Strategy Trade and List management Thread Part 4 (opposition supporters - READ posting rules before posting)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ask any Brisbane supporter and they will tell you Martin was nowhere near his best all year. He's clearly on the decline, which is why Brisbane than happy to cut him.
We have a list that should be good enough to contend for flags, why should we be feeding off other teams 34 year old scraps? Just because Tim English still struggles badly doesn't mean to should be bringing in a 34 year old.


His pensioner card?
If you were following this we had inquired about Goldstein and Big Boy. I reckon Martin will be ok for a bargain basement price
 
I think Sweet could develop well under Martin’s guidance. Instead of English and Sweet taking the ruck contests against each other in match sim, they can swap out against Martin and get some reliable experience rucking against someone quality. Plus it’d give them both more time in the forward line in match sim, to develop (Sweet) and refine (English) their forward craft.
Martin said all the right things on SEN
 

Log in to remove this ad.

4lwj8h.jpg
 
Are we now pretending Jordon Sweet, a 0 gamer, speculative pick from the rookie draft, has an even 10% chance of making it at AFL level? Let alone becoming a good enough ruckman for a contending team?

Perhaps we should've read the memo before delisting say, Eddie Prato; he just needed more time to develop...
Ruckman generally don’t come into their own till their mid twenties so the answer is yes we are prepared to give him another year
 
I don't get why we weren't in the discussions with Alir Alir he seems like the perfect player for Bevo
Because we have limited assets and list spaces, with the inclusion of Hannan, Martin and JUH, suspected lists of 38 instead of 40 (not counting rookies) and current delisting/retirements we are full (38 players).

We still need to delist another two minimum for the draft probably more considering we want as many live picks as possible that carry points. Ideally we would be into Allir, Fogarty, etc... but at the moment I see only Trengove, Suckling, Porter and Hayes as potential delistings.

If Dunkley goes we no doubt bring Treloar in. At best we will have 5 lists spots (main list) open come draft night
 
I've got a bad feeling we will take 7 or 8 for Dunkley without their future first being involved

Would be stupid. Treloar won’t cost a first rounder- therefore pick 7 or 8 is wasted. There’s a reason Sammy power doesn’t want that three way trade as it will dilute the Dunkley value.
 
Ruckman generally don’t come into their own till their mid twenties so the answer is yes we are prepared to give him another year
Perhaps we should've told list management that before the delisting every ruckman we've ever delisted under the age of 25.

Eddie Prato and Nathan Mullenger-McHugh must feel hard done by.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

As events unfold looks more likely a Dunkley will be at the bombers and Treloar at Dogs. Sam be true to your name we have the power hand on both.

Get 6 & 7 for Dunkley
14 and 41 to crows for 22, 23
7, 23 and Bailey Dale or Schache to North for 2
22 to pies for Treloar plus they pay $250k for 3 years in a fire sale.

Then we get the best payer in JUH and pick 2 in the draft. Utopia watch out tigers we are coming after you.
 
Because we have limited assets and list spaces, with the inclusion of Hannan, Martin and JUH, suspected lists of 38 instead of 40 (not counting rookies) and current delisting/retirements we are full (38 players).

We still need to delist another two minimum for the draft probably more considering we want as many live picks as possible that carry points. Ideally we would be into Allir, Fogarty, etc... but at the moment I see only Trengove, Suckling, Porter and Hayes as potential delistings.

If Dunkley goes we no doubt bring Treloar in. At best we will have 5 lists spots (main list) open come draft night
We need to delist three more to have minimum 3 list spaces for the minimum 3 picks at the draft
 
You mean when Collingwood were rebuilding and perpetually at the bottom end of the ladder for several years?

By the way, English turns 24 next year.

Did you even bother to look at where Collingwood finished during 2013-14 when Ben Hudson was there? I did, it was 6th and 11th.

Collingwood realised that Grundy was going to need a workhorse early on and its a strategy that we should've followed. Thats the point.

English is indeed 24 next year and will get older beyond that point. Thanks for pointing that out.

The reality is that he turned 23 3 months ago and has been given the unwanted burden of playing as a sole ruckman as a 22 year old for most of the season.

If you think that I am arguing in favour of Beveridges ruck strategies then you have never read one of my many posts on the matter.
 
Last edited:
We need to delist three more to have minimum 3 list spaces for the minimum 3 picks at the draft
yep that is what my post states... 37 signed players still listed (some out of contract), JUH makes 38 (we know we are drafting him) and minimum two more delistings for unknown draftees
 
yep that is what my post states... 37 signed players still listed (some out of contract), JUH makes 38 (we know we are drafting him) and minimum two more delistings for unknown draftees

Macpherson and/or Raak as those unknown draftees most likely. I’d guess delistings would be Porter, Trengove, or Hayes.
 
yep that is what my post states... 37 signed players still listed (some out of contract), JUH makes 38 (we know we are drafting him) and minimum two more delistings for unknown draftees
You say 38 players (correct) in your post, not 37, and then say minimum two delistings (incorrect, would need to be three).
 
Having pick 2 would be great but I think I’d legit die of nervousness until the draft and pick 1s outta the way and it’s not a bid. Imagine it was. It would completely **** us
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top