List Mgmt. List Management 2024-25

[Macca19]

Well Fox Sports has us as big losers for the trade period.

And we are.

These sorts of things are annoying really. For the last 6 weeks we've heard from almost everyone in the media that Houston isn't worth what we were asking. So if he's not worth two first round picks, and we didnt get two first round picks, then how did we lose?

 

[Willsy10]

The Houston trade up against the Rioli trade is plain and simply awful. For 2 comparable players. Same age, same position, similar ability and yet completely different outcomes

However, it appears it was the best deal on offer to us in the end other than growing a pair and making the entitled Dan come back to the club he had signed a long term deal at and was apparently in the leadership group (which is the most laughable and embarrassing part of all of this).

Sounds like we had a good deal brewing with the Dees but Dan changed his mind like his undies and went cold on them and then it just all went to shit from there.

And to make matters worse we failed to pick up any of the free agent targets we were pursuing that would’ve softened the blow.

But it’s not all doom and gloom. I’m very happy we got Luko, time will tell if we overpaid for him but I don’t think it’s too bad especially if we reach the pointy end again. If someone had told me prior to the 2022 trade period we would get JHF and Luko over the next 3 trade periods I would’ve been completely over the moon.

Luko’s stocks seem to have dropped but maybe like JHF he just needs a new environment back home to prosper. I’m confident he will be a good player for us.

Ditto Richards, he was steak knives in the deal but I think he could be very handy for us. I feel like his skill set will work in well for us as we are lacking in that area.

And do we have to keep going on about last years trades? It was obvious at the end of last year that we needed a competent ruck and another KPD. So we tried to fill that void, and traded for two players we thought could help us immediately, which is what we wanted because we had a list capable to contend in 2024. We made a prelim despite soldo and Esava not really working out but I haven’t completely ruled a line through them, they did show enough glimpses to suggest they aren’t complete bust just yet. And the future first we split for them was pick 18 this year, i think at the time it was worth the gamble because we wanted to win a flag in 2024 and we saw those 2 players as helping fill gaps.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Malibu#27]

The Houston trade up against the Rioli trade is plain and simply awful. For 2 comparable players. Same age, same position, similar ability and yet completely different outcomes

The reason was the completely different destinations and the crap afl rules that allow the northern state clubs to treat draft picks like confetti.

 

[MrChow]

We won't know for a couple of seasons. I'm not overly optimistic but it could be a huge gamble to pay off.

For mine:

Turn Lukosius into an elite forward 60+ goals a season, Richards a match winning small. Pick #13 and 29, Dan Houston replacement, and inside bull midfielder.

Only way the club can turn around and say we took a risk and got it right.

Luko would have been done anyway and Richards and Atkins for Future First.

So really its Dan for Pick 13 and 29. If either of these turn into a consistent Top 5 player we win. Purely on the fact Dan probs has 3-5 years to go.

Although if we miss out on winning a flag by a kick in the next 2-3 years, with 13 and 29 doing nothing we lose.

 

[El_Scorcho]

And do we have to keep going on about last years trades? It was obvious at the end of last year that we needed a competent ruck and another KPD. So we tried to fill that void, and traded for two players we thought could help us immediately, which is what we wanted because we had a list capable to contend in 2024. We made a prelim despite soldo and Esava not really working out but I haven’t completely ruled a line through them, they did show enough glimpses to suggest they aren’t complete bust just yet. And the future first we split for them was pick 18 this year, i think at the time it was worth the gamble because we wanted to win a flag in 2024 and we saw those 2 players as helping fill gaps.

We keep going on about it until someone is held accountable.

Was Hinkley's "best list ever" in 2023 good or was it full of holes. If it was good, why isn't Hinkley held accountable for his failures?

If it's full of holes, why is the long term list manager not held accountable for long term mismanagement leading to him have to make a series of unfavourable trades, further weakening our list position

Either way, why is the long term footy dept boss not held accountable for overseeing this mess?

Until the club hold someone accountable there is no closure so it's pretty hard to move past it. I'm sick of this club telling me to forget about past failures as if we don't have a decade long pattern of failure that needs addressing

 

[johnnysix]

The "Sack Cripps" thread is rough. Our list management have clearly gone out there to address needs over time. We've got a ****ing 40 thread "Sack Hinkley" saga, but because we haven't, we now turn the Eye of Sauron on Cripps. I thought he explained it fairly well on FiveAA today elsewhere. Yes, our trades last year put us in this position but also, realistically you can't compare the Rioli deal and others because they're dealing with Clubs who aren't in Melbourne and who don't value the picks right now. The market determines the value. You can judge the decision they've made in going for draft over keeping Dan, but we really can't judge that yet. Just about any other season I think the offers would have been higher, but that is in theory because the picks aren't as valuable.

 

[Willsy10]

We keep going on about it until someone is held accountable.

Was Hinkley's "best list ever" in 2023 good or was it full of holes. If it was good, why isn't Hinkley held accountable for his failures?

If it's full of holes, why is the long term list manager not held accountable for long term mismanagement leading to him have to make a series of unfavourable trades, further weakening our list position

Either way, why is the long term footy dept boss not held accountable for overseeing this mess?

Until the club hold someone accountable there is no closure so it's pretty hard to move past it. I'm sick of this club telling me to forget about past failures as if we don't have a decade long pattern of failure that needs addressing

Our main issues for me are coaching and game plan. Obviously our game plan is good enough to get us to finals in a string position but it just doesn’t stand up in big games.

It is clearly the obvious time for a new direction in coaching and game plan.

Another important thing for me is fitness, conditioning and overall injury management side of things, would be nice to hit a September full of run like we did in 2014 rather than looking cooked.

But I don’t think our list management has been as diabolical as it’s made out to be. I think we’ve definitely got the makings of a premiership squad here.

I think even most premiership squads have gaps, but the gaps became obvious for us at the end of 2023 when there was a clear changing of the guard with all of Jonas, clurey, McKenzie and lycett cooked or retired.

Whilst Esava and Soldo didn’t work out as well as we liked I can understand why they did it as they saw 2024 as a big opportunity for us.




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[cmpower]

He wanted no part of being at Port next year. He has no problem per se with the Club, he just wants to be in Melbourne with his partner.

I have made it clear I believe his stance is pathetic given she is a "client services manager" (codeword for admin office worker) who could do plenty of her job remotely from Adelaide, and there were no extenuating family circumstances that warranted a move on compassionate grounds. They could have easily revisited this trade in 12 months time.

Is Gorilla Grip extenuating?

 

[RangaInTeal]

silly question, can we pay out Atkins? He has one year, so does Williams and Charleson, why not pay out Atkins?

 

[Launchpad McQuack]

He should be banned from working in this industry.

Throw him in jail. RIGHT NOW.

 

[Revan11]

Its the Rioli trade that really pisses me off.

Surely, surely we could've got pick 6 instead of 13 out of gold coast, or 23 instead of 29.

Its should've been two options: 6+29 or 13+23 for Houston.

I think Richmond would've definitely taken 13+23 for Rioli considering their haul.

1, 10, 11, 13, 18, 20, 24, 29 would would've been absolutely fine for them.

Would of left us with 6, 29, 36, 50. Much better.

 

[El_Scorcho]

The "Sack Cripps" thread is rough. Our list management have clearly gone out there to address needs over time. We've got a ****ing 40 thread "Sack Hinkley" saga, but because we haven't, we now turn the Eye of Sauron on Cripps. I thought he explained it fairly well on FiveAA today elsewhere. Yes, our trades last year put us in this position but also, realistically you can't compare the Rioli deal and others because they're dealing with Clubs who aren't in Melbourne and who don't value the picks right now. The market determines the value. You can judge the decision they've made in going for draft over keeping Dan, but we really can't judge that yet. Just about any other season I think the offers would have been higher, but that is in theory because the picks aren't as valuable.

Then just hold him to his contract. Like Geelong did with Tim Kelly and Ratugolea, or Sydney did with Papley.

I'm sorry but we've got some significant list issues due to mismanagement and poor development, especially with talls. Why is the list in a position where we have to agree to bad trades?

I think ultimately Davies should be sacked because he oversees all of this, but of course, he won't be.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Its the Rioli trade that really pisses me off.

Surely, surely we could've got pick 6 instead of 13 out of gold coast, or 23 instead of 29.

Its should've been two options: 6+29 or 13+23 for Houston.

I think Richmond would've definitely taken 13+23 for Rioli considering their haul.

1, 10, 11, 13, 18, 20, 24, 29 would would've been absolutely fine for them.

Would of left us with 6, 29, 36, 50. Much better.

We could have been strong at the start of the trade period and said that we want a top 10 pick and another pick inside 30 and don't even engage with us if you don't have that to offer, we'll keep Dan whether he likes it or not.

Instead, as usual, we showed weakness and accepted a bad deal.

 

[RossFC]

Should we be expecting some delistings + a Boak contract extension next week?