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:
Just had a quick chat to Finn O'Sullivan. He confirmed he'd be thrilled to move to WA, to play with Harley as well as the added bonus of having better weather than Victoria.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk
If he’s going to be there at 3 then 100% keep the pick and select him.
 
Thats the thing though, we have no idea how the club is going to handle the trade period. Completely new management, and no indication from the club of any deals so far.

Getting in baker and graham is fine, they add something to the b22 that we lack. Who cares if they want to come over together? What difference does that make?
As long as we dont pay overs for Baker(theres been no real indication we will) then we cant really lose
I've been looking at how the Baker trade could work and I think there's a world where it could be something like 14 + 33 (HAW) for Baker + 20 (BRI). Values him at 24 for us but Richmond get their first rounder. Can't say that I'm sold on it but taking 3 + 20 into draft night with the ability to slide 3 or trade Hawthorn's F1 + our F2 into this draft wouldn't be the end of the world. If Adelaide were interested in moving up, we could offload our F2 to Gold Coast for 29. If they're still holding 13 on draft night, we could throw Hawthorn's F1 in and take that off their hands as well, leaving us with 3, 13, 20, 29, Baker and F1, F2 (ADE), F4 next year.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Does the Trade window just shut for the weekend? It gets dragged into multiple weeks….

I don’t understand why we have to wait for so long. Trade period should be for one week, majority of clubs should have deal in place on principle and can easily be done in one week.
 
If we hold pick 3 why wouldnt we? Richmond wont with pick 1, but anybody from pick 2 onward probably should
You'd be happy with Lombard over any of the top mids and Travaglia?
 
Thats the thing though, we have no idea how the club is going to handle the trade period. Completely new management, and no indication from the club of any deals so far.

Getting in baker and graham is fine, they add something to the b22 that we lack. Who cares if they want to come over together? What difference does that make?
As long as we dont pay overs for Baker(theres been no real indication we will) then we cant really lose

I reckon the rest of this trade period will tell us a bit on whether WCE & GC have changed their reputations at the trade table with their common Richmond influenced reps - and both relating to possible Tiger players.
 
Chill. Patrick Cripps ran 3.23 and is a dual Brownlow Medallist. He’ll fit in well to the right system.

It's reasonable to be concerned. Cripps and Bont are the two examples everyone points to regarding poor athletic testing but they're massive exceptions and have big points of difference that arguably Langford doesn't. I think if he tanks the agility too it makes a lot of sense for him to slide.
 
Holy **** wait until agility testing is done

Harvey langford is done. Completely done for me. Came 4th last in 20m with a time of 3.24. That's horrific and even slower then some ruckman. Alex dodson a 200cm ruck got 3.28

That may be a regression in his previous testing time.
Mundy and Pendles would test poorly in this area too
 
It's reasonable to be concerned. Cripps and Bont are the two examples everyone points to regarding poor athletic testing but they're massive exceptions and have big points of difference that arguably Langford doesn't. I think if he tanks the agility too it makes a lot of sense for him to slide.
They are the extreme examples but Cripps, Bont, Pendles, Mundy etc weren’t recruited to be runners and neither will Langford. Really don’t expect him to be on our radar but for the right team I think he’s going to be a great acquisition despite his pedestrian speed.
 
Found some similar times from current players at their respective combines

Cripps. 3.23
Bont. 3.20
Sidebottom. 3.22

Paul Seedsman ran 3.23 which surprised me a little.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Speed between the ears beats leg speed anytime.
Is Langford a 'first to the ball' type? One of those with elite hands would be pretty damaging paired with Harley.
 
People need to start booking their therapy secessions, or get proactive by going to their GP for a referral to see a Psychiatrist, if the knowledge that we wont be holding pick # 3 after the trade periods, sends them into a mental breakdown or a relapse.

Because the information that I have been privy too, has told me that, if things go to plan and the preliminary discussions that have already been had, come to fruition, then we will have two picks inside the top 20 BUT we wont retain pick 3.

Of course I could have been spoon feed a pile of BS 🥄:poo:, however I have heard this from two seperate and unrelated sources, who have previously been pretty good with intel.
 
People need to start booking their therapy secessions, or get proactive by going to their GP for a referral to see a Psychiatrist, if the knowledge that we wont be holding pick # 3 after the trade periods, sends them into a mental breakdown or a relapse.

Because the information that I have been privy too, has told me that, if things go to plan and the preliminary discussions that have already been had, come to fruition, then we will have two picks inside the top 20 BUT we wont retain pick 3.

Of course I could have been spoon feed a pile of BS 🥄:poo:, however I have heard this from two seperate and unrelated sources, who have previously been pretty good with intel.
7+8 🤞
A top 10 and another top 20 isnt the worst result as long as the trades seem fair enough on their own
 
People need to start booking their therapy secessions, or get proactive by going to their GP for a referral to see a Psychiatrist, if the knowledge that we wont be holding pick # 3 after the trade periods, sends them into a mental breakdown or a relapse.

Because the information that I have been privy too, has told me that, if things go to plan and the preliminary discussions that have already been had, come to fruition, then we will have two picks inside the top 20 BUT we wont retain pick 3.

Of course I could have been spoon feed a pile of BS 🥄:poo:, however I have heard this from two seperate and unrelated sources, who have previously been pretty good with intel.
More pls.
6 and 14?
7 and 8?
 
Except the system needs to be built around that player. Unless they’re Cripps or Bont level you’re in major strife with an above average player that has those deficiencies.
I agree with the last part of your post but do think Langford has enough strings to his bow to be elite at AFL level. Whilst contributing I wouldn’t have said the 2016 Dogs system was built around Bont. A team like Norf would have a system they are planning to implement and Langford may be the missing piece they are after which doesn’t require speed or agility. Rather someone that can get first hands to the ball, make good decisions and have a long penetrating kick.

As I said don’t think he’s for us but will be interesting to see what team ends up selecting him because his role will become clear.
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

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

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top