List Mgmt. 2025 List Mismanagement and Trading

[Rory Walkerfield]

Is a midfield line up of Rankine, Draper and Peatling the fastest in the league? All express pace

A tad quicker than a Laird, Crouch, Sloane midfield from a few years ago

 

[cmndstab]

First mistake was giving Burgess 2 years, why? Where else was he going to go?

The mistake was giving him a contract at all.

 

[Scorpus]

The mistake was giving him a contract at all.

Didn't taking on his contract get us over the line for the pick swap with Gold Coast he was part of?

 

[George Kramer]

Didn't taking on his contract get us over the line for the pick swap with Gold Coast he was part of?

What was the swap and did we give him an extra year?

 

[Scorpus]

What was the swap and did we give him an extra year?

We swapped pick 23 and 26 last year for pick 14 and Burgess. We probably had to give him an extra year to agree to the trade in contract

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I think our depth is starting to look pretty good:

FORWARDS
FF: Darcy Fogarty - Riley Thilthorpe - Alex Neal Bullen
HF: Josh Rachele - Taylor Walker - Ben Keays

Depth: Luke Pedlar, Dan Curtin, Brayden Cook, Toby Murray, Chris Burgess

MIDFIELDERS
C : Jordan Dawson - Matthew Crouch - Jake Soligo
1st R: Riley O'Brien - James Peatling -
Izak Rankine

Depth: Sid Draper, Lachie Sholl, Zac Taylor, Charlie Edwards, Billy Dowling, Harry Schoenberg, Keiran Strachan, Sam Berry

DEFENDERS
HB: Isaac Cumming - Mark Keane - Mitch Hinge
FB: Max Michalanney - Nick Murray - Josh Worrell

Depth: Chayce Jones, Luke Nankervis, Rory Laird, Jordon Butts, Wayne Milera, Oscar Ryan, Hugh Bond, James Borlase, Brodie Smith

So injuries should not be used as an excuse... but they shouldn't have been used this year as had nothing to do with our rubbish 1st month of football.

We have our best squad for years & there are no excuses for missing finals.

If we are not tracking for finals during the year, Nicks must be sacked.

 

[Carmo]

We swapped pick 23 and 26 last year for pick 14 and Burgess. We probably had to give him an extra year to agree to the trade in contract

(not really commenting on scorpus's post which was pretty informative more on just the whole burgess discussion)
Getting in experience this year was good but getting in experience last year was bad?
It helped get us the improved pick.
He was our backup in case we lost tall depth by Himmelberg leaving (and Himmelberg has now left).

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

We still have the ability to pay anywhere from 95 to 105% of the $15.8 million salary cap, depending on how we've structured it.

Unless we are forced into a 95% salary cap this year from a huge overspend in previous years, there would have been some flexibility.

A 2% swing (let's say 102% spend in 2024 and 98% in 2025) is $320k which should be more than enough to pay out one of our lowest contracts. And noting that we are forced to pay that total amount in 2025 anyway if they stay on the list, so the only thing changing is moving from a 100%-100% spend to accommodate that contract over two years, to 102%-98% to accommodate that in 1 year.

The only reason we wouldn't be able to do that is if we've forced ourselves into a position of zero cap flexibility due to overspending in prior years. Maybe that's the case, but our list has certainly not deserved it and there's little advantage to front loading to the degree it lowers our salary cap in future years. The fact we have recontracted or restructured contracts very early suggests it's more likely we are struggling to hit the salary floor then being hard up on the cap limit

I have no doubt we could have afforded to pay out the likes of Burgess or Strachan to free up another list position if we wanted to.

We choose not to, not because we couldn't, but because we didn't want to.

 

[Carmo]

Also, relax folks, there will, in fact, be future draft and trading opportunities where we can get a ruckman.

That said I'm pretty sad about missing out on Dodson too.

 

[WeeBlake]

I think our depth is starting to look pretty good:

FORWARDS
FF: Darcy Fogarty - Riley Thilthorpe - Alex Neal Bullen
HF: Josh Rachele - Taylor Walker - Ben Keays

Depth: Luke Pedlar, Dan Curtin, Brayden Cook, Toby Murray, Chris Burgess

MIDFIELDERS
C : Jordan Dawson - Matthew Crouch - Jake Soligo
1st R: Riley O'Brien - James Peatling -
Izak Rankine

Depth: Sid Draper, Lachie Sholl, Zac Taylor, Charlie Edwards, Billy Dowling, Harry Schoenberg, Keiran Strachan, Sam Berry

DEFENDERS
HB: Isaac Cumming - Mark Keane - Mitch Hinge
FB: Max Michalanney - Nick Murray - Josh Worrell

Depth: Chayce Jones, Luke Nankervis, Rory Laird, Jordon Butts, Wayne Milera, Oscar Ryan, Hugh Bond, James Borlase, Brodie Smith

I prefer depth charts where you list the depth for each position, including players who can play multiple positions. So Laird is listed as mid and defender. Thilthorpe as fwd and ruck etc.

Ruck should seperate too, I think.

Anyway I agree with you. Our depth is pretty good, except for ruck.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I argued the same that we should have flexibility. Surely we haven’t gone to the 105% level YET

One question for you or Vader is how many years forward can you roll the underspend from only paying 95%?

Good question.

Can't go below 95% & can't go over 105% in a given year.

We have definitely been front loading with our young list, which is why we have been extending most of our young players on long term deals.

I don't think you can go over 100% average over an extended period. Ie. You can use your underspend from previous year to pay more the following year... but you can't just keep paying 105% of the cap every year without an offsetting underspend.

I'm sure Vader can clarify.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Also, relax folks, there will, in fact, be future draft and trading opportunities where we can get a ruckman.

That said I'm pretty sad about missing out on Dodson too.

This isn't the issue though.

The problem is if ROB is injured for any significant time next season, it's a huge risk it ruins our season.

 

[Danger in Texas]

This isn't the issue though.

The problem is if ROB is injured for any significant time next season, it's a huge risk it ruins our season.

Drafting a rookie ruck wouldn’t help that kind of situation, though

At this point, we just have to hope ROB’s good to go for all of 2025, then do a complete overhaul of our ruck stocks (esp if ROB leaves)

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Drafting a rookie ruck wouldn’t help that kind of situation, though

At this point, we just have to hope ROB’s good to go for all of 2025, then do a complete overhaul of our ruck stocks (esp if ROB leaves)

We could have drafted a mature aged rookie!

 

[Jack McKraken]

We still have the ability to pay anywhere from 95 to 105% of the $15.8 million salary cap, depending on how we've structured it.

Unless we are forced into a 95% salary cap this year from a huge overspend in previous years, there would have been some flexibility.

A 2% swing (let's say 102% spend in 2024 and 98% in 2025) is $320k which should be more than enough to pay out one of our lowest contracts. And noting that we are forced to pay that total amount in 2025 anyway if they stay on the list, so the only thing changing is moving from a 100%-100% spend to accommodate that contract over two years, to 102%-98% to accommodate that in 1 year.

The only reason we wouldn't be able to do that is if we've forced ourselves into a position of zero cap flexibility due to overspending in prior years. Maybe that's the case, but our list has certainly not deserved it and there's little advantage to front loading to the degree it lowers our salary cap in future years. The fact we have recontracted or restructured contracts very early suggests it's more likely we are struggling to hit the salary floor then being hard up on the cap limit

That’s not how I understand it to work. You can only exceed the cap if you have already banked underpayments in a prior year.

Then once you have banked you have three years to use it, or it’s lost.

There is very little incentive to pay anything other than 100% each year, except in limited situations (Richmond going forward, North the last few years).

The better model is to max as close to 100% by bringing forward payments, and create space in future years.

The problem is that by this stage of the year, this planning has already happened. Mostly in 2023 and earlier years, with I would assume some shuffling during this year.

Certainly by November, our hands would be tied- we either have cap space or we don’t, it would be difficult to create more space because the 2024 payments have already been made and so are counted.

And as above, there aren’t very good reasons to be at anything other than 100% (or close to it).

 

[Jack McKraken]

Just unpacking this - are you sure that you can exceed the salary cap to payout players you're delisting a year early? I'm not sure the AFLPA would be happy with that.

I just think there must be barriers to clubs doing this, because almost none do. It's not like it's just us - more clubs are moving contracted players onto the rookie list than aren't.

Most supporters want players cut a year early and new players added, but that feels exactly like something the AFLPA would do their best to prevent.

It’s more a question of if we have the cap space. If we do, we can payout delisted players. I just don’t believe we have the space, even to cut Burgess.

 

[Jack McKraken]

I have no doubt we could have afforded to pay out the likes of Burgess or Strachan to free up another list position if we wanted to.

We choose not to, not because we couldn't, but because we didn't want to.

I think it’s the exact opposite. We can’t because we don’t have the cap.

We won’t ever know for sure unless someone for list management comments on it.

 

[Mutineer]

Drafting a rookie ruck wouldn’t help that kind of situation, though

At this point, we just have to hope ROB’s good to go for all of 2025, then do a complete overhaul of our ruck stocks (esp if ROB leaves)

Should have, could have drafted/rookied a young development ruck either late through the National Draft or rookie draft in recent years instead to all it appears we kept Himmelberg on as a break glass in emergency option even when he wanted out a year earlier. Now we're in the position where if ROB goes at year's end we;re stuffed. God forbid if we have to use Thilly in ruck if ROB cops an injury because Strachan just isn't up to it.

If ROB stays on we will still need to replace Strachan that's a no brainer (Harry Boyd didn't get taken in the rookie draft or PSD), interesting to see if the Saints try him out with a view to takinng him in the pre-season supplementary period.

Either way we have to start putting time into young development rucks.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Should have, could have drafted/rookied a young development ruck either late through the National Draft or rookie draft instead to all it appears we kept Himmelberg on as a break glass in emergency option even when he wanted out a year earlier. Now we're in the position where if ROB goes at year's end we;re stuffed. God forbid if we have to use Thilly in ruck if ROB cops an injury because Strachan just isn't up to it.

If ROB stays on we will still need to replace Strachan that's a no brainer (Harry Boyd didn't get taken in the rookie draft or PSD), interesting to see if the Saints try him out with a view to takinng him in the pre-season supplementary period.

Either way we have to start putting time into young development rucks.

Hopefully Smith retires during the year & we can take a ruckman in the MSD.

It's a huge risk next season if ROB goes down.

Assuming Strachan still can't run out an AFL game, think we need to use the T Murray & Thilthorpe combo with 50/50 ruck duties.

 

[jackster83]

Berry is the head scratcher, especially given we traded in Peatling who automatically takes his spot, and drafted Draper who will quickly go past him.

If no one else was interested in him, then that's even less reason to give him two years.

The odds are we'll have to "Schoenberg" him to the rookie list in 12 months time.

 

[Vader]

The 95-105% rule is specified in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, Section 13

13. Payment of Total Player Payment and Additional Services Agreements
(a) Each AFL Club must expend no less than 95% of the combined annual Total Player Payments and Additional Services Agreements limits in Football Payments to Players on its List in each relevant year.
(b) Where an AFL Club does not expend the amount set out in clause 13(a) in payments to Players on its List, the AFL Club shall be required to pay to the AFL, any shortfall in Football Payments.
(c) The AFL shall advise AFLPA whether each Club has expended 95% of the combined annual Total Player Payments and Additional Services Agreements limits in Football Payments and shall advise AFLPA of any shortfall by any AFL Club including the amount of such shortfall.
(d) Any shortfall will be distributed in an equitable manner between the Players in the relevant AFL Club in a manner determined by the AFL and AFLPA after consultation with the Players from that Club.
(e) AFL Clubs may spend over 100% of the combined Total Player Payments and Additional Services Agreements limit (Combined Limit), if in any of the preceding three years the Club has spent below 100% of the Combined Limit.
(f) The permitted amount of overspend will be tied to the level of underspend in the relevant preceding period. For example, if a Club was $500,000 below the combined Total Player Payments and Additional Services Agreements limit in 2017, and paid 100% of the Combined Limit in 2018 and 2019, the Club would be entitled to spend $500,000 above the Combined Limit in 2020. If a $500,000 overspend was not made in 2020, the Club has lost the right to overspend in 2021.
(g) It is agreed that the overspend amount is to be capped at a maximum of 105% of the Combined Limit in any given year.

Sections e, f & g are the most interesting here.

By my reading of that, it's a rolling 4 year window. The net outcome of the window can't be greater than 100%, and you can't pay more than 105% in any given year.

 

[Vader]

Berry is the head scratcher, especially given we traded in Peatling who automatically takes his spot, and drafted Draper who will quickly go past him.

If no one else was interested in him, then that's even less reason to give him two years.

The odds are we'll have to "Schoenberg" him to the rookie list in 12 months time.

Cook would go on the rookie list before him. At least Berry has looked like an AFL player at times. I don't understand why Cook was re-signed at all, let alone why he was given 2 years.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Berry is the head scratcher, especially given we traded in Peatling who automatically takes his spot, and drafted Draper who will quickly go past him.

If no one else was interested in him, then that's even less reason to give him two years.

The odds are we'll have to "Schoenberg" him to the rookie list in 12 months time.

Don't think we though we were in the running for Peatling when we re-signed Berry.

Shouldn't have an issue with delistings next season. For starters
Smith
Walker
Burgess
Strachan

There are a few others playing for their careers too.

 

[ams4crows]

Doubtful. Really hope we don't go for him because he will cost a bunch and I dont like spending on ruckman.



Brisbane v Adelaide:

Starting Ruckman
Big O - 31 years old vs ROB - 29 years old.

Backup Ruckman
Fort - 31 years old vs Strachan - 29 years old.

Developing Ruckman
Smith - 22 years old Ruck/Forward 206cm vs Murray - 21 years old 202cm Ruck/Forward.

Seems pretty identical to me.

He's coming home, and he'll be a free agent likely an unrestricted free agent too.
We can get Draper and still get a developing ruck as well, it's not like we're gonna delist O'Brien he'll stay on it'll be Draper for Strachan

 

[Vader]

He's coming home, and he'll be a free agent likely an unrestricted free agent too.
We can get Draper and still get a developing ruck as well, it's not like we're gonna delist O'Brien he'll stay on it'll be Draper for Strachan

Not a chance. It's Draper or ROB, not both.