Strategy Trade and List Management Thread Part 7 (opposition supporters - READ posting rules before posting)

[Foxman98]

Our future first could be enticing for them to target Warner next year.

You'd assume they want a pick in this years draft though,

Richmond could be the one to potentially target

 

[Foxman98]

Midfield since 21 GF

Out: Dunkley, Macrae, Daniel, Smith

In: Harmes, Kennedy

View attachment 2142229

When was Daniel a midfielder in 21?

 

[TiAn_]

Bont, Libba, Treloar, Richards, Sanders, Kennedy, Gallagher. I don’t think we’re losing anything between Kennedy & Macrae as our 5-6 inside mid, and he’s a better fit at half forward or half back.

 

[Ash1337]

If Cats cared at least a little bit about working to a decent deal they'd trade 17 up to 14 then trade that for Smith.

 

[Libbaaaa]

Bont, Libba, Treloar, Richards, Sanders, Kennedy, Gallagher. I don’t think we’re losing anything between Kennedy & Macrae as our 5-6 inside mid, and he’s a better fit at half forward or half back.

We really aren't, and despite being listed at 192 (which is a blatant lie) Macca can't provide the presence on the half forward line that Kennedy can. And by that I mean to just compete in the air and take in the occassional mark.

 

[Bald]

Midfield since 21 GF

Out: Dunkley, Macrae, Daniel, Smith

In: Harmes, Kennedy

View attachment 2142229

Ed Richards and Ryley Sanders play monopoly?

 

[threenewpadlocks]

It implies that his downtick in form has been driven by age-related decline, or that he was moved because of a decline. The latter just isn't true.

I think it's strange to claim that Macrae's decline isn't age-related.

I think we can debate how much of it is, but I think it is to some extent.

The former certainly could be the case, but we don't have as much evidence for that as is made out because his "drop off" coincided with a preconceived intention to move him into another position on the ground.

Even if this is true, we have to assume that Bevo is more often than not making the correct moves. It's not actually that likely that Macrae is still some outstanding centre bounce mid that Bevo is stuffing around. It's more likely that Bevo is a good coach that knows what he's doing, and he's inferring elements of Macrae's value to the team to win games in the positions he plays in intangible ways other than what you and I can see.

We can dig out the win-loss record this season, but we clearly played better football in the second half of 2023 when Macrae went from small centre bounce attendance to zero centre bounce attendance.

More recently, I would argue that we've marginalised at least three leadership group members - Hunter, Macrae, and now Daniel

The full stories that will come out in due course for Hunter should shock you. Culturally, I'm surprised any AFL club took him on, because it wasn't exactly hidden in the industry.

Macrae was the one that requested a trade here, not us. We're not doing the marganisling. In fact, I would argue that treating a leadership individual poorly would be to refuse to accept their trade request and insist they stay out their contract.

Daniel I can agree with, which is why we're not trading him unless it's for a good trade haul, hence our rejection of 25 for Daniel + 48.

I get the arguments about pace and about him not being better than other mids... but every single other team in the league rotates their midfield more than we do. It's not "80% midfield or bust" - every other team in the league seems to find a way to have a second midfield rotation.

Perhaps true for 2023. Not for 2024. Richards was our fourth mid and therefore actually number 1 in our second midfield rotation. Garcia, Sanders, Gallagher all spent reasonable time in there in the back half of the year and we can explore West and Weightman in there more. I wouldn't say that the amount that player 4, 5, 6 spend in the middle is any less than the league average.

I suspect that Macrae is going to have at least two strong seasons for St Kilda. I may be wrong and will happily concede that I was wrong if his decline continues at the Saints.

So will I, but we have to put it in the context that we can only ever play two "slow" centre bounce mids at any given point in time.

It can be both true that Macrae looks good enough around the ball as one of the two centre bounce mids for St Kilda, but it's not among the best 36 slow centre bounce mids at any club, and if you want to be playing finals, you should be looking to upgrade that position.

Saints will be on the hook for three years but they're looking to incrementally improve that positon.

I can say that they looked at Paddy Dow as a way to upgrade a declining/injured Seb Ross/Brad Crouch. But now they'll look at Macrae as an upgrade to (e.g.) Paddy Dow. They will attempt to look at someone next year as an upgrade in Macrae. Just because each player is an incremental step over what they had before, doesn't make those players are "good" so to speak or the fact that by virtue of being around the ball a lot and doing things that an AFL player is capable of, that they're good relative to the typical types of players in their positions on the field.

But that's actually not my main frustration at all. Perhaps Macrae isn't the best fit for us - I can hear and acknowledge that possibility. What is undeniable, though, is that there has been a very considered plan to extract him from his best position. If that was always the intention, he should have been moved two years ago. That is where my frustration lies - we are now losing a club champion for nothing because we executed a plan to marginalise him to the point where he wants to leave.

It's all a matter of interpretation, isn't it though?

I would argue that it isn't marganilising, it's simply the value he provides evolving over time.

At a point in mid 2022, he was an elite centre bounce mid.

Today, he's a player that wouldn't be in the best 50 centre bounce mids in the league, can only play in the "slow" role of the centre bounce (as opposed to e.g. Sanders who has the agility to play with both slow and other fast centre bounce midfielder).

So logically over the course of 50 games since mid 2024 there's a trendline where the former was partially true and the latter was partially true. I don't think it's margianlising but just the realities of moving our cattle around in different positions to try and win as many games as possible.

 

[Mofra]

Midfield since 21 GF

Out: Dunkley, Macrae, Daniel, Smith

In: Harmes, Kennedy

View attachment 2142229

Richards, Sanders, Garcia

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Ed Richards and Ryley Sanders play monopoly?

Harvey Gallagher was at the centre bounce in the 2024 season more than three times than Harmes, lol.

One would assume he plays 100+ centre bounces across the 23 games next year in some variety or form (tagging, specific matchups, dropping in a couple of times a game when rotations break down mid-game, etc.)

 

[Angak]

Ed Richards and Ryley Sanders play monopoly?

Sanders hasn't proven himself to be AFL standard yet. Might get there but his first season wasn't good at all.

I'd take Gallagher ahead of Sanders based on 2024 output and it isn't close.

 

[Norm De Guerre]

Midfield since 21 GF

Out: Dunkley, Macrae, Daniel, Smith

In: Harmes, Kennedy

View attachment 2142229

Guys that have asked for a trade or put a gun to the clubs head since the 2021 GF.

Dunkley, Macrae and Smith.

Its not always the club.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Saints have relented and will pay 100% of Macrae's salary including potential performance bonuses for 2027 (which is why you're hearing conflicting news about how much he's due to get paid in 2027).

The end result is instead of Macrae to Kennedy and getting both a small draft and salary cap upgrade, it's Macrae to Kennedy with no draft but a medium salary cap upgrade.

Both Dogs and Saints were happy to have a slightly better draft pick (s) involved and because the Dogs were not under salary cap pressure, happy to pay a small but not insignifcant amount of Macrae's contract per year (ie low six figures per year).

However translating the contract language over a new contract as it relates to being tied to increases to the salary cap, performance bonuses, how Saints structure their salary cap vs. the Dogs was too hard, especially as it would have to involve Macrae - who had agreed in principle to join the Saints - ticking off changes to his contract. For instance, if he does play well for the Saints and get performance bonuses, is that entire increase paid by the Saints, or will the Dogs pay a similar proportion of that increase?

So in the end the clubs go "it's all too hard" and the Saints relent and just transfer the contract over in its entirety with 100% payments, and the Dogs, who were hoping to pay for Kennedy with less than what they were getting for Macrae, also just gives up on that idea and is happy to transfer over the Macrae pick to Kennedy.

I don't really think people realise how busy the likes of Power is and the pepole that support him ie the person that reads the forward projections of our salary cap and work with Power to see what does/doesn't fit. I don't envy it. The media really dumbs down the work here.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

I don't even agree with you on that we're similar to Brisbane in leg speed, but in any case there's speed and then there's quality speed. Our best vs there's

Brisbane (since 2016)

Hugh McCluggae (pick 3)
Charlie Cameron (traded pick 12)
Brandon Starceivich (pick 18)
Cam Rayner (pick 1)
Zac Bailey (pick 15)
Callum Ah Chee (traded 2nd and 4th round pick) (former pick 8)
Darcy Wilmot (pick 16)
Kai Lohmann (pick 20)
Jaspa Fletcher (pick 12)

Dogs (since 2016)

Ed Richard (pick 16)
Bailey Smith (pick 8)
Rhylee West (pick 26)
Cody Weightmen (pick 15)
Lachie McNeil (rookie)
Laithan Vandermeer (pick 37)
Harvey Gallagher (pick 39)
Joel Freijah (pick 45)
Lachie Bramble (SSP)

In terms of quality we aren't really close, the fact is we've spent most of our draft capital on talls and very little on our smalls.

I missed this - good post. There's no doubt we lack quality speed and I'd actually written that in a previous iteration of my reply.

What it says to me though is that speed is not inherently a difference maker. Talent outpoints speed, and for speed to be beneficial, you actually need to invest in good footballers that have it. We just haven't done that, and yet we've continued pushing slow, talented players out for faster but less talented players. My point is that I don't think that is a positive step forward.

Anyway - I am going to stop posting on Macrae/pace as I'm aware I sound like a broken record and that's not pleasant for the board.

I am just frustrated. I don't see how these changes make us better and I am sick and tired of seeing premiership players in other colours for no real benefit on our end. Our list management decisions all feel, to me, like they've been worked out over the past month without any forethought. Meanwhile the teams below us have executed long-considered moves to make them immediately better.

 

[Charlie Bucket]

Some of the Libba comments in this thread. Jesus Christ.

He is an out and out star in that midfield. If he is fit and healthy he starts in there. And he will be fit and healthy. He always shows up.

No one is doubting how good a player he is. It’s the “fit and healthy” bit that concerns.

He’s 33 by start of next season. How long are you suggesting he plays for? 40, 50?

The cliff is close, so supporters scepticism is more than fair.

 

[Bald]

Sanders hasn't proven himself to be AFL standard yet. Might get there but his first season wasn't good at all.

I'd take Gallagher ahead of Sanders based on 2024 output and it isn't close.

"It isn't close"

The output:

Harvey Gallagher / Ryley Sanders

Disposals: 12.3 / 16.5
Contested Posessions: 3.6 / 5.4
Disposal Efficiency: 61% / 73%
Tackles: 3 / 4.6
Turnovers 3.4 / 2.6
Inside 50s 2 / 1.5

Sanders was also subbed 5 times either on or off. You're right. It isn't close, just not in the direction you think.

 

[CarnTheScray]

If Sanders had more confidence with his disposal at AFL level and stopped looking to backwards handball frequently, he would play every game.

Our MC are so harsh on Sanders and Garcia for flaws in their game but let players like Vandermeer off, even when every third disposal from them is a stinker

 

[Proffessor]

Harvey Gallagher was at the centre bounce in the 2024 season more than three times than Harmes, lol.

One would assume he plays 100+ centre bounces across the 23 games next year in some variety or form (tagging, specific matchups, dropping in a couple of times a game when rotations break down mid-game, etc.)

And to be fair Gallagher’s output or lack thereof given his time there was one of the biggest weakness in our midfield throughout 2024, and certainly in the EF.

I recognise Harvey is still young and developing, but we need to put a big preseason into making him worthy of his spot, because he hasn’t earned it yet.

 

[ossie_21]

A deal will get done for Smith today, Geelong can’t afford to damage their reputation as difficult and stubborn it would put off other clubs and importantly players who don’t want to see their former club not fairly compensated. Not all players are self centred like Smith.

Connors on the other hand has a duty of trying to help his client get to the club he wants to go to, and this means putting pressure on Geelong to get the deal done, not kick the Bulldogs. Sooner or later he will have a client that needs a club, and might find the Bulldogs don’t answer his calls.

But this is Geelong we are talking about. If it goes through to the draft, they will be applauded for standing their ground and not being held to ransom over an out of contract player.

Their recruitment team heads wouldn’t be able to get any bigger when they are praised with gaining the player and keeping their draft hand, as it will “prove just how good they are”, despite it being complicit in multiple channels of tampering and nobody at AFL HQ will Cotton On to it.

It’s a joke they have known about this for 2 years and couldn’t even come with a suitable offer on day 1 and will probably stretch it to the final hour of the day.

 

[0utsider]

Sanders hasn't proven himself to be AFL standard yet. Might get there but his first season wasn't good at all.

I'd take Gallagher ahead of Sanders based on 2024 output and it isn't close.

Don’t think that’s fair, he plays 23 games this season for most clubs in the comp.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

And to be fair Gallagher’s output or lack thereof given his time there was one of the biggest weakness in our midfield throughout 2024, and certainly in the EF.

I recognise Harvey is still young and developing, but we need to put a big preseason into making him worthy of his spot, because he hasn’t earned it yet.

Agree, but I can argue its his attributes (speed, agility, being coachable, looking to move the ball directly and quickly) that means he's going to get a game, rather than the quality and quantity of his ball winning/use.

Bevo has slowly realised the need for attribute balance across the field and it's why we were winning more games with a quicker player in Gallagher who was winning the ball half as often and using it half as well, but, in the more abstract sense, helped his teammates play better, and helped block space and influence the opposition ball use with his ability to run to the right spots and with speed.

 

[Pencil case]

Both Dogs and Saints were happy to have a slightly better draft pick (s) involved and because the Dogs were not under salary cap pressure, happy to pay a small but not insignifcant amount of Macrae's contract per year (ie low six figures per year).

However translating the contract language over a new contract as it relates to being tied to increases to the salary cap, performance bonuses, how Saints structure their salary cap vs. the Dogs was too hard, especially as it would have to involve Macrae - who had agreed in principle to join the Saints - ticking off changes to his contract. For instance, if he does play well for the Saints and get performance bonuses, is that entire increase paid by the Saints, or will the Dogs pay a similar proportion of that increase?

So in the end the clubs go "it's all too hard" and the Saints relent and just transfer the contract over in its entirety with 100% payments, and the Dogs, who were hoping to pay for Kennedy with less than what they were getting for Macrae, also just gives up on that idea and is happy to transfer over the Macrae pick to Kennedy.

I don't really think people realise how busy the likes of Power is and the pepole that support him ie the person that reads the forward projections of our salary cap and work with Power to see what does/doesn't fit. I don't envy it. The media really dumbs down the work here.

Turning Macrae into Kennedy is a huge L, but the salary relief wouldn’t hurt if we need it that badly.

 

[Foxman98]

Turning Macrae into Kennedy is a huge L, but the salary relief wouldn’t hurt if we need it that badly.

How is it a huge L?

Neither will play significant midfield time Kennedy is a much better forward younger and gives us a big bodied inside mid to finally replace Dunkely

 

[Proffessor]

Sanders hasn't proven himself to be AFL standard yet. Might get there but his first season wasn't good at all.

I'd take Gallagher ahead of Sanders based on 2024 output and it isn't close.

Neither Sanders or Gallagher covered themselves in glory this year.

They were very lucky to get the games they did particularly as better performed players were regularly pushed out to accomodate them in the team.
Creating disgruntled players who wanted to leave.

Huge preseason for them both.

Really important for Harvey to recognise that his regular selection in the team didn’t really correlate with his output and unless he improves massively over the preseason Sanders, Garcia or someone else is likely to go straight past him.

 

[Hoges64]

Just so we can put all the "midfield rotations" talk to bed, here's our 2024 CBA's...

Sanders numbers actually look even better when you see he spent only 28.3% of his time in there.

 

[Dogs Rule]

Richmond have 10, 11 and 18. This is where the Dogs in a perfect world should be able to say 'You want him, yep, that's the best deal for us, we'll take pick 11 and whatever else' and freeze Geelong out, but the AFL have no balls to allow this.