List Mgmt. List Management Discussion for 2022

[Dewyyyyy]

I do get that and not trying to be harsh (also noting that again, these are large generalisations given you can't classify performance and potential into only 3 tiers) - however, Gunston has now played only 12 of the last 37 matches, his back issues worry me, and he will be 31 come the start of next year.

Put that all together and I think there's enough there to say there's a bit of risk there, and I would put it 'in the realms' of Wingard (again - not saying it's equal, but don't think they are worlds apart).

His back issues don't worry me, his injuries since do. Which are different and again, just simply unlucky.

Not sure about his goal kicking, no doubt he'd be working hard on getting back to where he was (as an elite setshot) because kicking in general play around goals he's still very good and he's still a very good field kick.

 

[HappyHawk_1]

His back issues don't worry me, his injuries since do. Which are different and again, just simply unlucky.

Not sure about his goal kicking, no doubt he'd be working hard on getting back to where he was (as an elite setshot) because kicking in general play around goals he's still very good and he's still a very good field kick.

Well - at least we can agree that he's got a few injury issues and has been down on previous years. His goalkicking though arguably hasn't been at that elite level since 2018, noting that since 2018, his best result was 31.21 (i.e. 59.6% assuming no out of bounds).

But let's hope he proves us wrong, pics up his form, and doesn't get any more injuries.

P.S. I rate Gunners and he has put in some really good performances, but we need to be practical about where our players/list are - but I wouldn't put him in the category of Morrison, Frost, Scrimshaw etc. in terms of the combination of their performance and the potential upside/extra contributions they can provide to our team.

 

[Dewyyyyy]

Well - at least we can agree that he's got a few injury issues and has been down on previous years. His goalkicking though arguably hasn't been at that elite level since 2018, noting that since 2018, his best result was 31.21 (i.e. 59.6% assuming no out of bounds).

But let's hope he proves us wrong, pics up his form, and doesn't get any more injuries.

P.S. I rate Gunners and he has put in some really good performances, but we need to be practical about where our players/list are - but I wouldn't put him in the category of Morrison, Frost, Scrimshaw etc. in terms of the combination of their performance and the potential upside/extra contributions they can provide to our team.

I don't rate Frost as highly perhaps, tho he hasn't been in his best spot. But again i'd prefer to play DGB, Sicily and Blanck.

But yeah, understandable. I'd honestly rate Scrim higher than you had because his talent is immense.

I rate Titch highly so i'd probably put him up one, but that'd be purely out of how much i value those types of players, compared to many others.

Gunston's general goal kicking (just not setshots inside 50) has been very good most years, his setshots have been down for a while which needs to improve. His field kicking is also very good.

 

[BIGHAWK23]

Worpel has no interest in leaving Hawthorn

Geelong have no interest in Worpel, spoke to someone at Geelong last night, only one they are going for is Bruhn but they arn't confident

Bank

 

[Judd2Sewell]

Wonder if they'd have been interested if he had lived up to his early promise. Hopefully if it's really been put to bed then he sorts his game and his form out. We really need him to.

 

[eldorado]

Worpel has no interest in leaving Hawthorn

But ...surfing? And Falcons??? And the vibe?

 

[Ned Ryerson]

But ...surfing? And Falcons??? And the vibe?

And the National Wool Museum - the absolute pinnnacle of Geelong tourism!

 

[MrPremiership]

How would we feel if we kept all of Mitchell, O'Meara and Wingard on the list for next year?

 

[KermitJagger]

Wonder if they'd have been interested if he had lived up to his early promise. Hopefully if it's really been put to bed then he sorts his game and his form out. We really need him to.

It's been said to death, but he simply can't play on the same team as Mitchell and be effective. His early promise was as a key guy, he was good in that role and I reckon he would have continued to be good in it - but our midfield really can't handle two ball focussed mids that go to ground so often.

This is what makes me think Mitchell will be gone at the end of the season.

Jaeger stays as a leader and steadying influence, Worpel can play with confidence in his bullocking extractor role and Newcombe can continue with the role he played his best football in - the inside/outside mid who gets forward and receives the ball from clearance.

 

[eldorado]

How would we feel if we kept all of Mitchell, O'Meara and Wingard on the list for next year?

Probably not very happy...but more than happy to have two of them (in particular JOM and Chad)

If you took a straw poll, I'd be very surprised if the consensus wasn't that Tom Mitchell has become expendable.

 

[hawks1998]

How would we feel if we kept all of Mitchell, O'Meara and Wingard on the list for next year?

Far from ideal, but i get the feeling it probably will happen

 

[MrPremiership]

Probably not very happy...but more than happy to have two of them (in particular JOM and Chad)

If you took a straw poll, I'd be very surprised if the consensus wasn't that Tom Mitchell has become expendable.

Agree, but funny he's probably the best player of the lot.

I wouldn't be surprised if all three were around next year, but I'm not sure that's what the supporter base wants

 

[Ned Ryerson]

How would we feel if we kept all of Mitchell, O'Meara and Wingard on the list for next year?

 

[Jazzfan]

Probably not very happy...but more than happy to have two of them (in particular JOM and Chad)

If you took a straw poll, I'd be very surprised if the consensus wasn't that Tom Mitchell has become expendable.

If you are saying who is most expendable, it would clearly have to be Wingard considering that he hardly gets on the park and isn't part of the leadership group like O'Meara.

His output is by far the worst of the three, and he just keeps breaking down with soft-tissue injuries now. With Bruest still playing well, and the likelihood Gunston will go on, two senior heads in the forward 50 during a rebuild is enough. Sam clearly has not interest in playing Wingard through the middle.

In respect of Mitchell, I think for most posters losing him would be because he would give us the best chance to get a decent pick. Yes it won't be a high first, but it might be part of another top 25 pick with some pick swaps etc.

Some of the posting on Mitchell has become bizarre. He plays well and he still cops it... Feel a bit for him with how a number of hawks fans seem to think he is the problem to everything despite moving out of the midfield for large chunks and frequently being in our best.

 

[Suntory Boss Coffee]

Hope Jeka stays on. Is only 20 years old. For someone who doesn't try very hard he gets a lot of shots on goal. Worth persisting with because of his ceiling.

 

[Hawthorn2023]

How would we feel if we kept all of Mitchell, O'Meara and Wingard on the list for next year?

Wingard is elite, game changer.

the other 2 are not current top 20 mids, plodders, no accountability, cost a fortune.

At least one of them has to go, Wingard stays.

 

[Turtles all the way down]

And the National Wool Museum - the absolute pinnnacle of Geelong tourism!

I thought that was the Waurn Ponds Red Rooster

 

[RoughysMullet]

How would we feel if we kept all of Mitchell, O'Meara and Wingard on the list for next year?

Will depend on whether anyone wants them. All 3 are expendable - other clubs know that and need to come knocking for any of them to leave…

 

[RutegerJones]

Not sure if many people here are familiar with the Performance/Potential Matrix - it's commonly used in the business world to track existing talent and plan for future needs, and it's just another way at looking at where our list is sitting.

I'm sure there will be plenty of comments about whether certain players should go up/down/change categories, but this is designed to be a general assessment - so let's not have any fits over where I've classified players please!

9 Box Talent Grid/Matrix
View attachment 1440271
Team Breakdown

'Star': (High Performance, High Potential): Sicily,
'High Potential': (Med Perf., High Pot.): Lewis, Moore, Newcombe,
'High Performance': (High Perf., Med Pot.): Hardwick,
'Potential Gem': (Low Perf., High Pot.): Jiath, Day, Ward, Butler, MacDonald, Blanck,
---------------------
'Solid Performer': (High Perf., Low Pot.): Mitchell, O'Meara, Bruest,
'Core': (Med Perf., Med Pot.): Morrison, Frost, Scrimshaw, Reeves,
----------------------
'Inconsistent': (Low Perf., Med Pot.): Impey, Worpel, Nash, Bramble, Koschitzke, DGB, MaGinness, Callow, Lynch, Phillips,
'Average': (Med Perf., Low Pot.): McEvoy, Howe, Gunston, Wingard, Sheils,
'Poor': (Low Perf., Low Pot.): Hartigan,
----------------------
Unknown: Long, Ramsden, O'Hara, Serong, ||| Brockman, Morris, Jeka, Downie, S.Mitchell, Saunders,

Summary

At the end of the year, Hartigan has to go, and at least a couple of the senior players that are in the 'inconsistent' or 'average' categories need to go - I just don't think they provide a good enough performance to justify staying on the list, particularly given how long they've been around (NB: in this category I have Impey, Phillips, McEvoy, Howe, Gunston, Wingard, Sheils). Obviously there's plenty of discussions regarding Mitchell and O'Meara and I'm not opposed to trading them for the right price, but I'm purely looking at what our list is offering from a performance and potential perspective.

There are a few younger players in the 'inconsistent' category - I think they largely deserve another crack as they have all generally (at least in the past) shown they could potentially make it (albeit Callow has looked off the pace at AFL so far, but as a tall only picked up last year, happy to give him a bit more stick).

In addition, a few of those in the 'unknown' category have been on the list for a while that could be at risk. With these players, the first 4 are locks for me due to the upside/minimal time spent at the club thus far. After this, I wouldn't be surprised if some of these players were gone come next year, as much as I don't want to see Brockman or Morris go given their potential upside given the VFL performance of Morris and the talent Brockman has shown.

IMO, those at the 'potential gem' level and above have done enough to suggest to me that they could absolutely be guns for our side, thus I would be playing them basically every game we can, full stop. Fingers crossed we can bring in some players at this level or above over the off-season through the draft and FA. Based on his current output, I think Karl Amon should at absolutely minimum be a core-level player, potentially up to the high performance level.

Think you've definitely undersold Scrimshaw here. He's at minimum Solid Performer, but I'd argue he's in the Potential Gem realm. Ultra consistent player and has had a really, really good year.

 

[Roger Rogerson]

I do get that and not trying to be harsh (also noting that again, these are large generalisations given you can't classify performance and potential into only 3 tiers) - however, Gunston has now played only 12 of the last 37 matches, his back issues worry me, and he will be 31 come the start of next year.

Put that all together and I think there's enough there to say there's a bit of risk there, and I would put it 'in the realms' of Wingard (again - not saying it's equal, but don't think they are worlds apart).

What has bothered me about Gunston is that he has been brought back into the senior side 3 times out of those 12 games and has been way underdone. St K game last year (which was just staggering that a professional organisation could present a player at the top level so underdone), one earlier one this year (milestone game for Breust and Shiels i think) and then the giants game last weekend. He could barely run on the weekend.

Given his injury history the last 2 seasons, he cannot be relied to 'get up' for games, he needs to have put a block of work in on the track and/or get some run in the legs at VFL level. Been an incredible player, but his credits have run out for the time being. Not an automatic. I get that we would value his experience on the ground enormously with our young group but he needs to be at a level where he can at least hold his own and not be a liability on the ground.

 

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

How would we feel if we kept all of Mitchell, O'Meara and Wingard on the list for next year?

Would not be a fan. We need to get more draft picks to heopefully find some elite young talent. Clarko gave away too many picks to bring in mature players which is now hurting us.

I would hope we have salary cap space that we could lure a good pick by paying half of the player's salary for the next two years.

Surely the Lions realise they need more top end mids to compete with the Dees?

 

[HappyHawk_1]

Think you've definitely undersold Scrimshaw here. He's at minimum Solid Performer, but I'd argue he's in the Potential Gem realm. Ultra consistent player and has had a really, really good year.

He's looked decent, but his 1v1 defensive efforts do leave a fair bit to be desired sometimes

Not to pick at your argument - but solid performer indicates high performance, but they aren't going to offer much more, whereas potential gem is low performance but low potential.

I think he's been solid/good, not great, but still has room to grow - hence the medium performance, medium potential. You'll see I've got Moore on that same performance level - i.e. medium, but I think Moore's ceiling could be as one of the best small forwards in the comp.

Again, would prefer to not to argue over those at the core level and above in particular as they all have some benefit to our side - its those who are inconsistent, average, poor, or unknown who have the significant question marks over quality/usefulness to our team moving forward (albeit recognising that there are those at 'core' and above which would be worth considering trading).

 

[HedgeFund]

Oh I get, and love, that he's a project ruckmen. But with another pre-season in him in a circumstance where Reeves and Lynch are our go-to ruckmen he could possibly be good to go if both of them were out. I didn't mean he was insurance for 2022. Personally 4 specialist rucks seems a bit much going into 2023.

Of we were to retire BB (which is insane given he’s now having a full year off for his body to recover) and have Reeves, Lynch and Ramsden as our only rucks, our TOTAL AFL GAMES played by our ruck division would be 30.

Lynch - 9 - unless he plays again this year
Reeves - 21 if he plays the last y games
Ramsden - 0

Do you honestly think we should only have 3 ruckmen with a grand total of 30 AFL games experience going into 2023?

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Of we were to retire BB (which is insane given he’s now having a full year off for his body to recover) and have Reeves, Lynch and Ramsden as our only rucks, our TOTAL AFL GAMES played by our ruck division would be 30.

Lynch - 9 - unless he plays again this year
Reeves - 21 if he plays the last y games
Ramsden - 0

Do you honestly think we should only have 3 ruckmen with a grand total of 30 AFL games experience going into 2023?

Yes. We won't be a top 8 side next year so I really am not that concerned about the lack of experience. Carrying 4 rucks on the list when we are trying to restock our midfield with youth makes less sense to me than having an inexperienced ruck trio. Reeves and Lynch can both handle senior footy, it won't be that risky to not have BB around.

 

[Blackhawk42]

Agree, but funny he's probably the best player of the lot.

I wouldn't be surprised if all three were around next year, but I'm not sure that's what the supporter base wants

The general supporter base with no understanding of list management would want to keep them.

The hardcore fans and those with a deeper knowledge of the game itself would suggest losing any of the 3 is mutually beneficial to player and club.