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

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dark Sharks said:
Give off with the Warner shit.

You don't win flags by selling the farm for overpriced players at the peak of their value ffs. It'd be a disaster, he'd cost 2 first rounders minimum. Probably our 2nd+F2 as well with Clarke in charge.

We did that with Kelly, it backfired spectacularly and set us back. We don't want to be trading out of NEXT year's draft for Warner after today's absolute shit show.

When you get a top pick you USE it. Stop splitting, stop trading. Either back your talent scouts to find good young top end prospects to add to a rebuilding side, or sack them and find one's who can.
Click to expand...
Yep, Sydney will absolutely Roger us next year if we try for Warner. Especially watching how we played it for Baker this year.

Plus early days, but if we've got two first rounders for next year, looks like some great talent in the draft we'd possibly be better off with. Especially if Tassie are going to complicate future drafts.
 
"We have an obligation and commitment to Baker... Here's pick 14" 🤝

"We have an obligation and commitment to Barrass... sure, we'll take 77 & an F3. As long as we're doing the right thing by him, that's what matters" 🤝


"So anyway Eagles fans are dumb, we haven't had access to top end selections, that's why we're not competitive. Don't worry we'll hit the draft hard next time"
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The one part of Nisbett's era as the years went on was the invulnerability to criticism.
Pyke was supposed to herald a new, open era.

We'll see if this just blows over or not. I suspect the resentment will linger, and the club will be surprised by it.
 
IMG_5787.gif

Time to have a crack at this

For the purpose of this analysis I’m going to assume we get a F1 and F2 for Barrass with nothing going back which I think is the minimum we should accept

On that basis, I’m breaking down our trade period as follows :

• Barrass for Baker and Graham - pick 14 was destined to link Baker and TB albeit it happened indirectly. Graham was a FA but he doesn’t commit without an assurance Baker is also coming.
• Pick 3 for 12, F1, F2 - in an even draft the slide from 3 to 12 is less significant than usual. If we pick right the F1 might be a top 10 pick but realistically it’ll sit in the 13-16 range putting the F2 in the low 30’s.
• Darling and 63 for Owies and 73 - Darling was cooked for us whereas Owies can help fill the void created by a declining Cripps whilst Long, Dewar and Brockman develop

There’s two main issues with what we’ve done :
1) Whilst it is an even draft the odds of getting a star at 12 are less than they’d be at 3. We’re relying on a slider that other clubs see an issue with or landing a Cripps style bolter. After years of not having access to a top 5 pick until 2022 it’s a significant risk
2) Was Baker really worth 14? Well, yes. And no. He’s the type of player you trade for to fill a hole when you’re a contender so he’d make sense for Fremantle. For a rebuilding side like us pick 14 is more valuable on a draftee even though Baker improves our best 22 from the moment he walks in the door. Adding players in the 23-27 age bracket was needed but we should’ve been more focused on Garcia/Robertson types than Baker. Whatever the arguments, the club felt he was worth 14 though. Time will tell


Other notes :
• People panicking about missing out on Champion need to chill the **** out. In all likelihood a bid won’t come until around pick 45 or later meaning we need at most 150 points to match if it’s pick 45. By that point the pick 73 we have will have come in to about 63 (112 points) but we also have pick 81 which would be about pick 70 (39 points) and abracadabra we have the points to match. If a bid comes later than 45, that pick 81 will come in far enough that we can use it to pluck someone with a pick in the 60’s once clubs start passing
• Owies cost us SFA so whilst we may or may not have been able to get him as a DFA it’s pretty irrelevant as he was a genuine steak knife as part of meaningless late pick swaps.
• Also Owies wasn’t the piece that turned the 3 for 12 and 14 from a no to a go. Rather it was the absence of any better offer for pick 3 than what we got. We spent an entire weekend shopping pick 3 around trying to find a path to get something we could satisfy Richmond with for Baker whilst retaining a R1 pick. Clubs either weren’t willing to give up 2 picks for 3 or didn’t have anything worthwhile
• Baker wasn’t a PSD option
• Hawthorn ****ed us by trading 14 but we are partly responsible. We don’t know what exactly was offered - it might have been 14 and F2 but that was with our F3 going back. Or it might’ve been just a F3 with 14. Either way both offers were unders. Our mistake, or specifically Clarke’s mistake, was not staying engaged with Hawthorn to improve their offer - pantskyle suggested Clarke broke off contact with Hawthorn for 2 days which is consistent with a post by Big_Birdy a while back that some player managers were getting frustrated with his tendency of not replying to phone calls. It’s a problem for a list manager that, if true, needs to be rectified post haste
• I think we’d have accepted 14 and F2. Had we done so and traded 14 for Baker we’d now have 3,26 and Hawthorn's F2 - instead we have 12,26 and F1+F2 tied to either Hawthorn or Carlton. If we’re lucky maybe a bit more from Hawthorn- another F2 for our F3 or another F1 for our F2
• We may be able to get an extra pick in this draft by trading the F1 we get from Hawthorn- Sydney with pick 19 (or 22) looms as an option. That would be a handy addition to our draft hand

In summary, I don’t particularly like the trade as I’d rather still have pick 3 and not paid as much for Baker. I’ve vented my frustrations both on here and twitter but on reflection it isn’t quite as catastrophic as I first thought and it isn’t setting our rebuild back years as some are suggesting

We got blindsided by Hawthorn’s recklessness and then had to scramble to recover our position as best we could which included honouring an undertaking to secure a trade for Baker (regardless of whether that undertaking was paying overs - player managers will note we fulfilled our commitment which will be important next time we’re trying to encourage a player to come west)

/Lipstick application
 
Yeahnahmate said:
I’d prefer Hawks F1 - I think both are possible to contend but Hawks more likely to regress if they can’t bottle lightning again in 2025
Click to expand...
Absolutely not, they're a bigger gamble than the blues who faithfully let their supporters down year on end.

Go look at Hawthorne fixture and performances amongst them. They didn't have an easy run
 
Ruben Grubarb said:
It's not really about being competitive. Essendon and St Kilda are competitive. Do they have lists that can win a flag? Nup.

You have to try and get top end talent. Find said talent, the rest will come - outside the first round, rookie draft, trade, etc. You only get a handful of top 5 picks. Don't piss them up the wall.
Click to expand...
I think we need to reach competitive, we’re not there yet and it is a necessary step on the journey.
We just don’t want to plateau and get stuck at competitive.
 
Dark Sharks said:
"We have an obligation and commitment to Baker... Here's pick 14" 🤝

"We have an obligation and commitment to Barrass... sure, we'll take 77 & an F3. As long as we're doing the right thing by him, that's what matters" 🤝


"So anyway Eagles fans are dumb, we haven't had access to top end selections, that's why we're not competitive. Don't worry we'll hit the draft hard next time"
Click to expand...
I'm sure we're all looking forward to which 27 year olds we'll be targeting next year.
Happy Shaquille O Neal GIF by Papa Johns
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

If we are even thinking about going for Warner next year(we are) then we HAVE to trade out our own f1 for picks this year.

Hopefully that means our f1 for 10+18, giving us 10+12+18+26+Champion in the draft this year.
Add Travaglia, Lindsay, Hynes and a KPD. Thats most bases covered, just the midfield to finish with Warner and a ruckman to find.

Whatever or however many f1s we have next year, Warner will wipe us out of the draft, and likely at least partially out of the 2026 draft. If we keep our f1 we have to use it on Warner, and means we are 2 first round picks(10+18) worse off by the start of 2026. Id rather get access to them now than in 2026/2027

If we dont get Warner then we lost, we split a top 4-6 pick for nothing, but id rather guarantee 10+18 so we can complete the list in the hopes we can get Warner than be fighting over whether we really want Warner or the draft more.


Edit: we have seen how our management handles players we "commit to" when trading now with Baker, I have no doubt we would absolutely trade 4 first round picks for Warner which is obviously overs. Gotta take the option away from ourselves.
 
Last edited:
Have to say the idea of perpetually trading F1s for current picks every year has some merit, especially when everyone expects it'll be valuable. There's always another F1 to trade back in next year!
 
amazingjoshy said:
If the Saints were offering 7+8 for we'd have done that. There's not a chance that was on offer

The issue was paying pick 14 for Baker, not the order we did it. Had we done Barrass first we'd have likely gotten 14 + an F2 for Barrass and an F3. 14 still wouldve gone to Baker

If Barrass gets done tomorrow for say an F1+F2, we'll have an F1+F3+12+Owies instead pick 3 if we had done them the other way around.
Click to expand...
The whole thing was bad, every bit of it. Let’s not put lipstick on the pig 🐷.

Our team have been outsmarted at every turn and appear to be amateurs. The whole AFL world is cacking themselves laughing at us, some are even pretending to sympathise it’s that bad.

Old pedestrian ROB and Nessie are looking like the the good ole days.
 
stallon said:
If we are even thinking about going for Warner next year(we are) then we HAVE to trade out our own f1 for picks this year.

Hopefully that means our f1 for 10+18, giving us 10+12+18+26+Champion in the draft this year.
Add Travaglia, Lindsay, Hynes and a KPD. Thats most bases covered, just the midfield to finish with Warner and a ruckman to find.

Whatever or however many f1s we have next year, Warner will wipe us out of the draft, and likely at least partially out of the 2026 draft. If we keep our f1 we have to use it on Warner, and means we are 2 first round picks(10+18) worse off by the start of 2026. Id rather get access to them now than in 2026/2027

If we dont get Warner then we lost, we split a top 4-6 pick for nothing, but id rather guarantee 10+18 so we can complete the list in the hopes we can get Warner than be fighting over whether we really want Warner or the draft more.
Click to expand...

I'm actually on board. As unlikely as it may be, it's not terrible in the slightest.
 
I have a feeling that we have already have an agreement with Warner that he will come at the end of next year - so we will be forced to overpay to get him.

Could be totally wrong but the attitude of those in charge makes me think that they are saying "if you knew what we know, you'd agree that we are only part way through this magnificent master plan that fixes everything".
 
Last edited:
sharps24 said:
Yeo, Reid, Kelly, Hewett, Ginbey, Duggan, Baker, Graham. Worst midfield in the league. Tbf I think that is a bit of a rogue opinion.

Consistently say we're the shittest team going around who are an age away from playing finals again, but your favourite pastime is potting fellow posters for being "melters'' when 90% of the time they are just engaging in a bit of banter and venting at the club for the lols. Say you don't follow the draft but follow the draft thread to so you can tell everyone who is following and thinks the club is signalling that its about to make some very bad moves that they are all wrong and the clubs actually never lost a draft. How did that work out?

Been an interesting 24 hours for you.
Click to expand...
Yeo, Reid, Kelly, Ginbey and Duggan played last year. Two of them look like HBFs, not mids. Hewett couldn’t walk, Baker and Graham played for Richmond. Quite the gotcha.

I was clearly talking about 2024. If I were talking about 2025, Zane Trew’s name wouldn’t have come up because I’m not much of a WAFL guy.

I don’t follow the draft. I read two articles and a few posts the week of and wait to see them on the field. You'll note that this isn’t draft week, it's actually trade week and I'm here to discuss trades. Quite the gotcha.

lol at never lost a draft. I’ve never said that. Our drafting has been broadly terrible, with a few nice mid/late hits eg Hough and JWill (and hopefully Long). Pointing out that Pick 14 is an unthinkable price for Baker, but people then spend all year bagging our mid teen picks for being shit isn’t saying we won the draft. Quite the gotcha.

I have no issue with people who articulate their issues with their club, or who skew critical but act reasonably. The perma-mad, always on the lash out, seemingly get zero joy from footy but make it our problem every week types? Yeah, they're huge melters.

Sorry again that your man got delisted by a club with no midfield depth and no concern that a single coach could actually find a role for him.
 
Having had 12 hours to stew on this ****ing horrible trade I feel no better. Baker and Owies aside, what really grates me is our inability to be creative or have any kind if back bone in negotiations. Perpetual good guys, happy to get bent over.

We traded pick 3 for pick 12 and pick 14 which is arguably the worst return for a top 3 draft pick in history. Then we doubled down that shitty deal by passing 14 to Richmond for Baker, paying overs.

This could have been salvaged to a degree by passing 14 to swans for 19 and 22 and squeezing an early second rounder out.

Good list managers aim to maximise the value of our draft hand, never compromising on a deal.

All this deal has shown is that we have no creativity, no killer mentality. We are weak and feeble in all negotiations and we get exploited and will continue to get exploited. We are the easy pickings of the competition.

Hawks exposed this horribly and our lack of planning and options B, C, D forced a panicked trade that eroded all value to make good on our commitment, because you know, nice guys...

BUT WORST OF ALL

Pyke has not read the room. We don't want a fast rebuild, we want a proper one. We've been calling for years to play the youth, build through the draft. Take early picks to the draft and hit on elite talent.

The irony is that they thought a few extra wins would keep the memberships full but all that's done is drive hardcore members away.

Extremely disappointing from the club.

It's honestly time there is representation from a supporters group in the decision making of this club, so our voice is heard and represented formally.
 
Last edited:
Keys said:
View attachment 2143338

Time to have a crack at this

For the purpose of this analysis I’m going to assume we get a F1 and F2 for Barrass with nothing going back which I think is the minimum we should accept

On that basis, I’m breaking down our trade period as follows :

• Barrass for Baker and Graham - pick 14 was destined to link Baker and TB albeit it happened indirectly. Graham was a FA but he doesn’t commit without an assurance Baker is also coming.
• Pick 3 for 12, F1, F2 - in an even draft the slide from 3 to 12 is less significant than usual. If we pick right the F1 might be a top 10 pick but realistically it’ll sit in the 13-16 range putting the F2 in the low 30’s.
• Darling and 63 for Owies and 73 - Darling was cooked for us whereas Owies can help fill the void created by a declining Cripps whilst Long, Dewar and Brockman develop

There’s two main issues with what we’ve done :
1) Whilst it is an even draft the odds of getting a star at 12 are less than they’d be at 3. We’re relying on a slider that other clubs see an issue with or landing a Cripps style bolter. After years of not having access to a top 5 pick until 2022 it’s a significant risk
2) Was Baker really worth 14? Well, yes. And no. He’s the type of player you trade for to fill a hole when you’re a contender so he’d make sense for Fremantle. For a rebuilding side like us pick 14 is more valuable on a draftee even though Baker improves our best 22 from the moment he walks in the door. Adding players in the 23-27 age bracket was needed but we should’ve been more focused on Garcia/Robertson types than Baker. Whatever the arguments, the club felt he was worth 14 though. Time will tell


Other notes :
• People panicking about missing out on Champion need to chill the **** out. In all likelihood a bid won’t come until around pick 45 or later meaning we need at most 150 points to match if it’s pick 45. By that point the pick 73 we have will have come in to about 63 (112 points) but we also have pick 81 which would be about pick 70 (39 points) and abracadabra we have the points to match. If a bid comes later than 45, that pick 81 will come in far enough that we can use it to pluck someone with a pick in the 60’s once clubs start passing
• Owies cost us SFA so whilst we may or may not have been able to get him as a DFA it’s pretty irrelevant as he was a genuine steak knife as part of meaningless late pick swaps.
• Also Owies wasn’t the piece that turned the 3 for 12 and 14 from a no to a go. Rather it was the absence of any better offer for pick 3 than what we got. We spent an entire weekend shopping pick 3 around trying to find a path to get something we could satisfy Richmond with for Baker whilst retaining a R1 pick. Clubs either weren’t willing to give up 2 picks for 3 or didn’t have anything worthwhile
• Baker wasn’t a PSD option
• Hawthorn ****ed us by trading 14 but we are partly responsible. We don’t know what exactly was offered - it might have been 14 and F2 but that was with our F3 going back. Or it might’ve been just a F3 with 14. Either way both offers were unders. Our mistake, or specifically Clarke’s mistake, was not staying engaged with Hawthorn to improve their offer - pantskyle suggested Clarke broke off contact with Hawthorn for 2 days which is consistent with a post by Big_Birdy a while back that some player managers were getting frustrated with his tendency of not replying to phone calls. It’s a problem for a list manager that, if true, needs to be rectified post haste
• I think we’d have accepted 14 and F2. Had we done so and traded 14 for Baker we’d now have 3,26 and Hawthorn's F2 - instead we have 12,26 and F1+F2 tied to either Hawthorn or Carlton. If we’re lucky maybe a bit more from Hawthorn- another F2 for our F3 or another F1 for our F2
• We may be able to get an extra pick in this draft by trading the F1 we get from Hawthorn- Sydney with pick 19 (or 22) looms as an option. That would be a handy addition to our draft hand

In summary, I don’t particularly like the trade as I’d rather still have pick 3 and not paid as much for Baker. I’ve vented my frustrations both on here and twitter but on reflection it isn’t quite as catastrophic as I first thought and it isn’t setting our rebuild back years as some are suggesting

We got blindsided by Hawthorn’s recklessness and then had to scramble to recover our position as best we could which included honouring an undertaking to secure a trade for Baker (regardless of whether that undertaking was paying overs - player managers will note we fulfilled our commitment which will be important next time we’re trying to encourage a player to come west)

/Lipstick application
Click to expand...

Consider hawks very smart trading.

They cashed in on carltons desperation for pick 3, landing the extra F2.

If they pay up F1 and F2 for tommy, they’ve paid with carltons F2.
 
I'm gunna grab that pig and paint its lips bright red. We don't really know what the overall plan is - the club's not going to tell us, because they're certainly not going to tell the entire world. The plan might be completely ****ed, but if so, there's a lot of people putting their names on it right now.

We can judge after the fact, but a lot of stuff is sheer fluke. We got one of the top three players in the 2010 draft even though it was screwed up by Gold Coast. Oh, and at rookie pick 44 (we also got a pretty good player at 4). We've had amazing players in the top 5 - Judd, Nat, probably H.Reid. We've had players that were just good role players like Banfield and Masten.

Picks around 12 can get real class, when they're players that were just a little behind their peers in development (and that doesn't mean bottom-aged, just how fast they can develop). I wanted to see who we'd get at 3, but now I just don't care. Let's see how #12 goes. Let's give Baker and Owies a shot. Let's hope that Hawthorn blink tomorrow morning and give us two x F1 and no returns and we can maybe rattle some cages with that and our F1.

Sure, for a pick in the 10s, we might get Jarrod Brander. But we could also get Darren Glass or Daniel Kerr or Luke Shuey. Beau Waters or Shannon Hurn. A new Sheed or Duggan even would improve our list.

Yeah, that trade looks crap, but we won't know for a couple of years probably.
 

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
982K
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
631
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
720K
Farang83150
Farang83150
HoneyBadger35
Autopsy Round 24, 2024: Positives and Negatives vs Geelong
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
158
Views
8K
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