List Mgmt. 2015 LIST Discussion - trades, free agency etc

[ferrisb]

All good ODN. I get that there are always intertwining issues.

Maybe this time it was picking up a little too much steam, but my post was mostly tongue in cheek.

I do retain the ability to scroll down if I'm bored, so I don't get too stressed about this stuff.

 

[passmark]

I love people like you... basing your opinions on a player because of a couple of bad games...

Matthew Dick... don't know where you get the opinion that he is no good based on the massive number of games that he has played in his career since 2012. But you put down that DVR looks likely and it is based on what? a warm fuzzy feeling?

At the moment, both Dick and DVR are in the same unknown basket because we havent really seen enough of either of them to make a decent judgement of them at SENIOR level.

If you are going on your system of assessment, you might as well throw Giles into the no good basket because he has done **** all at the club in the time he has been there. Ohh wait... he has been injured for most of the time he has been at the club so we might as well delist him at the end of the year.

Brad Walsh... played a couple of VFL games and was the sub in one senior game... but looks likely.

Matty Dick when he gets a fully functional defence around him might be a lot better than you think. In his couple of appearances for the club so far, he has looked serviceable in his role. We can only give him more time to settle in and we can see how he goes after he has played 20-30 games.

......and I'm not sure you'd have Smith in the likely group.

He's doesn't seem to be doing much and nobody seems to be able to tell me where he'd play at senior level.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

......and I'm not sure you'd have Smith in the likely group.

He's doesn't seem to be doing much and nobody seems to be able to tell me where he'd play at senior level.

He wouldn't, at the moment. He's more intent on tackling anybody who comes near him (with or without the footy) than winning the ball and using it effectively

 

[ferrisb]

I love people like you... basing your opinions on a player because of a couple of bad games...

Matthew Dick... don't know where you get the opinion that he is no good based on the massive number of games that he has played in his career since 2012. But you put down that DVR looks likely and it is based on what? a warm fuzzy feeling?

At the moment, both Dick and DVR are in the same unknown basket because we havent really seen enough of either of them to make a decent judgement of them at SENIOR level.

If you are going on your system of assessment, you might as well throw Giles into the no good basket because he has done **** all at the club in the time he has been there. Ohh wait... he has been injured for most of the time he has been at the club so we might as well delist him at the end of the year.

Brad Walsh... played a couple of VFL games and was the sub in one senior game... but looks likely.

Matty Dick when he gets a fully functional defence around him might be a lot better than you think. In his couple of appearances for the club so far, he has looked serviceable in his role. We can only give him more time to settle in and we can see how he goes after he has played 20-30 games.

So you're saying he's not right, back at ya?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

All good ODN. I get that there are always intertwining issues.

Maybe this time it was picking up a little too much steam, but my post was mostly tongue in cheek.

I do retain the ability to scroll down if I'm bored, so I don't get too stressed about this stuff.

All good. I'll probably move it anyway simply because it adds to the other thread which is fairly hard hitting stuff.

 

[passmark]

He wouldn't, at the moment. He's more intent on tackling anybody who comes near him (with or without the footy) than winning the ball and using it effectively

But even playing well I don't see where he'd play apart from the smallest of small defenders or as a small forward himself. But I haven't seen him display too much goal sneakiness.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

But even playing well I don't see where he'd play apart from the smallest of small defenders or as a small forward himself. But I haven't seen him display too much goal sneakiness.

Haven't seen him display much of anything unfortunately...hence why no one can say where he'd be played, we just don't know.

 

[Blue__Balls]

He wouldn't, at the moment. He's more intent on tackling anybody who comes near him (with or without the footy) than winning the ball and using it effectively

Is this our (Carlton club/fans) fault for talking up his tackling so much after we drafted him? One of those self-fulfilling prophecies whereby we harp on about a particular aspect of his game and as a result he just tries to do more and more of it, to the detriment of the rest of his game?

Some players would respond the other way - Cripps was touted as a gun inside distributor with good hands...so he hires a running coach and pushed himself to improve his outside game.

Maybe Clem thinks by laying 15 tackles in a game he'll somehow endear himself to the supporters, even if he doesn't get a kick.

 

[Dramoth]

......and I'm not sure you'd have Smith in the likely group.

He's doesn't seem to be doing much and nobody seems to be able to tell me where he'd play at senior level.

Honestly, I would have an unknown group and Smith would be in the group along with anyone who hasnt had significant time in the senior squad. It's all well and good after 5-10 games coming out and saying that someone is s**t... but we get rid of them and they end up at another club where they explode into prominence and make us look like idiots for getting rid of them.

 

[95blues]

Haven't seen him display much of anything unfortunately...hence why no one can say where he'd be played, we just don't know.

Are we certain they aren't playing him in the Ruck? I mean.. that's what we do right? We draft anybody, and then try and turn them into what we need

 

[passmark]

Honestly, I would have an unknown group and Smith would be in the group along with anyone who hasnt had significant time in the senior squad. It's all well and good after 5-10 games coming out and saying that someone is s**t... but we get rid of them and they end up at another club where they explode into prominence and make us look like idiots for getting rid of them.

true

 

[chunkylover53]

I love people like you... basing your opinions on a player because of a couple of bad games...

Matthew Dick... don't know where you get the opinion that he is no good based on the massive number of games that he has played in his career since 2012. But you put down that DVR looks likely and it is based on what? a warm fuzzy feeling?

At the moment, both Dick and DVR are in the same unknown basket because we havent really seen enough of either of them to make a decent judgement of them at SENIOR level.

If you are going on your system of assessment, you might as well throw Giles into the no good basket because he has done **** all at the club in the time he has been there. Ohh wait... he has been injured for most of the time he has been at the club so we might as well delist him at the end of the year.

Brad Walsh... played a couple of VFL games and was the sub in one senior game... but looks likely.

Matty Dick when he gets a fully functional defence around him might be a lot better than you think. In his couple of appearances for the club so far, he has looked serviceable in his role. We can only give him more time to settle in and we can see how he goes after he has played 20-30 games.

Relax mate, you'll give yourself a heart attack.

You want Dick to be treated the same as all our other draftees, yet he's the only one who got delisted by another club.

DVR, Giles and co. were drafted by Carlton and are still hard to get a gauge on. Dick is struggling to get a game in a bottom 4 club after already being delisted by another club. Make sense?

 

[Blue__Balls]

Relax mate, you'll give yourself a heart attack.

You want Dick to be treated the same as all our other draftees, yet he's the only one who got delisted by another club.

DVR, Giles and co. were drafted by Carlton and are still hard to get a gauge on. Dick is struggling to get a game in a bottom 4 club after already being delisted by another club. Make sense?

Dick was delisted by a top 2/4 club who were expecting to rake in 3-4 gun Academy/Father-son kids over the following few years.

Perspective.

Even if he's not top level AFL material, he's young depth who has shown he can at least play a role if required. He's also come from a club with a strong culture and proven success at developing good players.

If you've seen anything of our VFL side (and even I've only seen a couple of games) you'd know the standard of footy is deplorable. If we want our draftees to develop into good players, they need to be surrounded by capable players from the start, both to set the example in workrate and professionalism as well as to ensure they're not being dragged down by the poor skills of others (arguably one reason Watson hasn't developed as well as we might have hoped).

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Relax mate, you'll give yourself a heart attack.

You want Dick to be treated the same as all our other draftees, yet he's the only one who got delisted by another club.

DVR, Giles and co. were drafted by Carlton and are still hard to get a gauge on. Dick is struggling to get a game in a bottom 4 club after already being delisted by another club. Make sense?

Not really. He is talking about having hopes for one player over another based on limited observations and you say the defining factor is the fact he has been delisted.

First, he was delisted by a strong Sydney Swans club. Secondly ... Andrew Carrazzo - delisted by Geelong. Sam Rowe - delisted by Sydney.

You go back to Greg Williams when he started out - cut from Carlton's training squad.

Is it worse to be delisted by a club having been drafted than it is to be passed over until you are in your early 20s? We have those as well.

He may not work out but I'm not sure he gets graded differently because the Swans didn't want him.

 

[chunkylover53]

Not really. He is talking about having hopes for one player over another based on limited observations and you say the defining factor is the fact he has been delisted.

First, he was delisted by a strong Sydney Swans club. Secondly ... Andrew Carrazzo - delisted by Geelong. Sam Rowe - delisted by Sydney.

You go back to Greg Williams when he started out - cut from Carlton's training squad.

Is it worse to be delisted by a club having been drafted than it is to be passed over until you are in your early 20s? We have those as well.

He may not work out but I'm not sure he gets graded differently because the Swans didn't want him.

I'm not saying he won't make it.

I'm saying he is going to be judged differently - to be turfed by a top club at a young age isn't the best thing to have on your resume', and he will be judged differently by a fair amount of supporters - probably the list managers too.

And the poster saying things like "I love people like you", and going on angry rants at people who choose to judge him differently is stupid.

Delisted free agents like Dick aren't going to be given the same opportunities and patience as a promising second round pick like DVR. Sorry.

 

[Dramoth]

Relax mate, you'll give yourself a heart attack.

You want Dick to be treated the same as all our other draftees, yet he's the only one who got delisted by another club.

DVR, Giles and co. were drafted by Carlton and are still hard to get a gauge on. Dick is struggling to get a game in a bottom 4 club after already being delisted by another club. Make sense?

Yup... I am sure that being delisted by Sydney is a really s**t thing if you can't break into their side.... if he has been struggling to break into their NEAFL side, then I would be more worried.

 

[HARKER]

I know you can't Harks but trust me I know people know certain employees. I know people who hang at the club and talk to some directors. I know of posters you are close with either on this site or from other sites. I know there are strong opinions and constant murmurings. We have seen these murmurings since the Unofficial Selection Committee and really, a lot of supporters believe strongly in what they hear and a lot of supporters feel they are more enlightened than others as a result.

What I am saying is you have to have all sides of an argument in order to assess the problem accurately. I've seen enough disgruntled employees to know there is two sides to an argument, as compelling their argument seems. Their immediate co-workers will often back their account because they sit around and talk about it. I've done the same thing myself when put under pressure but truth be told, did I contribute to that pressure by not doing all I could have done? Hell yes. Really hard to be honest with yourself.

SOS was brought in to do a job and back himself in to do that job. If he believes something, he has to voice it. He too will be judged on results once enough time has passed, and if we are in the same position and he can't point to his KPIs, he too will lose his job. That event won't make the events of this year wrong as we have no anecdotal evidence even that anything was working.

I'm always happy to hear an opinion but that opinion won't sway me from what I see.
You say that this is a results driven industry and I agree......................so why have we the same people at the helm?

Show me one result they can hang their hat on? Employment? Membership? Financial? Unity?
Not much there is there but whilst they're happily swinging the axe, their heads remain intact because their not honest enough to put their own head on the chopping block...........this game is too much fun.

 

[BluesRule]

Dick was delisted by a top 2/4 club who were expecting to rake in 3-4 gun Academy/Father-son kids over the following few years.

Perspective.

Even if he's not top level AFL material, he's young depth who has shown he can at least play a role if required. He's also come from a club with a strong culture and proven success at developing good players.

If you've seen anything of our VFL side (and even I've only seen a couple of games) you'd know the standard of footy is deplorable. If we want our draftees to develop into good players, they need to be surrounded by capable players from the start, both to set the example in workrate and professionalism as well as to ensure they're not being dragged down by the poor skills of others (arguably one reason Watson hasn't developed as well as we might have hoped).

Sydney have a proven ability to trade in players to cover a position (Laidler, Buddy, Tippett, Kennedy, etc.) and to exploit their academy to get talent that other clubs do not have access to at a bargain price. They seem to identify structural weaknesses well, but exploit the salary cap and academy for advantage over other teams. Not sure Sydney's player development is really better than other teams, so their rejects are no better than ours (ie. Laidler, Garlett, Robbo, etc.).

Watson needs more AFL game time. Maybe then he would develop - as his last full game against Essendon was OK . In His cameo (subbed out) game this year he was given no opportunities (but also made none ).

 

[Blue__Balls]

Sydney have a proven ability to trade in players to cover a position (Laidler, Buddy, Tippett, Kennedy, etc.) and to exploit their academy to get talent that other clubs do not have access to at a bargain price. They seem to identify structural weaknesses well, but exploit the salary cap and academy for advantage over other teams. Not sure Sydney's player development is really better than other teams, so their rejects are no better than ours (ie. Laidler, Garlett, Robbo, etc.).

Watson needs more AFL game time. Maybe then he would develop - as his last full game against Essendon was OK . In His cameo (subbed out) game this year he was given no opportunities (but also made none ).

Dan Hannebery - Pick 30
Sam Reid - Pick 38
Luke Parker - Pick 40
Dane Rampe - rookie
Kieren Jack - rookie
Nick Smith - rookie
Jake Lloyd - rookie
Harry Cunningham - rookie

Looks like some decent development to me...

You can't honestly say that Sydney's cast-offs aren't potentially better than ours. Some, sure, but they've got the talent on their list to be able to delist average players while we've been forced to retain some pretty ordinary sorts for years.

 

[chunkylover53]

Yup... I am sure that being delisted by Sydney is a really s**t thing if you can't break into their side.... if he has been struggling to break into their NEAFL side, then I would be more worried.

Sydney are generally pretty spot on with their youth. If they saw something they liked, they would have kept him.

Again, I'm not saying he won't make it. But I feel like people shouldn't get so worked up when he is graded differently to others.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I'm always happy to hear an opinion but that opinion won't sway me from what I see.
You say that this is a results driven industry and I agree......................so why have we the same people at the helm?

Show me one result they can hang their hat on? Employment? Membership? Financial? Unity?
Not much there is there but whilst they're happily swinging the axe, their heads remain intact because their not honest enough to put their own head on the chopping block...........this game is too much fun.

Their heads are on the chopping block. Anybody is free to stand against this board and get voted in by the members. Hardly anybody puts their hand up.

As for the same people at the helm ... probably the two most important are the president and the CEO. One took over his role mid 2014 and the other late 2015. You have to assume that merely being on the board doesn't make you responsible for all that goes wrong. Kernahan had his way and his advisors, MLG has his. We do not know if all directors agreed with every decision that has been made so we have to judge based on specifically what they are responsible for.

However there are some directors with specific skill sets that lie in areas we are deficient in. It is appropriate to question the value those directors are adding. They can't all be there to raise $15k cash each a year and rubber stamp everything. It's just hard to get a handle on who is pulling their weight.

 

[BluesRule]

Dan Hannebery - Pick 30
Sam Reid - Pick 38
Luke Parker - Pick 40
Dane Rampe - rookie
Kieren Jack - rookie
Nick Smith - rookie
Jake Lloyd - rookie
Harry Cunningham - rookie

Looks like some decent development to me...

You can't honestly say that Sydney's cast-offs aren't potentially better than ours. Some, sure, but they've got the talent on their list to be able to delist average players while we've been forced to retain some pretty ordinary sorts for years.

Everybody has some luck in the draft. We got Simmo and Fev with late picks, plus Jammo, Bell, Joseph (now Adelaide), Garlett (Melb), and a host of our best players were Rookies. We got Crippa at #13, Fyfe went second round!

Sydney got NSW boys Jack, Rampe and Cunningham, plus they still get access to the best in Victoria etc.

Sydney develop well, but are so good due to competitive advantages in salary cap (trading) and academy (discounted talent). They also trade so well the AFL banned them

Agree CFC need the best talent available, playing their optimal position, plus fully trained and motivated. Do not care if it comes from Sydney or Ireland!

Given what we now know who would you prefer Dick or Laidler?

 

[DaVillaBlues]

Everybody has some luck in the draft. We got Simmo and Fev with late picks, plus Jammo, Bell, Joseph (now Adelaide), Garlett (Melb), and a host of our best players were Rookies. We got Crippa at #13, Fyfe went second round!

Sydney got NSW boys Jack, Rampe and Cunningham, plus they still get access to the best in Victoria etc.

Sydney develop well, but are so good due to competitive advantages in salary cap (trading) and academy (discounted talent). They also trade so well the AFL banned them

Agree CFC need the best talent available, playing their optimal position, plus fully trained and motivated. Do not care if it comes from Sydney or Ireland!

Given what we now know who would you prefer Dick or Laidler?

Laidler was dropped again last week, wish people would move on, he would hardly make a difference to our squad right now, we have far more pressing issues.

The only player we lost on the last five years that would make a substantial and positive difference to our team right now is Jacobs.

Dick was a freebie we picked up for nothing as a DFA, I don't see what the issue is there ..

 

[Sin City]

Laidler was dropped again last week, wish people would move on, he would hardly make a difference to our squad right now, we have far more pressing issues.
..

He was out with an ankle injury

 

[FoeverBlues]

Everybody has some luck in the draft. We got Simmo and Fev with late picks, plus Jammo, Bell, Joseph (now Adelaide), Garlett (Melb), and a host of our best players were Rookies. We got Crippa at #13, Fyfe went second round!

Sydney got NSW boys Jack, Rampe and Cunningham, plus they still get access to the best in Victoria etc.

Sydney develop well, but are so good due to competitive advantages in salary cap (trading) and academy (discounted talent). They also trade so well the AFL banned them

Agree CFC need the best talent available, playing their optimal position, plus fully trained and motivated. Do not care if it comes from Sydney or Ireland!

Given what we now know who would you prefer Dick or Laidler?

Dick for me as they say a "Dick in hand worth two in the bush"