Rumour Bluemour Discussion XXXVI - 'Loopy' Season in full swing

[BlueBlood15]

Houston isn’t likely to officially nominate a club. Sounds like he’ll go to the club that can do the deal. At the moment Collingwood are more chips in. Sometimes that’s the easier decision. Sometimes the more difficult decision is sticking to a medium term list strategy rather than jumping at the short term gain that presents itself.

We want Houston at our price. We’ve been clear on that. If we don’t get him, it’ll be on our terms. Take 12 to the draft. Ideally trade in another top 15-20 pick. 2 x Campos. A mini refresh of the list on the fly without losing any substantial pieces from our list.

 

[CrippaTheGoat9]

I'd honestly rather Oliver than Houston
If we can get his head right his best is miles ahead of Houston and he won't cost much because Melbourne want the salary dump

 

[BlueTongue]

Say we get pick 13 from the suns, what will our offer be to port for Houston?

Pick 13 and what?

Owies and Kennedy?

 

[LanceRomance]

Agree. Houston isn't a game changer and the cost is too much. Add some much needed young talent to not bottom out when tassie enters. Use any spare salary cap space to bring forward some payments on longer term deals.

I think Houston makes contend better next year.

 

[AT97]

He’s 25, has played 9 games in his career and kicked 6 goals

His trade value is a bag of chips. That Collingwood “offer” in the The Age is just as “delusional” as the one we got lambasted for

I’m hoping someone can direct me to tonight’s jay clark video ‘hopping into’ coll. For not being serious about getting Huston.

 

[AT97]

From someone who works within the Pies LM team re flog Leppitsch - He's a uhh... 'Interesting operator'. Seems to have plans to get every player on the market but I'm not sure where exactly he's getting the picks for them all.

I think our new deputy might agree.

 

[lukep_86]

Can't believe we need to go through another week of this crap. Cut it down to 5 days and be done with it.

The AFL are very good at keeping footy in the news.

 

[YeoShuey]

I'd honestly rather Oliver than Houston
If we can get his head right his best is miles ahead of Houston and he won't cost much because Melbourne want the salary dump

 

[ctwenty1]

Can't believe we need to go through another week of this crap. Cut it down to 5 days and be done with it.

The AFL are very good at keeping footy in the news.

Yup- they are doing their job

 

[Benaly28]

Is Richards ordinary ?

I dont even know who he is.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Is Richards ordinary ?

I mean, drafted from Wangaratta at 23 two years ago using Pick 48. 9 games, av 11 disposals, under 3 tackles and 0.67 goals per game playing forward.

His value is extremely low, put it that way. He has pace apparently so it's down to an attribute.

 

[Forty3]

From someone who works within the Pies LM team re flog Leppitsch - He's a uhh... 'Interesting operator'. Seems to have plans to get every player on the market but I'm not sure where exactly he's getting the picks for them all.

To add to this, from someone who worked with Leppitsch when he was an assistant coach and first wanted to move into list management. The club strongly encouraged him to continue with coaching. This was firstly because they regarded his coaching acumen to be very good, but secondly because from the conversations held there were serious reservations with his list management abilities. I guess only time will tell.

I only say this because it leads me to my next point. There is a very big difference in job between a coach and a list manager. They will always have ongoing conversations throughout the year about how to improve the team, but will very often have differing opinions on how to achieve it, and different realities.

It is important to note that neither one is considered above the other in hierarchy, and its very very important for club success that each let the other do their jobs.

In regards to coaches, they spend most of their time in the 'we need to win now' mode, which usually leads them to wanting to constantly obtain top end talent year on year, which is understandable as they traditionally receive the most external pressure from media/members/fans. They can often end up with quite a myopic view on what their best 23 to 30 players should be. Yet their skill sets, their day to day job and their overall knowledge of how everything sits and what is possible doesn't often stretch as far as the nuances of list management.

On the flip side the head of List management is responsible of a team of personal, from talent scouts, recruiters, finance staff (both soft cap and TPP) as well as constant dialogue with players, player agents and other teams list managers.
They need to not only look at ways of improving the team in the short term, but forecast ways of making sure the team can constantly grow, improve and build both depth across an entire squad whilst fitting within the parameters of the salary cap and drafting rules.
Whilst they don't often receive the day to day pressures that a head coach does in the public forums, their body of work can often be career defining after usually about 5 years. An example of things going really poorly is someone like Ned Guy.

This can lead to clashes between the two departments. The best teams with the best administrations will make sure that each stays in their lane, as that is what they are hired to do.
So I look on with interest to see the outcome of Leppitsch career, coming from a head and assistant coach role, to a LM role, will definitely be an interesting case study.

From what I've heard, the media is omitting parts of the pies offers. Noble + F1 + F2 for 13 and 23 (23 could become 24 or 32 depending on the Rioli trade). The 13 + 23* pick + Richards for Houston and future change.

This really is an all out strategy. Collingwood have a massive age gap in their list, and having already brought in 1 HBF on 900k trading that much capital for another is a real win now mentality. Yet how does that look when they need to refresh in a couple of years whilst competing with the compromised Tasmanian drafts?

As for us, I believe Austin is being as transparent as he can/should be. Houston is a very good player, he would be welcome at our club on our term BUT we are using our first round draft pick this year, and intend on bringing in as many kids from this draft as possible.

We have forecasted this is the draft to obtain as much young talent as possible for several reasons. It's a super strong and deep draft, their is underwhelming opinions on next years draft, their is uncertainty around access to top end talent in drafts after that and on top of it all, we are not swimming in cap space. We have wiggle room, but with some very important signings coming up, it would be better to have flexibility than to go all out on a very good player, but one that isn't necessarily the absolute difference maker.
Especially with the Tasmanian team coming, they will have access to players from other clubs with the ability of offering a sign on bonus that sits outside the cap plus more which is yet to be fully revealed.

 

[Juddrockz]

Great post.
Apparently this Joe Richards fella is uncontracted so if Port had any brains they'd walk him to the PSD an take the risk of getting him for nothing and make the Pies pony up more for Houston?

 

[Manhattanite]

To add to this, from someone who worked with Leppitsch when he was an assistant coach and first wanted to move into list management. The club strongly encouraged him to continue with coaching. This was firstly because they regarded his coaching acumen to be very good, but secondly because from the conversations held there were serious reservations with his list management abilities. I guess only time will tell.

I only say this because it leads me to my next point. There is a very big difference in job between a coach and a list manager. They will always have ongoing conversations throughout the year about how to improve the team, but will very often have differing opinions on how to achieve it, and different realities.

It is important to note that neither one is considered above the other in hierarchy, and its very very important for club success that each let the other do their jobs.

In regards to coaches, they spend most of their time in the 'we need to win now' mode, which usually leads them to wanting to constantly obtain top end talent year on year, which is understandable as they traditionally receive the most external pressure from media/members/fans. They can often end up with quite a myopic view on what their best 23 to 30 players should be. Yet their skill sets, their day to day job and their overall knowledge of how everything sits and what is possible doesn't often stretch as far as the nuances of list management.

On the flip side the head of List management is responsible of a team of personal, from talent scouts, recruiters, finance staff (both soft cap and TPP) as well as constant dialogue with players, player agents and other teams list managers.
They need to not only look at ways of improving the team in the short term, but forecast ways of making sure the team can constantly grow, improve and build both depth across an entire squad whilst fitting within the parameters of the salary cap and drafting rules.
Whilst they don't often receive the day to day pressures that a head coach does in the public forums, their body of work can often be career defining after usually about 5 years. An example of things going really poorly is someone like Ned Guy.

This can lead to clashes between the two departments. The best teams with the best administrations will make sure that each stays in their lane, as that is what they are hired to do.
So I look on with interest to see the outcome of Leppitsch career, coming from a head and assistant coach role, to a LM role, will definitely be an interesting case study.

From what I've heard, the media is omitting parts of the pies offers. Noble + F1 + F2 for 13 and 23 (23 could become 24 or 32 depending on the Rioli trade). The 13 + 23* pick + Richards for Houston and future change.

This really is an all out strategy. Collingwood have a massive age gap in their list, and having already brought in 1 HBF on 900k trading that much capital for another is a real win now mentality. Yet how does that look when they need to refresh in a couple of years whilst competing with the compromised Tasmanian drafts?

As for us, I believe Austin is being as transparent as he can/should be. Houston is a very good player, he would be welcome at our club on our term BUT we are using our first round draft pick this year, and intend on bringing in as many kids from this draft as possible.

We have forecasted this is the draft to obtain as much young talent as possible for several reasons. It's a super strong and deep draft, their is underwhelming opinions on next years draft, their is uncertainty around access to top end talent in drafts after that and on top of it all, we are not swimming in cap space. We have wiggle room, but with some very important signings coming up, it would be better to have flexibility than to go all out on a very good player, but one that isn't necessarily the absolute difference maker.
Especially with the Tasmanian team coming, they will have access to players from other clubs with the ability of offering a sign on bonus that sits outside the cap plus more which is yet to be fully revealed.

Thanks - based on what you’re saying then Collingwood indeed is offering more than us to Port and their offer to GCS also seems reasonable. So makes sense that Houston ends up there. Hopefully the deal still falls through and we can sweep in on our terms.

Otherwise I’m also on Team Austin and would love to take 2 Top 15 picks to the draft - that Hawks pick via WCE and Richmond sounds doable.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Blue Dimension]

To add to this, from someone who worked with Leppitsch when he was an assistant coach and first wanted to move into list management. The club strongly encouraged him to continue with coaching. This was firstly because they regarded his coaching acumen to be very good, but secondly because from the conversations held there were serious reservations with his list management abilities. I guess only time will tell.

I only say this because it leads me to my next point. There is a very big difference in job between a coach and a list manager. They will always have ongoing conversations throughout the year about how to improve the team, but will very often have differing opinions on how to achieve it, and different realities.

It is important to note that neither one is considered above the other in hierarchy, and its very very important for club success that each let the other do their jobs.

In regards to coaches, they spend most of their time in the 'we need to win now' mode, which usually leads them to wanting to constantly obtain top end talent year on year, which is understandable as they traditionally receive the most external pressure from media/members/fans. They can often end up with quite a myopic view on what their best 23 to 30 players should be. Yet their skill sets, their day to day job and their overall knowledge of how everything sits and what is possible doesn't often stretch as far as the nuances of list management.

On the flip side the head of List management is responsible of a team of personal, from talent scouts, recruiters, finance staff (both soft cap and TPP) as well as constant dialogue with players, player agents and other teams list managers.
They need to not only look at ways of improving the team in the short term, but forecast ways of making sure the team can constantly grow, improve and build both depth across an entire squad whilst fitting within the parameters of the salary cap and drafting rules.
Whilst they don't often receive the day to day pressures that a head coach does in the public forums, their body of work can often be career defining after usually about 5 years. An example of things going really poorly is someone like Ned Guy.

This can lead to clashes between the two departments. The best teams with the best administrations will make sure that each stays in their lane, as that is what they are hired to do.
So I look on with interest to see the outcome of Leppitsch career, coming from a head and assistant coach role, to a LM role, will definitely be an interesting case study.

From what I've heard, the media is omitting parts of the pies offers. Noble + F1 + F2 for 13 and 23 (23 could become 24 or 32 depending on the Rioli trade). The 13 + 23* pick + Richards for Houston and future change.

This really is an all out strategy. Collingwood have a massive age gap in their list, and having already brought in 1 HBF on 900k trading that much capital for another is a real win now mentality. Yet how does that look when they need to refresh in a couple of years whilst competing with the compromised Tasmanian drafts?

As for us, I believe Austin is being as transparent as he can/should be. Houston is a very good player, he would be welcome at our club on our term BUT we are using our first round draft pick this year, and intend on bringing in as many kids from this draft as possible.

We have forecasted this is the draft to obtain as much young talent as possible for several reasons. It's a super strong and deep draft, their is underwhelming opinions on next years draft, their is uncertainty around access to top end talent in drafts after that and on top of it all, we are not swimming in cap space. We have wiggle room, but with some very important signings coming up, it would be better to have flexibility than to go all out on a very good player, but one that isn't necessarily the absolute difference maker.
Especially with the Tasmanian team coming, they will have access to players from other clubs with the ability of offering a sign on bonus that sits outside the cap plus more which is yet to be fully revealed.

Absolutely love this insight. Thanks for sharing Forty3. I love the approach of getting in some young talent this year.

Any insights/updates on our hustle to secure another first rounder?

 

[GCS in 11]

Forgive the intrusion, I’d much rather GC deal with you than Collingwood considering how crazy their demands are atm. I know 12 isn’t on the table currently, but would you put it up if we gave you 13 and then you split it with Sydney?

GC - Out 13, In Carlton F1 + F2
Carlton - Out F1 + F2, In 13

Carlton - Out 13, In 19 + 21
Sydney - Out 19 + 21, In 13

Carlton - Out 12 & 21, In Houston
Port - Out Houston, In 12 & 21

You’d get Houston in by trumping Collingwoods deal and still have 19 to take to the draft.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

To add to this, from someone who worked with Leppitsch when he was an assistant coach and first wanted to move into list management. The club strongly encouraged him to continue with coaching. This was firstly because they regarded his coaching acumen to be very good, but secondly because from the conversations held there were serious reservations with his list management abilities. I guess only time will tell.

I only say this because it leads me to my next point. There is a very big difference in job between a coach and a list manager. They will always have ongoing conversations throughout the year about how to improve the team, but will very often have differing opinions on how to achieve it, and different realities.

It is important to note that neither one is considered above the other in hierarchy, and its very very important for club success that each let the other do their jobs.

In regards to coaches, they spend most of their time in the 'we need to win now' mode, which usually leads them to wanting to constantly obtain top end talent year on year, which is understandable as they traditionally receive the most external pressure from media/members/fans. They can often end up with quite a myopic view on what their best 23 to 30 players should be. Yet their skill sets, their day to day job and their overall knowledge of how everything sits and what is possible doesn't often stretch as far as the nuances of list management.

On the flip side the head of List management is responsible of a team of personal, from talent scouts, recruiters, finance staff (both soft cap and TPP) as well as constant dialogue with players, player agents and other teams list managers.
They need to not only look at ways of improving the team in the short term, but forecast ways of making sure the team can constantly grow, improve and build both depth across an entire squad whilst fitting within the parameters of the salary cap and drafting rules.
Whilst they don't often receive the day to day pressures that a head coach does in the public forums, their body of work can often be career defining after usually about 5 years. An example of things going really poorly is someone like Ned Guy.

This can lead to clashes between the two departments. The best teams with the best administrations will make sure that each stays in their lane, as that is what they are hired to do.
So I look on with interest to see the outcome of Leppitsch career, coming from a head and assistant coach role, to a LM role, will definitely be an interesting case study.

From what I've heard, the media is omitting parts of the pies offers. Noble + F1 + F2 for 13 and 23 (23 could become 24 or 32 depending on the Rioli trade). The 13 + 23* pick + Richards for Houston and future change.

This really is an all out strategy. Collingwood have a massive age gap in their list, and having already brought in 1 HBF on 900k trading that much capital for another is a real win now mentality. Yet how does that look when they need to refresh in a couple of years whilst competing with the compromised Tasmanian drafts?

As for us, I believe Austin is being as transparent as he can/should be. Houston is a very good player, he would be welcome at our club on our term BUT we are using our first round draft pick this year, and intend on bringing in as many kids from this draft as possible.

We have forecasted this is the draft to obtain as much young talent as possible for several reasons. It's a super strong and deep draft, their is underwhelming opinions on next years draft, their is uncertainty around access to top end talent in drafts after that and on top of it all, we are not swimming in cap space. We have wiggle room, but with some very important signings coming up, it would be better to have flexibility than to go all out on a very good player, but one that isn't necessarily the absolute difference maker.
Especially with the Tasmanian team coming, they will have access to players from other clubs with the ability of offering a sign on bonus that sits outside the cap plus more which is yet to be fully revealed.

Pies are basically going for 1 more flag before their list implodes as the father time catch up to them. One can argue that its a good strategy... One could also very easily argue its a bad strategy. Imo when you're so reliant on just a few key players to your structure in Nick Daicos, Moore and Degoey it's just a bad idea to be going all in on the next 1-2 years when you know you have a mass of retirements imminent and the list will be forced to rebuild during the Tassie drafts. A disaster waiting to happen.

Funnily enough my connection inside the Pies LM team suggested similar and was desperately hoping the club would head to the draft to refresh the list a bit, but seemed to know his opinion would fall on deaf ears with the new big wig running the show.

That being said, we're also an extremely star reliant team (though quite a bit younger). We saw what can happen when they aren't all operating at near to 100% or a few are struck down with injury in the back end of this season. The wheels fall off and the season can go up in smoke in the blink of an eye.

Bringing in fresh young talent can help smooth over that discrepancy and create a more balanced list if u hit ur picks right (due to the low contracts draftees are held to for 3 years which can allow us to keep overperforming kids on minimal contracts) but adding players like Houston simply make our top end even heavier and almost require a miracle to occur to adequately fill our our lower end depth due to the immense cap pressure it puts on list. There's just not enough money in a salary cap to pay so many stars and maintain valuable depth pieces for a sustained period of time.

Leppitsch is clearly all in on the now, as is McRae... We just need to hope they have some bad luck in their 1-2 year window and then the ass falls out of the list after that. They'll be in strife for years and years if they don't perfectly balance things out over the next couple of off seasons.

There is 0 quality coming through their VFL team. Absolutely none.

 

[Juddrockz]

Pies are basically going for 1 more flag before their list implodes as the father time catch up to them. One can argue that its a good strategy... One could also very easily argue its a bad strategy. Imo when you're so reliant on just a few key players to your structure in Nick Daicos, Moore and Degoey it's just a bad idea to be going all in on the next 1-2 years when you know you have a mass of retirements imminent and the list will be forced to rebuild during the Tassie drafts. A disaster waiting to happen.

Funnily enough my connection inside the Pies LM team suggested similar and was desperately hoping the club would head to the draft to refresh the list a bit, but seemed to know his opinion would fall on deaf ears with the new big wig running the show.

That being said, we're also an extremely star reliant team (though quite a bit younger). We saw what can happen when they aren't all operating at near to 100% or a few are struck down with injury in the back end of this season. The wheels fall off and the season can go up in smoke in the blink of an eye.

Bringing in fresh young talent can help smooth over that discrepancy and create a more balanced list if u hit ur picks right (due to the low contracts draftees are held to for 3 years which can allow us to keep overperforming kids on minimal contracts) but adding players like Houston simply make our top end even heavier and almost require a miracle to occur to adequately fill our our lower end depth due to the immense cap pressure it puts on list. There's just not enough money in a salary cap to pay so many stars and maintain valuable depth pieces for a sustained period of time.

Leppitsch is clearly all in on the now, as is McRae... We just need to hope they have some bad luck in their 1-2 year window and then the ass falls out of the list after that. They'll be in strife for years and years if they don't perfectly balance things out over the next couple of off seasons.

Yeah the Pies giving one last hooray for a flag in 2025. Curious how their salary caps going if they've just taken in Perryman and now possibly Houston? Players must be playing for peanuts?

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

Yeah the Pies giving one last hooray for a flag in 2025. Curious how their salary caps going if they've just taken in Perryman and now possibly Houston? Players must be playing for peanuts?

Pies have many means of paying their players. As do Geelong.


As do we :S

 

[GT619]

To add to this, from someone who worked with Leppitsch when he was an assistant coach and first wanted to move into list management. The club strongly encouraged him to continue with coaching. This was firstly because they regarded his coaching acumen to be very good, but secondly because from the conversations held there were serious reservations with his list management abilities. I guess only time will tell.

I only say this because it leads me to my next point. There is a very big difference in job between a coach and a list manager. They will always have ongoing conversations throughout the year about how to improve the team, but will very often have differing opinions on how to achieve it, and different realities.

It is important to note that neither one is considered above the other in hierarchy, and its very very important for club success that each let the other do their jobs.

In regards to coaches, they spend most of their time in the 'we need to win now' mode, which usually leads them to wanting to constantly obtain top end talent year on year, which is understandable as they traditionally receive the most external pressure from media/members/fans. They can often end up with quite a myopic view on what their best 23 to 30 players should be. Yet their skill sets, their day to day job and their overall knowledge of how everything sits and what is possible doesn't often stretch as far as the nuances of list management.

On the flip side the head of List management is responsible of a team of personal, from talent scouts, recruiters, finance staff (both soft cap and TPP) as well as constant dialogue with players, player agents and other teams list managers.
They need to not only look at ways of improving the team in the short term, but forecast ways of making sure the team can constantly grow, improve and build both depth across an entire squad whilst fitting within the parameters of the salary cap and drafting rules.
Whilst they don't often receive the day to day pressures that a head coach does in the public forums, their body of work can often be career defining after usually about 5 years. An example of things going really poorly is someone like Ned Guy.

This can lead to clashes between the two departments. The best teams with the best administrations will make sure that each stays in their lane, as that is what they are hired to do.
So I look on with interest to see the outcome of Leppitsch career, coming from a head and assistant coach role, to a LM role, will definitely be an interesting case study.

From what I've heard, the media is omitting parts of the pies offers. Noble + F1 + F2 for 13 and 23 (23 could become 24 or 32 depending on the Rioli trade). The 13 + 23* pick + Richards for Houston and future change.

This really is an all out strategy. Collingwood have a massive age gap in their list, and having already brought in 1 HBF on 900k trading that much capital for another is a real win now mentality. Yet how does that look when they need to refresh in a couple of years whilst competing with the compromised Tasmanian drafts?

As for us, I believe Austin is being as transparent as he can/should be. Houston is a very good player, he would be welcome at our club on our term BUT we are using our first round draft pick this year, and intend on bringing in as many kids from this draft as possible.

We have forecasted this is the draft to obtain as much young talent as possible for several reasons. It's a super strong and deep draft, their is underwhelming opinions on next years draft, their is uncertainty around access to top end talent in drafts after that and on top of it all, we are not swimming in cap space. We have wiggle room, but with some very important signings coming up, it would be better to have flexibility than to go all out on a very good player, but one that isn't necessarily the absolute difference maker.
Especially with the Tasmanian team coming, they will have access to players from other clubs with the ability of offering a sign on bonus that sits outside the cap plus more which is yet to be fully revealed.

how many kids do you see us taking. are we looking at getting another 1st rounder or 2

 

[katmanblue]

we moved LOB on...still in contract.

And he gave the Blues far more than Orazio ever has!!

Only because he was a top 10 draft pick who we were trying to get any sort of return from

On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Soapy V]

As for us, I believe Austin is being as transparent as he can/should be. Houston is a very good player, he would be welcome at our club on our term BUT we are using our first round draft pick this year, and intend on bringing in as many kids from this draft as possible.

We have forecasted this is the draft to obtain as much young talent as possible for several reasons. It's a super strong and deep draft, their is underwhelming opinions on next years draft, their is uncertainty around access to top end talent in drafts after that and on top of it all, we are not swimming in cap space. We have wiggle room, but with some very important signings coming up, it would be better to have flexibility than to go all out on a very good player, but one that isn't necessarily the absolute difference maker.
Especially with the Tasmanian team coming, they will have access to players from other clubs with the ability of offering a sign on bonus that sits outside the cap plus more which is yet to be fully revealed.

This I 100% agree with. Supports everything I have been told.

Only rider to this is the possibility, if we can trade F1 for a pick around 14-18? we MAY use 12 and F2 for Houston but will want something back.

The scenarios being bandied around are still possible but Carlton are looking at many different options that may satisfy Port. Other deals will likely need to happen first and this will be done late. Carlton have a clear idea of what Port want and are trying to make something happen for Houston while still having a first round pick this year

If we don't get Houston we want our F1 to be a pick this year

My take is that by Monday, if not earlier, you will start to see some pick swaps etc that may well lead to this happening

 

[tarczonandjane]

More compulsory reading from forty3

 

[RPCB]

The trade period has this uncanny knack of the biggest deal(s) (Houston/Smith, Oliver?) being done in the last 2 days. No need to stress too much about things before that time.

 

[Accidental genius]

Houston situation is sounding like the trade period when we were after Shiel...and him and his manager making the most of the attention to drive up his value