Freo and the never ending rebuild

[chaosball32]

Making this post in the hopes that we somehow win our last 2 games and it backfires spectacularly

Given our current predicament, losing/choking 2 very winnable games in the past 2 weeks - among others earlier in the season - and having to face two top-4 teams to round out the season, there’s now a very realistic chance Freo miss finals altogether.

Which is quite remarkable considering we were equal 2nd just 12 short days ago. But of course this just had to be the most even season in recent memory.

That will make it just 1 finals series in 9 years for Freo. The only team worse in that same time period being Gold Coast. And 1 finals series in 5 years under Longmuir.

Our age profile remains amongst the youngest in the competition, as we have been for 5 or 6 years now. Which is the result of so many players leaving every off-season combined with always going heavy at the draft. Yes you can say that most of the players who’ve left have overall been a net positive for us but the age and experience they bring is invaluable, as you can see how inconsistent we’ve been this season, which is what can happen when you have a young team. We have three 1st rounders this off-season so the opportunity to bring in some established talent and speed up our premiership window opening is there, and with us being stacked with talent in the 18-25 range, it won’t hurt our future to do so.

Worst of all is seeing the emergence of Hawthorn, a team who accomplished a dynasty (2013 and 2015 still hurts), stayed competitive for a few years after, bottomed out under Clarkson and now is playing some of the most exciting and attractive football under Mitchell. Their list is skewed older by the likes of Bruest and Gunston but they have such a good young core - Day, Newcombe, Macdonald, Mackenzie, Ginnivan, Weddle, Dear, Watson etc all under 23. Similar age profile to us but are playing the footy and producing the results that we should be, and have done it in half the time. Really puts our rebuild to shame.

What say you? Personally I’m getting a bit fed up with the excuses, I think we have all the tools to be a successful footy club but consistently fail to be. When I say successful, I don’t mean winning the flag every year, but at least being a reliable, competitive and respected team who consistently are up there come September - like a Sydney, GWS or Geelong. 1 finals series in 9 years is woeful in retrospect.

 

[88mph]

Next year is our year.

 

[chaosball32]

Next year is our year.

Been hearing that for a very, very long time. We may as well rebrand to Next Year FC.

 

[sumavich]

We are 6th! Wait for the next 2 weeks, then this may be more poignant

 

[chaosball32]

We are 6th! Wait for the next 2 weeks, then this may be more poignant

Yes we are 6th, but we face GWS (3rd) and Port (2nd)

Hawthorn face Richmond (18th) and North (17th)

Carlton face West Coast (16th) and St Kilda (14th)

Bulldogs face North (17th) and GWS (3rd)

So there’s a pretty good chance we will have to win our last 2 games to make finals - and there’s also a pretty good chance that won’t happen

I’ll be very happy if I’m proven wrong and Freo go ahead and defy the odds but the odds aren’t looking too great

 

[MadMundy]

At the end of the day it sucks, but hey, that was the choice I made becoming a Fremantle supporter, I'm stuck here for the long run, might as well get behind the boys. Yeah it can be painful, but I like to look at it a bit more positively, it just makes it that much sweeter when we do manage to get up and achieve something, it'll feel like those years of misery paid off.

 

[Sturty2Hurty]

While I agree with you (this rebuild has taken way too long), asking ‘how long should a rebuild take?’ is really difficult to answer, simply because every team is different.

Imagine our list, but we get to add Sam Darcy and Jamarra-Ugle Hagan to it on top. Imagine if we got Essendon’s draw. Imagine if we got Geelong’s home ground advantage.

The most comparable team are the Eagles. They win a flag every 12 years.

The Hogan/Neale debarkle set us back 5 years. There’s been a lot of ink spilled on whether Lyon would’ve got us back to finals so I’ll leave that as a moot point.

You could make a case for a few of our players but I don’t think we have that genuine matchwinner (yet). Most teams pick that player up when they bottom out (i.e. Dusty). This has dragged out the rebuild IMO.

 

[Firesharter]

we need to trade for more mature agers e.g. Warner or Bolton. The hawks have always had a balance of doing this and drafting young players. Granted it’s easier for Victorian teams but there are WA born prospects wanting to come home and we don’t have time to wait for a young mid or crafty forward to develop, if they do. We have the capital now. Keep one first rounder for the draft this year, because apparently it’s a good one, use the other two to bolster the list.

 

[muckypup]

The balance is very fine. Hawks lose a couple of their older players probs next year. If Meek goes down now they are back in the pack. Balance is very very fine. We are competing NOW. Thats all you can ask for.

 

[go_the_dockers]

This trade and draft period will either make us or break us.

Trade in the right player at the right price, hit the draft, pick the wrong player, or pay overs.

Would be great if we targeted 1 or 2 mature age players.

The balance is very fine. Hawks lose a couple of their older players probs next year. If Meek goes down now they are back in the pack. Balance is very very fine. We are competing NOW. Thats all you can ask for.

Hawks have had a lot of success trading in unwanted players to fill holes and only using 2nd or 3rd rounders.

I don't believe our talent identification is good enough.

 

[blue shark]

The balance is very fine. Hawks lose a couple of their older players probs next year. If Meek goes down now they are back in the pack. Balance is very very fine. We are competing NOW. Thats all you can ask for.

Hawks have already lost a few older players, they traded JOM for Meek.
The reality is that we are heading for a replumb with Walters, Fyfe, JOM.
Aish? Only way we get out of this is with trades, but we need to keep at
least one first rounder and an eye to the future.

 

[FUS_RO_DAH]

imo we cut our list waaaaaay too hard after 2016. We pretty much burnt the whole thing down and started again. Granted, we needed to because our drafting had been atrocious, but we are coming from a seriously long way back. We had barely any quality players in that 24-28 range that could hang around and balance the team as we bought in high end talent.

And, then the Neale disaster. In hindsight trading him at the time wasn't the worst idea. More draft picks, more talent. But we screwed the whole thing up with taking a gamble and bringing in Hogan.

 

[go_the_dockers]

I think Ryan Daniels summarised our issue very well, and said we are two quick to trade away picks and don't hit the draft for long enough.

I would say our talent identification is poor as well.

 

[SPEEDWAGON]

I don’t see the point of trading all our picks on bad value. Want long term success- draft the best players, spend money on the best recruiters

 

[go_the_dockers]

I don’t see the point of trading all our picks on bad value. Want long term success- draft the best players, spend money on the best recruiters

This is the big issue I have with Bolton.
Richmond will want a king ransom for him, and I think he is overpaid.

Would prefer Baker we got Baker this year, and Warner next year and took the rest of the picks to the draft.

 

[freo1997]

We need to top up.

Just like early 00s we brought in two A graders in Farmer and Bell. We made the finals 2 years after the spoon.

Bolton is the X factor we need and Baker will be handy as a Small Fwd/Mid.

 

[Lach72]

This is the big issue I have with Bolton.
Richmond will want a king ransom for him, and I think he is overpaid.

Would prefer Baker we got Baker this year, and Warner next year and took the rest of the picks to the draft.

1. you don’t know that Bolton cost a kings ransom or that he’ll be overpaid. I still think the most likely scenario is one first and a second for Bolton. He will also need to have his contract massaged if he wants to come
2. Bolton plays in a position where we have a minimum of THREE spots filled by inferior players. we are not filling this quickly through the draft alone.
3. We currently have three firsts and a second this year and a full hand of picks next year. Trading for Bolton, unless it screws with a deal for Warner, will not compromise our draft hand going forward.
4. Baker can be traded for easily. Not an issue when taking Bolton into account.

 

[Mr Cheese]

Sorry, this is bollocks. Our talent identification is bad? Give me a break. Our risk assessment? Sure, a bit loose, and over estimated our ability to manage problem players, but talent? No ****ing way.

We've been arguably the best team at the draft since 2016. Our trading has been pretty on point too (Neale debacle aside, though if Hogan had been doing what he's doing for GWS, that's a fair trade - he ****ed that up, not us).

Hawks have done well, but it's apples and oranges. We don't get to pick from a smorgasbord of Vic talent wanting to move or go home. It's WA Boys or bust (generally speaking). Currently, that's Warner and Bolton (A graders) and Baker. Makes trading really difficult and often inflates the price.

If we could land Warner and Bolton now for all our firsts and Saint's second, we'd be negligent not too. We're a gnats testicle away from having a formidable side. Adding an elite 23 and 26 yr old (start of next season) with immediate impact will put us over the top.

Sometimes, some things are simple. Don't overthink it.

On SM-G988U1 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[go_the_dockers]

1. you don’t know that Bolton cost a kings ransom or that he’ll be overpaid. I still think the most likely scenario is one first and a second for Bolton. He will also need to have his contract massaged if he wants to come
2. Bolton plays in a position where we have a minimum of THREE spots filled by inferior players. we are not filling this quickly through the draft alone.
3. We currently have three firsts and a second this year and a full hand of picks next year. Trading for Bolton, unless it screws with a deal for Warner, will not compromise our draft hand going forward.
4. Baker can be traded for easily. Not an issue when taking Bolton into account.

Lach72 - this is all guess work we are both doing, and getting different answers. I think the best way forward for the club is to bring in Warner next and Baker this year, and ignore Bolton and Richmond will want way overs.

The only we should look seriously at Bolton, is if Richmond is half pushing him out for picks.

I need to watch Bolton closer, but I have concerns he relies on his pace massively, is not an accurate kick on goal, relies on getting the ball out back and once he hits 30 his performance will drop off quickly. I am probably wrong, but this is how I see it.




1. You are right, but most times a club tries to bring in a player who is contracted for multiple years that a side is not pushing out, they are forced to pay a king ransom.

Can you name one time a club has tried to get a contracted player (2+ years left) that the club did not want to trade, and it worked out for the club. To me this looks like the Gibbs trade, where they are forced to pay massive overs for him.

His contract concerns me as well, I doubt we can afford to 1.1 million a year, and pay similar for Warner.

This is just my guess work, would be happy if I was wrong and we got only paid pick 7 or 8 for him (the max I would pay)


2. Yes, he plays in a position we need. So do Berry, Lalor, Hotton etc. I think two of these players will have a better career than Bolton would from 26 onwards.

3. We don't get maximum value from the assets we have. I don't see us having 2 million in salary cap spare, 2.5 million if you include Baker. Surely we can't fit all 3 in.


4. I don't see us having 2 million in salary cap spare, 2.5 million if you include Baker. Surely we can't fit all 3 in.






Maybe just agree to disagree on this one, we will see what Richmond want for him come trade week. If they ask for Pick 7 and 15, then I would walk away.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Sorry, this is bollocks. Our talent identification is bad? Give me a break. Our risk assessment? Sure, a bit loose, and over estimated our ability to manage problem players, but talent? No ****ing way.

We've been arguably the best team at the draft since 2016. Our trading has been pretty on point too (Neale debacle aside, though if Hogan had been doing what he's doing for GWS, that's a fair trade - he ****ed that up, not us).

Hawks have done well, but it's apples and oranges. We don't get to pick from a smorgasbord of Vic talent wanting to move or go home. It's WA Boys or bust (generally speaking). Currently, that's Warner and Bolton (A graders) and Baker. Makes trading really difficult and often inflates the price.

If we could land Warner and Bolton now for all our firsts and Saint's second, we'd be negligent not too. We're a gnats testicle away from having a formidable side. Adding an elite 23 and 26 yr old (start of next season) with immediate impact will put us over the top.

Sometimes, some things are simple. Don't overthink it.

On SM-G988U1 using BigFooty.com mobile app

Talent identification for trading in players, not drafting

 

[Firesharter]

Talent identification for trading in players, not drafting

Is talent identification a problem or convincing mature agers, often with small children, to move to another state, without their friends and family, a problem? Anyone who is available and good will have several options to choose from. That leaves us with not-as-good players and former sandgropers wanting to come home.

 

[Mr Cheese]

Talent identification for trading in players, not drafting

Even there, given the parameters in which we work, I reckon we've gone ok.

Cannot stress enough that we are not operating on the same playing field as the Eastern States teams (Vic especially). We're subject to inflated prices if they're not from WA, and generally elite WA talent will cost a lot to prise loose. Only guy we really ****ed up was Acres I think (even then that was a punt on durability, not talent).

On SM-G988U1 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Lach72]

Lach72 - this is all guess work we are both doing, and getting different answers. I think the best way forward for the club is to bring in Warner next and Baker this year, and ignore Bolton and Richmond will want way overs.

The only we should look seriously at Bolton, is if Richmond is half pushing him out for picks.

I need to watch Bolton closer, but I have concerns he relies on his pace massively, is not an accurate kick on goal, relies on getting the ball out back and once he hits 30 his performance will drop off quickly. I am probably wrong, but this is how I see it.




1. You are right, but most times a club tries to bring in a player who is contracted for multiple years that a side is not pushing out, they are forced to pay a king ransom.

Can you name one time a club has tried to get a contracted player (2+ years left) that the club did not want to trade, and it worked out for the club. To me this looks like the Gibbs trade, where they are forced to pay massive overs for him.

His contract concerns me as well, I doubt we can afford to 1.1 million a year, and pay similar for Warner.

This is just my guess work, would be happy if I was wrong and we got only paid pick 7 or 8 for him (the max I would pay)


2. Yes, he plays in a position we need. So do Berry, Lalor, Hotton etc. I think two of these players will have a better career than Bolton would from 26 onwards.

3. We don't get maximum value from the assets we have. I don't see us having 2 million in salary cap spare, 2.5 million if you include Baker. Surely we can't fit all 3 in.


4. I don't see us having 2 million in salary cap spare, 2.5 million if you include Baker. Surely we can't fit all 3 in.






Maybe just agree to disagree on this one, we will see what Richmond want for him come trade week. If they ask for Pick 7 and 15, then I would walk away.

We can get Berry with one of our picks anyway. Getting Bolton and Berry fills two if the three holes.

And Bolton is only 25. If any of them have a better career than Bolton they’ll basically be Eddy Betts…fantastic but unlikely

 

[sumavich]

I’ll be very happy if I’m proven wrong and Freo go ahead and defy the odds but the odds aren’t looking too great

Drafted fine, our midfield are high end Victorians. Jackson hasn’t worked out yet, but he’s only 22. Just need a couple more quality players or a game breaker and we’ll be at the pointy end. Don’t know if Longmuir survives, but a harder bastard would be good imo

 

[go_the_dockers]

Even there, given the parameters in which we work, I reckon we've gone ok.

Cannot stress enough that we are not operating on the same playing field as the Eastern States teams (Vic especially). We're subject to inflated prices if they're not from WA, and generally elite WA talent will cost a lot to prise loose. Only guy we really ****ed up was Acres I think (even then that was a punt on durability, not talent).

On SM-G988U1 using BigFooty.com mobile app

Clark has been a win.

Lobb, Matera, Kersten, Colyer, O'Meara all have been poor recruits.

Aish was ok, but I think it was the wrong time based on where our list build was.

We should have supported Hogan a lot better, if we brought him in. We knew he had issues, but offered him no support. GWS had him living with Mumford. He should have been living with Mundy or Fyfe.


We appear to use a scatter gun approach, where we target any player from WA and don't care if they will approve us or not.