Snoops Annual Player Review, List and Draft Strategy

Remove this Banner Ad

Kane Lucas is a poor mans Sidebottom.
 
MagpieBat said:
Yep, Ramsay is indeed out of contract, having been drafted in 2012 and receiving the standard initial two year deal. In my opinion, has done enough for at least another year.

There's confusion as to whether Armstrong is on a 1 year deal or a 2 year deal, given he was signed as a Delisted Free Agent after Sydney tossed him out for hard rubbish collection. Can't imagine why we would give a 2 year deal to a failed player at two different clubs, when he would likely have taken a 1 year minimum chips contract to keep his career alive. He might be one of those left out of contract, but could be paid out in any event.

Oxley, I believe, received a two year contract as a result of being promoted from the rookie list. I'll stand to be corrected, but promoted rookies automatically get 2 years upon promotion to the senior list in the draft.

Gault I think is be of contract as well. I vaguely recall something about him being on a 3 year deal (2 years initially, but extended by an extra year sometime during his original draftee contract).

Other than that, I think everyone is accounted for...
Click to expand...

Armstrong demanded to go.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Apex36 said:
Where did you hear that? Never saw anything in any media reports indicating he wanted out.
Click to expand...

On the AFL website. I kept a close eye him after he played really well in the NEAFL grandfinal and heard reports he was keen on going to Collingwood.
 
MagpieBat said:
Link please?
Click to expand...

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-10-26/what-we-learned-from-the-trade-period

The Swans' decision to sign Lance Franklin to that nine-year deal represented an almighty risk and the results won't be known for some time. Franklin is a proven winner and has shown plenty of durability, averaging more than 20 games a season to date, something that will need to continue if he is any hope of playing out his $10 million deal. But the Swans have lost a significant amount of depth, something they relied so heavily upon during last season's injury-ravaged campaign. Shane Mumford, Jesse White, Jed Lamb and Andrejs Everitt have left, with Tony Armstrong likely to join them. In return they have a swag of draft picks: 15, 32, 35, 44, 53, 71, 89, 107 and 125. Few if any of them will be ready to contribute in 2014, so the Swans will be hoping for a much cleaner bill of health and a big contribution from their new marquee man. - James Dampney
Click to expand...

This is the only thing I could find right now. I know this isn't much but it suggests that Sydney were forced to reduce allot of their depth players contracts including Tony Armstrong's. We obviously offered Tony Armstrong a better deal than Sydney is is the reason the two years.
 
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-10-31/swan-armstrong-set-to-join-magpies

THE SYDNEY Swans have cleared the path for Tony Armstrong to join Collingwood as a delisted free agent, cutting the midfielder ahead of Thursday's list lodgement deadline.

The Magpies are committed to signing Armstrong once the window for delisted free agency opens on Friday.
Click to expand...

This suggest we were interested in Armstong and Armstrong wanted to come to us before he was delisted.
 
Not sure if this is the right place for it but it is a list strategy issue?
Does it annoy anyone else that for pies to get players to come across and join us they keep offering mediocre free agents long term contracts?
Im not in the same boat as some others and am certainly not 'unhappy' with bringing stop gaps such as Armstrong, Young and Varcoe over but if we have to get them to sign with us by offering the 3-4 year contracts wouldn't we be better off chasing a kid?

Off the top of my head we signed -
Russell to 2 years (who was basically delisted from Carlton)
Young to 3 years (who wasnt in Hawks best 22 - give him 2 years with conditions for a third - would have preferred him de-listed at the end of the season just gone)
Armstrong - if he really has two years - why? was there competition to sign him? Sydney were desperate to make cap space...
Now to get Varcoe and Greenwood to sign we've offered them 3 and 4 years iirc?
Varcoe isn't that good a player that warrants us having a bidding process with Geelong - hell if we have all this cap space give him a Sh*t load for one year to come over then see how he goes.
Greenwood getting four years after one good season is really concerning but I think the long term offer was a bit of a desperation move to try to cover up the loss of beams in team structures.

We arent going to have this 'treasure trough' of money in any free agency period if we keep signing mediocre guys up to fill in gaps... its poor management i'd think! And by all accounts and player comments we're guaranteeing the older players midfield minutes and overpaying what their teams were going to...Are they the difference between us being a poor side and a great side ? I'd say no!

Give the 2 years max unless they're a bona-fide star. If they dont want to come then so be it - its not as though we've given it to a 'difference maker' such as Dangerfield or Franklin
 
Scottabe_pendles said:
Not sure if this is the right place for it but it is a list strategy issue?
Does it annoy anyone else that for pies to get players to come across and join us they keep offering mediocre free agents long term contracts?
Im not in the same boat as some others and am certainly not 'unhappy' with bringing stop gaps such as Armstrong, Young and Varcoe over but if we have to get them to sign with us by offering the 3-4 year contracts wouldn't we be better off chasing a kid?

Off the top of my head we signed -
Russell to 2 years (who was basically delisted from Carlton)
Young to 3 years (who wasnt in Hawks best 22 - give him 2 years with conditions for a third - would have preferred him de-listed at the end of the season just gone)
Armstrong - if he really has two years - why? was there competition to sign him? Sydney were desperate to make cap space...
Now to get Varcoe and Greenwood to sign we've offered them 3 and 4 years iirc?
Varcoe isn't that good a player that warrants us having a bidding process with Geelong - hell if we have all this cap space give him a Sh*t load for one year to come over then see how he goes.
Greenwood getting four years after one good season is really concerning but I think the long term offer was a bit of a desperation move to try to cover up the loss of beams in team structures.

We arent going to have this 'treasure trough' of money in any free agency period if we keep signing mediocre guys up to fill in gaps... its poor management i'd think! And by all accounts and player comments we're guaranteeing the older players midfield minutes and overpaying what their teams were going to...Are they the difference between us being a poor side and a great side ? I'd say no!

Give the 2 years max unless they're a bona-fide star. If they dont want to come then so be it - its not as though we've given it to a 'difference maker' such as Dangerfield or Franklin
Click to expand...
Russell I believe was only signed for one year then delisted.

Young was absolutely best 22 at the Hawks when we signed him. He played 20 games in 2012 and only missed games through injury from memory.

The rest of your post I can agree with though.
 
Apex36 said:
Russell I believe was only signed for one year then delisted.

Young was absolutely best 22 at the Hawks when we signed him. He played 20 games in 2012 and only missed games through injury from memory.

The rest of your post I can agree with though.
Click to expand...
Sorry should clarify my young comment ... he was in the best 22 that year but wasn't seen as best 22 long term (or even in the short term future) - Hence why they only offered him a one year deal (and we offered 3)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Scottabe_pendles said:
Sorry should clarify my young comment ... he was in the best 22 that year but wasn't seen as best 22 long term (or even in the short term future) - Hence why they only offered him a one year deal (and we offered 3)
Click to expand...
They offered him a two year deal, but I get your point.
 
Snoop Dog said:
I think that to but interestin process to force rank;

Hunt
Blessed
Ramsay
Armstrong
Oxley
Newton
Robinson

Who are the two best?
Click to expand...

I was talking about Football Manager seeing as Eade is likely to go. But if we were to have a player to replace him Armstrong has the most fitting name. His strength could terrify the masses.

On the DFA we don't have enough list space to really take a punt IMO. So we might as well keep who we have or delist one so we can use pick 48.
 
Scottabe_pendles said:
Armstrong - if he really has two years - why? was there competition to sign him? Sydney were desperate to make cap space...
Click to expand...

Armstrong was given 2 years so he'd want to come to Collingwood.
 
Scottabe_pendles said:
Not sure if this is the right place for it but it is a list strategy issue?
Does it annoy anyone else that for pies to get players to come across and join us they keep offering mediocre free agents long term contracts?
Im not in the same boat as some others and am certainly not 'unhappy' with bringing stop gaps such as Armstrong, Young and Varcoe over but if we have to get them to sign with us by offering the 3-4 year contracts wouldn't we be better off chasing a kid?

Off the top of my head we signed -
Russell to 2 years (who was basically delisted from Carlton)
Young to 3 years (who wasnt in Hawks best 22 - give him 2 years with conditions for a third - would have preferred him de-listed at the end of the season just gone)
Armstrong - if he really has two years - why? was there competition to sign him? Sydney were desperate to make cap space...
Now to get Varcoe and Greenwood to sign we've offered them 3 and 4 years iirc?
Varcoe isn't that good a player that warrants us having a bidding process with Geelong - hell if we have all this cap space give him a Sh*t load for one year to come over then see how he goes.
Greenwood getting four years after one good season is really concerning but I think the long term offer was a bit of a desperation move to try to cover up the loss of beams in team structures.

We arent going to have this 'treasure trough' of money in any free agency period if we keep signing mediocre guys up to fill in gaps... its poor management i'd think! And by all accounts and player comments we're guaranteeing the older players midfield minutes and overpaying what their teams were going to...Are they the difference between us being a poor side and a great side ? I'd say no!

Give the 2 years max unless they're a bona-fide star. If they dont want to come then so be it - its not as though we've given it to a 'difference maker' such as Dangerfield or Franklin
Click to expand...

I agree with your post. I think part of our problem the last 2 seasons has been a bit of confusion over whether we are in fact challenging or rebuilding. Because we've held on to the faint hope that we are challenging we've tried to supplement the list by replacing outgoing and retiring experience with stop gap solutions that were readily available. We have accepted a lot of other teams refuse, rather than being more targeted and strategic like hawthorn. I don't think our uncertainty has been as bad as say Carlton, who took way too long tomregister that they were non contenders. At least we began bringing through a new wave of youth. But from here on you would like to see a much more settled list fewer defections and retirements and the chance to be much more considered and strategic in which free agents we target and how long we contract them for.

I'd hope next year to see a big big play for the aces likely to fall out of GWS.
 
Snoop Dog said:
Anyone fancy a DFA?

A Football Manager would be handy to.
Click to expand...

If we're talking about delisting an existing player to draft someone in at 48, I'd have to say forget it at this stage. We're not close to contending for a premiership just yet so let's be patient and not throw away any more collateral.

We can't (or shouldn't) delist Armstrong as he played a role toward the end of the year plus he could be handy and has another year on contract yeah? And we shouldn't delist Oxley or Ramsay just yet either... it's too early.

Another guy that's been in the system 3 years, and in my opinion could of been close to getting the flick was Gault. He's game against Hawthorn was solid and enough to give him another year. Was a long time coming though.

As for drafts picks.... After tossing up between Leverde and Lever, I'm honestly leaning toward taking Lever. I know his some what of a risk, but I could see him and Shara calling the shots down back and Moore taking up a key role up forward with Reidy in a year or two. Lever would fill the gap that's been left by the loss of Maxwell and give us additional insurance if Keefey or Brown don't work out.

So for mine... Keep current list and take Lever at 5 and a Midfielder at pick 30. Then next trade season after all the youngesters have got another year's experience under their belt, go shopping! Then we can have a look at the DFA list again and go hard on trading in a big gun like a Dangerfield or trade hard for some low picks again!
 
Snoop Dog said:
I think that to but interestin process to force rank;

Hunt
Blessed
Ramsay
Armstrong
Oxley
Newton
Robinson

Who are the two best?
Click to expand...
Blessed obviously the pick of that crop.;)
 
Obese Arachnid said:
Blessed obviously the pick of that crop.;)
Click to expand...
Reported he's heading to the Cattery I think.

The thing about this is that we don't have to be involved in picking up anyone elses rubbish, I mean surely we have enough of our own. Joking of course.

But I think since there is nothing that jumps out and fills any real voids we have, lets put another season under what we have and really find out who is going to make it, and who goes.

I'd rather keep and have another look at Ramsay, Armstrong and Oxley and then delist a heap next year LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MyManLynch
List Mgmt. 2024 Season final list (post trade & draft)
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
RobJD
RobJD
TradeDraft
List Mgmt. 2024 Mid Season Draft
6 7 8 9 10
Replies
235
Views
7K
sr36
sr36
Jen2310
Strategy List build: Draft, trade 2024-
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
185
Views
13K
Jen2310
Jen2310
76woodenspooners
List Sizes
2 3
Replies
59
Views
3K
Markfs
Markfs
magpielicious
Player Barometer
Replies
8
Views
378
Sea fog
S
adammania9
Opinion 2024 Collingwood list rankings
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
Chief
Chief
Jen2310
Analysis Under 24 youth list
Replies
18
Views
2K
brockbruiser
brockbruiser

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top