List Mgmt. Official 2016 trade period discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Wells talking to K-Rock:

Geelong says it was “reluctant” to let go of hard-nosed midfielder Josh Caddy.

The 24-year-old, who played 71 games at the Cats after arriving from Gold Coast in 2013, today joined Richmond for pick No.24 and an exchange of later round trades.

“We were reluctant to do the deal,” Geelong list manager Stephen Wells told K rock Football.com.au.

“Josh, through his manager, made the request, and, in the end, Richmond Football Club came back with a reasonable deal that improved our position in the draft and, consequently, Josh will be playing at Richmond.

“We’re sad to see him go and wish him all the best.”


http://www.krockfootball.com.au/geelong-cats-news/cats-unhappy-lose-caddy/

If you are reluctant to do it dont do it FFS. Soft.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Wells talking to K-Rock:

Geelong says it was “reluctant” to let go of hard-nosed midfielder Josh Caddy.

The 24-year-old, who played 71 games at the Cats after arriving from Gold Coast in 2013, today joined Richmond for pick No.24 and an exchange of later round trades.

“We were reluctant to do the deal,” Geelong list manager Stephen Wells told K rock Football.com.au.

“Josh, through his manager, made the request, and, in the end, Richmond Football Club came back with a reasonable deal that improved our position in the draft and, consequently, Josh will be playing at Richmond.

“We’re sad to see him go and wish him all the best.”


http://www.krockfootball.com.au/geelong-cats-news/cats-unhappy-lose-caddy/

Go home Stephen, you're drunk.
 
Gregson was pretty good in his first season.
Not as bright this year and he had his season cut short by a Navicular stress fracture.
Cocky also had his season interrupted by injury, but he will be a good player.
Lang will be OK. They are young players and a little patience would not go astray.

They will definitely get more opportunities now. Makes me ponder who are the next in line after them to come in if we needed?
 
Well that was a head-scratcher.

Like myself and plenty of others have said today; no evidence of rhyme, reason, planning or foresight on display during the trade period in 2016.
Almost offsets the gains we made during last year's trade period.

Looking at each case individually:

* Losing Josh Caddy for #24 (and upgrading *Richmond's* late-draft pick!) is ponderous and seemingly self-defeating.
Caddy didn't set the world on fire during his time at Geelong, but he is 24, has played 95 games and if he is ever going to step things up, the next 2-3 year period will be his most productive. For a team who loaded up on 26 year olds with 100+ games last year, it makes little sense to have traded a best 22 player for a draft selection in 2016.

* Losing Shane Kersten for #63 was disappointing. With Kersten being out of contract we had little in the way of leverage, but an offer of #63 from Freo for a player they clearly wanted and need was a bit insulting. Might have been a rare opportunity to play a little hardball there, but apparently we're not that kind of club.

* Losing Vardy I can handle, no issue at all there.

* Tuohy is a good get, he will fill a role nicely for us, and the cost of Smedts and a future 1st round selection wasn't too exorbitant considering we will get Carlton's 2nd rounder (presumably low 20's) in return.

* Aaron Black for 92 obviously didn't cost us much in terms of players or draft selections, but he isn't much more than a tall list clogger; we may as well have kept hold of Mitch Brown or Josh Walker as this bloke won't be an upgrade in any way shape or form.

* Lastly, the Deledio fiasco was poorly handled, the club should have known we didn't have the currency to trade him in ahead of time, but instead allowed itself to be flattered by it's new-found status as a so-called 'destination club' and in doing so precipitated the Caddy trade.

In summary, we traded away blokes like Caddy, Kersten and Smedts for Tuohy, who is a good player, and Black, who will be lucky to play much football with us. And parted with another first round draft selection.

It's hard not to wonder whether the club has entered a period of hubris, where buzzwords like 'destination club' and 'the Geelong Way' are an acceptable substitute for genuine graft and nous.
 
For all those claiming Geelong had to do all this to ease salary cap issues, explain to me why/how Caddy, Smedts, Bartel were contracted for 2017, and we put offers to Kersten and Vardy? (Not to mention wanting Enright to play on).
If everyone contracted had have insisted they wanted to stay and Kersten and Vardy had accepted our offers, how could we possibly be under the cap next year (considering the claim that we had to offload Caddy)? And don't say we expected to offload Motlop because he has a contract also.

So explain why we simply had to do this? Did we accidentally give everyone a contract, or offer a contract, and in the last two days say "oopsie, we made a mistake, we can't possibly fit you all in".

I understand wanting to justify the boneheadedness that was this trade period but this excuse needs further explanation.
Its to throw everyone off of the Fyfe scent, uncle Frank is bringing in the Fyfe family to ship his fruit and veg;)
 
For all those claiming Geelong had to do all this to ease salary cap issues, explain to me why/how Caddy, Smedts, Bartel were contracted for 2017, and we put offers to Kersten and Vardy? (Not to mention wanting Enright to play on).
If everyone contracted had have insisted they wanted to stay and Kersten and Vardy had accepted our offers, how could we possibly be under the cap next year (considering the claim that we had to offload Caddy)? And don't say we expected to offload Motlop because he has a contract also.

So explain why we simply had to do this? Did we accidentally give everyone a contract, or offer a contract, and in the last two days say "oopsie, we made a mistake, we can't possibly fit you all in".

I understand wanting to justify the boneheadedness that was this trade period but this excuse needs further explanation.

Obviously we don't have access to GFC inner circle. But they were clear from the start of this trade period, they were not looking for players. They shopped mots around. Both actions told me at the start of the period, salary cap was an issue. Why? Who knows? Does it even matter?
 
That depends on your perspective.

It's possible to look at the home and away season, and see only the best performances against poor opposition. Or, you can be a lot more skeptical (and cynical), and ask, how good are these guys really? How were they when the pressure was really on? I'd say very, very few players had their reputations enhanced by the finals series, and I'd say a few were exposed. The question is will the club seriously evaluate every player's performance, or will they treat it as anomaly and arrogantly assume every player is wonderful (my guess is the latter).
Thought Menegola played well in pretty well all the games he played in and you can only perform against the teams you play.(Adelaide in SA etc) Thought he was very good in the Hawthorn final which was a pressure game, and he was particularly good in the last 15 minutes of the game when we had to put ourselves in a position to win.
We had plenty of players stand up against the Hawks even if we didn't bring our best footy.
Everyone looked ordinary against the Swans. And yes, they have to be much better than that. Not good enough.
Am not sure if you have the club's mentality correct though. If your assumptions are correct, it means the club is run by idiots and there isn't much evidence to support that given our efforts this year. We got plenty right this year, we just have to do more of it and more consistently next year.
 
On the proviso that Wellsy doesn't reach with our early picks - there should be good players selected with our picks 24, 38, 42. Our picks beyond that are speculative, unless we go a mature aged player with those later picks - House and Stewart (although Stewart may require an earlier pick),

Do we still have the ability to adequately develop these decent selections into decent footballers?

#38, #42; these are around the Kersten/Hamling range; players we took and were unable to get up to scratch.
 
They will definitely get more opportunities now. Makes me ponder who are the next in line after them to come in if we needed?
I don't think any of them played finals this year, so one will take Bartel's spot, the other two are rotating/next in line/competing with the third, Menegola, McCarthy, S.Selwood, etc.

Our depth is definitely weaker with Bartel, Smedts and Caddy all gone, though.
 
Thought Menegola played well in pretty well all the games he played in and you can only perform against the teams you play.(Adelaide in SA etc) Thought he was very good in the Hawthorn final which was a pressure game, and he was particularly good in the last 15 minutes of the game when we had to put ourselves in a position to win.
We had plenty of players stand up against the Hawks even if we didn't bring our best footy.
Everyone looked ordinary against the Swans. And yes, they have to be much better than that. Not good enough.
Am not sure if you have the club's mentality correct though. If your assumptions are correct, it means the club is run by idiots and there isn't much evidence to support that given our efforts this year. We got plenty right this year, we just have to do more of it and more consistently next year.

Well said,
the over reaction by some on this board is as bad as what they are accusing the club of.
Go figure some even know the inner workings of the club and their attitudes. With this sort of skill they should be stocking up on Tattslotto tickets such is their insight.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Wondering if I could get a brief explanation of why the Cats are involved in giving up a first round future in the Delidio trade? Just unsure why they had to give anything? Thanks.

Carlton received Geelong's 2017 first rounder for Tuohy.
Carlton traded that pick on to GWS for Marchbank.
GWS traded that pick back to Richmond for Deledio.
 
Wanted to compare our last two trade periods with Hawthorns, here's the results (it's more info than I thought it would be):

Geelong outs (combined for 2015/2016 trade periods):
Shane Kersten, Nathan Vardy, Billie Smedts, Josh Caddy, Dean Gore, Jarrad Jansen, Josh Walker, Dawson Simpson (FA), Steve Johnson
Picks (by draft order):
2015: 9, 28, 49
2016: 16, 56, 63, 92
2017: rd1

Picks (by round):
2015: rd1, rd2, rd3
2016: rd1, rd3, rd4, rd5
2017: rd1

Geelong ins (combined):
Aaron Black, Zach Tuohy, Patrick Dangerfield, Lachie Henderson, Zac Smith, Scott Selwood (FA)
Picks (by draft order):
2016: 24, 42, 63, 64, 72
2017: rd2 (Carl)

Points difference on picks only (not including future picks): 2395 (roughly pick 3 + 59)
Points difference on picks only (including 2017 picks if Geelong finish 4th, Carlton 14th): 2693 (roughly pick 2 + 58)
If we finish 2nd and Carlton 2nd last, it drops to 2550 (pick 2 + 70)
If we finish 6th and Carlton 12th, it jumps to 2851 (pick 2 + 46)

Hawthorn outs (combined):

Matt Suckling, Jed Anderson, Bradley Hill, Sam Mitchell, Jordan Lewis
2015 rd2 - 38
2015 rd3 - 40
2015 rd4 - 58
2015 rd5 - 94
2016 rd1 ~ 14
2016 rd2 ~ 36
2016 rd3 ~ 54
2016 rd4 ~ 72
2017 rd1
2017 rd2

Hawthorn ins (combined):
Jack Fitzpatrick, Tom Mitchell, Jaeger O'Meara, Tyrone Vickery (FA)
2015 rd1 - 15
2015 rd3 - 48
2016 rd5 (WC) ~ 88

Points difference on picks only (not including future picks): 1552 (roughly pick 8)
Points difference on picks only (including 2017 picks if Hawthorn finish 10th): 3723 (roughly pick 1 + 26)
If Hawks finish 6th, that drops to 3370 (pick 1 + 46)
If they finish 12th, it jumps to 3952 (pick 1 + 19)

So I know it's a lot of info, but it was interesting to me. Hawks got a round 1 last year and younger recruits with their spend, but we'll get more out of the next two drafts than they will, so youth-wise we're not that far behind. The proof will be in the flags though; ours would need to come in the next 4 years, they're set up to start challenging in about 4 years.
 
We can't claim that we look after our players wishes by taking unders in trades we're "reluctant" to do, whilst simultaneously encouraging our older players to retire for the club's best interests. You can't have it both ways. Either we look after ALL our players ALL the time, or the club's best interests come first ALL the time. It's just illogical and hypocritical.
 
Do we still have the ability to adequately develop these decent selections into decent footballers?

#38, #42; these are around the Kersten/Hamling range; players we took and were unable to get up to scratch.
Motlop and Christensen were around those picks. Same with Luke Parker from Swans. There are decent players up for grabs at those selections so long as Wellsy doesn't over reach with some no namers. Use the no namers with speculative picks beyond 60 and in the rookie draft.
 
They will definitely get more opportunities now. Makes me ponder who are the next in line after them to come in if we needed?

There is not much there after them. Luxford, naaah, Cunico-possibly, and maybe the rookie kid Parsons is a chance.
 
Obviously we don't have access to GFC inner circle. But they were clear from the start of this trade period, they were not looking for players. They shopped mots around. Both actions told me at the start of the period, salary cap was an issue. Why? Who knows? Does it even matter?

Yes o_O
If no one contracted wanted to be traded would we have been over the Cap in 2017?
 
Wondering if I could get a brief explanation of why the Cats are involved in giving up a first round future in the Delidio trade? Just unsure why they had to give anything? Thanks.

We gave it to Carlton in the trade for Tuohy also giving up Smedts and getting Carlton's future second round back.

Carlton on traded that to GWS for Marchbank and Pickett.

GWS then on traded it to Richmond for Deledio.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. Official 2016 trade period discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top