List Mgmt. List Management 2023-24

[Incarnate]

What about Evans for Esava? The little fella seemed at home out there tonight…

 

[davesnothere]

Yeah I'm off the Grundy wagon.

It will bite us on the backside in a couple of years.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Well it was only over Stanley who while competent as a ruck isn’t a gun, but that performance from Dante was pretty exciting for the future.

I think it’s also an indicator that he’s going to be ready to be a full time first ruck quicker than usual.


I just don’t think we can splash out on Grundy for 4 years on good coin if we think Dante is going to make it. Anyone watching tonight think Dante will wait 4 years waiting for Grundy to be injured to get games?

We need a 1-2 year stop gap, not a 4 year multi million dollar eyesore.

There’s no way I want to be paying Grundy the kind of coin he’s on to play sanfl if Dante goes past him, or want to lose Dante while our first ruck is in his 30’s.

I think Dante could play close to 10 games next year (not sure I want him to shoulder a full load for a year) and should for developments sake at least get 3/4 plus games.

Don’t * it up port. Acquire a cheap ruck, split them and Dante across next year so Dante can take over the year after and save the cash for other players.

We're trying to win a flag. We're not going to win a flag with a 20 year old or some Fort/Sweet-esque stopgap spud leading our ruck division. We need a proper lead ruck, and Grundy is the only one on the market.

You're always so averse to us ever paying a fair price to get anyone else in because you always massively overrate our players. You don't sacrifice a chance to win a flag while we're smack bang in our window for the sake of getting a few more games into a fourth round pick ruck prospect, that's madness.

 

[davesnothere]

We're trying to win a flag. We're not going to win a flag with a 20 year old or some Fort/Sweet-esque stopgap spud leading our ruck division. We need a proper lead ruck, and Grundy is the only one on the market.

You're always so averse to us ever paying a fair price to get anyone else in because you always massively overrate our players. You don't sacrifice a chance to win a flag while we're smack bang in our window for the sake of getting a few more games into a fourth round pick ruck prospect, that's madness.

We've got a player who by the end of next year is a better option than Grundy like it or not.

Another pre-season Dante goes up a level.

That gets him competitive in most games and he will do a job.

20 games and 2 pre-seasons will get him more than competitive.

A 22-23 year old Dante is a top end Ruck.

 

[sobrave]

We've got a player who by the end of next year is a better option than Grundy like it or not.

Another pre-season Dante goes up a level.

That gets him competitive in most games and he will do a job.

20 games and 2 pre-seasons will get him more than competitive.

A 22-23 year old Dante is a top end Ruck.

He showed some good signs last night but carn... He's not a lock to be a superstar yet.

Rhys Stanley I thought was ordinary but still had 18 disposals and 31 hitouts last night, he just kept turning it over.

Dante is heaps better than teakle and better than a one legged lycett.

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

I don’t think our list is that bad, honestly think a better coach could do more with what we have already

Clearly a key defender is needed. I would be after Both Esava and Harry McKay

10

Harry Mckay

Age

26

Ht

200cm

Wt

106kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

9.9

3star

K

7.5

3star

HB

2.4

2star

M

5.5

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

1.4

5star

D

6.6

1star

K

4.6

2star

HB

2.0

1star

M

3.6

4star

T

1.4

2star

G

1.4

5star

D

8.8

3star

K

6.8

3star

HB

2.0

2star

M

4.4

4star

T

0.8

3star

G

2.0

5star

.

Ruck are overrated but clearly need a good one

We need another small forward as well, raz is done, McEntee and Evans are trash

Maybe another 20-24 year old mid considering Ollie and Boak are near the end.

We do not need KPF and HBFers

 

[philthy05]

We're trying to win a flag. We're not going to win a flag with a 20 year old or some Fort/Sweet-esque stopgap spud leading our ruck division. We need a proper lead ruck, and Grundy is the only one on the market.

You're always so averse to us ever paying a fair price to get anyone else in because you always massively overrate our players. You don't sacrifice a chance to win a flag while we're smack bang in our window for the sake of getting a few more games into a fourth round pick ruck prospect, that's madness.

What I’m massively averse to is the idea that every player is “The Missing Link” TM and this clubs complete and utter refusal to develop talls of their own.


How many times have we brought in the “missing link” during hinkleys tenure and it’s done nothing? (Almost like it’s not the personnel that’s the issue)

When was the last time we developed talls of our own?

The last ruck we drafted developed and played was lobbe in 2007 (ish off the top of my head)

The last key defender we drafted developed and didn’t trade away was clurey in 2012.



I agree Grundy would almost certainly give us a better performance next year but if Hinkley is still here (and that’s looking fairly likely) I don’t think it will mean much.

And then what about after that? Grundys performance will decline and we will be stuck with an albatross of a contract that will hinder us re-signing our stars or going after talent and Dante will get offers from teams to leave and we will have a first ruck whos 30 something and then no one behind him.

If Grundy was on a 2 year contract it would be a no brainer, but he isn’t. He’s signed for another 4 years. I don’t want to pin all our hopes on snagging a cup in the next year or two at the cost of later, we need sustained success.

 

[philthy05]

My position is fairly simple and logical

- Grundy would be a big upgrade over what lycett offers and the best ruck possibly on the market (tho I don’t think grundy is a star ruck anymore)

- grundys performance will decline massively before his contract is out

- if Ken is here he will continue to play Grundy well after he declines

- if Dante is any good he’s going to leave us in the next few years and we will be left with a 30 something ruck and no clear choice ready behind him.

- there’s either 2 scenarios in the future

1. We’re paying Grundy a fortune to play sanfl when he declines

2. We’re paying Grundy a fortune to spud it up in our afl side when he’s finished while Dante either gets offers to bail or has already bailed.


Unless your view is the hipster dude who looks like he couldn’t give 2 shits about football and is already declining doesn’t decline post 30 then 1 of the 2 above options is 100% to happen.


It’s a short term win for long term pain, and I’m not sure that short term win guarantees us a cup.

 

[Nelso]

We need to play Dante every week.

Do what the Bulldogs did with English.

Not saying that Dante will be as good as English but we can't stall the development of Dante by getting Grundy.

We are not winning anything with the current administration in charge and we can't afford to pay a 30yr old ruckman that type of money. I would rather use the money to fill other holes on our list.

 

[JUSTWORK]

Im very keen to see what Dante offers across the next 3 games and then reassess Grundy.

Im as keen on getting Grundy as anyone for the sort term, but we need to consider he's one huge money and on a very long term deal. We need to carefully assess what that means to our salary cap and can't risk losing our young talent in a few years because we are needing to still pay grundy big money, after he's potentially cooked.

He will be 33 when his contract expires, very few players are playing well at that age.

 

[philthy05]

Watching esava last night reaffirmed a few things for me..

- He’s a very poor man’s Alir

- he plays best , actually scratch that, he can only play any good when he’s got no opponent whatsoever and allowed to roam and jump at high balls



The problem is we already have Alir, if we bring in esava does Alir have to be more lockdown?

And the way we play doesn’t often allow an open key defender to play back as we push numbers up the field we’re quite often man for man back there in open play (ie not repeated stoppages where we’ve had time to shift players back)

My general feeling is that we bring in esava that Alir will be 30% less of the player he is now and closer to what we saw at Sydney, but that also an Alir and esava backline with two 195cm + guys is a fair upgrade on the talls we’ve been rolling with for years under Hinkley

+ taller backline I feel is more competitive in the air versus our past teams

- trade-off is I think Alir will be slightly a lessor factor / star

 

[Pafcsince86]

Im very keen to see what Dante offers across the next 3 games and then reassess Grundy.

Im as keen on getting Grundy as anyone for the sort term, but we need to consider he's one huge money and on a very long term deal. We need to carefully assess what that means to our salary cap and can't risk losing our young talent in a few years because we are needing to still pay grundy big money, after he's potentially cooked.

He will be 33 when his contract expires, very few players are playing well at that age.

How much of his contract are Collingwood paying?

 

[philthy05]

How much of his contract are Collingwood paying?

Articles have admitted they actually do not know the figures , which is troubling , but it’s always been guesstimated around 250k by the same media.

We have no idea whether the amount is consistent and linear across the years either.

Could it be less as the years go on? Who knows?

 

[JUSTWORK]

How much of his contract are Collingwood paying?

Who knows, how much they and Melb combined for determines whether we should go after Grundy.

 

[Pafcsince86]

I'd take Grundy our ruck situation is terrible assuming hayes leaves we left with even thinner ruck stocks we don't need Grundy to play tall forward we just need him to ruck

 

[Gryllis]

If Visentini shows promise in the next 3 games, maybe we're better off giving Lycett another year with the intention that Dante plays around 15 games and Scott covers the rest. Rather than bringing in a Fort type disgard to do that.

Lycett is fairly cooked so doesn't have a full season in him, but might be able to cover some games. His manager can talk about 2 year deals elsewhere all he likes, but if those do exist, surely they won't get past the medical.

 

[Schulzenfest]

We've got a player who by the end of next year is a better option than Grundy like it or not.

Lol.

I like Dante. He's better than Teakle and well on his way to being better than Lycett. He's not fit to tie Brodie Grundy's boots. Not yet anyway.

 

[philthy05]

Lol.

I like Dante. He's better than Teakle and well on his way to being better than Lycett. He's not fit to tie Brodie Grundy's boots. Not yet anyway.

I absolutely agree that it would be a risky bet to say Dante will be a better ruck next year than Grundy.

But beyond that? With one declining and one improving how long until it’s reversed? Before next year is out? The next year? The year after?

I think it would come very fast.

I also don’t think Dante will be that far behind Grundy after another preseason. Certainly not a massive gap. The main concern might be Dante’s consistency early.

 

[Schulzenfest]

I absolutely agree that it would be a risky bet to say Dante will be a better ruck next year than Grundy.

But beyond that? With one declining and one improving how long until it’s reversed? Before next year is out? The next year? The year after?

I think it would come very fast.

I also don’t think Dante will be that far behind Grundy after another preseason. Certainly not a massive gap. The main concern might be Dante’s consistency early.

It's somewhat dependent on whether Hinkley is still here next year I suppose. But if we have a new coach next year, we're smack bang in the middle of our window, and our performance next year becomes a much higher priority than our performance in four years' time.

 

[afl2004]

It's somewhat dependent on whether Hinkley is still here next year I suppose. But if we have a new coach next year, we're smack bang in the middle of our window, and our performance next year becomes a much higher priority than our performance in four years' time.

Hinkley is here again mate it's over , Grundy or no Grundy we ain't doing shit in the next 2 years minimum

 

[davesnothere]

Lol.

I like Dante. He's better than Teakle and well on his way to being better than Lycett. He's not fit to tie Brodie Grundy's boots. Not yet anyway.

Give him a year "Visentfest" has a nice ring to it

 

[Long live PAFC]

The grundy deal seems defined by money, length of contract, his age and the potential to inhibit growth and development of other rucks.

- we don’t know the money situation and it may change if he came to port anyway. Maybe he would take a pay cut. Maybe it’s performance based. Maybe he would be happy to smooth it out or front end a bit extra. Maybe the list managers get creative and pay Grundy extra in the first year and everyone takes a 25-50k pay drop for a year, then his contract is only 500k per year thereafter. It seems that Port, if they took the whole contract, would be on the hook for 6-700k a year, so what we paid Lycett from recollection. For four years, that’s hell of a lot but Grundy is a solid ruck and should remain serviceable at worst for another 2-3 years at least.

- Hayes is likely to leave. Teakle, I don’t think will make it. Danté has shown a bit when none of us thought he would even get a game. Let’s face it, Danté probably wouldn’t be getting consistent games for another 2-3 years.

- as to Hinkley playing Lycett and Jonas despite them being done, well both have dropped for their under studies this year, just because Hinkley didn’t play Hayes and Pasini (who we wanted) doesn’t mean he doesn’t develop players or would play Grundy into the ground over Danté.

- Grundy coming would bring the intel from the two best teams of the last few years. Rucking against him likely speeds the development of guys like Teakle, Visentini, Scully, Finlayson, Dixon and Goad(hopefully). West Indies batters during their golden era put their success down to the fact they trained with the best bowlers in the world. Surely it’s the same for rucks.

- as to being worried about Danté, Hayes, Teakle, etc wanting to leave for opportunities. Grundy would likely get rested from time to time, would have some injuries etc so there would be short term opportunities. By the time Danté is seriously ready, Grundy would be retiring. If Danté wanted to leave, he is a fourth round ruck prospect who has a handful of games under his belt. Plenty of those going around and little to suggest he will make it or walk into another side and get opportunities. Grundy rucking for port and the low chance that an unproven ruck prospect might leave vs Danté out of his depth for a couple of years or a journeyman ruck.

 

[Portmagpies36]

I don’t think our list is that bad, honestly think a better coach could do more with what we have already

Clearly a key defender is needed. I would be after Both Esava and Harry McKay.

Ruck are overrated but clearly need a good one

We need another small forward as well, raz is done, McEntee and Evans are trash

Maybe another 20-24 year old mid considering Ollie and Boak are near the end.

We do not need KPF and HBFers

Our depth is crap

 

[philthy05]

The grundy deal seems defined by money, length of contract, his age and the potential to inhibit growth and development of other rucks.

- we don’t know the money situation and it may change if he came to port anyway. Maybe he would take a pay cut. Maybe it’s performance based. Maybe he would be happy to smooth it out or front end a bit extra. Maybe the list managers get creative and pay Grundy extra in the first year and everyone takes a 25-50k pay drop for a year, then his contract is only 500k per year thereafter. It seems that Port, if they took the whole contract, would be on the hook for 6-700k a year, so what we paid Lycett from recollection. For four years, that’s hell of a lot but Grundy is a solid ruck and should remain serviceable at worst for another 2-3 years at least.

- Hayes is likely to leave. Teakle, I don’t think will make it. Danté has shown a bit when none of us thought he would even get a game. Let’s face it, Danté probably wouldn’t be getting consistent games for another 2-3 years.

- as to Hinkley playing Lycett and Jonas despite them being done, well both have dropped for their under studies this year, just because Hinkley didn’t play Hayes and Pasini (who we wanted) doesn’t mean he doesn’t develop players or would play Grundy into the ground over Danté.

- Grundy coming would bring the intel from the two best teams of the last few years. Rucking against him likely speeds the development of guys like Teakle, Visentini, Scully, Finlayson, Dixon and Goad(hopefully). West Indies batters during their golden era put their success down to the fact they trained with the best bowlers in the world. Surely it’s the same for rucks.

- as to being worried about Danté, Hayes, Teakle, etc wanting to leave for opportunities. Grundy would likely get rested from time to time, would have some injuries etc so there would be short term opportunities. By the time Danté is seriously ready, Grundy would be retiring. If Danté wanted to leave, he is a fourth round ruck prospect who has a handful of games under his belt. Plenty of those going around and little to suggest he will make it or walk into another side and get opportunities. Grundy rucking for port and the low chance that an unproven ruck prospect might leave vs Danté out of his depth for a couple of years or a journeyman ruck.

1. Why would Grundy take a significant pay cut that it would take to make a difference

2. Why would his contract be performance based? Like it’s possible that a fraction of it is, but an amount to make any difference? Why would he have agreed to that when he got his contract.

If it was performance based why would pies have had to trade him to get him off their books?

3. That’s a lot of what ifs in your post.

 

[Long live PAFC]

Our depth is crap

Is it? Mitch and Clurey have long terms injuries, that’s your key position depth. We have four rucks, bad luck that three are injured. Evans, Raz, McEntee, Rioli, DBJ - should be enough small forward depth.

Arguably we are short a running HBF and/or wing. Yes we could use better players in ruck, key back and small forward but the players are on the list.

1. Why would Grundy take a significant pay cut that it would take to make a difference

2. Why would his contract be performance based? Like it’s possible that a fraction of it is, but an amount to make any difference? Why would he have agreed to that when he got his contract.

If it was performance based why would pies have had to trade him to get him off their books?

3. That’s a lot of what ifs in your post.

1. Because players take pay cuts all the time. See Geelong over the years, see Bowes dropping from 800k to less than 500k, see Boak and Wines shifting pay around. It’s not an uncommon practice and not unreasonable to think Grundy may consider it. Play Melbourne reserves or come to port and be number one for 50-100k less.

2. Why performance based? Well we don’t know. Maybe 100k is performance or none. We don’t know. Why wouldn’t some of it be performance based?

The pies had multiple heavy contracts and should never have paid grundy what they did and for that length. Performance based or not, they had to move him on. Would they have preferred to keep him on a lesser contract for sure but they signed him to that heavy deal. Several years later, now playing reserves, it’ll be a different story for grundy I suspect.

3. No fewer ifs in yours. My point is that there are plenty of ways to make this work and that the concerns you have, which are very reasonable, are able to be solved. So I think the contract size can be solved and I think Danté won’t be discouraged by Grundy coming.