List Mgmt. Contract, Trade and Draft Discussions - 2024 Post Season

Remove this Banner Ad

  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #2


Quick links



Latest news and rumours

Done deals:



  • Zane Trew, Jamaine Jones and Jordyn Baker delisted


Ongoing discussions:



  • List Manager Matt Clarke appeared on Sept 11 Gettable - Click spoiler below for summary
    On the draft: "We predicted that the draft was strong, but it's probably gotten stronger during the year."

    On top end of draft: "You could probably make five or six different choices and get it right."

    On Pick 3: "I reckon there's five (players) around that mark."

    On splitting: "I think you want to hold an early selection if you can. The depth of this group allows you to maybe have some movement there, and see what you can do to bring in more talent in the first 20-25 picks. Easier said than done, and I think most clubs would be saying the same thing. We'll see what we can do."

    On Liam Baker: "He's still yet to make a decision. They're still weighing up a few things. We'd love to get Liam on board from what he offers from a talent and leadership point of view. We understand where we're at as a group, we're rebuilding our group, we need to add some guys in the middle tier to support our young group."

    On Jack Graham: "We've got a number of players that we're speaking to. A bit of a wait and see on that one as well. We'll talk to a number of guys."

    On Shai Bolton: "I think it will be difficult for anybody, really. He's heavily contracted and a high quality player."

    On James Peatling: "He's heavily involved in a finals series at the moment so I don't want to comment too much on it, but I think there's a number of guys that have been playing really good footy this year that could suit what we do and what other clubs do. He's taken his footy to another level this year."

    On Tom Barrass: "We've had an early discussion with Hawthorn about it, they understand where we're at. He's nominated Hawthorn as his ideal destination. We want what we think he's worth, as a genuine key back in the competition that can do what he can do. We're obviously mindful of getting an appropriate deal for West Coast."

    On Tom Clurey: "Maybe (note: sounded very non enthused). We'd probably need some key back depth, whether that's through the draft or trade and free agency."

    On Jack Darling: "We've had initial discussions with his management group about (moving). We're open to talking, as we are with all of our players, but Jack's contracted with us."

    On Liam Ryan: "I expect him to be at West Coast next year, yes." (The most definitive answer of the day by a mile, a non-starter of a talking point.)

    On out of contact players e.g. Rotham, Witherden, Jones: "We're still working through what it looks like from a list point of view, and how many selections we'll want to have, and players that may come in and potentially may go out. You might want to give a coach an opportunity to look at these guys."

    On Harley Reid: "We've had discussions most of the year with his management group. I think it sits in a really good place. We're open to doing really whatever they want to do to be honest. We're really confident in building the right system around Harley, on and off field, to make sure that he's really comfortable, that he's going to play his best footy, and his long term future."

    On Jake Waterman's new deal: "Yep, really close. We're working really closely with his management on that. I expect that we'll have something done pretty soon."

    On Oscar Allen: "We've been talking with Oscar and his manager most of the year on that one. We're going through some stuff at the moment. I think we'll be ok with that one."




Past rumoured targets:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Even though there has been 0 trades for 23 days we still have a HUGE day with some MASSIVE guests on Trade Radio - coming up after 9 hours of ads we have Max King back to talk about St Kilda for an hour. Stay tuned for the BIGGEST week of the year"
 
There's two things that matter in your scenario though, 1) what is coming back and 2) what are we conceding in terms of talent by dropping from 13 to 24/32?


Statistically, pick 14 will play 118.7 games and we have a better than 1 in 4 chance of getting a 200 gamer.

If we trade 14 for Baker + 32, what are we getting back? Baker is likely to play 100-odd games for us, assuming he plays another 6-7 seasons, with production likely to taper off in the last 2-3 seasons.
Pick 34 nets us a player statistically likely to play less than 40 games, and only a better than 1 in 4 chance of playing 120 games (as opposed to 200 games for pick 14).

In a nutshell, Baker + 32 is not good value for us if we're rebuilding. Yes, 2 players. But neither is likely to be around as long as pick 14 would.

It has to be Baker + 24. 1 in 4 chance to play 160 games.
Nicely put. Agree there looks to be a sweet spot that it has to be the 24 coming back and that’s what I personally would hope for.

And don’t get me wrong, the players around 14 look real delicious this year, but I don’t mind the club trying different things to maximise the list turnover. If they did nothing but have an outgoing pick for an incoming player, our rebuild would arguably take a lot longer and we’d have the likes of Ledwards, Witherden and Rotham on the list again.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Having a good relationship with AFL house will be beneficial as there are other things currently in play after the equalisation review. No will mean no so what’s the point in poking the bear and looking like a beggar that’s being turned away. It would be a poor look for the club putting its hand out for assistance and being told no. We would get zero support from the AFL media just like during the COVID era and that was a poor look for our club. Surely that one is recent enough to remember what having whinge looks like in the VAFL landscape.
Don't buy this at all.

Let's agree to disagree on this one.
 
They should be very much in the window with their list profile and the talent they have.

However, when you have a case of the losers ingrained in your DNA it's hard to realise your potential.
Agree. And it is off field too. As supporters Eagles and Docker fans are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Generalising, they’re happy if they win. We’re pissed off we lose.

High expectations might mean more heartache but also … more success?

Frankly, I don’t give much time to all ‘the Derby’ hype. To me beating the Dockers is just another four points, to them it’s way more important. Sad but true.
 
yeah, bugger

ah well prob better for them. Icing on the cake guy.



Sent from my SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

Yep - and I prefer we keep building our
cake this year. We need some layers before we start thinking about icing. Protect and better our draft hand as much as possible then maybe make a play next year for a big dog if it’s the right fit
 
AFL Trade Radio
@traderadio
·
16s

"Dan Rioli - Richmond want more than Pick 6. It is on the table, the Tigers aren't happy with just pick 6, and want more than that." - Tom with the latest on Dan Rioli

More than 6? haha wow
No Way Commando GIF by 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

AFL Trade Radio
@traderadio
·
16s

"Dan Rioli - Richmond want more than Pick 6. It is on the table, the Tigers aren't happy with just pick 6, and want more than that." - Tom with the latest on Dan Rioli

More than 6? haha wow

Based on that Bolton is worth the first 4 picks in the draft.
Rioli I would not offer a first round for.
 
I’m not saying paying pick 14 isn’t overs for Baker but I think picks in general are over valued especially looking at our drafting ability.

Baker or any of the following
Brander
Venables
Hewett (still some hope he’s not dead)
Chesser
A couple of things.
Firstly, you can't include Venables in that comparison given the circumstances.
Secondly, Hewett will be tremendous if he can get on to the park.
Also, this years draft is considered much deeper than previous years (despite the top end not being as good).
I would back a Travaglia or Lindsay to play more games for us than Baker.
 
I’m not saying paying pick 14 isn’t overs for Baker but I think picks in general are over valued especially looking at our drafting ability.

Baker or any of the following
Brander
Venables
Hewett (still some hope he’s not dead)
Chesser
What? I'll give you Brander but Venables was awesome, Hewett will be a gun and Chesser will be ok
 
I concur. But then we're allegedly going to offer pick 14 for Baker, so everything is sideways.

The problem is the gap between our draft picks is quite big. I don’t think Baker is worth 14 but I think he is worth more than 23.
We don’t have pick 17 or 18 unfortunately.
Sometimes these deals can only get done with what’s in your hand.
If the Hawks had a better pick then we would be asking for it for Barrass.
Just the way it is.
 
A bid on Ashcroft at 1 makes sense as he is the best player in the draft.

If Tigers agree to not bid on either Ashcroft or Marshall, Tigers would not have to over pay for pick 20
These are the deals the AFL needs to scrutinise.

If another club offers more points for pick 20 than the Tigers the club offering the most points should get the deal.

Tigers promising not to bid using pick 1 as leverage is outside the current rules. And is technically draft tampering.

A trade for points should be an open auction.
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. Contract, Trade and Draft Discussions - 2024 Post Season

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top