List Mgmt. List Management 2024-25

[RussellEbertHandball]

In a post I responded to someone and said that you can't trade out all of your F1+F2+F3+F4 picks, according to AFL rules unless you trade picks back in.

You have to keep F1 and can trade out the rest, or if you trade out F1 and other picks you have to trade back in another club's F1, or,
If you trade out F1 you have to keep the rest of picks or do trades to get other clubs' F2, F3, F4.


I decided to look Lore's 2025 AFL Provisional Draft Order thread to see who has done what and how they have kept to the rules. She has used the ladder positions at end of 2024 home and away part of the season, to set up the picks over 4 rounds and I have taken the data and arranged it horizontally rather than her vertical table to see who has done what and how the 4 picks line up for all the clubs. See her thread at;

Resource - FUTURE PICKS - 2025 Provisional AFL Draft Order, based on 2024 H&A Ladder

2025 FUTURE PICKS For the 2024 AFL Draft, see here: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/2024-provisional-afl-draft-order.1370742/ This thread is for the 2025 Draft Order. Some of these picks will be traded as future pick trades in the 2024 trade period. Through the trade period I will try...

www.bigfooty.com

5 clubs have traded out their F1 pick are Melbourne, Collingwood, Carlton, Port and Hawthorn. However Hawthorn traded in Carlton's Rd 1 pick so the other 4 clubs have retained their all their F2+F3+F4 picks. Hawthorn out their F2 and traded in Carlton's F2 and they traded out their F3.

Several clubs have traded out some of their F2,F3 and F4 picks but maintained their F1 so they can have gaps and don't have to keep all 4 picks.

So Port wont be able to trade any of their 2025 picks at the Draft, unless they draft in picks first. 14 of the clubs will be able trade out any of their picks first rather than try and get any in.

 

[Launchpad McQuack]

It seems if you're 6 foot and can kick well and play either inside or out, then we can "develop" that into half back flankers, mid or wing but after that, buttkiss.

 

[Windy Cindy]

Sam Weideman?

He’s garbage.. Atkins level garbage

 

[Coobk001]

We don't have any list positions left for someone like DGB.

Fascinating to see what happens with our delistings. Looks like we'll only take 4 picks to the draft, and that's if we basically delist everyone who is uncontracted.

Given it is supposed to be a great draft, we have no first next year and next year is supposed to be crap, it seems crazy to be thinking we will delist so many players next year.

Gotta think there might be some surprise delistings beyond Scully, K Marshall, Evans and Narkle.

 

[Waspy79]

Don't know about the AAs but sure as shit there's no way he's getting 5 weeks again for a shirtfront.

Houston’s self-sabotaging defence of that incident was probably a sign he had mentally checked out already.

 

[philthy05]

jesus we’re gonna cut Scully and Jackson while bringing in ratkins , holding onto mcintee and letting boak add another pointless 20 games onto the end of his career for no reason I can see other than vanity.

 

[Waspy79]

jesus we’re gonna cut Scully and Jackson while bringing in ratkins , holding onto mcintee and letting boak add another pointless 20 games onto the end of his career for no reason I can see other than vanity.

Would you play Lukosius and Marshall in the same forward line?

 

[longdonkey]

Realistically he shouldn't be guaranteed a game at AFL level in 2025. Good man to have around the Club but that's where it pretty much ends at this point.

I think he should start maybe 12 games. Play him in centre square until just after half time and sub him. He can still find the ball but he'll need to be heavily managed.

 

[longdonkey]

Denver Granger barrass has just been delisted from hawks, absolutely worth a look at for us.

if there was ever a guy who'd you love to turn around a 21 year old key defender would be the best. Surely West Coast take him as a DFA.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

jesus we’re gonna cut Scully and Jackson while bringing in ratkins , holding onto mcintee and letting boak add another pointless 20 games onto the end of his career for no reason I can see other than vanity.

Disgraceful

 

[Ford Fairlane]

FEvans goneski according to 7 news.

 

[JakeNeadeFan]

Boak is still a significantly better player than about the bottom 10 players on our list.

He is much, much more useful than Jackson who can barely get on the park let alone put up the performances that 40 year old Boak was offering last year.

Although I'd probably delist Charleson over Jackson, but if it's Jackson I don't care that much. There are a million Hugh Jacksons playing in the CTL or SANFL u18s, most of which can probably get in the park occasionally.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Jackson strikes me as a poor man's Mead, and Mead sucks. No loss if we delist him.

 

[philthy05]

Boak is still a significantly better player than about the bottom 10 players on our list.

He is much, much more useful than Jackson who can barely get on the park let alone put up the performances that 40 year old Boak was offering last year.

Although I'd probably delist Charleson over Jackson, but if it's Jackson I don't care that much. There are a million Hugh Jacksons playing in the CTL or SANFL u18s, most of which can probably get in the park occasionally.

Regardless, what are we getting for taking boak from 370 to 390 games ? What’s the payoff? Warm fuzzy feelings?


We’ve got a limited ability to bring in young talent over the next 2 years after 3 or so years of bringing in a very limited amount of young talent.

Having Ratkins on the list and pumping an extra 20 games into boak and cutting 2 juniors / taking few picks into a supposedly deep draft we were so suddenly desperate to get into …

does that sound like a logical decision?

 

[JakeNeadeFan]

Regardless, what are we getting for taking boak from 370 to 390 games ? What’s the payoff? Warm fuzzy feelings?


We’ve got a limited ability to bring in young talent over the next 2 years after 3 or so years of bringing in a very limited amount of young talent.

Having Ratkins on the list and pumping an extra 20 games into boak and cutting 2 juniors / taking few picks into a supposedly deep draft we were so suddenly desperate to get into …

does that sound like a logical decision?

One year of Ratkins = pick 29. Its actually very simple to understand why that is helpful. Also, Ratkins is taking Narkle spot, not a young player.

The payoff is also pretty simple with Boak. We have like three wings on our list, and one of them is 19. He will play games next year.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Our young players would look a lot better if they were allowed in the gym.

 

[all seeing eye]

Jackson strikes me as a poor man's Mead, and Mead sucks. No loss if we delist him.

Disagree strongly, kid has x factor, unfortunately injury ridden. Would of loved to see him get a chance.

 

[longdonkey]

Regardless, what are we getting for taking boak from 370 to 390 games ? What’s the payoff? Warm fuzzy feelings?


We’ve got a limited ability to bring in young talent over the next 2 years after 3 or so years of bringing in a very limited amount of young talent.

Having Ratkins on the list and pumping an extra 20 games into boak and cutting 2 juniors / taking few picks into a supposedly deep draft we were so suddenly desperate to get into …

does that sound like a logical decision?

I'd love to hear his reasoning for going on. I still think he's in out best 25 but you'd think he might have the self-awareness to move into coaching. Because from the outside it looks like he's putting himself ahead of the team.

I don't think its great for culture but he's probably encouraged to play on by Stinkers.

 

[Launchpad McQuack]

I'm going to put you on ignore now because 1) I understand a helluva lot more about the intricacies of the situation than you, and 2) I'm sick of you arguing about the same bloody viewpoints just from a tiny different angle.

We are oil and water on this and that is perfectly ok. Go and argue with someone who actually gives a shit.

 

[philthy05]

Also people are watching boak with rose coloured glasses. Peak boak was great.

Boak of last year really has no to minimal difference to guys like narkle.

He basically cleared the “you must be this good to get a game for a team with questionable depth helped by the fact Hinkley won’t drop him to debut youth” bar by a whisker last year.

If Boak had been taken on as a dfa last year, there isn’t a single , single person in their right mind who would advocate to keep him on the list.



Eh, so he’s going around again. There’s worse things happening I guess. But gee, I’m not sure how anyone thinks it’s really a sound decision.

As I’ve said already, what is to be gained by taking boak from 370 to 390 games next year?


Forget even about the list spot we can’t use in a draft we’re supposedly keen on and don’t have enough list spots to take anything remotely close to our draft picks and f/s and ngas available…

Who in their right mind with all evidence at hand trusts Hinkley to be impartial and select boak on merit? How did that work with Dixon and lycett?

There’s a fair risk Lorenz gets overlooked for games next year, and the development we could be getting into him cause we’re giving boak a year long farewell tour.

 

[JUSTWORK]

Houston’s self-sabotaging defence of that incident was probably a sign he had mentally checked out already.

It wouldn't have been Houstons defence, the club and its lawyer would have been entirely responsible.

 

[all seeing eye]

I'd love to hear his reasoning for going on. I still think he's in out best 25 but you'd think he might have the self-awareness to move into coaching. Because from the outside it looks like he's putting himself ahead of the team.

I don't think its great for culture but he's probably encouraged to play on by Stinkers.

Are we saying the same for Pendlebury, or Sidebottom etc. He has earned the right to call his time.

 

[philthy05]

One year of Ratkins = pick 29. Its actually very simple to understand why that is helpful. Also, Ratkins is taking Narkle spot, not a young player.

The payoff is also pretty simple with Boak. We have like three wings on our list, and one of them is 19. He will play games next year.

What?

You have no evidence that we got pick 29 to take ratkins on, and even if true, that just makes an insanely pissweak trade even worse.

Ratkins isn’t taking narkles spot. Narkkes was getting delisted anyway. He was never offered a contract and he never would have been.

It’s one less draft pick we can take or the delisting of a junior we might of held onto.

im also unsure why our fan base is so scared of having to play developing players and where this idea comes from that teams around the league manage to birth 22-30 afl ready players into existence and not, you know, just give games to developing players…




Besides, if we gave less games to boak last year (or any other soon to be finished player ahem mcintee) and more to developing players we would have achieved the exact amount of success as we did anyway. Which is zero.

 

[RangaInTeal]

Jackson strikes me as a poor man's Mead, and Mead sucks. No loss if we delist him.

Yeah, nahhhh…

His movement through traffic is Elite!

 

[JakeNeadeFan]

What?

You have no evidence that we got pick 29 to take ratkins on, and even if true, that just makes an insanely pissweak trade even worse.

Ratkins isn’t taking narkles spot. Narkkes was getting delisted anyway. He was never offered a contract and he never would have been.

It’s one less draft pick we can take or the delisting of a junior we might of held onto.

im also unsure why our fan base is so scared of having to play developing players and where this idea comes from that teams around the league manage to birth 22-30 afl ready players into existence and not, you know, just give games to developing players…




Besides, if we gave less games to boak last year (or any other soon to be finished player ahem mcintee) and more to developing players we would have achieved the exact amount of success as we did anyway. Which is zero.

Just about everyone who has any information on this trade has said taking on Ratkins salary netted us 29.

Do you really think we got him for his footballing ability? Christ