Strategy List management approach and philosophy

[Johnny Cattery]

Are we approaching “The Cliff”? 2021 updated version. View the 2017 version here.

First a definitional issue – what is The Cliff? I’d say it’s where your list gets to a point that it’s clear that you can’t win a flag with the core of your current group and you have to make a fairly sudden change in approach to your list management approach by building from the bottom-up. It also involves the gap in talent between you and the contenders being so great that the only way to bridge it is through a sustained period of access to high end draft talent and natural improvement in draftees over a longer time horizon. Plugging gaps with imported players will not be sufficient.

A good start to assess if we are headed that way is to look at our best 25 players and see how many of them will be retired in 3-4 years’ time (as distinct from those that are traded because you at least get a return on them). In 2017 I started with a conservative assumption that anyone 27 years old or over now will not be here in four years’ time (to play season 2021). That was evidently far too conservative as we have Hawkins, Selwood, Henderson and Tuohy all still playing. It looks more realistic to say anyone over 29 will be gone by season 2026.

From our best 25 in 2017 we have lost:

Lonergan, Tom 32
Mackie, Andrew 32
Taylor, Harry 30
Smith, Zac 27
Motlop, Steven 26
Selwood, Scott 26
Menzel, Daniel 25
Murdoch, Jordan 24

So that was eight players. To re-cap, between 2013 and 2017 we lost ten from our best 25:

Steve Johnson
Jimmy Bartel
James Kelly
Mathew Stokes
Corey Enright
Paul Chapman
Joel Corey
James Podsiadly
Josh Hunt
Jared Rivers

For 2021 let’s work with:

Shaun Higgins 33
Joel Selwood 32
Tom Hawkins 32
Isaac Smith 32
Josh Jenkins 32
Zach Tuohy 31
Lachie Henderson 31
Patrick Dangerfield 31
Rhys Stanley 30
Mark Blicavs 30
Gary Rohan 29
Mitch Duncan 29
Sam Menegola 29
Cameron Guthrie 28
Luke Dahlhaus 28
Tom Stewart 28
Jeremy Cameron 28
Darcy Fort 27
Jed Bews 27
Jake Kolodjashnij 25
Tom Atkins 25
Mark O'Connor 24
Quinton Narkle 23
Brandan Parfitt 22
Sam Simpson 22
Zach Guthrie 22
Esava Ratugolea 22
Brad Close 22
Stefan Okunbor 22
Jack Henry 22
Gryan Miers 22
Charlie Constable 21
Nathan Kreuger 21
Oscar Brownless 21
Ben Jarvis 20
Jordan Clark 20
Cooper Stephens 20
Sam De Koning 20
Cameron Taheny 19
Francis Evans 19
Nick Stevens 19
Paul Tsapatolis 18
Shannon Neale 18
Max Holmes 18

That’s 12 best 25 players we look like losing just to retirement. You could make the case that Dahlhaus is in the best 25 and will also be gone. In any case it is a big number and bigger than the previous two cohorts I have looked at using this approach. The question is, can we avoid ‘the cliff’ with such a big hit to come?

Let’s first retrace our steps.

We replaced the ten players from the 2013 best 25 with:

Henderson (pick 17 2016)
Smith (picks 49 and 53)
Tuohy (2017 first round pick and pick 63 with Carlton’s 2017 second round pick coming back to us)
Dangerfield (picks 9 2015, 28 and Dean Gore)
Scott Selwood (free agent)
Rhys Stanley (pick 21 traded for Christensen)
Sam Menegola (drafted with pick 66)
James Parsons (drafted with pick 27 rookie draft)
Jake Kolodjashnij (drafted with pick 41)
Darcy Lang (drafted with pick 16 2013)
Nakia Cockatoo (drafted with pick 10 2014)

In summary this took six first round picks, one second round pick, a bunch of later picks, a rookie pick and a free agent. We managed to “use” six first round picks in that time because we got an extra through Christensen and we used a future pick to get Tuohy.

Then between 2017 and 2021 we replaced the eight we lost from the best 25 with:

Miers (pick 57)
Rohan (traded for pick 61)
Dahlhaus (UFA)
Atkins (rookie pick 11)
Close (rookie pick 14)
Cameron (picks 13, 15, 20 and R4 2021 with two 2021 R2 picks coming back)
Higgins (pick 30)
Smith (UFA)
Holmes (pick 20)

[Note: during this period we also welcomed and farewelled Ablett and Kelly which I will ignore for current purposes as it doesn’t affect the broader discussion]

Again, to summarise, to replace eight players we used four first round picks, a second round pick, a bunch of later picks and rookie picks and two UFAs.

What the above demonstrates is that replacing 8-10 or so of your best 25 players in a four year period and to remain a top four team in doing so is entirely possible. This is because you get replenished with access to picks each year and the trade and free agent pools. Over this eight year period we are still in ‘deficit’ for one R1 pick that we have used on Holmes but we are ahead with the two extra R2s we will have this November.

The bottom line is: replacing 8-10 is possible but is replacing 13-14 in four years possible?

In the next four player movement periods we will have three R1s, six R2s, four R3s, three R4s plus rookie selections and FA opportunities.

Some will say that the quality we are about to lose in this four year period is an insurmountable challenge. In particular Hawkins, Selwood and Dangerfield are generational players. But there are counterpoints two this. The players we lost after 2013 were also of that calibre: Johnson, Chapman, Enright, Bartel and Corey. It was arguably a bigger hit. The other counterpoint is the salary cap impact of losing good players. The salary cap is like Newton’s Third Law: each player lost frees up an equivalent amount of salary cap space to be filled by a player of equal ability (if you can attract them!). The club will seek to fill the voids left by these great players with players of equivalent quality. The free agency market makes this more possible than ever. It makes no logical sense to say that you can’t replace Selwood in football quality terms (leadership, fabric of the club, etc. a different matter).

Then there is the question about whether we have the younger cohort now that can step into the middle aged cohort. Four years ago I was very dubious that we would find 5-6 AFL standard players from Buzza, House, Kolodjashnij, Lang, Cockatoo, Cunico, Gregson, Hayball, O'Connor, Gardner, Narkle, Parsons, Z.Guthrie, Henry, Jones, Parfitt, Ratugolea and Simpson. It turns out we did pretty well there. So can we find another 5-6 from:

Charlie Constable 21
Nathan Kreuger 21
Oscar Brownless 21
Jordan Clark 20
Cooper Stephens 20
Sam De Koning 20
Francis Evans 19
Nick Stevens 19
Paul Tsapatolis 18
Shannon Neale 18
Max Holmes 18

There would have to be significant doubt there. We have thinned out this part of our list in recent years and now really need this smaller crop to come through for us.

Overall, I certainly see the challenge ahead as the biggest we have faced in the Scott era of list management so I don’t expect to stop hearing about the inevitable cliff that awaits us. I am, however, more open minded to other possibilities than others.

Come on Mods, there has to be a Doctor of Football degree awarded for that ... or at least a Masters

 

[Partridge]

No one could predict in 2013 and 2017 all the incoming ready made players that we would get.

geelong had struggled to attract players to swap clubs historically. Plus free agency was new and trading future draft picks was not even a thing. It was a reasonable assumption. But the outlier scenario happened.

but we literally have no draft picks left to trade. We are done unless they change the trading rules again. Plus we have far more over 30s now then we did in 2013 and 2017.

There's an interesting query - how many 30+ players did we have in 2013, in 2017, and now?

I know that Grand final day in 2007 we had ONE. Darren Milburn. Melbourne had only one this year. Hmm.

 

[Warhorse]

No one could predict in 2013 and 2017 all the incoming ready made players that we would get.

geelong had struggled to attract players to swap clubs historically. Plus free agency was new and trading future draft picks was not even a thing. It was a reasonable assumption. But the outlier scenario happened.

but we literally have no draft picks left to trade. We are done unless they change the trading rules again. Plus we have far more over 30s now then we did in 2013 and 2017.

Problem is when players do want to come here we overpay. We somehow manage to throw away draft picks on free agents.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Problem is when players do want to come here we overpay. We somehow manage to throw away draft picks on free agents.

Yes and no.

We are forced to pay with picks because clubs are able to match our financial offers. We don’t alter our relatively flat wage structure for recruits.

So we under pay in salary relative to other clubs with FA but give up draft picks, which many clubs overvalue.

 

[Seeds]

There's an interesting query - how many 30+ players did we have in 2013, in 2017, and now?

I know that Grand final day in 2007 we had ONE. Darren Milburn. Melbourne had only one this year. Hmm.

at the end of the 2013 season we had 4 on the entire list. hunt, corey, p. Chapman, s.johnson.

Well well below what we have now.


and only one of them stayed on for the 2014 season. That was johnson who had only turned 30 three months before the end of the season and was close to the best player in the league that year.

 

[Johnny Cattery]

I

Are we approaching “The Cliff”? 2021 updated version. View the 2017 version here.

First a definitional issue – what is The Cliff? I’d say it’s where your list gets to a point that it’s clear that you can’t win a flag with the core of your current group and you have to make a fairly sudden change in approach to your list management approach by building from the bottom-up. It also involves the gap in talent between you and the contenders being so great that the only way to bridge it is through a sustained period of access to high end draft talent and natural improvement in draftees over a longer time horizon. Plugging gaps with imported players will not be sufficient.

A good start to assess if we are headed that way is to look at our best 25 players and see how many of them will be retired in 3-4 years’ time (as distinct from those that are traded because you at least get a return on them). In 2017 I started with a conservative assumption that anyone 27 years old or over now will not be here in four years’ time (to play season 2021). That was evidently far too conservative as we have Hawkins, Selwood, Henderson and Tuohy all still playing. It looks more realistic to say anyone over 29 will be gone by season 2026.

From our best 25 in 2017 we have lost:

Lonergan, Tom 32
Mackie, Andrew 32
Taylor, Harry 30
Smith, Zac 27
Motlop, Steven 26
Selwood, Scott 26
Menzel, Daniel 25
Murdoch, Jordan 24

So that was eight players. To re-cap, between 2013 and 2017 we lost ten from our best 25:

Steve Johnson
Jimmy Bartel
James Kelly
Mathew Stokes
Corey Enright
Paul Chapman
Joel Corey
James Podsiadly
Josh Hunt
Jared Rivers

For 2021 let’s work with:

Shaun Higgins 33
Joel Selwood 32
Tom Hawkins 32
Isaac Smith 32
Josh Jenkins 32
Zach Tuohy 31
Lachie Henderson 31
Patrick Dangerfield 31
Rhys Stanley 30
Mark Blicavs 30
Gary Rohan 29
Mitch Duncan 29
Sam Menegola 29
Cameron Guthrie 28
Luke Dahlhaus 28
Tom Stewart 28
Jeremy Cameron 28
Darcy Fort 27
Jed Bews 27
Jake Kolodjashnij 25
Tom Atkins 25
Mark O'Connor 24
Quinton Narkle 23
Brandan Parfitt 22
Sam Simpson 22
Zach Guthrie 22
Esava Ratugolea 22
Brad Close 22
Stefan Okunbor 22
Jack Henry 22
Gryan Miers 22
Charlie Constable 21
Nathan Kreuger 21
Oscar Brownless 21
Ben Jarvis 20
Jordan Clark 20
Cooper Stephens 20
Sam De Koning 20
Cameron Taheny 19
Francis Evans 19
Nick Stevens 19
Paul Tsapatolis 18
Shannon Neale 18
Max Holmes 18

That’s 12 best 25 players we look like losing just to retirement. You could make the case that Dahlhaus is in the best 25 and will also be gone. In any case it is a big number and bigger than the previous two cohorts I have looked at using this approach. The question is, can we avoid ‘the cliff’ with such a big hit to come?

Let’s first retrace our steps.

We replaced the ten players from the 2013 best 25 with:

Henderson (pick 17 2016)
Smith (picks 49 and 53)
Tuohy (2017 first round pick and pick 63 with Carlton’s 2017 second round pick coming back to us)
Dangerfield (picks 9 2015, 28 and Dean Gore)
Scott Selwood (free agent)
Rhys Stanley (pick 21 traded for Christensen)
Sam Menegola (drafted with pick 66)
James Parsons (drafted with pick 27 rookie draft)
Jake Kolodjashnij (drafted with pick 41)
Darcy Lang (drafted with pick 16 2013)
Nakia Cockatoo (drafted with pick 10 2014)

In summary this took six first round picks, one second round pick, a bunch of later picks, a rookie pick and a free agent. We managed to “use” six first round picks in that time because we got an extra through Christensen and we used a future pick to get Tuohy.

Then between 2017 and 2021 we replaced the eight we lost from the best 25 with:

Miers (pick 57)
Rohan (traded for pick 61)
Dahlhaus (UFA)
Atkins (rookie pick 11)
Close (rookie pick 14)
Cameron (picks 13, 15, 20 and R4 2021 with two 2021 R2 picks coming back)
Higgins (pick 30)
Smith (UFA)
Holmes (pick 20)

[Note: during this period we also welcomed and farewelled Ablett and Kelly which I will ignore for current purposes as it doesn’t affect the broader discussion]

Again, to summarise, to replace eight players we used four first round picks, a second round pick, a bunch of later picks and rookie picks and two UFAs.

What the above demonstrates is that replacing 8-10 or so of your best 25 players in a four year period and to remain a top four team in doing so is entirely possible. This is because you get replenished with access to picks each year and the trade and free agent pools. Over this eight year period we are still in ‘deficit’ for one R1 pick that we have used on Holmes but we are ahead with the two extra R2s we will have this November.

The bottom line is: replacing 8-10 is possible but is replacing 13-14 in four years possible?

In the next four player movement periods we will have three R1s, six R2s, four R3s, three R4s plus rookie selections and FA opportunities.

Some will say that the quality we are about to lose in this four year period is an insurmountable challenge. In particular Hawkins, Selwood and Dangerfield are generational players. But there are counterpoints two this. The players we lost after 2013 were also of that calibre: Johnson, Chapman, Enright, Bartel and Corey. It was arguably a bigger hit. The other counterpoint is the salary cap impact of losing good players. The salary cap is like Newton’s Third Law: each player lost frees up an equivalent amount of salary cap space to be filled by a player of equal ability (if you can attract them!). The club will seek to fill the voids left by these great players with players of equivalent quality. The free agency market makes this more possible than ever. It makes no logical sense to say that you can’t replace Selwood in football quality terms (leadership, fabric of the club, etc. a different matter).

Then there is the question about whether we have the younger cohort now that can step into the middle aged cohort. Four years ago I was very dubious that we would find 5-6 AFL standard players from Buzza, House, Kolodjashnij, Lang, Cockatoo, Cunico, Gregson, Hayball, O'Connor, Gardner, Narkle, Parsons, Z.Guthrie, Henry, Jones, Parfitt, Ratugolea and Simpson. It turns out we did pretty well there. So can we find another 5-6 from:

Charlie Constable 21
Nathan Kreuger 21
Oscar Brownless 21
Jordan Clark 20
Cooper Stephens 20
Sam De Koning 20
Francis Evans 19
Nick Stevens 19
Paul Tsapatolis 18
Shannon Neale 18
Max Holmes 18

There would have to be significant doubt there. We have thinned out this part of our list in recent years and now really need this smaller crop to come through for us.

Overall, I certainly see the challenge ahead as the biggest we have faced in the Scott era of list management so I don’t expect to stop hearing about the inevitable cliff that awaits us. I am, however, more open minded to other possibilities than others.

In a way the really striking difference that this brilliant analysis has brought out is that in 2017 we had 18 younger players to choose from (and in a way you could put Tom Stewart in there as a 2016 draftee), from whom we got 8 first level players, a hit rate close to 50%, whereas this time around we only have eleven in that young group, from whom we need more like 80% to come through. And if Kreuger, Constable and Clark all go, then that figure jumps to 100%, which isn't happening.

it does suggest two things: that whilst we desperately need quality young mids, we should also be trying to get a large draft cohort this year (2016 is the dream result) to strengthen that group. I guess it will come down to the club's assessment of whether, in each case of Ckark, Kreuger and Constable, they are better off with the pick or the player.

My concern is that if we don't bite the youth bullet now, which is to say take as many draftees as possible (which doesn't preclude over age players, with whom we have been phenomenally successful) then our options get more and more squeezed towards the UFA/ topup model over the next three years. But the topup model itself has only had about a 50% success rate.

abaove all, thank you for the work that let's me think about this mathematically and not with my guesses. even so, somewhere in there I do think the level of our dependence on mature age recruitment has a teaspoon of Ponzi in it ...

 

[catempire]

I

In a way the really striking difference that this brilliant analysis has brought out is that in 2017 we had 18 younger players to choose from (and in a way you could put Tom Stewart in there as a 2016 draftee), from whom we got 8 first level players, a hit rate close to 50%, whereas this time around we only have eleven in that young group, from whom we need more like 80% to come through. And if Kreuger, Constable and Clark all go, then that figure jumps to 100%, which isn't happening.

it does suggest two things: that whilst we desperately need quality young mids, we should also be trying to get a large draft cohort this year (2016 is the dream result) to strengthen that group. I guess it will come down to the club's assessment of whether, in each case of Ckark, Kreuger and Constable, they are better off with the pick or the player.

My concern is that if we don't bite the youth bullet now, which is to say take as many draftees as possible (which doesn't preclude over age players, with whom we have been phenomenally successful) then our options get more and more squeezed towards the UFA/ topup model over the next three years. But the topup model itself has only had about a 50% success rate.

abaove all, thank you for the work that let's me think about this mathematically and not with my guesses. even so, somewhere in there I do think the level of our dependence on mature age recruitment has a teaspoon of Ponzi in it ...

Some good points. Reminds me of another post on a similar topic about list age profile from a couple of years back. At that point I was worried about our mid aged cohort. Now the gap is in the younger end.

Ask the average Joe and even some thoughtful in-the-know Geelong followers what the biggest challenge is for Geelong’s list into the future and you’ll get a fairly consistent answer along the lines that it’s how we deal with a very old list.

It’s true that, on average, Geelong has a fairly old list – the 5th oldest behind Hawthorn, Adelaide, Collingwood and West Coast.

But dig a bit deeper and you see that, much like the list of 4-5 years ago, there’s age-profile skew on Geelong’s list but not in the way you might think. Geelong has only four players aged 30+ on its list which is as per the league median and average. When you look at Hawthorn, Adelaide and Sydney they have far bigger problems than Geelong on this front.

Number of 30+ players on list:

Hawthorn	10​
Collingwood	8​
Adelaide	7​
Sydney	7​
Carlton	5​
West Coast	5​
Western Bulldogs	5​
Brisbane	4​
Essendon	4​
Geelong	4​
GWS Giants	4​
North Melbourne	4​
Port Adelaide	4​
Richmond	4​
St Kilda	4​
Fremantle	3​
Gold Coast	3​
Melbourne	3​
	​

Dig a little further and you see that Geelong’s high average age is driven by its large number of 26-29 year olds – here we rank equal first. We know from history that having a large number of players in this bracket is positively correlated with winning the flag. It is unambiguously a good thing in terms of the near future.

Geelong	15​
North Melbourne	15​
Richmond	14​
Collingwood	13​
West Coast	13​
Essendon	13​
Port Adelaide	13​
Fremantle	13​
Adelaide	12​
GWS Giants	12​
Hawthorn	10​
St Kilda	10​
Gold Coast	10​
Melbourne	10​
Sydney	9​
Brisbane	9​
Western Bulldogs	8​
Carlton	7​

So this might lead one to conclude that Geelong has been sacrificing youth in order to develop that 26-29 year old bracket. First, let’s look at the 18-21 year old bracket. Geelong actually ranks equal 4th having well above the league average and median number of players in this age bracket. There is absolutely no shortage of players in this category for Geelong.

Carlton	20​
Gold Coast	19​
Sydney	19​
Geelong	18​
Port Adelaide	18​
Fremantle	18​
Brisbane	18​
Hawthorn	17​
North Melbourne	16​
GWS Giants	16​
Richmond	15​
West Coast	15​
Collingwood	13​
Western Bulldogs	13​
Essendon	12​
Adelaide	12​
St Kilda	10​
Melbourne	10​

That leaves the final cohort and this is where things look worrying for Geelong. This group – 22 to 25 year olds – are the players on your list that are starting to come into their own and, if things work out, will become the players that form the core of your next premiership when they move into the 26-29 year bracket. Geelong ranks dead last.

St Kilda	24​
Melbourne	24​
Western Bulldogs	19​
Essendon	18​
Gold Coast	16​
Carlton	15​
Brisbane	15​
Sydney	14​
GWS Giants	14​
Collingwood	13​
Adelaide	13​
Richmond	13​
West Coast	12​
Port Adelaide	12​
Fremantle	12​
North Melbourne	11​
Hawthorn	10​
Geelong	9​

What has happened to put Geelong in this position? The players in this cohort are from the drafts of 2011-2014. Geelong has lost from that era: Hamling, Kersten, Murdoch, McCarthy, Thurlow, Hartman, Lang, Jansen and Gregson. You quickly see that the failure to develop/hang on to these players has led to a huge gap in Geelong’s list. It was a dire era of recruitment for Geelong that will leave a mark for some time yet. There was also a failure with mature players during this era, but not to the extent you might think: McIntosh (pick 38, 2012), Clark (for Varcoe) and Stanley (for pick 18, 2014) were at least arguably at the cost of a player who might now be a 22-25 year old on our list had we gone in a different direction.

What is the upshot of all of this? Well, for all the calls to ‘hit the draft’ and focus on youth I think there’s a strong chance you will see Geelong target players with some experience both through the draft (in continuing a pattern of recruiting mature agers) and through trades focusing on players with AFL experience aged 22-25.

 

[Sticksman]

This one?

GO Catters

anyone under 30 will have no clue

GO Catters

Hey Daz, maybe we should get our boys to train while wearing gumboots.

 

[Partridge]

My concern is that if we don't bite the youth bullet now, which is to say take as many draftees as possible (which doesn't preclude over age players, with whom we have been phenomenally successful) then our options get more and more squeezed towards the UFA/ topup model over the next three years. But the topup model itself has only had about a 50% success rate.

Have we, how?

 

[Partridge]

Hey Daz, maybe we should get our boys to train while wearing gumboots.

Couldn't kick any worse. Not in a final anyway.

 

[Johnny Cattery]

Have we, how?

I had in mind Taylor, Kelly and Stewart ...

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Yes and no.

We are forced to pay with picks because clubs are able to match our financial offers. We don’t alter our relatively flat wage structure for recruits.

So we under pay in salary relative to other clubs with FA but give up draft picks, which many clubs overvalue.

Maybe the wage structure needs to be re-evaluated then. Seems we over-pay average players and under-pay our stars. Not just for helping getting deals done at trade time, I could also see this becoming a problem once we are not a regular finals contender.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Maybe the wage structure needs to be re-evaluated then. Seems we over-pay average players and under-pay our stars. Not just for helping getting deals done at trade time, I could also see this becoming a problem once we are not a regular finals contender.

When you are a top 4 list you tend to have cap issues so you would rather overpay in picks if it means paying someone less salary whereas when you are a non top 8 club you have more cap space and your draft picks are more valuable so you have the room to overpay guys in salary to get them out as FA without trading picks.

We will soon find out as i expect us to clear up to 2 mil cap space in trades and retirements next year (as we did in 2015) so we will likely target RFAs..whether we offer them higher wages than we normally have to avoid trading for them we will see.

 

[TheYid]

Then there is the question about whether we have the younger cohort now that can step into the middle aged cohort. Four years ago I was very dubious that we would find 5-6 AFL standard players from Buzza, House, Kolodjashnij, Lang, Cockatoo, Cunico, Gregson, Hayball, O'Connor, Gardner, Narkle, Parsons, Z.Guthrie, Henry, Jones, Parfitt, Ratugolea and Simpson. It turns out we did pretty well there. So can we find another 5-6 from:

Charlie Constable 21
Nathan Kreuger 21
Oscar Brownless 21
Jordan Clark 20
Cooper Stephens 20
Sam De Koning 20
Francis Evans 19
Nick Stevens 19
Paul Tsapatolis 18
Shannon Neale 18
Max Holmes 18

Winning post...and you are correct about this part.

The puzzle gets tougher as we don't really have much of a handle on these guys- with two shortened VFL seasons, they have been starved of game time and opportunity- and especially development.

We know nothing about Cooper Stephens. Is he the next perpetually injured "could have been a champ" player like Cockatoo?
We look like letting Kreuger go, which is a shame considering we have no other up and coming guys to play down back, replacing Hendo.
Not too mention Clarke as trade bait too.
We know nothing about Paul Tsapatolis either.
Neale looks like a gun- but has he had any opportunity to gain experience?
Will Brownless and Okunbor, who both showed real improvement and promise in the VFL this year, get their bodies right and even get a game?

I'd say it's ok to be optimistic, but I hate to say that none of those in the list above look set to really boost the team forward this year. I hope I'm wrong.

 

[bellpark]

Winning post...and you are correct about this part.

The puzzle gets tougher as we don't really have much of a handle on these guys- with two shortened VFL seasons, they have been starved of game time and opportunity- and especially development.

We know nothing about Cooper Stephens. Is he the next perpetually injured "could have been a champ" player like Cockatoo?
We look like letting Kreuger go, which is a shame considering we have no other up and coming guys to play down back, replacing Hendo.
Not too mention Clarke as trade bait too.
We know nothing about Paul Tsapatolis either.
Neale looks like a gun- but has he had any opportunity to gain experience?
Will Brownless and Okunbor, who both showed real improvement and promise in the VFL this year, get their bodies right and even get a game?

I'd say it's ok to be optimistic, but I hate to say that none of those in the list above look set to really boost the team forward this year. I hope I'm wrong.

Not to mention Jermaine Jones who we cut 2 years ago at 19 years of age and now at 22 and after a breakout year he has been offered a new contract ( 2 years I think) at West Coast. We did our standard approach to most young players and played him in and out of the ones for a while then went off him and cut him. Sound like Counstable, Clarke, Krueger, Evans ? When will our club understand not all good AFL players go straight into the ones and stay there - it’s not what usually happens. Darcy Parish for example ?

 

[cats_09]

Not to mention Jermaine Jones who we cut 2 years ago at 19 years of age and now at 22 and after a breakout year he has been offered a new contract ( 2 years I think) at West Coast. We did our standard approach to most young players and played him in and out of the ones for a while then went off him and cut him. Sound like Counstable, Clarke, Krueger, Evans ? When will our club understand not all good AFL players go straight into the ones and stay there - it’s not what usually happens. Darcy Parish for example ?

That's the thing about list management, you can't keep all the players and sometimes you have to cut a youngster. As for our "standard approach to most youngsters", I'd say more often than not they are backed in but it's also fair to expect them to perform at a certain level when given the chance

Jones spent 3 years on our rookie list and was delisted after 7 senior matches, all played in his 2nd year - including 2 blocks of 3 games and he kicked a total of 4 goals. He wasn't favoured in his 3rd season with the club preferring Ablett & Miers as our predominant small forwards in 2019, and both went at over a goal a game - Ablett 1.42 & Miers 1.12

Jones was only picked up by the Eagles as a supplementary selection ahead of the 2020 season and played a total of 14 games in his 2 seasons there - if he signs a new contract with WCE, well done to him and good luck at WCE

As for comparing with the others - Clark was a lock in our 22 back in 2019 prior to his elbow injury and he really hasn't recaptured that form. Subsequent to the elbow injury he's also dealt with a dislocated shoulder & an AC injury this year - that doesn't excuse the fact he hasn't really demanded selection across the past couple of seasons

Evans lost his spot in the seniors this year due to injury and the interruptions to the VFL season wouldn't have helped with his return and push for a recall. For the duration of Miers missing from the seniors, Evans had a total of 1 VFL match in his own return from injury - not exactly a helpful situation to push for selection

Kreuger needs a clean run from injury and show form to warrant selection - hard to pick a guys who's spent more time with the medical staff than on the field this year

Constable you could possible argue has been hard done by, but the fact that for the 3rd trade period in a row he's looking his options and that for the 3rd trade period it's basically crickets for external interest, maybe it's a sign that he's just not that good

Youngster need to stay fit to start with, and if they show themselves as warranting selection, they'll get their chances