List Mgmt. Contracts/Trade/Draft Thread - 2025 Edition

[Keys]

Quick links

• Player contract status
• Draft prospect video highlights (thanks to noobermensch)
• Provisional 2025 Draft order

List Spots Available

• One on either main OR rookie list to be filled as a SSP selection following train on assessments.
• Current train on players -
  - Sandy Brock

SSP signing dates

Spoiler

• Monday, November 25, 2024 – Thursday, December 19, 2024
• Monday, January 13, 2025 – Friday, February 21, 2025

Players out of Contract (16) - 2025

Spoiler

• Tim Kelly (26/7/94) - Signed a 6 year contract (2020-25) in October 2019
• Dom Sheed (10/4/95) - Signed a 4 year extension (2022-25) in April 2021*
• Oscar Allen (19/3/99) - Signed a 3 year extension (2023-25) on an existing contract due to expire 2022 in May 2021
• Campbell Chesser (27/4/03) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) on an existing contract due to expire 2023 in May 2022
• Tom Cole (28/5/97) - Signed a 3 year extension (2023-25) in May 2022
• Rhett Bazzo (17/10/03) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) on an existing contract due to expire 2023 in September 2022
• Jayden Hunt (3/4/95) - Signed a 3 year contract (2023-25) in October 2022
• Callum Jamieson (31/7/00) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) in March 2023
• Jeremy McGovern (15/4/92) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) in August 2023
• Jamie Cripps (23/4/92) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) in August 2023
• Jack Petruccelle (12/4/99) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) in August 2023
• (R) Jack Hutchinson (10/11/01) - Automatic 18 month contract (2024-25) when drafted in May 2024
• (R) Tyrell Dewar (27/3/04) - Signed a 1 year extension (2025) in June 2024
• (R) Loch Rawlinson (1/6/05) - Signed a 1 year extension (2025) in September 2024
• (R-B) Coen Livingstone (25/5/05) - Signed a 1 year extension (2025) in September 2024
• (R-B) Malakai Champion (17/5/06) - Automatic 1 year contract (2025) when added as a Cat B Rookie in November 2024

 

[Wild Kelly]

Burgeil has signed with the mighty Royals.
Must have found himself a sheila in WA.

 

[Mr Q]

Petrucelle has been on the list for ages and we are still waiting for his breakout year.

When people write off a player for years and they somehow still hang around, I think of Andrew Embley. There was much dislike here for him in the early Bigfooty years until he shut everyone up, and that was years into his career. When Port? offered at one point to trade for him, there was much scoffing that the offer wasn't taken up - until suddenly he was a good player the next season.

(I don't really expect Petrucelle to become Embley, but I'm always willing to give someone a go once they're on the list for the year)

 

[eaglevision]

Blues young gun won’t put timeline on free agency call amid massive rival interest

Blues young gun won’t put timeline on free agency call amid massive rival interest

www.foxsports.com.au

I’m very happy to offer TDK band 1 money you can’t refuse to feed our mids for the next 10 years.

 

[kane249]

Blues young gun won’t put timeline on free agency call amid massive rival interest

Blues young gun won’t put timeline on free agency call amid massive rival interest

www.foxsports.com.au

I’m very happy to offer TDK band 1 money you can’t refuse to feed our mids for the next 10 years.

26 next year, don't see him lasting another 10 years past that

 

[Grahame]

There’s still prolonged rage, it’s not just initial. I’m glad he’s receiving praise like that on the track but no one will ever convince me that he was worth pick 14.

Maybe we got Graham for SFA because Richmond knew they were getting 14 for Baker?

Too many only look at the 14 for Baker in isolation - and it was overs - but never consider adding to that the trade that got us Graham for not much.

So … there is a scenario where the club looked at both trades in combination and said we’re considering it as ‘Graham + Baker’ for ‘14 + SFA’.

However, I know some here just won’t-can’t have a bar of this as a possibility because they went all in on ‘the trade period was a calamity’ meme. That it was a complete disaster. That Clarke was a f*ing ****. And Pyke was the same.

 

[RanaNaved]

Think the Baker and Graham inclusions are good. If we want to keep Harley and attract decent players (Warner) we need to show much more and quickly. They will improve the team and help fast track the talented youth we have, making WC much more appealing for players.

 

[Grahame]

There’s still prolonged rage, it’s not just initial. I’m glad he’s receiving praise like that on the track but no one will ever convince me that he was worth pick 14.

Okay. Another serious question. Even putting aside the possibility of Graham being part of the Baker trade, do you think the club would be better off now with yet one more young ‘possible’ at #14, or getting in Baker and what he brings?

 

[twce13]

Maybe we got Graham for SFA because Richmond knew they were getting 14 for Baker?

Too many only look at the 14 for Baker in isolation - and it was overs - but never consider adding to that the trade that got us Graham for not much.

So … there is a scenario where the club looked at both trades in combination and said we’re considering it as ‘Graham + Baker’ for ‘14 + SFA’.

However, I know some here just won’t-can’t have a bar of this as a possibility because they went all in on ‘the trade period was a calamity’ meme. That it was a complete disaster. That Clarke was a f*ing ****. And Pyke was the same.

Graham was taken as a FA, trying to pretend he needs to be included when analyzing the value of the baker trade is clutching at straws.

Furthermore jack Graham paper work was lodged Oct 7th and Baker trade finalized on 14th Oct. Between those dates a lot happened.

Holistically I think we came out of the off season very nicely, we let the draft fall to us and it worked out. But it doesn't change the fact that the baker deal in isolation was poor work from our list management team. 14 was and always will be an unnecessary overpay by the club.

 

[WCE777]

Maybe we got Graham for SFA because Richmond knew they were getting 14 for Baker?

Too many only look at the 14 for Baker in isolation - and it was overs - but never consider adding to that the trade that got us Graham for not much.

So … there is a scenario where the club looked at both trades in combination and said we’re considering it as ‘Graham + Baker’ for ‘14 + SFA’.

However, I know some here just won’t-can’t have a bar of this as a possibility because they went all in on ‘the trade period was a calamity’ meme. That it was a complete disaster. That Clarke was a f*ing ****. And Pyke was the same.

well said.
WC rated Baker and agreed to work something out for a late 1st round pick, while 14 is still expensive its only 2-3 spots away from real value.
Graham getting FA band 3 compo, pick 43 from memory was low ball return which WC & Richmond would have known and agreed to before agreeing.
The second part of the deal, Richmond leave B Allan alone with your 2 picks previous to WC pick, wonder how Allan miraculously got to us?

 

[eaglevision]

Maybe we got Graham for SFA because Richmond knew they were getting 14 for Baker?

Too many only look at the 14 for Baker in isolation - and it was overs - but never consider adding to that the trade that got us Graham for not much.

So … there is a scenario where the club looked at both trades in combination and said we’re considering it as ‘Graham + Baker’ for ‘14 + SFA’.

However, I know some here just won’t-can’t have a bar of this as a possibility because they went all in on ‘the trade period was a calamity’ meme. That it was a complete disaster. That Clarke was a f*ing ****. And Pyke was the same.

No.

We got Graham for SFA because he was an UFA. Richmond couldn’t do s**t about anything regardless of Baker so to lump them together and say it was a package is ridiculous.

We overpaid for Baker.

 

[Shueygod]

Maybe we got Graham for SFA because Richmond knew they were getting 14 for Baker?

Too many only look at the 14 for Baker in isolation - and it was overs - but never consider adding to that the trade that got us Graham for not much.

So … there is a scenario where the club looked at both trades in combination and said we’re considering it as ‘Graham + Baker’ for ‘14 + SFA’.

However, I know some here just won’t-can’t have a bar of this as a possibility because they went all in on ‘the trade period was a calamity’ meme. That it was a complete disaster. That Clarke was a f*ing ****. And Pyke was the same.

Graham + Baker for 14 is still a shit deal

 

[twce13]

well said.
WC rated Baker and agreed to work something out for a late 1st round pick, while 14 is still expensive its only 2-3 spots away from real value.
Graham getting FA band 3 compo, pick 43 from memory was low ball return which WC & Richmond would have known and agreed to before agreeing.
The second part of the deal, Richmond leave B Allan alone with your 2 picks previous to WC pick, wonder how Allan miraculously got to us?

Firstly he was unrestricted so we didn't need tigers to agree to anything. What an absurd narrative.

Secondly the one most impacted by the compo in reality is jack Graham given that it reflects he is only being paid said amount... but spoiler alert, that is exactly what he is worth.

Or you think Graham took less so that eagles and tigers could keep some bizarre agreement on baker.. dang I've heard their good mates, but that next level...

What a stupid narrative this is lol.

 

[eaglevision]

Okay. Another serious question. Even putting aside the possibility of Graham being part of the Baker trade, do you think the club would be better off now with yet one more young ‘possible’ at #14, or getting in Baker and what he brings?

Yes. 100% I would have taken Murphy Reid over Baker. Or Hannaford, Oliver, Hynes, either Whitlock, Dattoli, Barrat, Mraz, O’Farrell, Jacques, Ough, Nichols, Moraes shall I go on?

 

[eaglevision]

well said.
WC rated Baker and agreed to work something out for a late 1st round pick, while 14 is still expensive its only 2-3 spots away from real value.
Graham getting FA band 3 compo, pick 43 from memory was low ball return which WC & Richmond would have known and agreed to before agreeing.
The second part of the deal, Richmond leave B Allan alone with your 2 picks previous to WC pick, wonder how Allan miraculously got to us?

Bo got to us because we rated him higher than any other club, would have been another case of being the smartest ones in the room if we had pick 6 and still taken him.

To suggest that Richmond would have done anything other than pick the best player for their list is a bit far fetched, they obviously rated Hotton and Faull as better players.

 

[RanaNaved]

Yes. 100% I would have taken Murphy Reid over Baker. Or Hannaford, Oliver, Hynes, either Whitlock, Dattoli, Barrat, Mraz, O’Farrell, Jacques, Ough, Nichols, Moraes shall I go on?

A lot of them (the majority tbh) will prove to be shit or busts in time

 

[RanaNaved]

Cal Twomey said Freo had pick 11 on the table Baker

 

[eaglevision]

A lot of them (the majority tbh) will prove to be shit or busts in time

They will, but many of them will be better than Baker and give more than 6 years.

 

[ep2018]

Suspect we'd have taken Shanahan with 14 had we used the pick so no point being salty about it any more imo.

 

[RookiePick]

Many? I kinda doubt that. In 6 years time the tiniest fraction of them will still be in the league. Those ones will be decent enough players.

 

[WCE777]

Firstly he was unrestricted so we didn't need tigers to agree to anything. What an absurd narrative.

Secondly the one most impacted by the compo in reality is jack Graham given that it reflects he is only being paid said amount... but spoiler alert, that is exactly what he is worth.

Or you think Graham took less so that eagles and tigers could keep some bizarre agreement on baker.. dang I've heard their good mates, but that next level...

What a stupid narrative this is lol.

entitled to your opinion
Graham was a FA and agreed to come on x amount, you don't think Richmond tried to up his deal after they realized what WC were paying(which they did) and the compo they were gong to receive?
The dealing with Richmond re- Baker/Graham and pick 14 had many layers imo.
How did B Allan miraculously get to WC pick?

 

[WCE777]

Yes. 100% I would have taken Murphy Reid over Baker. Or Hannaford, Oliver, Hynes, either Whitlock, Dattoli, Barrat, Mraz, O’Farrell, Jacques, Ough, Nichols, Moraes shall I go on?

fair enough but I can't agree with Baker not being a solid trade, 50% fail rate on draftees, Baker is a known commodity with 6+ years in our best 22.
Apart from M Reid all your other names are mid-late 2nd round picks ad again 50% failure rate.

 

[Grahame]

Holistically I think we came out of the off season very nicely, we let the draft fall to us and it worked out. But it doesn't change the fact that the baker deal in isolation was poor work from our list management team. 14 was and always will be an unnecessary overpay by the club.

Agree with ‘in isolation’. But that wasn’t my point.

 

[squashface]

Many? I kinda doubt that. In 6 years time the tiniest fraction of them will still be in the league. Those ones will be decent enough players.

And the posts will be “Baker trade was such a fail, we could have had [the one good player from that group] and definitely not [the 12 crap players from that group].

 

[Grahame]

We got Graham for SFA because he was an UFA. Richmond couldn’t do s**t about anything regardless of Baker so to lump them together and say it was a package is ridiculous.

Again. Didn’t say that. Just raised the possibility that the two trades might have been related (which nobody in the ‘trade pile on’ seemed to even consider).

I don’t have inside knowledge to say it was or wasn’t. But your ‘ridiculous’ certainty on the matter indicates inside knowledge - so please share.

 

[Happy Mastenator]

Yes. 100% I would have taken Murphy Reid over Baker. Or Hannaford, Oliver, Hynes, either Whitlock, Dattoli, Barrat, Mraz, O’Farrell, Jacques, Ough, Nichols, Moraes shall I go on?

Balls on the line. Pick 1 you’d have taken and see how that one goes against him. Naming a stack is easy because one of them will probably be good, but which one?