List Mgmt. COLLINGWOOD Trade & FA 2024

[Babylove]

We have list depth?

Allan still hasn't even ripped a vfl game apart.
So far not AFL relevant looks a bit of a loafer across the ground despite his draft screening. Big bodied but doesn't use it. Really needs a big development year.

We have 0 decent talented KPP prospects coming through (wonder why).

Ryan like Allan is just going at that level to date. No stand out attributes.

Harrison has shown promise at VFL but nothing in an AFL since yet but not exposed.

Steene showed some preseason signs he could be handy in the future.

A heap of mature listed talents and rookie listed players.

Begg who knows what role they even have in mind for him bit of a Tristan Walker type.

Demattia and Tew look promising.

Noble is good depth.

AJ is another depth type given his inconsistency but hey they ask him to play a role he is not suited go back to point one no kpf.

Krueger was a hail Mary on a athletic injury prone type. Unfortunately his body won't let him hold up to the way he plays nor AFL/VFL footy.

We have a dearth of talent coming through and the club has no one to blame but itself thinking they can circumvent the draft and reinvent the wheel.

Beams was 2 late firsts in the teens.

Treloar 2x pick 7 only trade him out for unders and pay for teh privilege.

We split a top 5 pick for picks to secure poulter and McMahon.

Waisted pick on Jayden Stephenson over KPP A.Naughton and then Traded him for a pack of peanuts.

Gave Henry to Geelong for a future 2nd.

Gave Grundy to Melbourne for a pack of winnie reds.

Traded eventual pick 2 which could of been used to double up with Nick Daicos.

Traded Ginnivan to Hawks for pick swaps which could see us giving him to Hawks for nothing and giving them pick upgrades for that privilege.

Paid what looks a top 10 pick and a pick 33 for Schultz.


Fair dinkum and you wonder why there is nothing coming through lol.

Just on Ryan and Allan, I wouldn’t be quick to write them off just yet. If I could be stuffed looking back over the last four years I could probably find 100s of similar statements being said about Fin Macrae and Reef McInness. Even amongst midfielders and General Forwards and Defenders some guys take time to develop.

Don’t forget this is Allan and Ryan’s second season and this last preseason was their first full preseason, and second-year blues is a real thing for many players (not saying this necessarily applies to Allan or Ryan, though it may, time will tell). Does this help our depth this season? Maybe, maybe not, depends on their development this season. But based on what I saw yesterday I don’t think we should be so quick to dismiss them.

I think we as fans forget that the AFL ready first and second year players are the exception rather than the rule.

 

[Scodog10]

Perkins has talent, no doubt. Taken a bit longer, but it’s still 1 from 3 top 10 picks, 8,9 and 10. Granted Reid has been injured a lot, I was just highlighting that there’s no guarantees. I think the draft is becoming more diluted (as we saw last year) and less even valuable. Top 5 picks are mostly elite, no arguments there.

The issue I see with picks is lack of trade currency, not necessarily the draft.

We will only be able to target FA’s. Don’t think there’s to many

I think he might be a bit better than that unfortunately. I definitely agree though on the guarantees of a draft pick and to me the hand wringing is ridiculous over what amounts to a nothing pick when we’re at the start of Rd 2*. My post in terms of it being being a win for them was also to highlight the vagaries of drafting. It’s a bloody hard gig.

Take 2020 most view that draft with a sour taste because of the trade, but that looks like it could wind up one of Hine’s best 3 drafts over a 20 year period. I think there’ll be 3 players that get to 100 matches and I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s 5. That’s pretty incredible considering the context of the season lost to Covid, but no one on here will look back on it fondly because of the trade that cost us Callaghan (unless we somehow trade him in) and the two we’ve traded out.

*my mind will shift on the pick though the further it slides toward the top 5.

We nearly had Goldy across the line.

Which would have been a terrible mistake in the context of having Cox until 2025. It worked if Cox was moved on, but both on the list was a poor move, IMO.

 

[Scodog10]

Just on Ryan and Allan, I wouldn’t be quick to write them off just yet. If I could be stuffed looking back over the last four years I could probably find 100s of similar statements being said about Fin Macrae and Reef McInness. Even amongst midfielders and General Forwards and Defenders some guys take time to develop.

Don’t forget this is Allan and Ryan’s second season and this last preseason was their first full preseason, and second-year blues is a real thing for many players (not saying this necessarily applies to Allan or Ryan, though it may, time will tell). Does this help our depth this season? Maybe, maybe not, depends on their development this season. But based on what I saw yesterday I don’t think we should be so quick to dismiss them.

I think we as fans forget that the AFL ready first and second year players are the exception rather than the rule.

I’m inclined to agree with you, but I have to acknowledge the points Loki made. Whilst I was feeling it with Allan this time last year I’m not currently to the same degree.

It’s little things like him seeming to always be caught with the ball or the opposition get a hand in whenever he disposes of it which I think comes from a lack of urgency. The best comparison would be to how Langdon ball in head would always be on the verge of being run down despite having elite pace. There’s something there, but I think he’s a long way off a debut at the moment which isn’t how the players you mentioned were introduced to the senior mix. Both Macrae and McInnes were introduced relatively early in terms of availability (Reef lost a lot of his first year due to the back issues of his draft year).

I’m less convinced by Ryan. Basically all of my positivity was driven by the club and the drafting of TJ is really going to challenge him, IMO.

 

[gouki88]

These were the reactions when I said we needed a rebuild after round 2. I was right then and I'm right now.

No amount of delusion and apologia is going to fix our list. Let's just hope the happy clapper voices are soon drowned out and the club does what needs to be done.

Patience would do you some good. Might have prevented some curious takes about Fly early in the piece

 

[memoryofmchale]

We have list depth?

Allan still hasn't even ripped a vfl game apart.
So far not AFL relevant looks a bit of a loafer across the ground despite his draft screening. Big bodied but doesn't use it. Really needs a big development year.

We have 0 decent talented KPP prospects coming through (wonder why).

Ryan like Allan is just going at that level to date. No stand out attributes.

Harrison has shown promise at VFL but nothing in an AFL since yet but not exposed.

Steene showed some preseason signs he could be handy in the future.

A heap of mature listed talents and rookie listed players.

Begg who knows what role they even have in mind for him bit of a Tristan Walker type.

Demattia and Tew look promising.

Noble is good depth.

AJ is another depth type given his inconsistency but hey they ask him to play a role he is not suited go back to point one no kpf.

Krueger was a hail Mary on a athletic injury prone type. Unfortunately his body won't let him hold up to the way he plays nor AFL/VFL footy.

We have a dearth of talent coming through and the club has no one to blame but itself thinking they can circumvent the draft and reinvent the wheel.

Beams was 2 late firsts in the teens.

Treloar 2x pick 7 only trade him out for unders and pay for teh privilege.

We split a top 5 pick for picks to secure poulter and McMahon.

Waisted pick on Jayden Stephenson over KPP A.Naughton and then Traded him for a pack of peanuts.

Gave Henry to Geelong for a future 2nd.

Gave Grundy to Melbourne for a pack of winnie reds.

Traded eventual pick 2 which could of been used to double up with Nick Daicos.

Traded Ginnivan to Hawks for pick swaps which could see us giving him to Hawks for nothing and giving them pick upgrades for that privilege.

Paid what looks a top 10 pick and a pick 33 for Schultz.


Fair dinkum and you wonder why there is nothing coming through lol.

What do you expect from players? That 18-21 year olds will burst out of the blocks and suddenly star? Not how development works but it doesn’t mean we don’t have depth.

Allan is someone who has performed well at VFL level and performed well enough that I feel confident he can make it.

Ryan can run. Developing attributes well.

Within the mature listed, you could play Bytel and especially Sullivan tomorrow. They had 55 touches and were laughing the whole time against St Kilda.

Begg’s Collingwood career is over. I guess we held on to him as rucks don’t grow on trees.

For McMahon, we got Reef in the split.

Retrospective drafting may work on paper but that’s not how it happens at the time. Same with trading. We learn from it.

Lastly, Ginni was out the door for every reason apart from talent.

 

[Jen2310]

I wonder if Allan could be one that will just perform better at senior level. Some kids are like that.
I reckon we will find out this year


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[No SPIN]

What do you expect from players? That 18-21 year olds will burst out of the blocks and suddenly star? Not how development works but it doesn’t mean we don’t have depth.

Allan is someone who has performed well at VFL level and performed well enough that I feel confident he can make it.

Ryan can run. Developing attributes well.

Within the mature listed, you could play Bytel and especially Sullivan tomorrow. They had 55 touches and were laughing the whole time against St Kilda.

Begg’s Collingwood career is over. I guess we held on to him as rucks don’t grow on trees.

For McMahon, we got Reef in the split.

Retrospective drafting may work on paper but that’s not how it happens at the time. Same with trading. We learn from it.

Lastly, Ginni was out the door for every reason apart from talent.

Agree - and when you recruit McStay, Hill, Schultz, Frampton, Mitchell, Markov who all become best 22, then by definition it reduces opportunity for the kids. So is anyone seriously suggesting we should stop successfully recruiting in this way, and just focus on youth?
I hope not.

 

[shizzle]

Personally I think trading future first rd picks should be reserved for all australians or young players on that sort of trajectory.

Schultz is simply a good ordinary footballer. Same goes for unnecessary long term contracts(McStay).

The problem isn't the players we've targeted, but how we've done so. There was no competition for McStay, no other team was offering anything, it was known for almost an entire year prior that he'd be coming to the us. He's not a spud, but he's not a bloke you give 5 years to at his age.

 

[No SPIN]

Personally I think trading future first rd picks should be reserved for all australians or young players on that sort of trajectory.

Schultz is simply a good ordinary footballer. Same goes for unnecessary long term contracts(McStay).

The problem isn't the players we've targeted, but how we've done so. There was no competition for McStay, no other team was offering anything, it was known for almost an entire year prior that he'd be coming to the us. He's not a spud, but he's not a bloke you give 5 years to at his age.

Why was McStay not worthy of 5 years?

 

[soreplums]

Personally I think trading future first rd picks should be reserved for all australians or young players on that sort of trajectory.

Schultz is simply a good ordinary footballer. Same goes for unnecessary long term contracts(McStay).

The problem isn't the players we've targeted, but how we've done so. There was no competition for McStay, no other team was offering anything, it was known for almost an entire year prior that he'd be coming to the us. He's not a spud, but he's not a bloke you give 5 years to at his age.

I’d happily give him 5 years at the price we paid him. If his contract doesn’t have the incremental increase in salary due to CBA negotiations it’s a bargain for a player who structurely is so important to us.
Could almost go as far as saying we may not have been playing off for a premiership without his purple patch against GWS.

 

[brysie]

Great post.

The club appears to have mismanaged the use of its 2024 first round pick. What is the value in draft picks? Well the draft pick is the only trade expense given to clubs for free each year. There's never any certainty one can improve their list with the players currently on their list. Draft picks are free assets which have trade value.

Clubs with the same list management/recruiting team for a few years will be aware of their strengths and weaknesses when it comes to drafting and developing certain positions. Collingwood has a well known history of not being able to draft and develop good talls, minus a couple of outliers and a F/S in Moore. Meanwhile the Pies have a strong crop of small forwards mostly drafted and developed by the club. Only Hill was traded in, but he enjoyed a career year in his first at Collingwood. This is a position the club can fairly back themselves in to continue to draft and nurture talent without the use of high draft picks.

Draft picks should really be used to, when given the opportunity, circumvent the time and risks of drafting in a position with weak development history, in order to acquire a ready-made player with little development needed. Our 2024 first round pick, if traded, should have been reserved for a key position player or uniquely skilled midfielder. Schultz can be a quality player for us, but it can still stand that attaining him may leave us in a weaker position in the future due to the club not trading that pick for a true positional need. On Thursday, we saw Reef given the chance where he kicked 3 and pressured well, and Harvey Harrison has shown nice things in his few games. Hill-Elliott-McCreery-McInnes-Harrison is a good enough group to roll on with even if we still traded Ginnivan. Mihocek, McStay (now injured), Kreuger and Johnson is not a good enough tall forward group to roll with with respect to where it will be in 3 years' time.

So with an aging list which is now declining (resulting in less trade worth come trade week), the club appears to have traded one of its most prized tradable assets to recruit a player we weren't short in his position's depth for.

I don’t think there’s a definitive answer re: the Schulz trade. I understand the argument that the push was for back to back and acquiring him would help that. That should however have been balanced with the cost of the pick which, if everyone is being honest with themselves, is currently unknown however looks to be higher than expected.

The other relevant factors which can be shaped either for or against include the fact that Schulz is a quality player whom other clubs were chasing but still has time on his side, that Elliott won’t go on forever and he’s a ready-made replacement, that we’re seemingly stacked in that area of the ground, that a first round pick in 2024 is unlikely to make an immediate impact in 2025 etc.

When McRae came into Collingwood in 2022, it was off the back of a dysfunctional board and a President who, in hindsight, had overstayed his welcome. There were sweeping changes being made at the club, which McRae was a part of. His success however should not (in my opinion) be viewed as job done, rather a measure of the character and ability of the man to extract something when he had no real right or expectation to do so.

2024 is now the new normal; what happened last season can’t be taken away from the club or the players, however it is in and of itself irrelevant to anything going forward. We still have an ageing list, only it’s 2 years older than when McRae took over. In those 2 years however opposition coaches and clubs, some with much better lists, have had the chance to analyse McRae’s methods and devise plans to combat them. Further, the northern clubs are getting louder each day with calls to improve what they claim to be inequalities within the competition, and the AFL, at least for the time being, is listening.

Now is a good time for the club to continue to audit itself, especially with the Tasmania Devils on the near horizon (subject to the election today). Talent identification and recruitment is one facet of the club.

Another I’d like to see reviewed is the level to which commercialisation and cooperation with the AFL effects the on-field performance - e.g. if the club agrees to play marquee fixtures which the AFL wants it to (such as Opening Round), should we be required to play at Marvel at all, let alone hosting a strong tenant like the Dogs?

The Swans and GWS (and GC, although to a lesser extent now that Cochrane has left) have been quite vocal in the media, which isn’t unexpected given they’re typically supported by the AFL. Previously, Eddie was one of the few Presidents who was willing to speak out where he thought it was in Collingwood’s interest, even if against the AFL. I’d like to see a review conducted by the club into its communication and marketing strategies, and whether these presently reflect the views of all of its stakeholders, including most notably its fans.

Two pertinent examples of the club’s willingness to tow the line in recent memory are its silence on other teams’ potting us for not travelling, despite our great interstate record or the fact that most other Victorian clubs play the same number of games in Victoria as we do (unless they elect to sell games), as well as what to me was an acceptance at the time of a what was a very difficult fixture in 2022, despite finishing 17th the season before.

To me the AFL landscape appears to be shifting. In my view now is an ideal time for the club to conduct a root and branch review of all aspects of its operations, so as to set the club up for sustained success in the future.

 

[gouki88]

Personally I think trading future first rd picks should be reserved for all australians or young players on that sort of trajectory.

Schultz is simply a good ordinary footballer. Same goes for unnecessary long term contracts(McStay).

The problem isn't the players we've targeted, but how we've done so. There was no competition for McStay, no other team was offering anything, it was known for almost an entire year prior that he'd be coming to the us. He's not a spud, but he's not a bloke you give 5 years to at his age.

I don't really have any issue on a team gambling its first when they think they'll be competitive next season. It hurts when it doesn't pay off, but I'm okay with it in certain contexts.

 

[stormskye]

I’d happily give him 5 years at the price we paid him. If his contract doesn’t have the incremental increase in salary due to CBA negotiations it’s a bargain for a player who structurely is so important to us.
Could almost go as far as saying we may not have been playing off for a premiership without his purple patch against GWS.

This was my thoughts exactly.

Mcstay was clunking marks and averaging 2 goals a game. On 600kish he’d be the cheapest KPP out there for form and talent. 5 years of that production is fine with me.

Just been unlucky with injuries… which he didn’t have at Bris

 

[soreplums]

This was my thoughts exactly.

Mcstay was clunking marks and averaging 2 goals a game. On 600kish he’d be the cheapest KPP out there for form and talent. 5 years of that production is fine with me.

Just been unlucky with injuries… which he didn’t have at Bris

The added value he has is that when he doesn’t clunk them, it comes to ground and brings Hill and co ito play.
He also gives checkers some relief from being physically pounded each week.
Also, let’s not forget that McStay if desperately needed can play key back (although, I don’t think that is where his value to us is as a team).

 

[No SPIN]

I don’t think there’s a definitive answer re: the Schulz trade. I understand the argument that the push was for back to back and acquiring him would help that. That should however have been balanced with the cost of the pick which, if everyone is being honest with themselves, is currently unknown however looks to be higher than expected.

The other relevant factors which can be shaped either for or against include the fact that Schulz is a quality player whom other clubs were chasing but still has time on his side, that Elliott won’t go on forever and he’s a ready-made replacement, that we’re seemingly stacked in that area of the ground, that a first round pick in 2024 is unlikely to make an immediate impact in 2025 etc.

When McRae came into Collingwood in 2022, it was off the back of a dysfunctional board and a President who, in hindsight, had overstayed his welcome. There were sweeping changes being made at the club, which McRae was a part of. His success however should not (in my opinion) be viewed as job done, rather a measure of the character and ability of the man to extract something when he had no real right or expectation to do so.

2024 is now the new normal; what happened last season can’t be taken away from the club or the players, however it is in and of itself irrelevant to anything going forward. We still have an ageing list, only it’s 2 years older than when McRae took over. In those 2 years however opposition coaches and clubs, some with much better lists, have had the chance to analyse McRae’s methods and devise plans to combat them. Further, the northern clubs are getting louder each day with calls to improve what they claim to be inequalities within the competition, and the AFL, at least for the time being, is listening.

Now is a good time for the club to continue to audit itself, especially with the Tasmania Devils on the near horizon (subject to the election today). Talent identification and recruitment is one facet of the club.

Another I’d like to see reviewed is the level to which commercialisation and cooperation with the AFL effects the on-field performance - e.g. if the club agrees to play marquee fixtures which the AFL wants it to (such as Opening Round), should we be required to play at Marvel at all, let alone hosting a strong tenant like the Dogs?

The Swans and GWS (and GC, although to a lesser extent now that Cochrane has left) have been quite vocal in the media, which isn’t unexpected given they’re typically supported by the AFL. Previously, Eddie was one of the few Presidents who was willing to speak out where he thought it was in Collingwood’s interest, even if against the AFL. I’d like to see a review conducted by the club into its communication and marketing strategies, and whether these presently reflect the views of all of its stakeholders, including most notably its fans.

Two pertinent examples of the club’s willingness to tow the line in recent memory are its silence on other teams’ potting us for not travelling, despite our great interstate record or the fact that most other Victorian clubs play the same number of games in Victoria as we do (unless they elect to sell games), as well as what to me was an acceptance at the time of a what was a very difficult fixture in 2022, despite finishing 17th the season before.

To me the AFL landscape appears to be shifting. In my view now is an ideal time for the club to conduct a root and branch review of all aspects of its operations, so as to set the club up for sustained success in the future.

A “ root and branch review” after winning the flag, followed by a slow start?
You obviously think it’s panic stations.

 

[gouki88]

This was my thoughts exactly.

Mcstay was clunking marks and averaging 2 goals a game. On 600kish he’d be the cheapest KPP out there for form and talent. 5 years of that production is fine with me.

Just been unlucky with injuries… which he didn’t have at Bris

He was super helpful R18-PF.

Kicked 17.4 (so accurate!), took marks and had presence.

 

[soreplums]

There’s a premiership window tax. Club’s will be willing to pay more and will be asked for more the closer they are to a premiership.
A future first and a second round pick for Schultz is overs. If Liam Henry was happy to come to the Pies then a deal for both of them fits.
Future firsts should be used for plugging holes to get you to take the next step to help get you over the line (eg Jolly and Ball). Or a player that you know will be in the top echelon of players and you can build a team around.
2023 first wasn’t going to cut it for a club coming off a premiership given it was a pick that was going to be pushed back.
I would have liked to see if we could have upgraded our 2023 first rounder and then see if Freo would have been happy with a pick inside 20.

 

[brysie]

A “ root and branch review” after winning the flag, followed by a slow start?
You obviously think it’s panic stations.

No, it’s not panic stations. And it’s not a slow start.

It’s what responsible organisations do on a continual basis, particularly following large achievements, periods of success or when results begin to change.

 

[memoryofmchale]

Agree - and when you recruit McStay, Hill, Schultz, Frampton, Mitchell, Markov who all become best 22, then by definition it reduces opportunity for the kids. So is anyone seriously suggesting we should stop successfully recruiting in this way, and just focus on youth?
I hope not.

The old days of take five at the draft, bring in one are over. St Kilda took five last year and I guarantee you only one or two will make it - apart from boosting odds, there’s not really much point to take more than three.

As a club, we have a ceiling for how high we even bother to draft because there’s just no point stats-wise after it. You’re better signing an established player.

 

[No SPIN]

No, it’s not panic stations. And it’s not a slow start.

It’s what responsible organisations do on a continual basis, particularly following large achievements, periods of success or when results begin to change.

Can’t agree “root and branch “ review is a response to a crisis.

 

[brysie]

Can’t agree “root and branch “ review is a response to a crisis.

But you can rarely agree anything with anyone on here, particularly certain posters whom you seem to take a ‘liking’ to.

 

[loki04]

A few things Leroy Jetta? Duursma? Really? The logic of these types of arguments is always flawed because it assumes that the team trading the pick out would have selected the same player. The real comparison is v the rest of the draft available at that pick. Lastly none of those players was offering in years 1-3 what Shoota will in years 1-4. What does that period also coincide with? An older team attempting to cash in on a winning cycle. On your assessment it’s cost us a 30% chance of a good player on the basis of the past 10 drafts. I’ll take Shoota thank you very much.

To give his numbers currently, most small forwards with pace and nouse could produce.
You are talking about hitting;
12 disp, 1 goal, 3 ins 50s, 3 tackles (1.3 ins 50), 1.3 1 %ers, 4.3 score involvements and 220m gained.
To replicate that would not be a big ask for hungry quick small fwd.

They could of even just backed in HH to develop, his role was not a pressing need nor a major factor on if we went b2b.

To when combined with our recent draft history trade out of yet another draft given our list demographic was a poor decision.

You are also talking about a pick that is best case scenario of us flaging.
Yep potentially blows out to 20 or so with matching bids but again thats another guess in 12 months that draft order is vastly different.

 

[loki04]

This is the thing, if you're looking at rebuilds through the draft, you're looking at 7+ years. You're not getting much at all for our 30+ guys. You'd be looking at trading out JDG, Moore and Bruzzy as your chance of getting picks. * that!

But you can't keep eroding the young talent buy trading out all the time. And Hine/club esp since covid has looked to do just that.

The issue is this trade was not a one off, we have 10 year history of trading out of drafts and losing talented players for sweet fa then overpaying for anyone we bring in.

How's the relying on trading in an elite KPF going again? oh we can't land one and have a dearth of goid talent in said role.

Trading Moore, Degoey or Maynard is not necessary esp all 3.
You will see falling down the ladder will happen, and said rebuild happen without that course of action they should be leading the next wave.

Also I'd rather we build a team set for multiple cracks at flags and dynasty team then a pinch one if all things go right team. Even if it does take 5 to 7 years.

You aren't garaunteed to flag faster with a patchwork build either hell took us a long time was basically 11 years.

 

[loki04]

Going back to 2023, it was fair to go all in for a better chance for a premiership in 2024 seeing as 2024 would likely be our last chance for a flag with this list.

Getting in another kid wouldn't of helped us. I can't criticize the club for going all in for a club when we're in a window.

Going all in on a small fwd when we had no real need for him and not a position that was going to see us b2b was a poor choice.

We lost a hard nut mid who played physical brand in Adams and a talented clutch small fwd in Ginni.
Who had a more speedy pressure fwd in Harrison in the wings and sold a future off to fill the area of less need.

 

[loki04]

The pick didn't need to be spent. We could have backed in the list we had that won the flag. This start to the season would be better stomached if we didn't trade away first and second round picks. It would be nice to dream about a Max Holmes-level target but if we don't have that first round pick then how do we even come to the table?

Lol and it was only 3 years ago we finished 2nd last and people talking as if we are no chance at 0-3, with a trip to Brisbane potentially 0-4 incoming of being a bottom 10 team.
In 2021 all our 28yo and up were not done new reinvigorated game plan and coaching group resparked the team.
Belief and riding a winning wave with a new brand, allowed a 17 games over 2 seasons of winning margin less then 2 goals including the GF.
Our gameplan has been worked out, old heads looking well old, belief slowly eroding and team wide malaise on doing the hard stuff.