List Mgmt. 2025 List management

[pK75]

Tbh I think picks two years into the future will be less valuable on average most years anyway - this just makes it significantly worse.

Not sure about “less valuable”, I think there will be something of an equaliser as a bottom 4 team could be a 9-12 team in two years and likewise a top 4 team could drop to be a 5-10 team, so clubs will place more emphasis on it just being a 2027 1st round pick and less on which club it belongs to.

Edit: if 2027 is heavily compromised by Tas, then yes, it will have less value, however I was more talking about trading 2-3 years in advance for any period, not just this year.

 

[freo84]

The original plan was for the stadium to open in 2029 and they play at Bellerive in 2028.
I believe now the stadium has to be a certain % built by 2027 to trigger a 2028 entry.

They need private investors to make up the funding gap which is believed to be around 140 million..

That gives them 4 years to get it up and running which given their location and budget constraints make the 2028 timeline unrealistic.

But hey I've been wrong before.

 

[eastfreo75]

They need private investors to make up the funding gap which is believed to be around 140 million..

That gives them 4 years to get it up and running which given their location and budget constraints make the 2028 timeline unrealistic.

But hey I've been wrong before.

AFL were pressured into accepting a Tassie team and then they put a major huddle in front of the new team.

8 games last year in Tasmania without a new stadium.

AFL are just buying time and 2028 seems unrealistic.

 

[Docker82]

Not sure about “less valuable”, I think there will be something of an equaliser as a bottom 4 team could be a 9-12 team in two years and likewise a top 4 team could drop to be a 5-10 team, so clubs will place more emphasis on it just being a 2027 1st round pick and less on which club it belongs to.

Edit: if 2027 is heavily compromised by Tas, then yes, it will have less value, however I was more talking about trading 2-3 years in advance for any period, not just this year.

I think for most teams it’ll be considered less valuable tbh. Maybe for teams that finish higher they’ll be the chance they finish lower in two years but in most cases clubs would rather take the pick as early as possible.

 

[theGav56]

Not sure about “less valuable”, I think there will be something of an equaliser as a bottom 4 team could be a 9-12 team in two years and likewise a top 4 team could drop to be a 5-10 team, so clubs will place more emphasis on it just being a 2027 1st round pick and less on which club it belongs to.

Edit: if 2027 is heavily compromised by Tas, then yes, it will have less value, however I was more talking about trading 2-3 years in advance for any period, not just this year.

Haven't we got a top range NGA coming through (Robinson?)?

It may be useful Tassie scooping up a whole load of players chewing up the highest draft picks if they don't bid on him. He could push back to a late first rounder/early second?

 

[Lach72]

Haven't we got a top range NGA coming through (Robinson?)?

It may be useful Tassie scooping up a whole load of players chewing up the highest draft picks if they don't bid on him. He could push back to a late first rounder/early second?

Robinson is 2026.

I didn’t think Tassie is taking players until 2027?

 

[eastfreo75]

Robinson is 2026.

I didn’t think Tassie is taking players until 2027?

I know nothing.

Is Robinson any good?

 

[Joao]

I know nothing.

Is Robinson any good?

Potential #1 contender apparently, but 2 years out doesn't guarantee you much.

 

[eastfreo75]

Potential #1 contender apparently, but 2 years out doesn't guarantee you much.

Very true, a lot of water under the bridge and not everything that glitter is gold, Early developers dominate junior sport, but growth can be exponential.

Love for us to get a free kick with an early draft pick.

 

[King Huskii]

I know nothing.

Is Robinson any good?

Yes a potential gun

 

[Docker82]

Robinson is 2026.

I didn’t think Tassie is taking players until 2027?

Who knows how the draft is impacted tbh.

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the 2026 AFL Draft is impacted in some way. It’d most likely be draft picks that need to be traded for future picks (slightly limiting the impact on the 2027 AFL Draft).

If I were the AFL I’d actually give them picks they can use in 2026. It’d mean they have a few 19 year olds in 2027. How that’d work with the AFLPA etc. (it probably wouldn’t) I don’t know but I think three year deals for some draftees has us slightly closer to that being a feasible option.

The year before Tasmania comes in will be the most impacted - almost no way around that.

 

[pK75]

Who knows how the draft is impacted tbh.

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the 2026 AFL Draft is impacted in some way. It’d most likely be draft picks that need to be traded for future picks (slightly limiting the impact on the 2027 AFL Draft).

If I were the AFL I’d actually give them picks they can use in 2026. It’d mean they have a few 19 year olds in 2027. How that’d work with the AFLPA etc. (it probably wouldn’t) I don’t know but I think three year deals for some draftees has us slightly closer to that being a feasible option.

The year before Tasmania comes in will be the most impacted - almost no way around that.

With current list size restrictions, I don’t think the draft concessions need to be too extreme, let them pillage the free agency market as they have a blank cheque book, let them pre-list anyone who’s previously nominated for the draft and been overlooked.
In the last couple of years we’ve brought in Voss, McDonald, Narkle, Wagner, Sharp and missed on Mannagh (who looks great at the cats) without expending more than a 3rd round pick.
I think they’d be more competitive building most of their team with mature ages and shouldn’t get anything like draft picks GWS received.

 

[Jezzitizle]

With current list size restrictions, I don’t think the draft concessions need to be too extreme, let them pillage the free agency market as they have a blank cheque book, let them pre-list anyone who’s previously nominated for the draft and been overlooked.
In the last couple of years we’ve brought in Voss, McDonald, Narkle, Wagner, Sharp and missed on Mannagh (who looks great at the cats) without expending more than a 3rd round pick.
I think they’d be more competitive building most of their team with mature ages and shouldn’t get anything like draft picks GWS received.

That list of Freo players are either not b22, or role players.

They can get some good players late sure, and they can get some good players as fa’s, but it’d be far from competitive overall, and they will end up relying on the draft to build a list which might compete for finals.

 

[pK75]

That list of Freo players are either not b22, or role players.

They can get some good players late sure, and they can get some good players as fa’s, but it’d be far from competitive overall, and they will end up relying on the draft to build a list which might compete for finals.

Wagner and Sharp are B22, Voss would be if we didn’t have Amiss and Treacy up front. McDonald would have played all 20 games Draper played in 2024 if he wasn’t injured. And that’s just the freo list, have a look at all the FA’s, DFA’s and SSP players picked up in the last two year at all teams and tell me it wouldn’t be more competitive than 22x 18yos running around each week, I’d still give them some draft picks, maybe the 1st two picks of each round to give them a cohort of 8 players coming through together.

 

[Jezzitizle]

Wagner and Sharp are B22, Voss would be if we didn’t have Amiss and Treacy up front. McDonald would have played all 20 games Draper played in 2024 if he wasn’t injured. And that’s just the freo list, have a look at all the FA’s, DFA’s and SSP players picked up in the last two year at all teams and tell me it wouldn’t be more competitive than 22x 18yos running around each week, I’d still give them some draft picks, maybe the 1st two picks of each round to give them a cohort of 8 players coming through together.

Agree that 22 x 18 year olds wouldn't work, but without really strong concessions similar to GC or GWS they will spend the first decade and a half in the bottom few.

Just keep in mind, even if Tassie went hard at FAs, SSPs, delisted players and so on, they would have to get all of the good ones - and they are competing with 17 other clubs - who will be targeting players returning home or looking for success.

A lot of the players delisted with talent are very injury prone (McDonald) or completely unproven (Voss).

They will use every option at their disposal on the mature players, but it just won’t be nearly enough - substantial draft concessions, and probably an academy, will be needed.

 

[eastfreo75]

Agree that 22 x 18 year olds wouldn't work, but without really strong concessions similar to GC or GWS they will spend the first decade and a half in the bottom few.

Just keep in mind, even if Tassie went hard at FAs, SSPs, delisted players and so on, they would have to get all of the good ones - and they are competing with 17 other clubs - who will be targeting players returning home or looking for success.

A lot of the players delisted with talent are very injury prone (McDonald) or completely unproven (Voss).

They will use every option at their disposal on the mature players, but it just won’t be nearly enough - substantial draft concessions, and probably an academy, will be needed.

Both Gold Coast and Giants were given access to mature age players but didn't use it to the max. We got Mzunga in a trade.

 

[Docker82]

Wagner and Sharp are B22, Voss would be if we didn’t have Amiss and Treacy up front. McDonald would have played all 20 games Draper played in 2024 if he wasn’t injured. And that’s just the freo list, have a look at all the FA’s, DFA’s and SSP players picked up in the last two year at all teams and tell me it wouldn’t be more competitive than 22x 18yos running around each week, I’d still give them some draft picks, maybe the 1st two picks of each round to give them a cohort of 8 players coming through together.

If those types made up the majority of their best 22 they’ll finish last with a very poor percentage. Without the high picks that situation stays exactly the same for quite a few years after and it takes them longer then GWS to come good.

Those types are the types that made up the majority of Freo’s 1995 list tbh and look where that got us. Port Adelaide got lucky with some better South Australian talent but did recruit slightly better - one or two players from Fitzroy’s demise helped too.

Gold Coast and GWS were set up with increased list sizes but all but about ten players under the age of 20. Around 10-15 of those 18 year olds were a complete waste of time.

The reality is the best model is somewhere in between and something the AFL has not perfected.

It’s a different landscape in 2025-2027. There’s so much that’s been brought in by the AFL list management wise. Things like the Mid Season Draft, SSP, free agency and trading of future picks did not exist when the AFL brought in Gold Coast and GWS. There’s also been the opportunity to learn from concession packages given to North Melbourne and Gold Coast in that time.

What I think we’ll see is compromised drafts over a 2-3 year period but Tasmania given incentives to not just go down the almost all youth model Gold Coast and GWS did. Honestly think the amount of draft picks given to Gold Coast and GWS was about right but there was a lot of other unnecessary concessions which compromised the draft further and discouraged them from adding fringe AFL players and state league talents to their list.

 

[guidodp15]

No thanks.

I doubt he would be best 22, plus I don't like his attitude.

All he cares is about getting his dick wet. When he was in perth and i'd open a girls instagram profile it would always say "Followed by Liam Henry"

 

[theGav56]

A Tassie team needs to be as parochial as possible. I would:

• give access to any Tasmanian player drafted or traded in, outside the salary cap, or with an ambassador bonus.
• reduce f/s eligibility to 50 games.

I'd also start the game with the Devil's with 30 points on the clock and the opposition playing barefoot. Just in an effort to have some pretence that the game will be competitive.

 

[Taylor]

They have floated the idea of any Tasmanian son qualifying as a father son for the Devils. So that would stuff over thr likes of St kilda and Richmond

 

[theGav56]

They have floated the idea of any Tasmanian son qualifying as a father son for the Devils. So that would stuff over thr likes of St kilda and Richmond

Not necessarily. It could mean the player gets to make a choice.

 

[Docker82]

Not necessarily. It could mean the player gets to make a choice.

Actually think it’ll be borderline pointless tbh. Those not living in Tasmania will probably just go to the home club, whilst those living in Tasmania will be in their academy/zone anyway. So basically just leaves players who’s father played for a club in one state and lives in another which isn’t Tasmania where it’s likely to make much impact.

 

[theGav56]

Actually think it’ll be borderline pointless tbh. Those not living in Tasmania will probably just go to the home club, whilst those living in Tasmania will be in their academy/zone anyway. So basically just leaves players who’s father played for a club in one state and lives in another which isn’t Tasmania where it’s likely to make much impact.

Yeah, true. Pointless, but has a nice little decorative effect.

 

[Taylor]

Potential access to top 10 VicM players with discounts will help them

 

[ilikepotatoes]

I hope they get as little as possible.