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

Remove this Banner Ad

  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #2


Quick links:
Draft prospect video highlights (thanks to noobermensch)
AFL retirements and delistings


Latest news and rumours:







  • Zane Trew, Jamaine Jones and Jordyn Baker delisted

  • 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:
kerrazy said:
The explanation is this: just because geelong and gws drafted those players does not mean that we would have done the EXACT same.

Example: Trent Rivers was taken after our 1st round pick in 2019, and someone who I had a keen eye on. We gave up on that and he is looking pretty decent now for Melbourne.

The trade was utterly diabolical.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we could have done worse.

Rivers hasn't been as good as Kelly has been for us to this point. And probably wont ever be, although he will play for longer.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Schtinker said:
Who's to say the PieMan wouldn't have picked Cody Weightman, Finn Maginness and Chad Warner if he had those picks?
Click to expand...

Weightman and McGinness? Gee losing sleep over them.

Fact is, if we actually hit every one of those picks, we'd be in a worse position than we are now. We'd just be a middling side the likes of St Kilda and Essendon at best.
 
greatwhiteshark said:
Most overblown thing ever the Kelly trade. The coach and the footy department put us where we are.
Click to expand...
The Kelly trade was the straw that broke the back.

The Pieman had his love of clean cut nice boys who were athletes. Hello Venables, Duggan and Chesser (I could add XON and Foley but at least these were R2 pick failures not R1). He refused to draft players who had balls. No love for Jarrod Berry or Worpel or Powell-Pepper types.

The Pieman continued to draft half backs thinking they would make midfielders.

The Pieman also loved 3rd talls not realising they were undersized.

The misuse of the Rookie List. We missed the chance to draft up and coming WAFL players and instead we re-rookied players that probably needed to be cut. Why Bailey Rogers and Bailey Banfield were not taken as rookies, I have no idea except assume they were not seen as athletes.

As Bond came out and stated, we never had the right mids at the range to pick from. I argued that best available means SFA when the range is not that far off

The Kelly trade we tried to get in 2018 made sense. Geelong were never going to budge. Timing is everything and we should have taken a brand new approach to Kelly then and got him to drive his family back to Perth a la Jamie Cripps and told Geelong he was not heading back to Victoria. Place himself in the PSD and stipulate conditions that would make him untouchable outside of WA. King Nessie I had failed to build a relationship with Freo that meant it should of been a formality but no, he couldn't do that. So Freo bobbed up with interest.

We had to trade for Kelly, Redden and Yeo because the Pieman could not do his job properly. To be fair, the club did not put checks and balances around the Pieman. A proper List Manager makes sure the team balance is right. If you recall Rawlings mouthing the words "Worpel" when he was over ruled and we took Ainsworth. Surely accountability and over ride is the role of the List Manager. And then in 2022 King Nessie I combines the List and Recruitment Manager roles because he never believed in reporting to the board himself and saw them as his appointments so had a screwed up approach to accountability.

Kelly has pretty well kept his end of the bargain. Apart from not telling Geelong to F off and drive back to Perth, he is the symptom not the cause.

Perhaps the blow bit about the Kelly trade was that it blew the wall paper off and exposed the true cracks



Well hello Fcuking Friday, glad to get that off my chest

. ASTERIX_PUNCH.gif
 
Last edited:
I wonder how things could've gone for both clubs if we had just let Gaff go to North at the end of 2018 as a free agent.

This isn't a hindsight thing, I was ok with letting Gaff go, but I understand why they didn't. Would've been a 'bad' compo pick for us since we won the flag that year, yeah?
 
AsterixTheGaul said:
The Kelly trade was the straw that broke the back.

The Pieman had his love of clean cut nice boys who were athletes. Hello Venables, Duggan and Chesser (I could add XON and Foley but at least these were R2 pick failures not R1). He refused to draft players who had balls. No love for Jarrod Berry or Worpel or Powell-Pepper types.

The Pieman continued to draft half backs thinking they would make midfielders.

The Pieman also loved 3rd talls not realising they were undersized.

The misuse of the Rookie List. We missed the chance to draft up and coming WAFL players and instead we re-rookied players that probably needed to be cut. Why Bailey Rogers and Bailey Banfield were not taken as rookies, I have no idea except assume they were not seen as athletes.

As Bond came out and stated, we never had the right mids at the range to pick from. I argued that best available means SFA when the range is not that far off

The Kelly trade we tried to get in 2018 made sense. Geelong were never going to budge. Timing is everything and we should have taken a brand new approach to Kelly then and got him to drive his family back to Perth a la Jamie Cripps and told Geelong he was not heading back to Victoria. Place himself in the PSD and stipulate conditions that would make him untouchable outside of WA. King Nessie I had failed to build a relationship with Freo that meant it should of been a formality but no, he couldn't do that. So Freo bobbed up with interest.

We had to trade for Kelly, Redden and Yeo because the Pieman could not do his job properly. To be fair, the club did not put checks and balances around the Pieman. A proper List Manager makes sure the team balance is right. If you recall Rawlings mouthing the words "Worpel" when he was over ruled and we took Ainsworth. Surely accountability and over ride is the role of the List Manager. And then in 2022 King Nessie I combines the List and Recruitment Manager roles because he never believed in reporting to the board himself and saw them as his appointments so had a screwed up approach to accountability.

Kelly has pretty well kept his end of the bargain. Apart from not telling Geelong to F off and drive back to Perth, he is the symptom not the cause.

Perhaps the blow bit about the Kelly trade was that it blew the wall paper off and exposed the true cracks



Well hello Fcuking Friday, glad to get that off my chest.



Consequently,
Click to expand...

The drugs saga really set this club back when it came to the draft. Simmo said in his BackChat interview with Schofield that he noticed there were too many 'clean cut' and good citizens in the team when he first arrived. That good character was the number 1 thing the club looked for and being a good footballer came second.
 
greatwhiteshark said:
You need all types of players to rebuild, you don’t rebuild with 40 odd 18 year olds, you will fail everytime doing that.
You need some experienced heads to teach and guide these players and show them what elite training and performance is all about.
Baker fills a role for our club. He has operated in an elite performance group and he is a better than average contributer himself.
I think many of you are getting to worked up over pick 13.
Click to expand...

We have plenty of experience on our list to set standards for our youth. By the time the likes of Gov, Yeo, Allen, Duggan, Cripps, Waterman, etc are off the list, the current batch of 18-21yr olds will be setting standards for the next group of 18yr olds.

If the trade comes down to Barrass for Baker, then getting worked up over pick 13 is definitely justified.
 
daddy_4_eyes said:
We have plenty of experience on our list to set standards for our youth. By the time the likes of Gov, Yeo, Allen, Duggan, Cripps, Waterman, etc are off the list, the current batch of 18-21yr olds will be setting standards for the next group of 18yr olds.

If the trade comes down to Barrass for Baker, then getting worked up over pick 13 is definitely justified.
Click to expand...

But it works both ways. Barrass aint worth pick 13 as he is nearly 30. Hawks may give it to us simply because it’s a need for them in their flag window.
Dartboard an 18 year old and get a WAFL player is just as big a chance.
What players are worth just isn’t how it works.
 
eaglevision said:
Good post, this is the most rational way of looking at it. There are six 250 gamers (projected) out of 11. Zak Jones is 150-200 and the rest were spuds although fair to say a number of those were high risk high reward.

Baker if he stays fit will play about 100 B grade games for WCE and the average games played for picks 10-20 is 119.

At what point is Baker a better investment than the pick? The players that are likely to be available (Lindsay or Berry) are IMO, very likely to play comfortably more than the 100 games Baker would offer us and at a higher level and so would Bo Allan.

Given our history of 2R drafting, there is an argument that he’d be a better investment than a pick in the 20s or 30s, but certainly not in the first round IMO.
Click to expand...
Good points. Only thing I’d add to balance the argument a little is that if something comes back with Baker it would need to be considered in the overall deal.
 
All these free agency deals going through today and we cant even land Graham on first day who after months still cant decide, shows the poor state of affairs of the club atm.
 
Big_Birdy said:
Weightman and McGinness? Gee losing sleep over them.

Fact is, if we actually hit every one of those picks, we'd be in a worse position than we are now. We'd just be a middling side the likes of St Kilda and Essendon at best.
Click to expand...
This is a really good point. Part of the reason we've won so many flags in AFL is that when our window shuts we've always plummeted straight to the bottom. Allows us to get the top talent and then jump back up.

Imagine if Judd hadn't left? We would have stayed mid table (like he turned Carlton into) but likely never got even one of our twin towers (JK &JD) and probably be stuck in an 18 year premiership drought at the moment.

The current situation is tough, but don't underestimate just how good Reid is going to be. Simmo has already said he's attracting interest from others to play with him. The club seems to know this too, with a focus on getting some mature aged players in to help jump up the ladder a bit next year.

If we win 10 games next year to sit 12-15th watch Harley extend for 2 years and us land a big fish (likely Warner). Finals in 2026 and we're back to prying open the premiership window.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

CountryLad said:
Good points. Only thing I’d add to balance the argument a little is that if something comes back with Baker it would need to be considered in the overall deal.
Click to expand...
I was going to mention that but didn’t want the point of the post to shift from opportunity cost to what is/isn’t coming back but you’re absolutely right 👍. Going to come down to a decision of in vs out in the end.
 
daddy_4_eyes said:
We have plenty of experience on our list to set standards for our youth. By the time the likes of Gov, Yeo, Allen, Duggan, Cripps, Waterman, etc are off the list, the current batch of 18-21yr olds will be setting standards for the next group of 18yr olds.

If the trade comes down to Barrass for Baker, then getting worked up over pick 13 is definitely justified.
Click to expand...

Incorrect, we have shown that our experience players are not consistent and are not switched on every game. They choose when to turn up. I dont want any of them helping our young players until they themselves get out if the rut they are in.
 
bzparkes said:
Gee, it's not even trade week yet and people are still pissing their pants over what some journos are saying based off Twomey's thought bubble over what WCE are likely to offer for Baker, despite Pyke saying we're not going to sell the farm and want to keep our early picks.
Click to expand...

Agree with you that it's unlikely.

But if Big Footy isn't the place for an early pre-melt then I don't know what it's for..
 
eaglevision said:
Good post, this is the most rational way of looking at it. There are six 250 gamers (projected) out of 11. Zak Jones is 150-200 and the rest were spuds although fair to say a number of those were high risk high reward.

Baker if he stays fit will play about 100 B grade games for WCE and the average games played for picks 10-20 is 119.

At what point is Baker a better investment than the pick? The players that are likely to be available (Lindsay or Berry) are IMO, very likely to play comfortably more than the 100 games Baker would offer us and at a higher level and so would Bo Allan.

Given our history of 2R drafting, there is an argument that he’d be a better investment than a pick in the 20s or 30s, but certainly not in the first round IMO.
Click to expand...
Personally I think Baker for 23 is about right but let’s just say that it’s slightly unders. Would you be happy with

Out 13 & 23
In pick 16 or 18 if the Tigers end up with one of those picks.

Basically upgrading pick 23 a little but staying in the first round.
 
Big_Birdy said:
Would love an explanation how we would be in a better spot with Cooper Stephens, Sharp, Bryan and Angwin on our list as opposed to Kelly.
Click to expand...
I don't like this argument that everyone always uses. Want to say we were in our window and were pushing for multiple premierships so we overpaid, then fair enough. But there is no way we would've selected those same players.
On the flipside we could've had Warner, Rivers and Nathan O'Driscoll over Kelly too.
 
greatwhiteshark said:
If the Hawks had pick 8 we would want that for Barrass. If they had pick 16 we would want that for Barrass.
You don’t get what players are worth, you get what picks clubs have to deal with.
Click to expand...
Don't agree.

Hawks are incumbent to find us the required value....He's UC and they want him.

We set they price, they either pay it or we hold him to his contract (or if TB really wants out, shop him to Sydney)
 
CountryLad said:
Personally I think Baker for 23 is about right but let’s just say that it’s slightly unders. Would you be happy with

Out 13 & 23
In pick 16 or 18 if the Tigers end up with one of those picks.

Basically upgrading pick 23 a little but staying in the first round.
Click to expand...
I'd be happy enough with 16 though I'd be willing to take 18 if it meant giving up our F2 instead
 
greatwhiteshark said:
If the Hawks had pick 8 we would want that for Barrass. If they had pick 16 we would want that for Barrass.
You don’t get what players are worth, you get what picks clubs have to deal with.
Click to expand...
If the Hawks had 8 we would only want that and maybe a F3 as a sweetner.

As they have 13, this deminishes the value of pick 8 by 5 and this the F3 that has to come in.

On Pixel 6 Pro using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

Remove this Banner Ad

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

Similar threads

eaglevision
  • Locked
  • Poll
List Mgmt. Contract, Trade and Draft Discussions - 2024 Edition
841 842 843 844 845
Replies
21K
Views
977K
maverick001
maverick001
HoneyBadger35
Up the Coasters Post Season Awards 2024
20 21 22 23 24
Replies
576
Views
20K
KERRPOW
KERRPOW
Yeahnahmate
  • Locked
  • Poll
Strategy 2024 Post Season Cull
Replies
7
Views
586
Ghossein
Ghossein
HoneyBadger35
  • Poll
Review 2024 Season in Review
Replies
20
Views
1K
KERRPOW
KERRPOW
Keys
  • Locked
List Mgmt. Trade & Draft Discussion 2023 post season - Picks Reid,30,40,49,66 (Bush league)
594 595 596 597 598
Replies
15K
Views
718K
Farang83150
Farang83150
HoneyBadger35
Autopsy Round 24, 2024: Positives and Negatives vs Geelong
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
158
Views
7K
jesterwester
jesterwester
HoneyBadger35
Autopsy Round 23, 2024: Positives and Negatives vs Carlton
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
218
Views
9K
The Dodger
The Dodger

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top