List Mgmt. 2025 List Management 📃

[charred_fate]

I feel like we may be better letting him go at this point. We have a lot of expensive contracts, and our list balance clearly needs adjusting. He's a restricted free agent, so we could negotiate a trade and get better than band 1. Unfortunately, I think we're in a position where we need to rejuvenate the list, he has the value and the timing is right. The only downside with that is we'd be dealing with SOS who we know is a scrooge in these sorts of negotiations, but worst case scenario he leaves as FA and we just get band 1 compo, which may end up being a top 10 pick (hopefully not, but early signs aren't great).

Further, gun ruckmen don't seem to be a crucial step to getting a flag. Brisbane just won one with their backup, really all you need is a B grader in the spot. If we can get premium grade value for a position not essential in that process, then fine.

Massive call. I would absolutely be trading one of Charlie or Harry before TDK (I would have already traded one by now and still would (and I’d be considering that salary space in any contract offer to TDK/recruitment in other positions)). Cripps, TDK and Weiters are the only untouchables for mine.

The argument re star players in certain positions could be made for most positions outside of the midfield I reckon (ie, it takes something special to win a flag without a top notch midfield) … I am no fan of average ruckmen, but when you have a truly elite ruckman (which is where TDK is heading), I think it can be as much of a game-changer as any other position.

 

[BlueJet]

Massive call. I would absolutely be trading one of Charlie or Harry before TDK (I would have already traded one by now and still would (and I’d be considering that salary space in any contract offer to TDK/recruitment in other positions)). Cripps, TDK and Weiters are the only untouchables for mine.

The argument re star players in certain positions could be made for most positions outside of the midfield I reckon (ie, it takes something special to win a flag without a top notch midfield) … I am no fan of average ruckmen, but when you have a truly elite ruckman (which is where TDK is heading), I think it can be as much of a game-changer as any other position.

TDK's agent would be proud of this post.

 

[BlueBlood15]

Despite all the pre season chatter about players improving, as many others have already said, we’ve compiled probably the worst small forward group in the league. It is concerning that we’re actually over indexed with small forwards on the list but none of them are high quality in the role. We’ve simultaneously not put enough resources into recruiting small forwards (compare to GWS, Hawthorn, Melbourne took Kozzy in the top 10 from memory) while actually wasting a few picks on guys who are not turning out as planned.

Williams might be our best bet of this group but he’s a re-purposed defender who is flighty, inconsistent and injury prone, not to mention his output is not even close to matching his big salary. Not an effective pressure player either.

Fantasia is ok when up and running but in reality that isn’t very often given his injury history. He’s certainly not the player he used to be. At best he’s a contributor in the 22 but likely not much more. Another one who isn’t particularly effective as a pressure player.

Durdin we used our first pick (albeit in the 30s) in the 2020 draft and he’s not working. Never kicked more than 2 goals in a game. He’s becoming as durable as the usual suspects who departed last year. Can’t be relied on.

Motlop we also used our first pick (albeit in the 20s) in the 2021 draft and he’s also not working. Promising in 2022 and some good footy in 2023, but otherwise is more hype than output at this stage. Doesn’t buy into the defensive side of the game. Query whether he’ll even do enough to get a contract beyond this year.

Fog is a midfielder masquerading as a forward. Can’t kick goals and isn’t quick. Can lay a tackle but that’s about it.

Evans is simply not up to it. Adds next to nothing to the list.

White I’ve been impressed with at VFL level but he’s a complete unknown at AFL level at this stage. He’s got pace (unlike most of the others) so he’s worth a try at some point.

 

[JustaBattler]

Carlton doesn't need to have elite smalls to win games against any team - all that si required is that the smalls selected play a small forwards defensive role properly - for as long as the Voss territorial contested game plan is in operation.

This requires Carlton to have their talls performing as they should be and can be and have been able to perform Charlie and Harry are the strike weapons and if Kemp can add another marking option all the better.

We have seen the worst of it in the first game sans Charlie a half fit Harry and an in game collision injury to Kemp.

Lets not get too down after one ( admittedly poor ) game- in the first round.

Add Fantasia and the missing E hollands to the mix and the execution and IQ levels go up significantly - but even sticking with same blokes and getting them to C grade levels of performance with Charlie present totally changes the forward mix.

A bit early for all this chuck it all in talk I am reading after game one- but at least expectations have been recalibrated back to a more realistic level.

I am glad that some people are starting to understand that the contested game is what Voss has to play given the make up of his between teh arcs player types and skills sets-...

Carlton had 65 inside 50's to Richmond's 40 - based on this single stat alone it should hav been an easy victory - the difference between loust conversion and (just) ordinary conversion percentages woudl have seen a totally different result.

Tweaking mid to forward entries and forward defensive pressure isnt a mountain too high to climb.

 

[RPCB]

Carlton had 65 inside 50's to [insert clubs] 40 - based on this single stat alone it should hav been an easy victory -

It’s frustrating how often this has been said after a game of football over the last few years.

 

[JustaBattler]

It’s frustrating how often this has been said after a game of football over the last few years.

Think about the lack of continuity in the forward line AND midfield and I suspect we get more than half the answer to the reasons why. Every slight improvement in teh connection between mids and forwards will pay massive dividends - because the contested game is strong.

Up to the coaches and players to focus on this and getting the best available on the actual field will help as well. I think it will be pretty hard for all the smalls to play as poorly as they did as a collective again and Walsh/Cerra are aonly going to get better with a few games under their belts.

 

[CCurnow3votes]

If we could find 2 or 3 really good, really quick genuine forwards we would be right in it. That's the good news.

The bad news is I don't think we have them on our list and I don't think our recruiters have the talent to identify those sorts of players.

I'll name four names in Hawthorn's team to watch this week. Watson, Ginnivan, Hardwick and Moore. If you put them in our side we would be top 4. We also would have beaten Richmond by a fair bit.

Watch them this week. Then compare them to Cottrell, Motlop, Fogarty, Fantasia and Evans. They are in a different league or two.

This is why losing Smith and Hollands has been a massive massive kick in the guts. We can't afford to lose any of our smaller forwards who can half play.

Our recruiting team has gone hard and drafted a big group of D grade forwards. Knowing they had done this, they went and got a heap of half backs.

I does not matter how hard our backs and mids play and how well Voss coaches. This problem is going to hammer us all season.

Teams going taller in defence and flooding the forward 50 is going to make it even worse and everyone knows this. Richmond did this well.

Smith & Elijah are not small forwards.

One is a pure mid, without breakout speed but great elusive skills, the other a mid/High half forward hybrid, not quick, who reads the play well.

Neither are the answer up forward.

I still think a forward line of Charlie, McKay, Kemp, Williams, Motlop, Fantasia, Fogarty can work.

Last week we coughed & spluttered - it hasn’t always been the case.

 

[BlueBlood15]

It’s frustrating how often this has been said after a game of football over the last few years.

This might be the crux of the issue. The league has moved away from a territory dominance model to a transition model. Inside 50s as a stat don’t correlate to wins as they used to. There’s a good article on the AFL website about this from last year. The best teams have bought into the transition game and score from the back half so aren’t too worried about conceding inside 50s necessarily. Given our list make up, we’re all in on the territory game and it’s not a sustainable winning method anymore unfortunately.

 

[JustaBattler]

This might be the crux of the issue. The league has moved away from a territory dominance model to a transition model. Inside 50s as a stat don’t correlate to wins as they used to. There’s a good article on the AFL website about this from last year. The best teams have bought into the transition game and score from the back half so aren’t too worried about conceding inside 50s necessarily. Given our list make up, we’re all in on the territory game and it’s not a sustainable winning method anymore unfortunately.

100% DISAGREE

EVERY contact sport is a terriorial game of percentages - even soccer is. Conversion is ratio is very important. Who says that you concede rebound from turnover if you play the territorial game anyway that is just poor defence of territory.

 

[BlueBlood15]

100% DISAGREE

EVERY contact sport is a terriorial game of percentages - even soccer is. Conversion is ratio is very important. Who says that you concede rebound from turnover if you play the territorial game anyway that is just poor defence of territory.

There’s no harm of course in winning the territory battle but it doesn’t equate to wins like it used to. Your second point about conversion is a good one but it’s also clearly linked to the quality of shots on goal a team can achieve. A slingshot fast break from half back often results in guys running into open goals or deep entries via the corridor. Hacking the ball forward from clearance as a shallow and wide inside 50 doesn’t create good scoring opportunities. The crux of it is that it’s more about quality of shots than quantity of shots and Thursday night against last years wooden spooners showed that.

 

[charred_fate]

TDK's agent would be proud of this post.

It seems pretty logical to me if we want to rebalance the list.

It’s not a reflection of H necessarily, it’s about what is best for the list. If he has another strongish year but we fail (and without a first round draft pick), we need to be bold to fix things. If that means we can get a couple of high draft picks or a gun type/premiership calibre type in a position/s we’re desperate in - small-forward, half-back, powerful mid etc. - we should do it. Even wing is a concern if Walsh isn’t playing there - most wingers are very good to elite kicks, ours are not.

Alas, I don’t expect Carlton to make such bold decisions, which is partly why we’re often reacting and behind the 8-ball imo.

This is not a reaction to Rd 1 - I’ve been saying it for a long time.

 

[JustaBattler]

There’s no harm of course in winning the territory battle but it doesn’t equate to wins like it used to. Your second point about conversion is a good one but it’s also clearly linked to the quality of shots on goal a team can achieve. A slingshot fast break from half back often results in guys running into open goals or deep entries via the corridor. Hacking the ball forward from clearance as a shallow and wide inside 50 doesn’t create good scoring opportunities. The crux of it is that it’s more about quality of shots than quantity of shots and Thursday night against last years wooden spooners showed that.

In a Venn diagram what you are saying and what I am saying has significant overlap - what needs to be improved is both the defensive performance of territory ie limiting easy rebound AND quality of entry ie who gets the ball where- but missing easy set shots isn't a factor that an help.

 

[DangerousD]

Carlton had 65 inside 50's to Richmond's 40 - based on this single stat alone it should hav been an easy victory - the difference between loust conversion and (just) ordinary conversion percentages woudl have seen a totally different result.

This would be a huge worry against any side in round one, even more so the reigning wooden spooners. After an entire pre season training and practice matches, we fail to address an issue that held us back so much last year.

A second year coach with supposedly the weakest AFL list in years can get a midfield and forward line functioning better than our experienced coach and team.

 

[Coops93]

Massive call. I would absolutely be trading one of Charlie or Harry before TDK (I would have already traded one by now and still would (and I’d be considering that salary space in any contract offer to TDK/recruitment in other positions)). Cripps, TDK and Weiters are the only untouchables for mine.

The argument re star players in certain positions could be made for most positions outside of the midfield I reckon (ie, it takes something special to win a flag without a top notch midfield) … I am no fan of average ruckmen, but when you have a truly elite ruckman (which is where TDK is heading), I think it can be as much of a game-changer as any other position.

I always refer to the list of ruckmen to win flags in the past 15-20 years. There's very few top line ruckmen and a lot of B grade, solid citizens there. The only A grader is Gawn - depending how you rank Nankervis I suppose, though I'd suggest he's better now than he was when they were winning. That's it.

 

[Stamos]

I always refer to the list of ruckmen to win flags in the past 15-20 years. There's very few top line ruckmen and a lot of B grade, solid citizens there. The only A grader is Gawn - depending how you rank Nankervis I suppose, though I'd suggest he's better now than he was when they were winning. That's it.

In the last 20 years there was Cox and Ottens, and that's without looking.

 

[Coops93]

In the last 20 years there was Cox and Ottens, and that's without looking.

Cox yes 19 years ago. I don't consider Ottens on Gawn & Cox' level, not even close. He's exactly the type I refer to in solid B grader

 

[Stamos]

Cox yes 19 years ago. I don't consider Ottens on Gawn & Cox' level, not even close. He's exactly the type I refer to in solid B grader

I guess it depends how you classify your grades.

Cox and Gawn are probably the 2 best rucks of the century. If anyone under them is B grade, then that's a different standard to what most people would use.

Ottens was All Australian, was traded for 2 x 1st round draft picks, and played a huge part in Geelong's 3 flags. Definitely in the A-grade category for me.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

I guess it depends how you classify your grades.

Cox and Gawn are probably the 2 best rucks of the century. If anyone under them is B grade, then that's a different standard to what most people would use.

Ottens was All Australian, was traded for 2 x 1st round draft picks, and played a huge part in Geelong's 3 flags. Definitely in the A-grade category for me.

This. The reason not many “elite” rucks win flags are because there are stuff all of them. They are also only one of 22 in a side. The position of the player is irrelevant, it’s the impact they have which is important.
for some reason a single rucks impact seems to be compared to multiple players in other roles.

 

[Coops93]

I guess it depends how you classify your grades.

Cox and Gawn are probably the 2 best rucks of the century. If anyone under them is B grade, then that's a different standard to what most people would use.

Ottens was All Australian, was traded for 2 x 1st round draft picks, and played a huge part in Geelong's 3 flags. Definitely in the A-grade category for me.

0x AA with Geelong, his berth was in 2001 as a forward and part time ruck when he kicked 46 goals, - which he never got close to again. With Geelong he averaged fewer than 20 hit outs a game. I don't really consider that even B grade for a ruck, but he could bob up with a goal now and then, still averaged less than a goal a game but at least posed a threat. Averaged about 11 possessions a game for Geelong. Fairly average statistics. If that's an A grader then you're a very generous marker, at no point as a ruckman was he in the conversation for best ruck in the game.

But, he's evidence to my point. He did have an impact - a ruck who takes the odd mark, kicks the odd goal at the right times and competes enough in the ruck to at least not be beaten handily is all you need. Less than a goal a game, fewer than 20 hitouts and about 12 possessions a game and is a 3x premiership ruck. There's just not a need for an over $1m a year player in the position.

 

[Stamos]

0x AA with Geelong, his berth was in 2001 as a forward and part time ruck when he kicked 46 goals, - which he never got close to again. With Geelong he averaged fewer than 20 hit outs a game. I don't really consider that even B grade for a ruck, but he could bob up with a goal now and then, still averaged less than a goal a game but at least posed a threat. Averaged about 11 possessions a game for Geelong. Fairly average statistics. If that's an A grader then you're a very generous marker, at no point as a ruckman was he in the conversation for best ruck in the game.

But, he's evidence to my point. He did have an impact - a ruck who takes the odd mark, kicks the odd goal at the right times and competes enough in the ruck to at least not be beaten handily is all you need. Less than a goal a game, fewer than 20 hitouts and about 12 possessions a game and is a 3x premiership ruck. There's just not a need for an over $1m a year player in the position.

I think it's about impact, rather than purely stats.
Just under a goal a game (109 in 116 at Geelong) is huge for a 1st ruck.

There's no 'need' for a gun in any position.
Filth just won a flag with no gun key position players. That doesn't mean you don't take them if you can get them. Lions don't win last year without Daniher.

There are different ways to build a winning team. For us, were much better off if TDK stays.

 

[Juddernaut08]

This. The reason not many “elite” rucks win flags are because there are stuff all of them. They are also only one of 22 in a side. The position of the player is irrelevant, it’s the impact they have which is important.
for some reason a single rucks impact seems to be compared to multiple players in other roles.

The strange thing with TDK so far is that although he's doing well in terms of raw stats, he isn't really outplaying his opponent. Even in his best games the other ruck has a huge impact.

Nank was perhaps BOG and kicked 2 goals on Thursday. TDK still had great numbers, but overall the ruck influence was in Richmond's favour.

When we look at the dominance of prime Gawn - not only did he have monster games but his opponents were quiet.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

The strange thing with TDK so far is that although he's doing well in terms of raw stats, he isn't really outplaying his opponent. Even in his best games the other ruck has a huge impact.

Nank was perhaps BOG and kicked 2 goals on Thursday. TDK still had great numbers, but overall the ruck influence was in Richmond's favour.

When we look at the dominance of prime Gawn - not only did he have monster games but his opponents were quiet.

Part of how he plays though I'd think? TDK does his best work running riot on his own through the middle of the ground. Essentially running off the other slow lumbering ruck he's up against to get loose and become another midfielder.

That means they're still able to have an influence on their own unless TDK becomes damaging enough that they have to try and follow him to prevent him winning games.

 

[goreds]

The strange thing with TDK so far is that although he's doing well in terms of raw stats, he isn't really outplaying his opponent. Even in his best games the other ruck has a huge impact.

Nank was perhaps BOG and kicked 2 goals on Thursday. TDK still had great numbers, but overall the ruck influence was in Richmond's favour.

When we look at the dominance of prime Gawn - not only did he have monster games but his opponents were quiet.

The elite rucks have one thing in common, presence...

The word that comes to mind when I think of elite rucks is 'imposing'...

Nank, big and strong, Gawn, elite in the air and strong.

TDK has some attributes of a quality ruckman but he is not imposing enough for me and his presence is fleeting.

The whole 'he's like another midfielder' is not what I want from him. Give me 10-12 marks across HB and HF and a goal or 2 and I would be happy.

I worry that he is fragile and will break when he is faced with an imposing ruckman...

 

[Coops93]

I think it's about impact, rather than purely stats.
Just under a goal a game (109 in 116 at Geelong) is huge for a 1st ruck.

There's no 'need' for a gun in any position.
Filth just won a flag with no gun key position players. That doesn't mean you don't take them if you can get them. Lions don't win last year without Daniher.

There are different ways to build a winning team. For us, were much better off if TDK stays.

That one stat is big for a first ruck, but with little else being above C grade. Overall just solid. There's nothing wrong with that, B grade is still very good. He wasn't elite but he also didn't need to be, which is my point. A solid ruckman is all that's needed, more is superfluous and has been shown over 20 yrs.

That's not true. They won with their KPD being the AA full back in that yr. He's been average since, but was 2x AA, one of which in a flag yr. They also had a very good no.2 in Murphy, who has since shown to be crucial to their structure given the vast difference in defensive stability with & now without him. Forward less so for sure, which does get done now and then.

In a vacuum we're definitely better with him in, but I'm not sure if we're better with him in at $1.2m a season.

 

[Stamos]

That's not true. They won with their KPD being the AA full back in that yr. He's been average since, but was 2x AA, one of which in a flag yr. They also had a very good no.2 in Murphy, who has since shown to be crucial to their structure given the vast difference in defensive stability with & now without him. Forward less so for sure, which does get done now and then.

In a vacuum we're definitely better with him in, but I'm not sure if we're better with him in at $1.2m a season.

Moore was a tall intercept/rebounder, not a true key back. Rarely lined up on the best key forward.
His AA guernsey was a joke.
Murphy very important to their structure, but also a long way off being a gun.