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:
I love these 'ITKs', and respect their commitment to posting. Sure it's almost all bullshit but it's great either way, they add colour to the board.

I do find it funny that neither Bond nor Phil has called the other out. Phil has certainly provided enough information for someone even tangentially related to the club to guess his identity - but then again - has he?

Because, of course, the scoundrel has been deliberately 'posting misinformation' to throw other recruiters off the scent!

If I was to seed them on likelihood of legitimacy it would be:

(1) Bond

He has been around for ages, no club affiliation on BF, speaks in riddles, undercover at WCE - I mean James Bond - love that shit. Writes like a footballer / normal person or senior partner/corpo (poorly).

He's defensive about WCE drafting/list management. Offers nothing falsifiable, doesn't regularly position himself for likes or backstop future posts.

Odds on he has some (however tangential) relationship, past or present to WCE.

Is he a recruiter? Hmm how about this, do you think he's a recruiter?

(2) Phil

Phil is an incredible character, written with uncommon élan and in full sentences. Even if the tenor of the character is substantively true, he writes with the creativity of an unfulfilled English teacher.

Some of my favourites:
  • Two VPNs
  • Chewing out Nisbett
  • Deliberate misinformation
  • Off the Richmond job
  • High flying career in Psychology, Business or Finance (or!), player psych assessments and now sort of actual player trading now.
  • NDA
  • 'Just when I thought I was out they pull me back in'

I love the 80s corpo flair - backroom deals, power plays and colourful dealmakers. In my shortish career I've had the misfortune of being involved, in one way or another, with corp law, politics, PE, tech and resources - met plenty of over comp'd execs - and nobody talks like this.

So is he legit? I reckon there's a kernel of truth - like he's an organisational psych or coach who may touched on these various areas over a career.

Does it matter? I don't think so. If there's one thing I learned from my Intelligence days, running assets out of the Panjsher, it's that everybody lies a little - just make it entertaining.
POTY🤣🍻👍
 

Log in to remove this ad.

100%

Will Day come on down.

View attachment 2137126

Played how many seasons at half back before transitioning into the midfield this season?

Can see Toby taking a very similar route.
He is exactly the player I thought of watching him at the start of the year. No doubt this is the plan for him if we select him. Also means I wouldn’t be against getting Harry Oliver with 24/26, they would complement each other nicely in the meantime.
Tobie is significantly more of an endurance player than Day was pre-draft, which does bode well for him to transition into the midfield.
 
I love these 'ITKs', and respect their commitment to posting. Sure it's almost all bullshit but it's great either way, they add colour to the board.

I do find it funny that neither Bond nor Phil has called the other out. Phil has certainly provided enough information for someone even tangentially related to the club to guess his identity - but then again - has he?

Because, of course, the scoundrel has been deliberately 'posting misinformation' to throw other recruiters off the scent!

If I was to seed them on likelihood of legitimacy it would be:

(1) Bond

He has been around for ages, no club affiliation on BF, speaks in riddles, undercover at WCE - I mean James Bond - love that shit. Writes like a footballer / normal person or senior partner/corpo (poorly).

He's defensive about WCE drafting/list management. Offers nothing falsifiable, doesn't regularly position himself for likes or backstop future posts.

Odds on he has some (however tangential) relationship, past or present to WCE.

Is he a recruiter? Hmm how about this, do you think he's a recruiter?

(2) Phil

Phil is an incredible character, written with uncommon élan and in full sentences. Even if the tenor of the character is substantively true, he writes with the creativity of an unfulfilled English teacher.

Some of my favourites:
  • Two VPNs
  • Chewing out Nisbett
  • Deliberate misinformation
  • Off the Richmond job
  • High flying career in Psychology, Business or Finance (or!), player psych assessments and now sort of actual player trading now.
  • NDA
  • 'Just when I thought I was out they pull me back in'

I love the 80s corpo flair - backroom deals, power plays and colourful dealmakers. In my shortish career I've had the misfortune of being involved, in one way or another, with corp law, politics, PE, tech and resources - met plenty of over comp'd execs - and nobody talks like this.

So is he legit? I reckon there's a kernel of truth - like he's an organisational psych or coach who may touched on these various areas over a career.

Does it matter? I don't think so. If there's one thing I learned from my Intelligence days, running assets out of the Panjsher, it's that everybody lies a little - just make it entertaining.
If I’m honest, I don’t think anyone truly ITK is posting nuggets of proprietary information on the internet to appease some footy nuffies. It’s just the usual internet boasting. But what would I know, I’m just a polyamorous astronaut.
 
You would've traded pick 1 last year for 2 or 3 picks in the 20's and missed out on reid?

Or pick 3 in 2001 and missed out on Judd which would've caused us to miss out on Kennedy?

Honestly sometimes I think you're a closet Freo supporter cause that's the shit they would have done.
What?
I wouldnt have traded pick 1 unless we got picks 2 and 3.
I wasn't following in 2001 so idk what I wouldnt done

Idk what you're even thinking here mate, I've explained many times in this thread what I think of the draft.
I want Travaglia, and travaglia at 6 with pick 18 extra is better than just travaglia at 3.
 
My apologies, I thought my post was sufficiently bizarre for 99.9999% of the population to realise it was tongue in cheek. Did not think the 0.0001 per cent would be a big footy poster.
Sorry Mistake GIF
Read the room mate. The room is chock full of posters sprouting similar nonsense, sarcasm has no place here. It did occur to me after posting you may have been taking the piss but it is impossible to tell in the current atmosphere ( unless its from Bender).
Kinda like slipping a Betoota artical into the Herald Sun politics section, almost impossible to pick the satire.
 


If we get 14 from the Hawks we better be splitting for 19 and 22 and sending 19 to Richmond for Baker.

That’s Harry Oliver for us.


That would mean Baker and 22 for 14

Which isn’t really much different from the 14 and 24 being proposed earlier
 
That would mean Baker and 22 for 14

Which isn’t really much different from the 14 and 24 being proposed earlier
Spot on. There is something about handing over 14 for a Baker trade that is really painful for some on here. Posters read red lights when Baker and 14 are in the same sentence

Is a Gross or Oliver plus Baker worth pick 14/ or Lindsay
 
My apologies, I thought my post was sufficiently bizarre for 99.9999% of the population to realise it was tongue in cheek. Did not think the 0.0001 per cent would be a big footy poster.
Sorry Mistake GIF
Sorry I must've missed it could you repeat it with an update of why you think only 0.0001% would be a BigFooty poster rather than the 99.9999%
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

What?
I wouldnt have traded pick 1 unless we got picks 2 and 3.
I wasn't following in 2001 so idk what I wouldnt done

Idk what you're even thinking here mate, I've explained many times in this thread what I think of the draft.
I want Travaglia, and travaglia at 6 with pick 18 extra is better than just travaglia at 3.
Now you're backtracking.

You stated you think we don't need first rounders and you would trade pick 3 for pick 6 and 18.

And now you're saying you would've traded pick 1 for 2 and 3 and still missed out on reid. North 100 percent take him.

Clubs need first round picks. We wouldn't have won in 2006 or 2018 without first round and high first round picks.

It just is a requirement and whether the draft is supposed to be even it just isn't

The best get taken in the first round. Doesn't always mean they turn out the best. And also doesn't mean later pick draftees dont become great players, we've had many.

But to suggest you dont need first round picks like you have said is just bullshit.
 
If I’m honest, I don’t think anyone truly ITK is posting nuggets of proprietary information on the internet to appease some footy nuffies. It’s just the usual internet boasting. But what would I know, I’m just a polyamorous astronaut.

I wouldn't call myself an ITK more of a OTE (on the edge)

I have about 20 pm's with posters on this board where I share more than I do on here.

I have info I'm certain on and other info where I'm sceptical but I think that it's all part of the game.

I'd never post something if I didn't believe it's true at the time. I think my track record speaks for itself.
 
Spot on. There is something about handing over 14 for a Baker trade that is really painful for some on here. Posters read red lights when Baker and 14 are in the same sentence

Is a Gross or Oliver plus Baker worth pick 14/ or Lindsay
I haven’t seen 24 coming back in any trade reported besides here….

Happy to go with the 14 if that is the case
 
Spot on. There is something about handing over 14 for a Baker trade that is really painful for some on here. Posters read red lights when Baker and 14 are in the same sentence

Is a Gross or Oliver plus Baker worth pick 14/ or Lindsay
IMO:
Lindsay is much better than Baker + Oliver/Gross

Allan/Berry are better than Baker + Oliver/Gross

whitlocks/Hotton/Hannaford/Dodson etc are worse than Baker + Oliver/Gross
 
I wouldn't call myself an ITK more of a OTE (on the edge)

I have about 20 pm's with posters on this board where I share more than I do on here.

I have info I'm certain on and other info where I'm sceptical but I think that it's all part of the game.

I'd never post something if I didn't believe it's true at the time. I think my track record speaks for itself.

Think you should keep the details of your dick-pick DMs to yourself mate.


PS: You still haven't replied to my last message.
 
Now you're backtracking.

You stated you think we don't need first rounders and you would trade pick 3 for pick 6 and 18.

And now you're saying you would've traded pick 1 for 2 and 3 and still missed out on reid. North 100 percent take him.

Clubs need first round picks. We wouldn't have won in 2006 or 2018 without first round and high first round picks.

It just is a requirement and whether the draft is supposed to be even it just isn't

The best get taken in the first round. Doesn't always mean they turn out the best. And also doesn't mean later pick draftees dont become great players, we've had many.

But to suggest you dont need first round picks like you have said is just bullshit.
If you actually read and understood what I said, you'd know I meant we don't need exclusively first rounders, particularly in this draft that's meant to be quite deep and even past pick 30.

So what if north take Reid with 1 if we get 2 and 3? That would be the idea of doing it.

You are reaching a bit here cob
 
Spot on. There is something about handing over 14 for a Baker trade that is really painful for some on here. Posters read red lights when Baker and 14 are in the same sentence

Is a Gross or Oliver plus Baker worth pick 14/ or Lindsay
If we want to be better in 2025 it’s option A, if we want the greatest chance at the best talent it’s Lindsay for me but that’s probably just because I’m higher on Lindsay than his likely draft position ends up.

Pick 14 for a kid that runs all day, has good disposal and racks regular 30 possession games, yes please.
 
Getting back to the draft it self

These are the boys going from pick 25 and on that I really like and believe club has interest in

Hamish Davis runs all day similar to Nic Martin early 30's pick

Zac Johnson good kick great pace nearly youngest player in draft later pick

Charlie Nicholls 197cm CHB great hands very good endurance and runs sub 3.00 sec 20 metre sprint 40+ pick

Gabriel Stumpf 196cm CHB incredible speed and leap late pick

Will Hays small forward wing amazing athlete speed agility endurance all elite and i believe the best kick in the draft
going into forward 50 ( a must pick up for WCE)
Just need more picks. Rookie/Late Picks for Cody Angove, Luke Urquhart, Otis Harvey, Jack Wooden or Clancy Dennis
 
I think some of us are getting married to the idea that we need 1st rounders, the draft is meant to be reasonably even, its not a huge deal to take picks in the 20s

If you actually read and understood what I said, you'd know I meant we don't need exclusively first rounders, particularly in this draft that's meant to be quite deep and even past pick 30.

So what if north take Reid with 1 if we get 2 and 3? That would be the idea of doing it.

You are reaching a bit here cob
"I think some of us are getting married to the idea we need first rounders."

"It's not a huge deal to take picks in the 20s"

I'm not reaching at all, you never said exclusively.

Your implications are and have been through this whole thread that you'd split the top picks for lower picks and in doing so you would have missed out on players that delivered us and other teams premierships.

Anyway, I disagree with your entire sentiment, I wouldn't split 3 and I am glad we didn't split 1 last year and 3 in 2001.

You have no guarantee travaglia is still there at pick 6.
You want him you keep 3.
 
Think you should keep the details of your dick-pick DMs to yourself mate.


PS: You still haven't replied to my last message.

That's because I have you blocked mate.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

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

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top