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

[MC Extra Dollop]

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.

Just as much moving of the goal posts there, I'm afraid. Hawthorn was doing pretty much what Melbourne was doing in the same era. Hawthorn hit on its draft picks, by and large; Melbourne didn't (to put it kindly). A first round compensation pick wasn't on offer until Melbourne was on to about its third rebuild in this era.

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.

I honestly don't see all the fuss about him. If some of these St Kilda players were as good as people seem to think they are, the team wouldn't be getting smashed by 20 goals every other week. He's a good player and that's about it, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Why? What's the chance that pick 4 ends up better than Steven? At best you'd be on average getting a similar standard of player. There's a chance you get a gun but there's a chance you get a spud too and Steven is quality. You also put yourself further up s**t creek in the short-term and getting thrashed consistently can't be good for anybody's development.

The obligatory Melbourne brainfart(s) aside, I'd say there's a very good chance that your pick four ends up better than Steven, going by the players that have been taken there since Steven's draft year, as well as the remaining top ten picks in those years (the odd F/S pick aside):

2007: Cale Morton (Grant, Myers, Palmer, Henderson, McEvoy, Dangerfield)
2008: Hamish Hartlett (Hurley, Yarran, Rich, Vickery, Ziebell, Davis )
2009: Anthony Morabito (Cunnington, Rohan, Sheppard, Butcher, Moore, Melksham)
2010: Andrew Gaff (Polec, Conca, Caddy, Heppell, Prestia, Gorringe)
2011: Will Hoskin-Elliott (Buntine, Wingard, Haynes, Longer, Tomlinson, Sumner)
2012: Jimmy Toumpas (Stringer, Macrae, Wines, Mayes, Vlastuin, Daniher)
2013: Marcus Bontempelli (Kolodjashnij, Scharenberg, Aish, McDonald, Salem, Freeman)
2014: Jarrod Pickett (De Goey, Marchbank, Ahern, Wright, Moore, Cockatoo)

 

[dazbroncos]

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.

Agree. In isolation id say that PD is not, as you say, worth matching and forcing a trade to get what, a GHS type? However, footy is not done in a vacuum.
AFC having lost several big names over time, they may very well get more emotive over this ( as we did with GAJ) than we expect. And fair enough. It just might not be the best outcome for them as a result.

GO Catters

 

[catempire]

 

[Willo_]

Can stop talking about Steven now at least, had signed until the end of 2020 I just read on twitter.

EDIT : beat me to it CE

 

[catman2006]

So Dangerfield and S Selwood it is for us next year handy additions to the midfield

 

[you pick one]

Well I've watched 5 seasons of Breaking Bad over the off,I've seen Walts demise,and purchased a squillion dollars of rubbish on ebay, it's time for the footy to get underway.These next 12 days are going to drag.

 

[Lana]

Just as much moving of the goal posts there, I'm afraid. Hawthorn was doing pretty much what Melbourne was doing in the same era. Hawthorn hit on its draft picks, by and large; Melbourne didn't (to put it kindly). A first round compensation pick wasn't on offer until Melbourne was on to about its third rebuild in this era.

Not really, my second sentence is me summering what I fell is the topic of the discussion. I probably should I explained why if felt that you moved the goal posts in more detail.

• The question isn't about how important is having a large number of having 1st round draft pick in order to obtain a premiership. No s**t of course they are important. You chose Hawthorn in 2008 but you could have chose any premiership team in the draft era most would have a similar number of 1st round picks in there team.
• The relevant question what should a team give up in the short to obtain first round picks and there potential future benefits.
• The reason why the Hawthorn isn't comparable is due to the manner they got the picks, they didn't trade 3 of there best players for mid to late first round picks. Hawthorn received 2 first round priority(pick 2 2004 and pick 3 2005) picks that St Kilda would have received if the same standard of compensation existed to day.
• The reason why Melbourne is a good example isn't because of the number of first round picks they have had. It's because they purposely damaged there ability to play in the short term in order to bring in new talent. They forced out a lot of senior players out even they were individually in good form but when the team wasn't playing well, which resulted in a lot of off issues and gave the younger too much responsibility well before they were read.

I honestly don't see all the fuss about him. If some of these St Kilda players were as good as people seem to think they are, the team wouldn't be getting smashed by 20 goals every other week. He's a good player and that's about it, as far as I'm concerned.

He's no Judd in 2008 but he is their best midfielder, the difference between worst team and top teams usually isn't there top end talent but rather how much of it is in there prime and how far does the list bat. However in St kilda's case like Melbourne they do in fact have a large shortage in mature talent
due to the aforementioned sacrificing of mature players for future picks. Which is hardly due to any inadequacy on Steven's part. if St Kilda had 2 or 3 more players like him they'd be pushing for finals with a healthy list.

Anyway he resigned until 2020 clearly he was never going anywhere.

 

[dazbroncos]

Good for the saints. Need this to counter the top teams taking all the good stuff arguements.

Good for the comp too.
Go Catters

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Not really, my second sentence is me summering what I fell is the topic of the discussion. I probably should I explained why if felt that you moved the goal posts in more detail.

• The question isn't about how important is having a large number of having 1st round draft pick in order to obtain a premiership. No s**t of course they are important. You chose Hawthorn in 2008 but you could have chose any premiership team in the draft era most would have a similar number of 1st round picks in there team.
• The relevant question what should a team give up in the short to obtain first round picks and there potential future benefits.
• The reason why the Hawthorn isn't comparable is due to the manner they got the picks, they didn't trade 3 of there best players for mid to late first round picks. Hawthorn received 2 first round priority(pick 2 2004 and pick 3 2005) picks that St Kilda would have received if the same standard of compensation existed to day.
• The reason why Melbourne is a good example isn't because of the number of first round picks they have had. It's because they purposely damaged there ability to play in the short term in order to bring in new talent. They forced out a lot of senior players out even they were individually in good form but when the team wasn't playing well, which resulted in a lot of off issues and gave the younger too much responsibility well before they were read.

And my point is, then there's really no case study to suggest whether a team in St Kilda's position would be better off letting players of Steven's ilk walk, because the current free agency set-up is only in its infancy. Cameron Bruce and James McDonald (both in their early 30s by the time they finished up at Melbourne) aren't exactly Jack Steven and Ben McEvoy. Melbourne went the straight (onfield) tanking route and made horrible mistakes on draft day. You could say those mistakes were still occurring recently: not a single player that Melbourne took in the 2011 national draft or rookie draft is even still in the AFL. How is that even possible?

If you draft like Melbourne has over the past 10-12 years, you'll be a terrible team no matter what. St Kilda would probably be hoping to do slightly better.

He's no Judd in 2008 but he is their best midfielder, the difference between worst team and top teams usually isn't there top end talent but rather how much of it is in there prime and how far does the list bat. However in St kilda's case like Melbourne they do in fact have a large shortage in mature talent
due to the aforementioned sacrificing of mature players for future picks. Which is hardly due to any inadequacy on Steven's part. if St Kilda had 2 or 3 more players like him they'd be pushing for finals with a healthy list.

Anyway he resigned until 2020 clearly he was never going anywhere.

Wow. I respectfully disagree. St Kilda was an absolute rabble last year and I've seen nothing to suggest that the Saints will be much better this year.

 

[Partridge]

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.

Which you could argue, they've already done by bringing in McIntosh.

 

[MarkCatsFan]

Just did a rewatch of the 2013 Prelim (although the stream tragically cut out at 3/4 time. I forget what happens next) and it struck me how much our list has actually changed since then. The difference between us in 2013 and 2015 is at least as significant as the difference between us in 2011 and 2013. This really shouldn't be a surprise but I guess the little changes accumulated and it snuck up on me.

Anyways our forward line is definitely going to be our strength this year, whereas it was our weakness (among other things) last year. The midfield is going to be hurting without Christensen there, which again is just a no-s**t Sherlock observation but upon watching old matches it really hits home.

It's looking like a transition year to me (and I NEVER say that, I'm usually the poster with rose coloured glasses) but I'm going to enjoy the ride whatever happens.

Top 4 again probably, but it won't count for much in the end. Hopefully not straight sets this time.

 

[Lana]

Which you could argue, they've already done by bringing in McIntosh.

I was under the impression that his contract is quite modest and front loaded. 3 years 1 million in total. Half it paid in the first year.

 

[you pick one]

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.

You will have your answer if Dangerfield comes over and Hawkins goes somewhere else if we don't give him a similar deal.

 

[catempire]

You will have your answer if Dangerfield comes over and Hawkins goes somewhere else if we don't give him a similar deal.

Can't believe you think Hawkins is still an "if" to go elsewhere. Or ever was.

 

[you pick one]

Can't believe you think Hawkins is still an "if" to go elsewhere. Or ever was.

Won't rest till I've seen he's signed.

 

[catempire]

Won't rest till I've seen he's signed.

Rest. It's done.

 

[Lana]

Rest. It's done.

Source?

 

[catempire]

Source?

Crystal ball. Wouldn't be surprised if it was announced at the season launch tomorrow.

 

[Turbocat]

Good for the saints. Need this to counter the top teams taking all the good stuff arguements.

Good for the comp too.
Go Catters

SEN had him getting 3.6M for the 5 years so 720K a year , obvious beyond what we would pay him. Good luck to him.., maybe the Saints have just about got enough early picks

 

[Turbocat]

I was under the impression that his contract is quite modest and front loaded. 3 years 1 million in total. Half it paid in the first year.

500 for zero games. Hardly a bargain.
250 & 250 , that would be value if he plays 10 games imo. So value last year , this year we will see. 250 a year is really backup money isn't hardly #1 ruck money.

 

[Lana]

500 for zero games. Hardly a bargain.
250 & 250 , that would be value if he plays 10 games imo. So value last year , this year we will see. 250 a year is really backup money isn't hardly #1 ruck money.

Hindsight is 20-20, at the time I felt that it was fair. The reason it was front loaded is that what his last contract from North was.

 

[Turbocat]

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.

The Pasties Peake issue.

To a degree there must be some education to the key players about what has to be done to make the side better for the clubs , for the players etc. That may mean more upfront or more in first contract. It a FA world now , and it will only be more fluid if the AFLPA get it down to 6 and 8.

 

[Turbocat]

Hindsight is 20-20, at the time I felt that it was fair. The reason it was front loaded is that what his last contract from North was.

You live and die on the outcome. If he had play 10 games and starred in the finals for us 500K is fine , but not play any was a gamble lost. Not playing any games and not having any backup was two or three gambles lost.
I dont mind the idea , or the attempt but we all get graded on the outcome.

 

[Turbocat]

Can't believe you think Hawkins is still an "if" to go elsewhere. Or ever was.

I guess we have been programmed to think all players are capable of walking if there is enough money thrown at them. But perhaps we should think on SJ.
What was he offered 4 or 5 years at 700 or 800 at GWS. Said no , and may only play one year. Some times playing is more than just the two hours in the turf, its the where and the who with just as much.