Does it take too long for clubs to rebuild their lists?

[Gethelred]

Let's do a Poll Thread:

'Who were the premiership contenders in 2023?'
Option 1 - Collingwood only
Option 2 - Collingwood, Brisbane and GWS

I'm sure you're familiar with the reasonable person test?

I'm not sure we'd see many posters other than you vote for Option 1.

Argumentum ad populum.

If you put 99 flat earthers in a room and one person who isn't and then hold a vote on whether or not the earth's flat, the fact that 99% of people vote for it doesn't mean the earth's flat.

 

[Gethelred]

You're doing my homework, by providing supporting evidence to a statement you made, that many of us disagree with and don't see the logic behind?

So when the Western Bulldogs traded in 28 year old Ben Hudson in 2007, they did that with an eye on 2016?

Picking up 29 year old Scott Welsh in the 2008 pre season draft for the same reason?

But I'm sure it was the trade for 32 year old Barry Hall in 2009 that was seen as the centrepiece for their targeted 2016 onslaught.

I suggest you should have given more thought before you chose the 2016 Bulldogs and 2008 Hawks as your examples of a rebuild taking minimum 8 years.

I mean, the Western Bulldogs 2016 aren't even a great example of a rebuild. They are actually a great example of an average team playing fantastic football for a month and claiming an unexpected premiership.

Ladder positions after home and away:
2012 - 15th
2013 - 15th
2014 - 14th
2015 - 6th
2016 - 7th
2017 - 10th
2018 - 13th

If I was to say to you about your footy club right now 'I know we're in the top 4 right now (as the Bulldogs were in 2008/9/10) but we really need to embark on a rebuild, and I can guarantee you within the next 10 years we'll peak with a ladder position after home and away of 6th, with only one additional season in the finals', I'm not sure you'd be too excited about it...

... do you read the posts you quote, ever?

This is why I stated that it would be the work of a PhD candidate to go into each and every season of the AFL, each club and each player, and project 'contention' as a pattern in the numbers. It would involve historical research of the kind that would be mindblowing and you still would struggle to find an answer that would work for the entirety of the time footy has been around because we keep changing the rules and the amounts of teams.

My solution is Occam's Razor: the only teams we can prove unequivocally to be contending are those that won a flag. If you're going to dispute this, you need to a) provide a reason why your general and subjectively weak definition of contention is superior to this, both in terms of workability - and newsflash, it's infinitely less workable, as your continued posts on specific instances go on to demonstrate - and in terms of accuracy; or b) argue that there are teams which win flags aren't in contention.

Good luck with arguing b.

 

[Toffee Lion]

Gethelred I respect your view point as it's certainly a unique one with some real thought put behind it, I'm not here to win internet points or convince you otherwise. I don't really have much skin in this game, my club just won as you said anyway so what do I care.

I believe we were a contender in the years you didn't believe us to be, the rest of the rebuild argument therefore in my eyes breaks down because of this disagreement and we just move on.

 

[tiger_tough]

Are seven 1st round selections over 5 drafts "F all " picks?

That was the claim / dumb statement I responded to.

I was talking about this year. but yeah 7 over 5 is hardly a strong rebuild, especially when you've split two of them.

 

[Fadge]

... do you read the posts you quote, ever?

My solution is Occam's Razor: the only teams we can prove unequivocally to be contending are those that won a flag. If you're going to dispute this, you need to a) provide a reason why your general and subjectively weak definition of contention is superior to this, both in terms of workability - and newsflash, it's infinitely less workable, as your continued posts on specific instances go on to demonstrate - and in terms of accuracy; or b) argue that there are teams which win flags aren't in contention.

Good luck with arguing b.

Yeah, I'm extremely confident in my take that has Collingwood, Brisbane and GWS as 2023 contenders (as per my rationale as outlined), compared to yours that has Collingwood as the only contender in 2023 (and you have suggested that with the 2023 flag, we are retrospectively regarded as 2022 contenders?).

And also that the Western Bulldogs didn't start a rebuild in 2008 (whilst they were finishing top 4 in 2008/9/10), given they traded in 28 year old Ben Hudson, 29 year old Scott Welsh and 32 year old Barry Hall across 2008 and 2009...

 

[Gethelred]

Yeah, I'm extremely confident in my take that has Collingwood, Brisbane and GWS as 2023 contenders (as per my rationale as outlined), compared to yours that has Collingwood as the only contender in 2023 (and you have suggested that with the 2023 flag, we are retrospectively regarded as 2022 contenders?).

Only definitive contender. As in, the only one we know for certain is a contender.

Dude, you're being deliberately obtuse out of a desire to disagree. It's as though you think ignoring someone else's argument is enough to make it go away.

To bring things back to old Graham's hierarchy of arguments, this is sitting at best in contradiction and statement of your own case without real evidence. While you include facts, they don't support your argument because your it's - as stated multiple times; would that you read the posts you quoted, old boy - based on a definition too general and unworkable.

And also that the Western Bulldogs didn't start a rebuild in 2008 (whilst they were finishing top 4 in 2008/9/10), given they traded in 28 year old Ben Hudson, 29 year old Scott Welsh and 32 year old Barry Hall across 2008 and 2009...

And now we're back at strawmanning.

Mate, go and grab yourself a beer. It'll be right as rain in the morning.

 

[Fadge]

Only definitive contender. As in, the only one we know for certain is a contender.

Dude, you're being deliberately obtuse out of a desire to disagree. It's as though you think ignoring someone else's argument is enough to make it go away.

To bring things back to old Graham's hierarchy of arguments, this is sitting at best in contradiction and statement of your own case without real evidence. While you include facts, they don't support your argument because your it's - as stated multiple times; would that you read the posts you quoted, old boy - based on a definition too general and unworkable.

And now we're back at strawmanning.

Mate, go and grab yourself a beer. It'll be right as rain in the morning.

I know you're desperate to use '8 years' as a standard rebuild duration, and you had plenty of teams to use as an example.

Unfortunately for you, Hawthorn 2008 and Western Bulldogs 2016 were probably two of the worst examples you could have used.

But on the 'contender' thing...

Contender can be defined as 'a person or group competing with others to achieve something'. I like to qualify that definition using the term 'genuine', or 'legitimate'.

How can you not see that, for example, a team like Brisbane in 2023, who hit the lead with 4 minutes remaining in the Grand Final, were a genuine contender for that year's premiership. It really is a remarkable perspective on the situation.

 

[Fadge]

And now we're back at strawmanning.

Mate, go and grab yourself a beer. It'll be right as rain in the morning.

And I'm 'strawmanning' by highlighting specific examples of decisions that would not be made if a club had resigned itself to a long term rebuild.

In fact, it was quite the opposite for the Western Bulldogs in 2008/9/10 - they were right in the premiership mix, and the very reason they topped up with the likes of Hudson, Welsh and Hall.

But that's not highlighting your failed statement. It's 'strawmanning'.

 

[Gethelred]

I know you're desperate to use '8 years' as a standard rebuild duration, and you had plenty of teams to use as an example.

Unfortunately for you, Hawthorn 2008 and Western Bulldogs 2016 were probably two of the worst examples you could have used.

I've demonstrated my analysis - did it a few posts back - and you've not touched that demonstration. You've adhered to a frequent pattern of yours: you only ever post on the substance when forced. I provided a sample for one of the provided sides; you're welcome to do your own homework this time around.

But then, we both know how allergic you are to research, Fadge.

But on the 'contender' thing...

Contender can be defined as 'a person or group competing with others to achieve something'. I like to qualify that definition using the term 'genuine', or 'legitimate'.

How can you not see that, for example, a team like Brisbane in 2023, who hit the lead with 4 minutes remaining in the Grand Final, were a genuine contender for that year's premiership. It really is a remarkable perspective on the situation.

You're still at best sitting at repeated contradiction and use of strawman.

The term used is definitive contention: as in, there can be no doubt of their status as a contender. That you are choosing to misconstrue this is something that indicates a) that you don't understand the point being made, or b) you found a strawman you liked and couldn't resist the feeling of it on your knuckles as you beat him round the ears.

And I'm 'strawmanning' by highlighting specific examples of decisions that would not be made if a club had resigned itself to a long term rebuild.

You're strawmanning by reframing my posting and arguments, nitpicking specifics unsuccessfully instead of trying to argue the point. Look at how you've attempted to misconstrue how you're strawmanning me right here.

Dude, you're so disingenuous one wonders if your face is attached.

 

[Fadge]

I've demonstrated my analysis - did it a few posts back - and you've not touched that demonstration. You've adhered to a frequent pattern of yours: you only ever post on the substance when forced. I provided a sample for one of the provided sides; you're welcome to do your own homework this time around.

But then, we both know how allergic you are to research, Fadge.

You're still at best sitting at repeated contradiction and use of strawman.

The term used is definitive contention: as in, there can be no doubt of their status as a contender. That you are choosing to misconstrue this is something that indicates a) that you don't understand the point being made, or b) you found a strawman you liked and couldn't resist the feeling of it on your knuckles as you beat him round the ears.

You're strawmanning by reframing my posting and arguments, nitpicking specifics unsuccessfully instead of trying to argue the point. Look at how you've attempted to misconstrue how you're strawmanning me right here.

Dude, you're so disingenuous one wonders if your face is attached.

So I've 'not touched your demonstration' (The Western Bulldogs build starting at 2007 and culminating with their premiership in 2016) and have been 'nitpicking specifics' by focussing on that very team at that very period of time and highlighted key decisions that were made - recruitment of players in their late 20's and early 30's to top up for a crack at a premiership whilst they were consistently in the top 4 - that would not have been made if the club had made the decision to commence a rebuild.

Meanwhile, you're suggesting there is doubt over the ability to acknowledge a team as a genuine premiership contender if they find themselves leading the Grand Final with 4 minutes remaining, yet eventually lose the Grand Final by less than a kick?

Jeepers.

 

[Gethelred]

So I've 'not touched your demonstration' (The Western Bulldogs build starting at 2007 and culminating with their premiership in 2016) and have been 'nitpicking specifics' by focussing on that very team at that very period of time and highlighted key decisions that were made - recruitment of players in their late 20's and early 30's to top up for a crack at a premiership whilst they were consistently in the top 4 - that would not have been made if the club had made the decision to commence a rebuild.

Meanwhile, you're suggesting there is doubt over the ability to acknowledge a team as a genuine premiership contender if they find themselves leading the Grand Final with 4 minutes remaining, yet eventually lose the Grand Final by less than a kick?

Jeepers.

... dude, this post at no point provides an accurate portrayal of what I've said.

I'm out, I think. Better things to do than argue with someone whose desire is to argue past me.

 

[Freomaniac]

Yes, exactly like that

Nah, we were full rebuild mode either way this year, those guys leaving have just sped up the process by about 2-3 years (Unlike the Eagles who still have **** all picks). We also could've denied Bolton and Rioli their trade request as Dees did with Petracca and Oliver. Time will tell if that was the correct decision.

Pies haven't made the call that the draft is broken. They're just going all out for another flag before the wheels fall off, like we did. I think they'll suffer the same fate.

Nothing wrong with what the tigers did in trade week in 2024. Liam Baker, Shai Bolton and Dan Rioli wanted out.

Liam Baker was out of contract. Shai Bolton and Dan Rioli were still contracted.

I personally thought Bolton and Rioli Should of stayed for another season or 2 at Richmond. Again... that is my personal opinion on those 2. Its not like both of those blokes are 30 year olds that needed to go.

But Dockers offered draft picks for bolton. Richmond accepted those picks. Had Bolton stayed another season at richmond, I dont think Richmond would of got 3 1st round draft picks for Bolton.

Gold Coast offered picks for Rioli. Suns Coach Damien Hardwick wanted to get Rioli on a suns shirt. Tigers got some good draft picks in return. Had Rioli stayed another season well it would of been interesting how the suns season pans out.

Gold Coast suns finish between 7th to 11th. It could of been picks 10 and 28 heading to the tigers for rioli in the 2025 draft. Or if it Suns made finals at 8th spot, Probably would of been picks 12 and 30.


Not a personal knock on Richmond. It depends what year it is. Richmond made finals in 2013-15, they meade 3 elim finals. They got guys like Troy Chaplin as a free agent. One of the few players on richmonds list that actually played and won finals, at Port though. Ivan Maric played and won finals at the crows. Taylor hunt won finals at Geelong. Remarkably not one of them managed to play in richmonds 2017 finals side.

When Richmond won the 2017 flag, the only noticeable bloke they got traded in or as a Free agent was Tom Lynch from the suns, a side that never played finals in Lynchs 8 years at the suns.

When Richmond dropped off in 2021, it was similar to Hawks at the end of 2017. Tigers traded in a couple of players to think they had one more shot in them. Tigers made finals in 2022, but got dumped out of the finals in the 1st week.

Is Richmonds squad an ageing squad? I dont think it is. I think its a moderately ageing squad. Yeah there are some players that are 30 years old or older that need to either leave or hang around for one more season.

Richmond does have some solid servants in that 24-27 year old range. Tigers are gonna bring in lots of kids in this 2024 draft and 2025 draft.


I think the tigers can tolerate finishing bottom 6 in 2025, 2026 and 2027 then contend for finals in 2028.

 

[Freomaniac]

Geelong are the best run club in the league for starters. Their drafting, recruiting and development is better than any other club.

Plus the fact that they can offer a country/coastal lifestyle while still being a Vic team and play big games at the G.

Yep I agree. Cats drafting, recruiting and Development is better than most clubs.

This is gonna be an umpopular opinion. There has been one other clubs I have respected their drafting, recruiting and development. Its better than most clubs too. They have had a solid amount of finals and won a few finals despite not getting a flag or even makng a grand final from 2013 to 2024..... Yep its Port Adelaide.

 

[Freomaniac]

Okay.

This isn't really an argument specific to AFL circles. Any team in the top - arguably - 8 is 'in contention' (were us to adopt this definition) because before the game has begun the scores are level and it's a relatively even playing field.

There are plenty of teams that have made finals or come top 4 without contention. Port Adelaide cannot be considered to be in contention between 2019 and 2024, despite coming top 4 in 4 of 5 seasons and top of the ladder twice. Brisbane were arguably a paper lion between 2019 and 2022, because they were demolished in straight sets twice and beaten by 40 points in a home quarterfinal.

Port Adelaide were a contender in 2020. Lost Narrowly to Tigers by 6 points.

Would of been interesting had they won that prelim vs the tigers. That means a Port vs Cats grand final in the Gabba. Port in 2021 got belted by 70 points vs the dogs in that prelim final at home. Even if Port some how won that 2021 prelim final, I dont think they would of troubled the demons in that 2021 grand final in Perth.

Brisbane, I sadly agree with you.

Brisbane made top 2 in 2019. They had a lot of prime players. But inexperience in finals cost them. They lost to GWS narrowly in that semi final. GWS were finals hardened as those players played finals and won finals in 2016, 2017 and 2018.

Brisbane were never a chance in 2020. Tigers, Cats, Port had way more finals experience compared to Brisbane.

2021, I dont think Brisbane deserved top 4. I wished they finished 5th. THat means a home elim final vs Essendon. Dogs got very lucky vs the Brisbane side in that 2021 semi final.

In 2022, Brisbane got 6th. Narrowly held off richmond in the gabba. Some how survived Demons in that 2022 semi final.

 

[Gethelred]

Port Adelaide were a contender in 2020. Lost Narrowly to Tigers by 6 points.

... at home.

Put this into context. Are you seriously telling me that a side that has failed to make a grand final over 6 seasons despite making top four 5 times in that duration and top 2 twice is seriously equally in contention to the sides that won flags over the same duration?

Would of been interesting had they won that prelim vs the tigers. That means a Port vs Cats grand final in the Gabba. Port in 2021 got belted by 70 points vs the dogs in that prelim final at home. Even if Port some how won that 2021 prelim final, I dont think they would of troubled the demons in that 2021 grand final in Perth.

Brisbane, I sadly agree with you.

Brisbane made top 2 in 2019. They had a lot of prime players. But inexperience in finals cost them. They lost to GWS narrowly in that semi final. GWS were finals hardened as those players played finals and won finals in 2016, 2017 and 2018.

Brisbane were never a chance in 2020. Tigers, Cats, Port had way more finals experience compared to Brisbane.

2021, I dont think Brisbane deserved top 4. I wished they finished 5th. THat means a home elim final vs Essendon. Dogs got very lucky vs the Brisbane side in that 2021 semi final.

In 2022, Brisbane got 6th. Narrowly held off richmond in the gabba. Some how survived Demons in that 2022 semi final.

This is what I'm going to call an "I cannot categorically state what it is, but I know it when I see it" definition of contention in AFL circles. This is perfectly fine when discussing the arbitrary/subjective nature of contention itself, but when it comes to something like the thread topic is not useful to use as a judge of when/where a side is no longer rebuilding.

 

[Freomaniac]

... at home.

Put this into context. Are you seriously telling me that a side that has failed to make a grand final over 6 seasons despite making top four 5 times in that duration and top 2 twice is seriously equally in contention to the sides that won flags over the same duration?

yep.

Crows made 2 prelim finals in 2005 and 2006 and fell short. They were premiership contenders in both of those seasons.


Ports 2020- 2024 side is a weird one. made top 4 in 4 of those 5 seasons. Yet they were never the best side in any year of those 5 years.

 

[Gethelred]

yep.

What are you basing that on? Is it purely ladder position?

Crows made 2 prelim finals in 2005 and 2006 and fell short. They were premiership contenders in both of those seasons.

... without even making a grand final?

Ports 2020- 2024 side is a weird one. made top 4 in 4 of those 5 seasons. Yet they were never the best side in any year of those 5 years.

Exactly, which is why ladder position in isolation is not a good indicator of contention.

 

[cactuscall]

does it take too long for teams to rebuild their lists?

Oh yes, should be done within a fortnight.

 

[Freomaniac]

Easy solution, get rid of front/back loading contracts and make contract values public...

Half the problem is solved almost instantly

As I said... Front loaded contracts, thats gonna get you mixed opinions.

Again... I look at Brad Hills contract at the dockers. He was orginally given a 5 year deal at $2.5 million. I thought it was $500,000 a year for 5 years.

But it was $700,000 in 2017 and 2018. $500,000 in 2019. Had he stayed at Freo, he would only be o $300,000 in 2020 and 2021.

This is gonna be interesting when Tassie gets their side and they are the 19th side in the AFL then the 20th side comes in as well. Tassie will lure players on 4 or 5 or even 6 year deals that could be front ended.

I look at Tom Scully and his deal at GWS. Tom Scully was given a 6 year deal at 6 million dollars. it wasnt $1 million a year for 6 seasons. It was 2 million in the 1st season then $800,000 a year for the last 5 seasons.

At least with the suns, They found a way to reach the Salary cap in their 1st 2 or 3 seasons. Ablett was on 1.5 million a year for 5 seasons. Guys Like Rischitelli, Jarrod Harbrow, Nathan Bock, Campbell Brown, Josh Fraser , Nathan Krakouer and Jared Brennan were on $500,000 to $600,000 a year. The other 40 or so players were 18 or 19 year old kids on 2 year deals.

Krakouer and Fraser were gone by the 2nd season. So that was $1,200,000 freed up along with $500-$600,000 increase with the salary cap each season. So it was easy to renew the younger blokes on 2 or 3 year deals at the end of 2012.



With Tassie coming in, I excpect a few average players getting 3 or 4 year front ended deals at $3 million.

3 year deals could easily be $1.2 million for year one, 1 million for year 2 and $800,000 for year 3.

4 year front ended deals could be $1 million for years one and 2. then $500,000 for years 3 and 4.