List Mgmt. List Management 2023-24

[Prince St]

As a HBF? Is he an upgrade on what we have?

Would be great on a wing

 

[Prince St]

Just a thought, while I didn’t want Jack Graham

17

Jack Graham

Age

26

Ht

181cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.7

4star

K

8.0

3star

HB

6.8

4star

M

2.1

2star

T

6.3

5star

CL

1.8

4star

D

11.8

3star

K

5.3

2star

HB

6.5

4star

M

2.8

3star

T

4.2

5star

CL

1.2

4star

D

14.0

4star

K

6.0

3star

HB

8.0

5star

M

1.8

2star

T

7.0

5star

CL

3.2

5star

last off-season, in our system he’d offer just as much output as Wines has produced so far IMO. Hypothetically speaking, if we make a play for Dimma, would make a lot of sense to go for Graham, a leader who knows Hardwick’s game and who’s role would complement our current group.

Dangle Wines in front of a few desperate Melb clubs, snag a first rounder and spend a third on Jack?

 

[backtozero]

Just a thought, while I didn’t want Jack Graham last off-season, in our system he’d offer just as much output as Wines has produced so far IMO. Hypothetically speaking, if we make a play for Dimma, would make a lot of sense to go for Graham, a leader who knows Hardwick’s game and who’s role would complement our current group.

Dangle Wines in front of a few desperate Melb clubs, snag a first rounder and spend a third on Jack?

A first rounder for Wines is optimistic. GC would be the only club silly enough to offer one.

 

[Prince St]

A first rounder for Wines is optimistic. GC would be the only club silly enough to offer one.

Think it depends on the market, Adelaide paid a lot more for an older Gibbs.

 

[Peninsula Boy]

This is incorrect - Aliir made the AA team in 2021.

You got me there. How could I forget Aliir? The defence is still not so crash hot.

 

[El_Scorcho]

This is incorrect - Aliir made the AA team in 2021.

Who was the last tall drafted by Port to win an AA guernsey at Port? Lade in 2007? I guess Chad as well although he was playing midfield at the time.

I feel like we need to do a deep dive on this board into the development of talls. Absolutely shameful. We've spent so much draft and salary cap capital in bringing them in because we flat out can't and won't develop them.

List of tall players drafted by Port to reach established AFL quality at Port in 26 seasons:

Tredrea
Lade
Cornes
Thurstans
Brogan
Carlisle
Trengove
Westhoff
Jonas
Clurey
Marshall

Just 3 players with AA guernseys, all drafted in the 90s. Grim.

 

[Buget]

Who was the last tall drafted by Port to win an AA guernsey at Port? Lade in 2007? I guess Chad as well although he was playing midfield at the time.

I feel like we need to do a deep dive on this board into the development of talls. Absolutely shameful. We've spent so much draft and salary cap capital in bringing them in because we flat out can't and won't develop them.

List of tall players drafted by Port to reach established AFL quality at Port in 26 seasons:

Tredrea
Lade
Cornes
Thurstans
Brogan
Carlisle
Trengove
Westhoff
Jonas
Clurey
Marshall

Just 3 players with AA guernseys, all drafted in the 90s. Grim.

Before we get too carried away, what do you consider tall?

Treadrea is 194cm, the same as the Bont….

 

[dirty2]

Before we get too carried away, what do you consider tall?

Treadrea is 194cm, the same as the Bont….

Yeah but if tredders was same age as Bont he would more then likely be taller...

 

[El_Scorcho]

Before we get too carried away, what do you consider tall?

Treadrea is 194cm, the same as the Bont….

Someone who plays KPD, KPF or Ruck.

 

[Buget]

Someone who plays KPD, KPF or Ruck.

Whilst I agree with you that the list is thin…. Can we agree that the list doesn’t include SPP?

With out looking too closely, I think Port would actually be pretty similar to most clubs, particularly when you have a KPP tie down a spot for a decade. Take WC, they have had Kennedy, Nic-Nat and Hurn all have played for over a decade. Now they are at the end or ended, WC have some big holes to fill.

Port’s biggest development hole is rucks. They haven’t had an a-grade organic ruck since Lade.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Whilst I agree with you that the list is thin…. Can we agree that the list doesn’t include SPP?

With out looking too closely, I think Port would actually be pretty similar to most clubs, particularly when you have a KPP tie down a spot for a decade. Take WC, they have had Kennedy, Nic-Nat and Hurn all have played for over a decade. Now they are at the end or ended, WC have some big holes to fill.

Port’s biggest development hole is rucks. They haven’t had an a-grade organic ruck since Lade.

West Coast, since we joined the league have had 7 draftees make an AA side with them.

Naitanui
McGovern
Darling
Cox
Glass
Gardiner
Gehrig

That's not including Kennedy who was acquired in the Judd trade and turned into a superstar at West Coast.

Then in terms of other draftees who have gone on to play as established AFL talls:

Oscar Allen
Eric Mackenzie
Quentin Lynch
Tom Barass
Mitch Brown
Will Schofield
Scott Lycett
Brent Stalker
Ash Hansen
Mark Seaby

Their key position and ruck development has been first class for their entire existence as a club. The only gun tall they've traded for is Kennedy and that only happened because Judd wanted to go to Carlton.

We've traded for or otherwise acquired established players including:

Wakelin
Paxton
Bishop
Schulz
Ryder
Dixon
Aliir
Lycett
McKenzie
Finlayson
Edit: Forgot Hombsch and even Jack Watts, although I think injury kept him from succeeding here

We haven't drafted a KPP or ruck who went on to win an AA guernsey with us since 1999. The closest was probably Jonas in 2020 and he's sub 190cm.

When you're having to trade in half of your AFL quality talls over the years, you're spending so much draft and salary cap capital that you could be using to fill other list needs. It's unsustainable and we're frankly lucky that our list is in the shape it's in. As usual, our biggest worry areas are talls, ruck and KPD. History suggests we're going to have to pay up big to fill those holes because we're awful at turning young talls into AFL quality players.

 

[Adz2332]

Get Bergman's signature now!

 

[Long live PAFC]

West Coast, since we joined the league have had 7 draftees make an AA side with them.

Naitanui
McGovern
Darling
Cox
Glass
Gardiner
Gehrig

That's not including Kennedy who was acquired in the Judd trade and turned into a superstar at West Coast.

Then in terms of other draftees who have gone on to play as established AFL talls:

Oscar Allen
Eric Mackenzie
Quentin Lynch
Tom Barass
Mitch Brown
Will Schofield
Scott Lycett
Brent Stalker
Ash Hansen
Mark Seaby

Their key position and ruck development has been first class for their entire existence as a club. The only gun tall they've traded for is Kennedy and that only happened because Judd wanted to go to Carlton.

We've traded for or otherwise acquired established players including:

Wakelin
Paxton
Bishop
Schulz
Ryder
Dixon
Aliir
Lycett
McKenzie
Finlayson

We haven't drafted a KPP or ruck who went on to win an AA guernsey with us since 1999. The closest was probably Jonas in 2020 and he's sub 190cm.

When you're having to trade in half of your AFL quality talls over the years, you're spending so much draft and salary cap capital that you could be using to fill other list needs. It's unsustainable and we're frankly lucky that our list is in the shape it's in. As usual, our biggest worry areas are talls, ruck and KPD. History suggests we're going to have to pay up big to fill those holes because we're awful at turning young talls into AFL quality players.

I take your point. I would suggest port might have had something to do with Schulz, Alir, Dixon and McKenzie all improving. And I’m not sure AA is a great cut off, as there are so many biases in this. Besides teams play a group defence, individual performance is less relevant. As an example Collingwood’s defence has been great, probably on Moore is in AA conversation. St Kilda similar with Wilkie. Port had the best defence a few years back and only DBJ was awarded AA, and even he probably didn’t deserve it.

Talls are tricky because it’s not as simple as drafting them and developing them. As you know, you need to pick the right players at the right time, ie Scully was a late pick key forward has about a 0% chance of being a regular AFL player. Geelong got lucky with multiple father sons. So did the dogs. Multiple sides bring in what they need, as they need it, which is understandable as talls take early picks, time, patience and money to develop. And there isn’t a guarantee. Hawthorn, Geelong, Melbourne, Collingwood - all have traded in talls as needed and done so with variable amounts of trade capital.

There has to be a balance between development and success.

So what would you suggest is the problem behind Port’s apparent failure in this area? And what’s the solution?

 

[El_Scorcho]

I take your point. I would suggest port might have had something to do with Schulz, Alir, Dixon and McKenzie all improving. And I’m not sure AA is a great cut off, as there are so many biases in this. Besides teams play a group defence, individual performance is less relevant. As an example Collingwood’s defence has been great, probably on Moore is in AA conversation. St Kilda similar with Wilkie. Port had the best defence a few years back and only DBJ was awarded AA, and even he probably didn’t deserve it.

Talls are tricky because it’s not as simple as drafting them and developing them. As you know, you need to pick the right players at the right time, ie Scully was a late pick key forward has about a 0% chance of being a regular AFL player. Geelong got lucky with multiple father sons. So did the dogs. Multiple sides bring in what they need, as they need it, which is understandable as talls take early picks, time, patience and money to develop. And there isn’t a guarantee. Hawthorn, Geelong, Melbourne, Collingwood - all have traded in talls as needed and done so with variable amounts of trade capital.

There has to be a balance between development and success.

So what would you suggest is the problem behind Port’s apparent failure in this area? And what’s the solution?

I think we've spent a lot of time flat out not caring about development. We've let young talls wither on the vine and played short instead. I used to rant about this a lot during the Butcher threads. A selected list of short, good honest triers with low ceilings who got plenty of games under Hinkley:

Jake Neade 66 games under Hinkley
Kane Mitchell 35 games under Hinkley
Sam Gray 92 games under Hinkley
Nathan Krakouer 29 games under Hinkley
Cam O'Shea 59 games under Hinkley
Andrew Moore 36 games under Hinkley
Aaron Young 64 games under Hinkley
Paul Stewart 36 games under Hinkley
Cam Sutcliffe 3 games under Hinkley

A lot of these guys played as stay at home forward or back types who could have easily had their games given to a developing tall without losing a lot of quality. Ultimately, we can either start putting some effort into developing talls by actually playing them at AFL level, or we can lament why we never seem to develop any talls. Every other club puts in the hard yards and gets games into their developing talls. It's a balancing act, yep, and that's the job of the coaches and list managers to sort out when and where we can give these guys runs of games at AFL level. It's not easy, but you can't just put your fingers in your ears for a decade and hope it'll sort itself out.

We've absolutely had opportunities to blood key defenders and rucks and we've decided that we'd rather play established players out of position and kick the player development can down the road. Now we've fallen off a cliff in terms of our ruck options and we're perilously close with our key backs.

 

[Doctor Feel]

The sutcliffe thing...our club is so off its ****ing tree on the smell of its own shit.

 

[philthy05]

I think we've spent a lot of time flat out not caring about development. We've let young talls wither on the vine and played short instead. I used to rant about this a lot during the Butcher threads. A selected list of short, good honest triers with low ceilings who got plenty of games under Hinkley:

Jake Neade 66 games under Hinkley
Kane Mitchell 35 games under Hinkley
Sam Gray 92 games under Hinkley
Nathan Krakouer 29 games under Hinkley
Cam O'Shea 59 games under Hinkley
Andrew Moore 36 games under Hinkley
Aaron Young 64 games under Hinkley
Paul Stewart 36 games under Hinkley
Cam Sutcliffe 3 games under Hinkley

A lot of these guys played as stay at home forward or back types who could have easily had their games given to a developing tall without losing a lot of quality. Ultimately, we can either start putting some effort into developing talls by actually playing them at AFL level, or we can lament why we never seem to develop any talls. Every other club puts in the hard yards and gets games into their developing talls. It's a balancing act, yep, and that's the job of the coaches and list managers to sort out when and where we can give these guys runs of games at AFL level. It's not easy, but you can't just put your fingers in your ears for a decade and hope it'll sort itself out.

We've absolutely had opportunities to blood key defenders and rucks and we've decided that we'd rather play established players out of position and kick the player development can down the road. Now we've fallen off a cliff in terms of our ruck options and we're perilously close with our key backs.

Mcintee - 15 afl games
Mead - 13 afl games
Burgoyne - 10 afl games

We have zero reluctance to give games to developing players under 190cm.

None of those guys were lighting it up at sanfl level before getting picked

Meanwhile pasini can’t get into the side even when one of our talls is in horrid form or goes out the side completely.

 

[TazD]

Gee, suts only played 3 games. Feels like he played 100.

 

[TeeKray]

We actually are playing a young developing ruckman, it's just not the one this board wants played.

 

[Doctor Feel]

We actually are playing a young developing ruckman, it's just not the one this board wants played.

"developing"

 

[TeeKray]

I think we have done a much better job of developing talls in recent years.

Marshall was persisted with through years of average football. Georgiades the same before being dropped earlier this season. We now have a relative abundance of key forwards with Dixon, Marshall, Georgiades and Finlayson to the point where it's actually hard to fit them all in.

We actually did develop a solid ruckman in Ladhams but we inexplicably traded him right after playing him in two prelim teams. That's the decision that has hurt us more than anything.

The key back thing is no big deal. Howard is a borderline spud, Aliir is a far better player. McKenzie lacks height but makes up for it by being excellent in other areas. The trade off with height and skill is real. You don't even need to draft key backs, just turn one of your many failed key forward picks into a defender like most teams do.

 

[Long live PAFC]

I think we have done a much better job of developing talls in recent years.

Marshall was persisted with through years of average football. Georgiades the same before being dropped earlier this season. We now have a relative abundance of key forwards with Dixon, Marshall, Georgiades and Finlayson to the point where it's actually hard to fit them all in.

We actually did develop a solid ruckman in Ladhams but we inexplicably traded him right after playing him in two prelim teams. That's the decision that has hurt us more than anything.

The key back thing is no big deal. Howard is a borderline spud, Aliir is a far better player. McKenzie lacks height but makes up for it by being excellent in other areas. The trade off with height and skill is real. You don't even need to draft key backs, just turn one of your many failed key forward picks into a defender like most teams do.

Agreed. Some of the successful development is overlooked.

It’s all well and good to persist or pump games into talls but they also have to be good, available and fit the structure/team dynamic.

Grundy, Shaw, Redden, Austin, etc - weren’t good enough. No point wasting games on them. Really we haven’t been burned by our traded out or delisted players. You can make arguments for and against Ladhams and Howard.

Stats show that outside the first round, KPFs rarely make it. Hinkley has had Butcher and Marshall through his rein - both given opportunities and one has ‘made it’. That isn’t a bad conversion rate. You could add Schulz and Dixon as ‘early’ picks that came to the club and got better.

KPDs and rucks can be found later.

Games have been given to Butcher, Howard, Ladhams, Marshall, Teakle, Jonas, Clurey, Pettigrew. Redden, Austin, Lord have also got a game or two. I know people would like to give players 100 straight games to see if they have got it but think we have to balance the success and structure of the side.

As to giving smalls wasted games - how do people think we develop midfield and small forward depth? Every team has role players. McEntee isn’t taking the spot of Pasini, Lord, Scully etc.

 

[philthy05]

I think we have done a much better job of developing talls in recent years.

Marshall was persisted with through years of average football. Georgiades the same before being dropped earlier this season. We now have a relative abundance of key forwards with Dixon, Marshall, Georgiades and Finlayson to the point where it's actually hard to fit them all in.

We actually did develop a solid ruckman in Ladhams but we inexplicably traded him right after playing him in two prelim teams. That's the decision that has hurt us more than anything.

The key back thing is no big deal. Howard is a borderline spud, Aliir is a far better player. McKenzie lacks height but makes up for it by being excellent in other areas. The trade off with height and skill is real. You don't even need to draft key backs, just turn one of your many failed key forward picks into a defender like most teams do.

I disagree.

Gave games to Marshall when he was average?

No we didn’t.

At no point have we ever been giving games to Marshall where there was better options available.

If not him, we would have just been giving more games to small players we’ve delisted.

If anything he could and should have had more games under his belt sooner.

As for key defenders how on earth can you not think we’ve ****ed that up?

We’ve sunk so many games into Jonas when he’s cooked and been a total liability, but refuse to blood pasini in the same era we’ve willingly pumped games into guys like Burgoyne mcintee and mead.

 

[Long live PAFC]

I disagree.

Gave games to Marshall when he was average?

No we didn’t.

At no point have we ever been giving games to Marshall where there was better options available.

If not him, we would have just been giving more games to small players we’ve delisted.

If anything he could and should have had more games under his belt sooner.

As for key defenders how on earth can you not think we’ve ****ed that up?

We’ve sunk so many games into Jonas when he’s cooked and been a total liability, but refuse to blood pasini in the same era we’ve willingly pumped games into guys like Burgoyne mcintee and mead.

I reckon Macca (correct me if I’m wrong) looked at Marshall’s games and potential games and basically he has played just about what he could, considering injuries and family concerns. He is also going well, does it matter about an extra 20 games now?

Jonas has been a great defender. He was slowing down last year but has fallen off a cliff this year - could we have predicted it I’m not sure? Pasini was out with an ACL. You said he wasn’t ready last year when I questioned his spot on the list and he has just played his first good game for the season this weekend. Would it have been good experience to throw Pasini into a defence that lacked the experience and support of Alir, McKenze and Jonas? And a side that had an inexperienced ruck in Hayes and no Dixon up front? Every chance he gets slaughtered like Skinner was.

We’ve had a great team defence for several years. Would be great to have a ready to go tall KPD - I reckon I know of about 17 other teams that would be keen on this too. We trialled a number of players Austin, Howard, Skinner and Grundy and we chased Sav. Reckon we have done what we can. Last year was a disaster but the two before that we were top four - you chase the now over getting games into x player who might or might not make it. You play role players to get the win. Reckon Richmond cares that they are hurting now cause they played role players whilst they won flags?

 

[El_Scorcho]

Butcher was certainly not "given opportunities". Never played more than 5 games on the trot, certainly not under Hinkley.

We've definitely gotten better with Marshall and Georgiades to a degree, but it's like they've decided it's less risky to blood a forward because a mistake doesn't hurt us. And look at the fruits of that development! Our first home grown KPF since Tredrea.

Ruck and KPD though? We gave Ladhams a run because he could play as a KPF, and then promptly forced him out. Teakle is getting a run purely because we've ****ed it up so badly that we're in emergency mode. Teakle getting games so unready isn't an example of us developing a ruckman well, it's the results of years of neglect and mismanagement of our ruck stocks. The current situation is laughable.

In terms of KPD, sure, converting KPFs is a perfectly good option, but we haven't done that either. The last KPDs we gave games to who could be even loosely described as developing were Lienert, who is 27 now and not really a KPD, Howard who is 28 and we traded and then Clurey, who is 29. That's flatout neglect.

And it's not like we've had 3 hall of famers back there holding down the spots. Jonas has been solid for most of the last decade. Clurey the same, Hombsch the same. Other clubs manage to do this just fine.

 

[philthy05]

I reckon Macca (correct me if I’m wrong) looked at Marshall’s games and potential games and basically he has played just about what he could, considering injuries and family concerns. He is also going well, does it matter about an extra 20 games now?

Jonas has been a great defender. He was slowing down last year but has fallen off a cliff this year - could we have predicted it I’m not sure? Pasini was out with an ACL. You said he wasn’t ready last year when I questioned his spot on the list and he has just played his first good game for the season this weekend. Would it have been good experience to throw Pasini into a defence that lacked the experience and support of Alir, McKenze and Jonas? And a side that had an inexperienced ruck in Hayes and no Dixon up front? Every chance he gets slaughtered like Skinner was.

We’ve had a great team defence for several years. Would be great to have a ready to go tall KPD - I reckon I know of about 17 other teams that would be keen on this too. We trialled a number of players Austin, Howard, Skinner and Grundy and we chased Sav. Reckon we have done what we can. Last year was a disaster but the two before that we were top four - you chase the now over getting games into x player who might or might not make it. You play role players to get the win. Reckon Richmond cares that they are hurting now cause they played role players whilst they won flags?

1. Macca didn’t go into that much detail as you suggest, he just thought we gave him games early so it wasnt that bad.

Todd didn’t play a full season until 2021, at the same stage of their careers (3rd year) ugle Hagen is on track to play 24 more games in the first 3 years of his career than todd did. Logan MacDonald + 26.

Todd was a talented first round pick kpf, and while he’s first 22 now we were slow to trust him and make him a first 22 player.

In an era we gifted games to smalls in the forward line off shit or no form (neades run of goalless games in the ones lol)

Yes. The general unchallenged consensus is getting games into players and that experience matters.


2. Could we have predicted Jonas falling off a cliff? He’s been well shit for so long now most people can’t remember when the last time he played good football was. What is there to predict? He was shit for the whole of 2022, who needs a crystal ball to know he was going to be shit this season?

I’m not sure what you’re talking about me saying pasini wasn’t ready? I watched every game of his for the magpies and was very vocal that we should be picking him. You’ve got me confused with someone else there.

Also, there was plenty of time to pick him before he did the acl while he was in excellent form, our defenders were floundering in the afl, and we were not remotely close to baulking at giving games to young smalls.

The club has no hesitation to pick young inexperienced small defenders. Burgoyne played last year at a weight of single ply toilet paper.

Inexperience cannot be used as an excuse why we won’t pick young talls with years under their belts when first year smalls are easily breaking into the side.