Discussion 2012 List Management: De-Listings, Trades, Drafting & Free Agency

[Manimal_Dunstan]

Once again we have Stanley, Koschitzke, Wilkes who are Ruckman/Forwards. We are apparently after a Genuine Ruckman.

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

Stefan Martin has played as a defender hasn't he? Or someone like Pederson

Yes. He has Played Ruck, Forward, Defense. Collingwood are the front runners for him Pederson, Chaplin, M Brown i hope we'll target for our Key defense role. I think Chaplin may turn into a great FB in a better defense then Ports.

 

[Tragic sainter]

Once again we have Stanley, Koschitzke, Wilkes who are Ruckman/Forwards. We are apparently after a Genuine Ruckman.

We have a genuine ruckman. We need a genuine backup ruckman.

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

We have a genuine ruckman. We need a genuine backup ruckman.

Yes. Not another Ruck/Forward as you stated!

 

[Tragic sainter]

Yes. Not another Ruck/Forward as you stated!

Also not another number one ruckman like Warnock as you stated!

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

Also not another number one ruckman like Warnock as you stated!

SEN actually stated it,

 

[saintsrfreak]

Also not another number one ruckman like Warnock as you stated!

A back up ruckman has to be a number one ruckman

 

[Tragic sainter]

A back up ruckman has to be a number one ruckman

Nope. Mcevoy is number one, as in number one ruckman in the best 22. Whoever we draft would be behind mcevoy so how could he be number one? Capable of playing as number one ruckman sure, but mcevoy will be our number one ruckman for years to come.

 

[saintsrfreak]

Nope. Mcevoy is number one, as in number one ruckman in the best 22. Whoever we draft would be behind mcevoy so how could he be number one? Capable of playing as number one ruckman sure, but mcevoy will be our number one ruckman for years to come.

Well yes, I thought number one ruckman just meant they were capable of playing as one.

 

[Tragic sainter]

Well yes, I thought number one ruckman just meant they were capable of playing as one.

So does that mean Warnock is the number one ruckman at Carlton :-s

 

[saintsrfreak]

So does that mean Warnock is the number one ruckman at Carlton :-s

Doesn't mean he's the number one at Carlton, but he's A number one ruckman

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

Doesn't mean he's the number one at Carlton, but he's A number one ruckman

He was #1 last year at Carlton. And was good i thought But would be a nice back up to McEvoy.

 

[Persevering Saint]

You guys are giving me the number-twos...

(sorry, I couldn't help it...)

 

[Kildonan]

(sorry, I couldn't help it...)

No Percy - that was justified

 

[mighty sainters]

Josh Toy. Would you?

I've seen him play, and he was pretty bad. But I cannot work out how a supposed 'Top 3' talent from 2 years ago can't even carve out 1 ok game.



He's got a a great kick, he's got speed. Maybe has the Sam Crocker's and just can't get near it?

if we didn't even look into getting him, that'd be one of the most stupid decisions made. lack of motivation is so much worse to have than lack of talent, and its more likely that is holding him back, especially since there is the consensus that he had a lot of talent when he was picked up as a 17 year old.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Not sure if anyone posted this last night, but found this interesting: http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/147559/default.aspx

"ST KILDA coach Scott Watters has denied his club is facing salary cap pressures and says it can be "aggressive" in the coming free agency period."

I sincerely hope that if we lose Goddard, as it seems likely we will, that we don't go out and blow our compo pick for losing him by picking up someone else through FA that isn't particularly good.

If we want someone like that I would much prefer we trade someone, or a lower pick for them, rather than blow a mid first round compo draft pick in order to get them.

And if we have all this money that we can be "aggressive" through free agency, why don't we put some more of that money into Goddard's contract offer? We will almost certainly have to pay "overs" to get someone from another club, so I would much prefer we pay someone who has bled for our club and loves it "overs", rather than someone who is mainly just coming here for the money and cares little about us at all. I reckon that would stink if we did that.

 

[Axcellence]

Not sure if anyone posted this last night, but found this interesting: http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/147559/default.aspx

"ST KILDA coach Scott Watters has denied his club is facing salary cap pressures and says it can be "aggressive" in the coming free agency period."

I sincerely hope that if we lose Goddard, as it seems likely we will, that we don't go out and blow our compo pick for losing him by picking up someone else through FA that isn't particularly good.

If we want someone like that I would much prefer we trade someone, or a lower pick for them, rather than blow a mid first round compo draft pick in order to get them.

And if we have all this money that we can be "aggressive" through free agency, why don't we put some more of that money into Goddard's contract offer? We will almost certainly have to pay "overs" to get someone from another club, so I would much prefer we pay someone who has bled for our club and loves it "overs", rather than someone who is mainly just coming here for the money and cares little about us at all. I reckon that would stink if we did that.

I was surprised by Watters openly stating that. Clearly the "everyone's equal" at the money front theory has been decided. Goddard needs to see buddy, rioli, selwood, kelly, bartel, etc who take less than market value to keep a team together. If not, I wish him all the best at his new club (whichever it is, blues, pies, oranges).

 

[Tragic sainter]

He was #1 last year at Carlton. And was good i thought But would be a nice back up to McEvoy.

Ok I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree, personally I feel 400k a year is too much to spend on a backup ruckman.

 

[Squizz]

And if we have all this money that we can be "aggressive" through free agency, why don't we put some more of that money into Goddard's contract offer?

It seems there is a change in tack, and the club no longer wants a situation where the salary cap is skewed towards a small number of players.

On the one hand, maybe there is a message for BJ that (if he stays) there is good potential to sustain success - we can go out and bring additional talent in (without losing anyone, if he's prepared to take a hit personally as many others have done - whilst still being relatively wealthy).

But $400k brings a very good AFL player. So if someone wants $800k, are we better off paying or getting two very good players plus a high draft pick?

Shoot - Mumford's contract raised eyebrows, but that was only $250k a year!

If there's been any reneging ... well that's a bit poor. But that stuff happens every day in the business world (let alone in politics where it's almost expected). The landscape changes, or different people start influencing decisions, and the strategy alters accordingly.

 

[Half Back Pocket]

Adelaide have selected Thompson for the semi (Talia injured)...I'll be interesetd to see how he goes on the big stage...i still think he has a huge upside as a young key back.

 

[tim_saints]

Saw a rumor on a trade page on Facebook that has been pretty reliable as of late but I guess they are always questionable. It stated toy and caddy are both heading to a victorian team in some type of deal and I'm just wondering if the saints have maybe offered a deal for both of them.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Saw a rumor on a trade page on Facebook that has been pretty reliable as of late but I guess they are always questionable. It stated toy and caddy are both heading to a victorian team in some type of deal and I'm just wondering if the saints have maybe offered a deal for both of them.

Do you still need to make a minimum of three draft picks if you trade some away.
Because if we traded 2 picks for Toy +Caddy it would then mean we would have to add 5 to the list in total, which would mean some nasty delistings to make room. Maybe a player and a pick.

 

[TheLastEmperor]

Do you still need to make a minimum of three draft picks if you trade some away.
Because if we traded 2 picks for Toy +Caddy it would then mean we would have to add 5 to the list in total, which would mean some nasty delistings to make room. Maybe a player and a pick.

Yep. We've already delisted three with more to come and Goddard...

That would be a massive win for us if we could somehow land those two players. That would add some much needed midfield depth.

 

[saintsrfreak]

Toy looks like more of a half back that can't find the pill, which we definitely don't need more of

 

[TheLastEmperor]

Toy looks like more of a half back that can't find the pill, which we definitely don't need more of

Flanker / outside midfielder however he has VERY good skills. Massive upside and was seen as a potential no. 1 pick prior to GC picking him up as a 17 yr old.

I understand Toy hasn't shown anything with the Suns however I hold some hope for him, being such a highly regarded junior player and a packaged deal with Caddy would make it all the worth while even if Toy didn't work out.