List Mgmt. Trade and F/A 2020 Cont’d

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not having a go at you No SPIN, most people when they said ‘trade him’ meant for something. Not give him away in a salary dump.

I understand your point, but if you look at the context of the post that started my replies (post #15,982), the poster DID NOT lament the price, but the clubs decision to trade Stevo. That's why I quoted back his own words wanting Stevo traded.
 
I understand your point, but if you look at the context of the post that started my replies (post #15,982), the poster DID NOT lament the price, but the clubs decision to trade Stevo. That's why I quoted back his own words wanting Stevo traded.
It’s hardly fair to hold a poster to a comment made in the heat of the moment in a game day thread. Most people end up saying stuff they don’t really mean in those. You need something better than that.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

And warming to the idea of trading our picks 14 & 16 down for multiple more picks in the 20s for this year and next years draft rather than package them up for a solitary top 10 pick.
What's really annoying is we had those picks in the second round from the Stephenson trade - pick 26, 33 - and we gave away those picks to Bulldogs with Treloar for Pick 14.

Pick 14 on its own should of been worth Treloar, especially if we are paying $300k of his contract.

They key position forward talent in this draft are either top 5 (McDonald, Thilthorpe) or second round (Callow, Baldwin).

We are kind of in an awkward position at pick 14 and 16 to draft a key position forward. Nik Cox is in our range but he isnt a bonafide forward and some scouts suggests he is better suited to play defense. If Cox goes before our pick, if we draft Callow or Baldwin, we are reaching for them based on team need which isnt the ideal way to draft. You should be drafting best available.

If we decide to do a draft day trade to move Pick 16 for two picks in the 20s, it is pretty risky because there is no guarantee that the player we are targetting (eg Callow or Baldwin) will be available. And it also make Collingwood look stupid because already had second round picks and we choose to dump them in the Treloar trade. Now we want to do a deal to get them back?
 
It's called self preservation from collingwood.

They stuffed up the cap and pushed 3 players out.

Club turns players over every year. As does every team in the league. Only difference this year was the "best 22" status and age of the players which only supports my position that we were aggressive.

I'll leave it there.
 
What are the rules that apply for player and club in terms of how a player can delist themselves? Is this effectively quitting the club (aka breaking a contract) or different?

I interpreted it as a standard delisting, but he told the media about it before the club did.
 
Troy Cook was the only ball butcher that i can remember.

Kirk Ugle another.

Simon Buckley was a beautiful kick of the footy renowned for burning the team with poor kicks.
 
What are the rules that apply for player and club in terms of how a player can delist themselves? Is this effectively quitting the club (aka breaking a contract) or different?
He didn’t delist himself.
 
Oct 9th - Game day thread v GEEL post# 934
Direct quote:

"Stevo debacle ... trade him"

There was a lot of that shit about Stevo from lots of posters throughout the year. I stay away from the game day threads but the same sentiments were being expressed in other threads. Many didn't think he had any value, yet now we got screwed in the trade. We're a fickle bunch.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mitch Clearly going with Jackson Thurlow has been delisted by Sydney
 
Has anyone else noticed the boys seem to be going hard with the off season training
 
Club turns players over every year. As does every team in the league. Only difference this year was the "best 22" status and age of the players which only supports my position that we were aggressive.

I'll leave it there.

You can leave it there but wouldn't being aggressive mean a good outcome, or a fair out come or even an outcome where we wont go into the next year considerably weaker?

Clearing salary cap space and having to pay ex players to play else where is not a good outcome.
 
It's called self preservation from collingwood.
They stuffed up the cap and pushed 3 players out.
Didn't we have some "strategic" meeting 3-4 yrs ago that the press spied on through a window and spotted a slide with "fix salary cap" on it?
The problem has been around for a while - with little oversight obviously.
 
You can leave it there but wouldn't being aggressive mean a good outcome, or a fair out come or even an outcome where we wont go into the next year considerably weaker?

Clearing salary cap space and having to pay ex players to play else where is not a good outcome.

You don't like the outcome but you're only guessing the club doesn't think it's a good outcome they've divested themselves of these players. They were all clearly targeted for a reason.
 
So first list lodgement is Wednesday. Hopefully we actually get official announcements of re-signings and delistings of the remaining out of contract players tonight or tomorrow.

If we assume Beams will remain officially on the list next year, and if we assume that no further delistings happen (ie all out of contract players are re-signed) and all three of Mihocek/Madgen/Appleby will be promoted (which is a requirement if they are to be re-signed), we go into the draft with 34 senior-listed players, 2 Cat A rookies and 2 Cat B rookies.

If we maintain the same list strategy of maximising the rookie count for salary cap purposes under the new list sizes, it means we can draft two players in the national draft, four players in the rookie draft and we are at the maximum capacity for Cat Bs.

I think it's reasonably likely we'll delist one or two players and commit to picking them up in the rookie draft in order to take more than two players in the national draft. This could be a veteran like Greenwood or we could come to an arrangement to rookie-list Beams. Not to mention rookie-listing a potential DFA.

Of course, we could do absolutely none of the above and it's just me talking out of my rear end.
 
Last edited:
I like the idea of Savage, beautiful kick, would release Crisp into the middle full time.

I've always liked Savage as a player but I'm not sure bringing in a guy who'll be 30 before the start of the 2021 season is the way we should be going. Especially given we'd be bringing him in essentially for depth. If we're looking to refresh the list then I'd rather opt for youth and hope to find the next Savage with a long career still ahead of them while giving the youth we already have greater opportunity.
 
Last edited:
I've always like Savage as a player but I'm not sure bringing in a guy who'll be 30 before the start of the 2021 season is the way we should be going. Especially given we'd be bringing him in essentially for depth. If we're looking to refresh the list then I'd rather opt for youth and hope to find the next Savage with a long career still ahead of them while giving the youth we already have greater opportunity.


Savage 100% if he plays for minimum chips.
 
Savage 100% if he plays for minimum chips.

As I say, he's depth. We get Howe back in 2021. Savage would be behind IQ, doesn't offer anything more than Noble who is 6-7 years younger and deserves the opportunity, we're apparently grooming Bianco as a HB, Tyler Brown has played there, we seem to want Murphy to play there, Ruscoe was recruited more as a defender than a forward, and we still haven't heard what will be happening with either Appleby or Langdon. I just don't think it's a position of need and would rather look to develop than re-clog a list we've gone to so much trouble to cleanse.

Long on minimum chips and I'd have a completely different view.
 
I like the idea of Savage, beautiful kick, would release Crisp into the middle full time.
I'd be disappointed if we picked up a 30 year old role player. The main positive about next year is that we're likely to see a fair few kids get opportunities and it's good to watch their development.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top