List Mgmt. 2025 List Mismanagement and Trading

[1970crow]

You're talking about seeing is believing .....didn't Phil Walsh project the Crows would be in the premiership window 3 years out from 2017 ?
Hardwick the same, he finished 13th in 2016 .....and said he had the best list ....he was roundly laughed at due to current performances:

Comment: Is Dimma delusional?​

POSITIVITY is a good football quality. Delusion isn't.

In trying to be forever positive in a season of football which has been anything but, Richmond coach Damien Hardwick has become delusional.

It started early April with a reference to the Tigers needing to take a few steps back in order to go forward. It continued in the same month with a pledge that his side would work its way out of an early season slump.

Then came the doozy in late May. "We feel in the footy club now (we have) as good a list as I think we've had at my disposal since I've been there,'' Hardwick said.

As late as yesterday, the delusion continued. "We feel we're a finals-calibre side."

Comment: Is Dimma delusional?

Maybe it's time for old-fashioned Tiger bloodletting: Damian Barrett

www.afl.com.au

"best list" since he'd been involved, looks like you forgot to finish that sentence..... That's not a long time frame and very easy to compare because he'd been there and was senior coach throughout it. Compare that to 30+ of AFC lists and you claiming confidently that 2025 is our "best list ever". Little different you'd think.

 

[Golumless]

No we don't. People on this board say this every year.

You are confusing having a lot of average AFL footballers on our list with actual proper depth.

Having a lot of average AFL footballers is the definition of depth. I have a bridge to sell you if you think there are genuine above-average players sitting in the 23--28 slots of a top-4 team.

What is getting confused here is having depth is generally a bad thing for a list, if the depth is a lot of players who had opportunities but were unable to lock down a best 22 spot. All they do is clog up your developmental pathways, and whilst you're uber talented kids will blow through it, the secondary tier of prospects coming through - who you want benefiting from misfortune - get pushed out as a coaching/selecting group can only afford to care about the next match in front of them.

 

[Scorpus]

So you're the one who always says we pump too many games into poor players ....that Mackay is the worst 200 game player in the Clubs history .....and now you're using games played to define list quality

Brent Reilly, Lyons, board whipping boys .....and you want to include Atkins, and Jake Kelly in your argument

Sorry if I don't take this seriously

No, what I'm saying is that some players on our list have a ceiling that is a role player, or even a dud.

So when you consider the entire list quality from the perspective of "potential", you have to factor in that some will be role players.

When comparing our 2025 list to 2014, and you start matching up who has the potential to be the Taylor Walker, Rory Sloane, Rory Laird types... eventually you get to filling out the role players too.

The reality is that for our current list to be the best ever, after you finish slotting in 18 All Australian squad members (11 of which played fewer than 100 games), you then have to slot in another seven up and coming 100-200 game role players, and another four 50-100 game fringe players.

And that's not even considering that our 2014 list also had the usual guys that don't make 50 games. Like the Cam Ellis-Yolmen, Brodie Martin types.

That type of squad we had back then had top end quality, it had a wealth of AA squad level players ("A graders"), it had a decent cohort of role players and it had a bunch of fringe depth.

You've made no case that our current list has that profile of "potential"

 

[1970crow]

The below is where Waynus attempts to criticise posters who laughed and rolled their eyes that he merely commented that, "we have one of the best lists now in the Clubs history". You can imagine his dismay, people daring to laugh and roll eyes at the comment, I mean, it's perfectly likely that we could have one of the best lists in the club's history. Waynus, you're right to condescend those posters that laughed and eye rolled what might end up being a fairly reasonable statement.



But, is that actually what your comment was? Let's use the magic of the interweb to confirm, so that you can continue to act superior. From the below, what I see is "and a list that's the best in the Clubs history". Now, I don't have a PHD in any language discipline, but I am seeing a fairly stark difference between these 2 posts. I'd almost argue that posters didn't eye roll and laugh because you commented that this is one of the best lists in the clubs history, but rather that you stated it was absolute best list in the club's history. These 2 statements are not the same and your eyeroll and laugh complaint is one of delusion. You need to wake up, the real world is going on around you.

 

[Scorpus]

The 2014 list is such a great comparison too because we know that list was right on the cusp of a grand final premiership window run. And we also know that list wasn't good enough to make finals that year, and it wasn't ultimately good enough to win a flag

Relative to the competition, the list profile of our 2014 list was very similar to our 2025 list. 14th and 11th for experience and age (relative to other teams) compared to 15th and 11th now.

If we can't project into the future and say our current list has the potential to be as good as our 2014 list, what does that say about our prospects of success?

 

[Captain Furious]

... Except that "winning games" is NOT the only realistic way of assessing the list, particularly a list which is coming out of a 5-year ground-up rebuild.

WW is arguing that the youngsters we have on our list now, while not yet at their peaks (and thus not yet winning enough games to be considered greats), have the potential to be the greatest overall list that the club has ever had. He's looking to their future, not to their past.

I think he's overly optimistic in forecasting what some of them will become (though I agree that Curtin has the potential to become a great). By all means argue on that basis - but arguing on the basis that "we didn't win enough games to make the finals in 2024, so the list is garbage" is to miss the point entirel.

Yes, basing the list on potential rather than production. What I'm saying is that we can do that every year and so can every club. It's great to be optimistic about what may come but that needs to be countered with the reality of outcomes.

*I never said the list was garbage, I did say it was closer to our worst lists than it is to our bests - which is accurate based on outcomes. Previously the most years we'd missed finals was 3 and that was last century. This century it's been two consecutive years. We are now currently 7 years from a finals appearance and 5 years into a rebuild, finished bottom 4. Yes we have some talented looking young players. So does everyone else. Yes we should improve next season. Also every other club thinks the same. We certainly did last season, didn't quite work out.

Maybe let's wait until we're out of the bottom 4, maybe make finals even, until we start comparing what we have now to genuinely excellent teams from the past that made us feel like we were a chance of a flag most years.

 

[1970crow]

Having a lot of average AFL footballers is the definition of depth. I have a bridge to sell you if you think there are genuine above-average players sitting in the 23--28 slots of a top-4 team.

What is getting confused here is having depth is generally a bad thing for a list, if the depth is a lot of players who had opportunities but were unable to lock down a best 22 spot. All they do is clog up your developmental pathways, and whilst you're uber talented kids will blow through it, the secondary tier of prospects coming through - who you want benefiting from misfortune - get pushed out as a coaching/selecting group can only afford to care about the next match in front of them.

Exactly, our depth should be the Dowlings, the Taylors, the Ryan's, not players like Murphy, McHenry etc where their ceiling has already been determined as fringe (at best). Players like Jones and Schoey that have shown a bit would have one more year or they should be moved on for the next batch of Dowlings et al. We should be cycling through these players and giving them games at every available opportunity, because in there somewhere will be a top 10 player that will make a difference when we need one made. The Murphys, Mackay's, McHenrys will never be a difference maker when the chips are down on the big stage.

 

[1990crow]

The 2014 list is such a great comparison too because we know that list was right on the cusp of a grand final premiership window run. And we also know that list wasn't good enough to make finals that year, and it wasn't ultimately good enough to win a flag

Relative to the competition, the list profile of our 2014 list was very similar to our 2025 list. 14th and 11th for experience and age (relative to other teams) compared to 15th and 11th now.

If we can't project into the future and say our current list has the potential to be as good as our 2014 list, what does that say about our prospects of success?

Our prospects depend on continued good recruitment and development.
Getting gun players from opposition and upgrading players in and around midfield, wing, ruck, small forward, small defender.

 

[GreyCrow]

" this is the best list we have ever had ""

"" This is ONE of the best lists we have ever had "'

Reverse beeping "" it has the potential to be the best list "'

One of those statements is not like the other

 

[AFC979810]

Having a lot of average AFL footballers is the definition of depth. I have a bridge to sell you if you think there are genuine above-average players sitting in the 23--28 slots of a top-4 team.

Apologies - we have a bunch of below average footballers which is why we dont have depth.

Having depth is having a very good best 22 and then some players that can come in and play a role.

We dont have that. We have an evenness of below average footballers from spot 17 - 30.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

So a list that was a few inches of a Sicily kick from making a prelim is no good but a list that finished bottom 4 is amazing?

You're basing your thoughts on what you hope and think might happen, not actual reality. I also hope that this list becomes one of our best ever but it patently isn't right now.

Nah, I'm too pragmatic for that stuff

 

[Carn The Texan]

The 2014 list is such a great comparison too because we know that list was right on the cusp of a grand final premiership window run. And we also know that list wasn't good enough to make finals that year, and it wasn't ultimately good enough to win a flag

Relative to the competition, the list profile of our 2014 list was very similar to our 2025 list. 14th and 11th for experience and age (relative to other teams) compared to 15th and 11th now.

If we can't project into the future and say our current list has the potential to be as good as our 2014 list, what does that say about our prospects of success?

Can't wait to lose the 2028 grand final!

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

No we don't. People on this board say this every year.

You are confusing having a lot of average AFL footballers on our list with actual proper depth.

People confuse having an even squad with having a deep squad

Yes, it's hard to split players 10-30 on our list. But that's not necessarily a good thing

 

[1970crow]

Nah, I'm too pragmatic for that stuff

There's only one poster on this forum with lower level of self awareness than you.

 

[Mostyn]

So a list that was a few inches of a Sicily kick from making a prelim is no good but a list that finished bottom 4 is amazing?

You're basing your thoughts on what you hope and think might happen, not actual reality. I also hope that this list becomes one of our best ever but it patently isn't right now.

He's making a prediction. He'll either be right or wrong.

But at the moment he's exactly as right as you are.

Personally, I think we'll finish above Hawthorn in 2025, but that's as far as my opinion goes.

 

[jackster83]

He's making a prediction. He'll either be right or wrong.

But at the moment he's exactly as right as you are.

Personally, I think we'll finish above Hawthorn in 2025, but that's as far as my opinion goes.

I think their midfield falls away very quickly after Day and Newcombe.

Worpel, Ward and Nash get exposed against the better sides, as we saw in that semi final.

 

[AFC979810]

People confuse having an even squad with having a deep squad

Yes, it's hard to split players 10-30 on our list. But that's not necessarily a good thing

Agree. The last 5 years different posters have commented on our supposed depth and they have been wrong every time.

Deciding between Dowling, Bond, Murphy, Berry, Pedlar, Jones, Taylor, Berry, Cook for the last 5 spots does not mean we have depth. It means we dont have a clearly defined best 22.

 

[SLOWNE]

Vader this is a generalisation, not a personal dig mate

This board only exists because everyone is making player assessments based on personal projections .....the only time there's a variance off this projecting is in the cases such as Smith & Sloane, known entities with a long career behind them, who are benchmarked against the past career performances

Currently, every poster on every board is making assessments of the potential of U18 draftees .....kids who haven't even played one AFL game .....but every poster is projecting their futures already

George Kramer & 1970crow .....both self-proclaimed non-junior draft watchers, and non judges of talent ......posted this just the other day

View attachment 2163273
So it's a bit hypocritical to then turn around and dismiss an opinion given of a list based on projection .....whilst others keen on dismissing the premise, for no other reason than to dismiss it ......have either done zero research, or included quite a few players they've personally pillared over the years

The Youtube video I posted yesterday of the Western Australian boys discussing Curtin .....saying the kid is going to be a champion.... what, after 7 games ? ......yep they've projected based on his talent ....so are people dismissive of these comments ?

People saying, we should overlook Rachele's slow start to his career .....he will be an "A" grader ....this is posters projecting his future

So I have 15 players on my list as "A" graders .....I'm not talking about the elite players we've had in the past & comparing them .....I'm talking about the number of quality players, and I've been cut throat ....Crouch, ROB, and Walker are not included in my list
I have not included the GWS boys coming in either

It's fine to disagree .....but don't be a hypocrite about what you yourself post everyday (not personal, but a generalisation) ....and don't be an ignoramus, and simply say you're wrong, without putting up some rationale to counter

Our premierships were never won off a great list .....great coaching, yes ....but we had a lot of role players, with elite talent in the right areas of the field

When I read your posts I get the same dull thud in my head that I get when listening to Nicks discuss.... anything.

Might be something in that.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

When read your posts I get the same dull thud in my head that I get when listening to Nicks discuss.... anything.

Might be something in that.

Thats very concerning .....from a health perspective, can I recommend you don't read my posts

Hoping you have a speedy recovery

 

[George Kramer]

He's making a prediction. He'll either be right or wrong.

But at the moment he's exactly as right as you are.

Personally, I think we'll finish above Hawthorn in 2025, but that's as far as my opinion goes.

What’s his prediction though?

Is it his original position that it’s the best list ever or his diluted position it’s one of our best?

Perhaps WaynesWorld19 or 1970crow might be able to clarify

 

[SLOWNE]

can I recommend you don't read my posts

If only the forum administrators would bless me with that option.

 

[baldandbroke]

What’s his prediction though?

Is it his original position that it’s the best list ever or his diluted position it’s one of our best?

Perhaps WaynesWorld19 or 1970crow might be able to clarify

I love predictions that have NO WAY of being judged.

Even if our current list duds out - it will be a “waste” ruined by “insert reason that aligns with posting history”.

Also, who agrees on which list is currently “BEST EVER”? We can’t even say who is the incumbent that the new challenger needs to knock off!!

 

[Vader]

I love predictions that have NO WAY of being judged.

Even if our current list duds out - it will be a “waste” ruined by “insert reason that aligns with posting history”.

Also, who agrees on which list is currently “BEST EVER”? We can’t even say who is the incumbent that the new challenger needs to knock off!!

It can be judged... just not now.

We are clearly now in a position to judge the 2014 list, having seen what those players were capable of at their peaks. Similarly, we'll be able to properly judge the 2025 list in 2034 or 2035.

As for which is "Best Ever", that's always going to be a subjective judgement.

 

[PeterSalt]

Rookie lists - possibly getting rid of them

 

[Multiballz]

So early 2024, HAW are losing games and playing **** ......so their list is bad ....and this was the so calledexperts talking here

2nd half of the season, HAW get Day back & go on an amazing streak of winning games

Is your premise, that the same list went from **** to amazing in the same year .....because I can't accept that argument

The argument is that they have to go bang before you can claim its amazing list. Pretty simple really.