List Mgmt. 2016 general list discussion and speculation (cont in Pt.2)

[Pure_Ownage]

That's true but they had an impetus to move him on, they traded in Hickey the year before for a 1st round pick and the two ruckmen just didn't work together. McEvoy didn't have the greatest year and they probably perceived him as being replaceable with what they had on the list without losing any output. Same reason they traded Stanley, they brought in Longer and have a large mix of key forward options to partner Riewoldt.

I wouldn't, you can't move up the ladder through a critical mass of low draft picks alone, Melbourne has shown that. It is essential to have enough players like Steven and Armitage around during younger players' formative years to help protect the younger midfielders developing bodies and available as on field teacher that sets good training habits and a provide standards to strive for. They provide "Cultural Capital", which once lost can take a very long time to build up again.

While I agree with you, St Kilda doesn't, under Pelchen they had a clear policy that to make up for their lack of draft involvement in previous years (read trading away too many picks and stuffing up their draft selections with the ones they had) they wanted to double their number of first round picks over the next 3 years, they even had it in one of their strategic document/blueprints that they put out to members (this is basically the same model Pelchen used at Hawthorn circa 2005). The only way to achieve that target is by aggressively trading out players of value/letting free agents go. Now unless they have changed tack signiciantly since Pelchen left, this means they will move on players for picks again this year. They basically shoved McEvoy out the door when Hawthorn came knocking and he was in their leadership group and far more likely to be their next captain than Steven ever will be, even if he stays. The reality is St Kilda's list is in a very bad state and they are 4-5 years off challenging for a flag at least, by which time Steven will be about 30 and possibly past his best. They may well decide it's better to let him go for a top 5 pick and use it in a quality 10-12 year player who will be in his prime when they are decent again. Now I think Steven will stay at St Kilda, mainly because unlike Dangerfield no contending club is going to offer him 800k +, his best chance of getting big money is to stay at St Kilda. But I am fairly confident that if he does decide to lodge an FA offer St Kilda won't be matching it.

 

[Lana]

Melbourne has butchered either the picks themselves, the development of the players, or both, time and again.

What about Hawthorn in 2008? Ten players in that premiership side were first round picks by the Hawks (Croad, Birchall, Hodge, Ladson, Lewis, Franklin, Rioli, Roughead, Ellis, Crawford) and a further six were second or third rounders (Mitchell, Williams, Brown, Bateman, Dew, Renouf). None of their players were traded in from other clubs; the only retreads Hawthorn had were Gilham (delisted), Guerra (delisted) and Dew (retired), hardly coveted names at the time. The Bulldogs seem to be going down this path right now, while utilising the additional freedom of player movement compared to what it was ten years ago, to rebuild its list.

I don't see what's wrong with it as a model. As long as you're not continually making a meal of your early draft picks, you'll always be an attractive destination for players to come back the other way to become regular senior players. Steven is a good player, but I don't think he's that good (maybe a top 25-30 midfielder). And the other thing about making your team a bit less competitive immediately, while earning more early draft picks is it's likely to get you earlier draft picks the following year as well.

There nothing atypical about that distribution(short of receiving two priority picks, which no longer exist due to Melbourne) but it seems like your moving the goal posts. The question isn't the importance of 1st round picks but how much should a team cannibalize it's core to get them. St Kilda has already done it to an extent leaving(trading away three of there best 10 players for picks, but at least those could be explained as expendable due to age or an already present replacement) their current experienced talent pool very thin and this only going to get worse when there remaining 30+ decent players retire.

They needed to due to there awful drafting in the Ross years but they are building up a decent core of under 22 who will get better and each year they will get a new first round pick every year anyway. They don't need to give up a guy who is there second best player in his prime. Losing a player of his calibrate when he has half of his career ahead of him will set them back more than an extra 1st round pick would give them.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I like Steven better than Selwood Jnr on current outputs.

I think he certainly has more ability and a much higher ceiling but you have to factor in that Selwood is a better structural fit for two of our huge weaknesses. One he excels at winning contested ball in close, which we still haven't improved on compared to other top 4 sides. Second, when you look at his tackle numbers across the league, and the way he plays you know he will (legally within the rules) block and smash into any opposition player that is trying to tag his brother. Considering how poor our midfield is at working together to offer Joel any protection from taggers (arguably this is even more disappointing than our lack of contested ball wins ourselves), it's hard to quantify exactly how valuable that would be for us. The other thing is that when you get a Selwood you know what you are getting in terms of work rate and personal values and the way they conduct themselves, and that's an important criteria to the club when they recruit players. For these reasons I would be quite happy to have Scooter at the club for the right price, and the club would be too.

 

[catempire]

I think he certainly has more ability and a much higher ceiling but you have to factor in that Selwood is a better structural fit for two of our huge weaknesses. One he excels at winning contested ball in close, which we still haven't improved on compared to other top 4 sides. Second, when you look at his tackle numbers across the league, and the way he plays you know he will (legally within the rules) block and smash into any opposition player that is trying to tag his brother. Considering how poor our midfield is at working together to offer Joel any protection from taggers (arguably this is even more disappointing than our lack of contested ball wins ourselves), it's hard to quantify exactly how valuable that would be for us. The other thing is that when you get a Selwood you know what you are getting in terms of work rate and personal values and the way they conduct themselves, and that's an important criteria to the club when they recruit players. For these reasons I would be quite happy to have Scooter at the club for the right price, and the club would be too.

All true enough. Right now, are you confident Selwood is more likely than Steven to provide all of that? I'm not. I fear his body is letting him down and as much as I like him as a player we don't need another player to manage in the NIB Medical Room.

If we get either I'll be very happy. Right now I just feel Steven is a safer bet.

 

[Turbocat]

I like Steven better than Selwood Jnr on current outputs.

Is that with GA injured?

 

[Turbocat]

That's true but they had an impetus to move him on, they traded in Hickey the year before for a 1st round pick and the two ruckmen just didn't work together. McEvoy didn't have the greatest year and they probably perceived him as being replaceable with what they had on the list without losing any output. Same reason they traded Stanley, they brought in Longer and have a large mix of key forward options to partner Riewoldt.



I wouldn't, you can't move up the ladder through a critical mass of low draft picks alone, Melbourne has shown that. It is essential to have enough players like Steven and Armitage around during younger players' formative years to help protect the younger midfielders developing bodies and available as on field teacher that sets good training habits and a provide standards to strive for. They provide "Cultural Capital", which once lost can take a very long time to build up again.

I think that StKilda have committed to the path , so if they could get P4 for JackS then they would let him go , but I do agree .GWS has basically worked that out. P4 and P7 for SJ , they are sick of kids , they want perfromance

 

[Lana]

While I agree with you, St Kilda doesn't, under Pelchen they had a clear policy that to make up for their lack of draft involvement in previous years (read trading away too many picks and stuffing up their draft selections with the ones they had) they wanted to double their number of first round picks over the next 3 years, they even had it in one of their strategic document/blueprints that they put out to members (this is basically the same model Pelchen used at Hawthorn circa 2005). The only way to achieve that target is by aggressively trading out players of value/letting free agents go. Now unless they have changed tack signiciantly since Pelchen left, this means they will move on players for picks again this year.

The difference between what Hawthron did and what St Kilda is doing now is the priority pick. back in 2004 and 2005 a team would receive a priority pick if they had won less than 5.5 games. If that was the case today St Kilda would have receive one in 2013 and another in 2014. To compensate for this they traded or allowed to leave 3 of there best players to cover this short fall. If you see my last post the reply to MC, you'll see that I get why they did it.

It was more than just the extra first round picks it was just getting in a lot new talent. Look what they did with there Goddard compensation pick and first round pick in 2012. Brought in Lee, Hickey a pair of extra 2nd round pick in the mid 20s and a pair of picks in the late 40s.

They basically shoved McEvoy out the door when Hawthorn came knocking and he was in their leadership group and far more likely to be their next captain than Steven ever will be, even if he stays. The reality is St Kilda's list is in a very bad state and they are 4-5 years off challenging for a flag at least, by which time Steven will be about 30 and possibly past his best. They may well decide it's better to let him go for a top 5 pick and use it in a quality 10-12 year player who will be in his prime when they are decent again. Now I think Steven will stay at St Kilda, mainly because unlike Dangerfield no contending club is going to offer him 800k +, his best chance of getting big money is to stay at St Kilda. But I am fairly confident that if he does decide to lodge an FA offer St Kilda won't be matching it.

They let McEvoy go because the just spent a first round pick the year before on a similar type of ruckman who was a few years younger and they weren't playing well together. One of them was surplus to need but if they didn't bring in Hickey there was no way that they would have let McEvoy go. In the case of Steven he's there best mid in his prime, its not comparable to Goddard or Dal Santo due to age, Stanley due to quality and McEvoy due to role.

Now if Steven wants to leave that's a different question as they won't really be able to stop him(even if he is restricted) but they will offer him a decent contract and won't be forcing him out of the door for almost any compensation.

 

[catempire]

Is that with GA injured?

You've lost me Turbo...

 

[winty]

Read a story in Inside Football a few weeks ago that apparently Jared Rivers is going to hang up the boots at year's end. Anyone else heard anything similar?

 

[dazbroncos]

Read a story in Inside Football a few weeks ago that apparently Jared Rivers is going to hang up the boots at year's end. Anyone else heard anything similar?

Was the Benny's piece?

Go Catters

 

[Pure_Ownage]

All true enough. Right now, are you confident Selwood is more likely than Steven to provide all of that? I'm not. I fear his body is letting him down and as much as I like him as a player we don't need another player to manage in the NIB Medical Room.

If we get either I'll be very happy. Right now I just feel Steven is a safer bet.

I would give it time and see, Selwood is back playing after missing most of the prseason and may stay fit, after all a couple of years ago Steven was the one that had groin trouble and Selwood was pretty durable at that time, so it's swings and roundabouts.

 

[winty]

Was the Benny's piece?

Go Catters

Could've been a Benny Cas article.

 

[catempire]

I would give it time and see, Selwood is back playing after missing most of the prseason and may stay fit, after all a couple of years ago Steven was the one that had groin trouble and Selwood was pretty durable at that time, so it's swings and roundabouts.

Of course, my original post was "on current outputs" though.

 

[Turbocat]

You've lost me Turbo...

You like Steven better than GAjr on current outputs.... Is that because GA is injured..ie his current outputs are zero due to him not playing.

But are thinking age / next 5 years etc?

 

[catempire]

You like Steven better than GAjr on current outputs.... Is that because GA is injured..ie his current outputs are zero due to him not playing.

But are thinking age / next 5 years etc?

Selwood Jnr mate - i.e. Scooter.

 

[Turbocat]

Selwood Jnr mate - i.e. Scooter.

OK that was a poor bit of reading. It makes sense now.
Rough guess...what would he be on at StKilda and what we he be on at Geelong...in fact what would it take to get the three of them.

My Guess
Danger...... 900+
ScottS...... 400+
StK.......... 400+

How much plus Im not sure. With SS and JS , as Pure has made the point ...attractive being able to get R1.
How much would Adelaide like that though. StK finishes last get P2 comp. , WC finish 12th get comp pick get P9 comp and the Happy Gilmores in Crowland finish 5th and end up with comp pick 17.

 

[catempire]

Truth be told Turbo, I think Scooter and Steven are plans B and C behind PD. I doubt we will be bidding for either if PD is in the bag. I think the cash will be spent retaining Motlop and Hawk and whatever is left over on a ruckman.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

OK that was a poor bit of reading. It makes sense now.
Rough guess...what would he be on at StKilda and what we he be on at Geelong...in fact what would it take to get the three of them.

My Guess
Danger...... 900+
ScottS...... 400+
StK.......... 400+

How much plus Im not sure. With SS and JS , as Pure has made the point ...attractive being able to get R1.
How much would Adelaide like that though. StK finishes last get P2 comp. , WC finish 12th get comp pick get P9 comp and the Happy Gilmores in Crowland finish 5th and end up with comp pick 17.

I think Danger costs a mil a season over 5 years, I don't think anyone who thinks we will get him for less is being realistic.
Scooter would probably be about 500k a year which doesnt bother me a lot when you consider Varcoe was on 450 a year for his last 3 years and didnt give us much, it puts $ in the cap into perspective. I reckon Eagles will offer Scooter more than that but it won't be about money, he is not money hungry and is a loyal guy who I think wants to stay at WC, only a terrible year from them will make him move.
Steven is tricky, you'd probably only offer him 450-500k whereas St Kilda will offer him 750 or maybe more, I don't think any other club will offer him what they will so he would need to take a pay cut to move.

Look on the matching Adelaide is partly more likely to match because it is unlikely to finish as low on the ladder as the other 2 clubs, so the compo pick is later. But really it would be an emotional decision, if you look at say band 1 compo, vs Geelong offering say 1st rounder + HS in a trade, they are not getting that much extra for the risk that he may go into the draft. From a business sense it makes no sense to match. But I think some of their staff may think that after the Tippett saga, if they now let Danger go without a fight they will lose their jobs, and for that reason I think they are likely to try and match.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Truth be told Turbo, I think Scooter and Steven are plans B and C behind PD. I doubt we will be bidding for either if PD is in the bag. I think the cash will be spent retaining Motlop and Hawk and whatever is left over on a ruckman.

We would definitely be talking to the managers of all 3.

Money is not the problem, when you look at the fact that we will lose Enright, Kelly, Hmac, Rivers, Lonergan, Rivers, Mackie, Stokes, SJ and probably Bartel by 2017, and Selwood and Hawkins will go on the vets list, we easily have the cap room for say both Danger and Scooter. The problem is Adelaide matching-if we think they will mat ch we can't afford to be making a deal with any other RFA because we can't risk having to trade a first rounder for them if we need to trade it for Dangerfield. That would be the biggest reason to focus just on him, not money.

 

[catempire]

We would definitely be talking to the managers of all 3.

Money is not the problem, when you look at the fact that we will lose Enright, Kelly, Hmac, Rivers, Lonergan, Rivers, Mackie, Stokes, SJ and probably Bartel by 2017, and Selwood and Hawkins will go on the vets list, we easily have the cap room for say both Danger and Scooter. The problem is Adelaide matching-if we think they will mat ch we can't afford to be making a deal with any other RFA because we can't risk having to trade a first rounder for them if we need to trade it for Dangerfield. That would be the biggest reason to focus just on him, not money.

We've had similar discussions before on how much cap space we have or will have. I won't go there again but will just say I don't think we have $1.5m a year. I think re contracting our existing players will soak up more than you think.

 

[Turbocat]

I think Danger costs a mil a season over 5 years, I don't think anyone who thinks we will get him for less is being realistic.
Scooter would probably be about 500k a year which doesnt bother me a lot when you consider Varcoe was on 450 a year for his last 3 years and didnt give us much, it puts $ in the cap into perspective. I reckon Eagles will offer Scooter more than that but it won't be about money, he is not money hungry and is a loyal guy who I think wants to stay at WC, only a terrible year from them will make him move.
Steven is tricky, you'd probably only offer him 450-500k whereas St Kilda will offer him 750 or maybe more, I don't think any other club will offer him what they will so he would need to take a pay cut to move.

Look on the matching Adelaide is partly more likely to match because it is unlikely to finish as low on the ladder as the other 2 clubs, so the compo pick is later. But really it would be an emotional decision, if you look at say band 1 compo, vs Geelong offering say 1st rounder + HS in a trade, they are not getting that much extra for the risk that he may go into the draft. From a business sense it makes no sense to match. But I think some of their staff may think that after the Tippett saga, if they now let Danger go without a fight they will lose their jobs, and for that reason I think they are likely to try and match.

looking thru the Crow only thread on the AFC board. Some "way out" there post and some very switched on... like

You don't seem to realise that the system is designed to discourage matching. there are all sorts of negatives and penalties for matching with no guarantee of success.

For example:
You can't sign another free agent or trade to take on salary (the cap hold is not released)
You lose FA compensation
You are at risk of getting nothing as the player is just uncontracted. He is able to nominate a team with a big salary in his head and enter the psd

Matching is a very very high risk poker game, where we don't hold many cards. I wouldn't be demanding it like you have as the system is setup against us.

If we matched and lost the game of chicken so we lose the player & the compo I wouldn't be expecting certain people to keep their jobs

Sanders , hope you don't mind the re-quote..as I can not comment on your thread. Seems a very knowledgeable approach to RFA.
Question ..would Adelaide be looking at FA's next year? If so , then matching becomes very restrictive.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

We've had similar discussions before on how much cap space we have or will have. I won't go there again but will just say I don't think we have $1.5m a year. I think re contracting our existing players will soak up more than you think.

I recognise some of those players will be on increased salaries to what they had previously (for example Motlop) think it needs to be kept in mind that the club runs a fairly flat pay scale and ensures that players take less than they could get elsewhere. If this weren't true, we would have lost more players over the last 3-4 years when our cap was far far together than it is now. The biggest issue as far as I see it in bringing in FA's is not having the room, I think we do, it's cultural in terms of does bringing in players on bigger money offers when existing players have taken pay cuts to stay in previous years, does it create any resentment among the group or risk disrupting that culture of players taking less money to remain here.

 

[catempire]

I recognise some of those players will be on increased salaries to what they had previously (for example Motlop) think it needs to be kept in mind that the club runs a fairly flat pay scale and ensures that players take less than they could get elsewhere. If this weren't true, we would have lost more players over the last 3-4 years when our cap was far far together than it is now. The biggest issue as far as I see it in bringing in FA's is not having the room, I think we do, it's cultural in terms of does bringing in players on bigger money offers when existing players have taken pay cuts to stay in previous years, does it create any resentment among the group or risk disrupting that culture of players taking less money to remain here.

Yep, agree that's an issue too. Although it seems the culture is changing and they are becoming accepting of the landscape that exists now with FA and active trading being a necessary part of building a premiership list.

 

[Lana]

Everyone has the same Salary cap and has to pay at least 95%.

Selwood if fit would require more than 500K a year to get him away from WCE, he is their Vice Captain
Steven there best midfielder in the prime of his career, St Kilda would have no trouble paying him 650K+ per year, were else could the money go?

 

[Turbocat]

Everyone has the same Salary cap and has to pay at least 95%.

Selwood if fit would require more than 500K a year to get him away from WCE, he is their Vice Captain
Steven there best midfielder in the prime of his career, St Kilda would have no trouble paying him 650K+ per year, were else could the money go?

I did say + , but Id say both could match the dollar we offer if they would want , and if they are in the zone.... but neither are , both may like to add some young talent. If both have the chance of getting an extra pick in the top 10 , I suspect they may just let them go. Top 10...they may just look at Cockatoo and think thats the type of player we can get with an extra top 10 pick.