end up will be our best effort.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

What's the average wage under the new CBA? About 400k?

A million for Battle seems high now but in 3 years it'll be about right.

If we ask the hard questions;
Who else are we paying on this list in the next 3-5 years?
If we let Battle walk, who are we bringing in with that cash?

Roma, Sinclair, Nas, Steele... Hill's next contract should be less.

 

[Joffaboy]

Winning is not a bad idea but think we've left it too late. I want a good pick in a draft even if it's not a superstar draft, there are still good players in it. You just aren't getting a ticket in a $120 million super draw. This one is more like a Wednesday night Tatts with a $1.2 million prize pool. Win it and it will change your life just the scale is a bit different.

From 3-8 the worst thing that could happen is we come good and end up in our usual spot of 9th or 10th. Pick 9 or ten blown out to 16 or 17 once the booster clubs get their mandatory free NGA's gifted to them by the corrupt AFL.

Get three or 4, then if the rumours are true on Battle get band one, so we may have four and 5.

Maybe trade for a LDU type for a second (otherwise dont trade), and purchase another high dp with our excess SC.

So in my fever dream fantasy world we have say pick 4,5 and 15 plus LDU. 4 and 5 mids,15 a free hit at the best available plus a LDU

We need to add to Wilson, Hotton, Windy, Chito etc, three new young mids and we are off and running.

 

[SteeleSaints]

I dont want to lose him.

But if the rumoured money is even close to correct, I just dont think we can justify matching what some clubs are offering. North and Hawks fans are talking 900k-1mil for him which seems obscene. He's a good player but not 'highest paid at the club' good.

Battle is a selfless team player who produces each and every week, as a club you simply cant afford to lose fabric players. I understand people think we may get an early compensation, but for centuries the AFL have found mysterious ways of screwing our club I wouldn't count on fair compensation. If it means we pay close to market price then so be it. Then if he wants to leave for huge money we have done everything we can to keep him. Im sure the club are thinking like us and have tabled a fair and lucrative offer.

I find the hyprocracy these same people last year were prepared to throw ridiculus money at Ben McKay, yet baulk at wanting to pay our own developed lad his fair price. The club beat their chest in the media and suggest they have bucket loads of cap to spend on outside players, they then cant expect their own players not to want their fair slice of the pie.

The AFL media and punters are like 'vultures', as soon as a free agent from a struggling club comes up he is a chance to leave. But when they are from power clubs they are always expected to re-sign. Thats why I have a lot empathy for club like North the last thing they need is to lose players like McKay, LDU and Zurharr, but the power clubs just pick them off like a mob of jackals.

Im confident Josh and the club will get a deal done!

 

[StFly]

What's the average wage under the new CBA? About 400k?

A million for Battle seems high now but in 3 years it'll be about right.

If we ask the hard questions;
Who else are we paying on this list in the next 3-5 years?
If we let Battle walk, who are we bringing in with that cash?

No averages in the CBA;

Totals


Additional


The majority is things like 1st year player, players drafted within the past 5 years, do you get an addition for brownlow, rising star, B&F and etc award here and things like "this player is a rookie and played 47 matches and got paid a billion dollars: you'll need to pay him more additional dollary doos for being a badarse!" type caveats.

IE: Cat A rookie - 90k base, 4k per match, max of 12k "bonus" for consecutive matches. MSD similar but a 50k base instead, Cat B 60k.

CBA sets the base and max and ways you can go above and beyond those measures, it's then up to clubs to distribute to then make an "averages" situation arise, but since they don't really report back in unison and more just AGM and financial report it "we spent X amount of TPP this year" without any meaningful breakdown, you just don't get averages.

Media do since they get to look at individual contracts to be all "these guys are millionaires and those guys are rookies, lol" in releases to draw medians.

What you really should look at is the breakdowns to then see that this coming year is the biggest jump in TPP cash across the 5 year CBA.

800k, 500k, 150k, 2m, so all three increments and then some in one year this coming draft cycle. Hence everyones contracts being "up" for review...

 

[SaintsSeptember]

No averages in the CBA;

Totals
View attachment 2004007

Additional
View attachment 2004008

The majority is things like 1st year player, players drafted within the past 5 years, do you get an addition for brownlow, rising star, B&F and etc award here and things like "this player is a rookie and played 47 matches and got paid a billion dollars: you'll need to pay him more additional dollary doos for being a badarse!" type caveats.

IE: Cat A rookie - 90k base, 4k per match, max of 12k "bonus" for consecutive matches. MSD similar but a 50k base instead, Cat B 60k.

CBA sets the base and max and ways you can go above and beyond those measures, it's then up to clubs to distribute to then make an "averages" situation arise, but since they don't really report back in unison and more just AGM and financial report it "we spent X amount of TPP this year" without any meaningful breakdown, you just don't get averages.

Media do since they get to look at individual contracts to be all "these guys are millionaires and those guys are rookies, lol" in releases to draw medians.

What you really should look at is the breakdowns to then see that this coming year is the biggest jump in TPP cash across the 5 year CBA.

800k, 500k, 150k, 2m, so all three increments and then some in one year this coming draft cycle. Hence everyones contracts being "up" for review...

The average is just the Total PP, divided by the number of players.
Its not a guide to how much most players will earn though. Most players will get less than average, due to the ones who get more than the average.

 

[StFly]

The average is just the Total PP, divided by the number of players.
Its not a guide to how much most players will earn though. Most players will get less than average, due to the ones who get more than the average.

You should get a job at the AFL, can condense the 195 page doc to "The average of all player payment is player / TPP increase."

And make no mention of any additional contracts, media, marketing, medical, award, bonus, nothing else at all that may influence a contract to alter TPP...

 

[gringo2011]

From 3-8 the worst thing that could happen is we come good and end up in our usual spot of 9th or 10th. Pick 9 or ten blown out to 16 or 17 once the booster clubs get their mandatory free NGA's gifted to them by the corrupt AFL.

Get three or 4, then if the rumours are true on Battle get band one, so we may have four and 5.

Maybe trade for a LDU type for a second (otherwise dont trade), and purchase another high dp with our excess SC.

So in my fever dream fantasy world we have say pick 4,5 and 15 plus LDU. 4 and 5 mids,15 a free hit at the best available plus a LDU

We need to add to Wilson, Hotton, Windy, Chito etc, three new young mids and we are off and running.

Battle is a huge risk. You have to make sure we have cover and nail that pick. My guess is that even at $900 k he probably gets us an end of round one pick. The ones that get top 10 picks are disguised priority picks. Melbourne and North got them when they were pure trash.

 

[gringo2011]

Battle is a selfless team player who produces each and every week, as a club you simply cant afford to lose fabric players. I understand people think we may get an early compensation, but for centuries the AFL have found mysterious ways of screwing our club I wouldn't count on fair compensation. If it means we pay close to market price then so be it. Then if he wants to leave for huge money we have done everything we can to keep him. Im sure the club are thinking like us and have tabled a fair and lucrative offer.

I find the hyprocaracy these same people last year were prepared to throw ridiculus money at Ben McKay, yet baulk at wanting to pay our own developed lad his fair price. The club beat their chest in the media and suggest they have bucket loads of cap to spend on outside players, they then cant expect their own players not to want their fair slice of the pie.

The AFL media and punters are like 'vultures', as soon as a free agent from a struggling club comes up he is a chance to leave. But when they are from power clubs they are always expected to re-sign. Thats why I have a lot empathy for club like North the last thing they need is to lose players like McKay, LDU and Zurharr, but the power clubs just pick them off them like a mob of jackals.

Im confident Josh and the club will get a deal done!

Also after losing Gresham we are getting very thin in the middle age bracket. Hunter Clark looks cooked and probably delisted at some point. We'll be very old and very young with out this tier. Byrnes, Bonner, Stocker types will be all we have left.

 

[Joffaboy]

Battle is a huge risk. You have to make sure we have cover and nail that pick. My guess is that even at $900 k he probably gets us an end of round one pick. The ones that get top 10 picks are disguised priority picks. Melbourne and North got them when they were pure trash.

Well it is reported that the President has headed the charge on the corrupt free gifts the AFL give their booster clubs.
Lets hope that the commission (which apparently his brother is on) continue with their corrupt ways and give us a band 1 to placate him and the compliant Saints fans.

 

[Jade Buddha]

So has Battle or his agent said anything yet?

 

[Parkysp]

Also after losing Gresham we are getting very thin in the middle age bracket. Hunter Clark looks cooked and probably delisted at some point. We'll be very old and very young with out this tier. Byrnes, Bonner, Stocker types will be all we have left.

which gets us back to Leathers polly gap filler approach doesn't it sigh

We spend our life on the narrow goat path track between the 100m sheer fall into the ocean through our own stumble on the left or the landslide (AFL rules) rocky mountain on our right. We come to a fork in the road and are so weary that we take the wrong option time and again. Usually what looks like the safer one but just leads us back to the ledge.

So we put faith yet again in our new herders. All we can do is have faith that their (bit) better body of work than all previous ones will guide us along our rocky path off the cliff.

 

[ScrappyDo]

This year's national draft being midfield heavy (exactly what we want, and exactly what North don't need) could be a really big opportunity.
North would surely get more out of next year's draft.

Of course, they'll have pick 1 which is a known entity so if we offered next year's first for their 1st this year, we'd obviously have to sweeten it a lot - but surely there's a price at which they'd consider it.

Something like 2025 1st + 2nd + players to help get them out of their hole sooner.

Hypothetically what do you think the price would be?

We'd end up with 2 top 5 mids this year, and it would also keep our gun list age a bit closer together between King's age and the young-uns.

Havinng looked at a few videos of the top 5-10 this is not a draft I'd be throwing the kitchen sink at. All the draft nuffies are aligned that it's a poor top 5but deep to 30 or so, which might be a subjective view.
Right now l think a similar strategy to last year would be the right thing. Get busy and take many small steps looking at value adding to our position. Cole and Peckett also being reasonable chances of late pickups.

 

[MrFoster]

We didn't look like we were Hill off a premiership though. He cost us heaps of capital and cash. Could have developed our own if we weren't in the window. Your soft outside players need to be fed, we hadn't even built a goods basic list.

I think history would be enough to show Hill was a road that we probably weren't ready to go down that has extended the rebuild out a lot longer than it had to. To step out of a couple of drafts and give up access to star kids should only be done if you're very sure that you're close to flag.

The years before we got Hill, we were averaging a lot of inside 50s, but mostly were long bombs or hack kicks that are intercepted.

The issue identified was we don’t have enough good kicks The truth is we had no midfield quality, so cannot create enough quality clearances or back to forward transitions..

This very mis-judgement lead to us recruiting Hill.. Rather than drafting and trading for quality genuine mids.

 

[austinnn]

I've been reading up a bit more on this draft. Some are saying the top end is weaker than usual and some of the games have been lack lustre with lots of the best players academy or FS. It looks like it runs deep though with potential all the way through but not much stand out.

Some are saying Jack Whitlock and his brother are like the McKays and Jack looks like he could push up along with Trainor and Shanahan as KPs in the front end of the draft.

The mids that are available are outside or classy mids rather than real extractor bulls at the front end of the draft. The good bulls all sit between late first round and late second round.

It doesn't look like a draft to go all chips in on the first round in.

So a good draft to have 5 or 6 decent picks rather than 1 or 2 in the top 10?

 

[austinnn]

I dont want to lose him.

But if the rumoured money is even close to correct, I just dont think we can justify matching what some clubs are offering. North and Hawks fans are talking 900k-1mil for him which seems obscene. He's a good player but not 'highest paid at the club' good.

Pay him well, make him captain, or at least vice captain. He will rise to the occasion.

 

[gringo2011]

The years before we got Hill, we were averaging a lot of inside 50s, but mostly were long bombs or hack kicks that are intercepted.

The issue identified was we don’t have enough good kicks The truth is we had no midfield quality, so cannot create enough quality clearances or back to forward transitions..

This very mis-judgement lead to us recruiting Hill.. Rather than drafting and trading for quality genuine mids.

Anyone outside the club could easily identify a distinct lack of high end players on the list. I think that they were desperate for anything that made us look like winners after losing Stuv and most of that era of draftees looking like they weren't going to be good enough. They wanted Hill as a publicity stunt IMO.

 

[gringo2011]

So a good draft to have 5 or 6 decent picks rather than 1 or 2 in the top 10?

To me we are at the point of honing the list rather than bulk loading up on kids. We should have 5 or 6 changes like most years but I imagine a couple will be replaced by mature players. I'd rather persist with a lot of the kids we have already than go neck deep in this draft.

If we could get a player like Jagga Smith with our first pick and then maybe a Cody Anderson/ Lalor type. Or otherwise find an inside mid a bit later and go after Malakai Champion as a small forward option if Jagga is gone.

 

[phantom13]

To me we are at the point of honing the list rather than bulk loading up on kids. We should have 5 or 6 changes like most years but I imagine a couple will be replaced by mature players. I'd rather persist with a lot of the kids we have already than go neck deep in this draft.

If we could get a player like Jagga Smith with our first pick and then maybe a Cody Anderson/ Lalor type. Or otherwise find an inside mid a bit later and go after Malakai Champion as a small forward option if Jagga is gone.

Thank god.

 

[seasonedsainter]

Reckon the Club will be doing everything they can to keep Battle. As they should be!

 

[SaintsSeptember]

To me we are at the point of honing the list rather than bulk loading up on kids. We should have 5 or 6 changes like most years but I imagine a couple will be replaced by mature players. I'd rather persist with a lot of the kids we have already than go neck deep in this draft.

If we could get a player like Jagga Smith with our first pick and then maybe a Cody Anderson/ Lalor type. Or otherwise find an inside mid a bit later and go after Malakai Champion as a small forward option if Jagga is gone.

I think about this year, and if we'd traded away our later picks to improve our first rounder.

We could have ended up with someone like McKercher instead of Wilson, and that sounds OK.
But if we ended up with McKercher instead of Wilson, Hastie, and Garcia, that would kind of suck.

Later picks aren't worth much, until you pick a good player with one.