Strategy Trade and List Management thread 3 (...The pining for the departed. Edition)

[BatteredBulldog]

Xavier Richards just doesn't look that good to me.

Fronk I believe our interest (not sure how strong though) is about him being a defender. Tall, athletic and I'm sure can be taught to play in our defensive system. He was after all a defender at Sydney until recently.
He could be a good replacement for Hamling (with Zaine a replacement for Morris in the future) and both those guys can pinch hit forward, which is Bevo through and through.

 

[Doggy]

Natural development (and return from injuries) in the following players is all that's required:
Webb
Williams
Crameri
Murphy
Maclean
Lynch
Cloke - structure will add flexibility
Collins
Adams
... and every other player under 25 years old.

Get round 3 picks for Hrovat, Hamling and Stevens (Honey as well but seems he is staying) and hit the draft. That's how prolonged dynasties are built. Picken, Crameri and Dickson are late 20's we will need to draft replacements now to develop on top of Murphy, Morris and Moyd.

Picken is 30. Dickson 30 next year

 

[jdz101]

I'm not saying he's done a bad job. Just that if we want to remain at the top of the mountain, it's a lot harder to stay there when you're picking last in the first round of the draft and teams start poaching your depth players. We are just very lucky we have Dalrymple. The best drafter in the AFL. And one of the best clubs for player development in the land.

If Longergan doesn't get retained by the cats, I wonder if JMac would want a look at him to fill a spot on the list similar to what Goodes and Adcock did. We shown some interest in him a couple of years ago. Could be a good option for some depth in case Adams gets injured next year, or Cordy or Collins aren't quite up to it.

Lonergan would be a good get for a 1 or 2 year deal I'll agree there.

 

[stefoid]

I'm not saying he's done a bad job. Just that if we want to remain at the top of the mountain, it's a lot harder to stay there when you're picking last in the first round of the draft and teams start poaching your depth players. We are just very lucky we have Dalrymple. The best drafter in the AFL. And one of the best clubs for player development in the land.

If Longergan doesn't get retained by the cats, I wonder if JMac would want a look at him to fill a spot on the list similar to what Goodes and Adcock did. We shown some interest in him a couple of years ago. Could be a good option for some depth in case Adams gets injured next year, or Cordy or Collins aren't quite up to it.

interesting, but hes been playing liked he is totally cooked at geelong - hard to see him turning it on for us. Over the long term, cycling new players through the rookie system is going to enable us to uncover JJs and Dalhauses. We shouldnt fill it with geriatric stop-gaps unless we are really scraping the barrel in one area.

 

[lachy]

Natural development (and return from injuries) in the following players is all that's required:
Webb
Williams
Crameri
Murphy
Maclean
Lynch
Cloke - structure will add flexibility
Collins
Adams
... and every other player under 25 years old.

Get round 3 picks for Hrovat, Hamling and Stevens (Honey as well but seems he is staying) and hit the draft. That's how prolonged dynasties are built. Picken, Crameri and Dickson are late 20's we will need to draft replacements now to develop on top of Murphy, Morris and Moyd.

It's interesting that some supporters believe the Hawks and Geelong dynasties came about through progressive trading. Not true, they came about through drafting, development and more importantly player retention.

In fact aggressive trading has basically stuffed the Hawks for the next period trading out the first 2 in THIS years b&f, Sydney are losing a substantial part of their mid tier players and the Cats cannot fit in players who want to go there after last years trading period. The Hawks and Cats built their dynasties they are now clawing to stay relevant.

We also have 2 rookie spots available to continue to develop our list

 

[Bemoreboyddog]

We can't trade out this and next year's first rounder.
The 2 in 4 rule for first rounders (as set by the AFL).

PS - Pearce is probably ranked about 2 or 3 in terms of importance to their list. They rate him that highly.

Nah we can do that because we're trading in a first rounder hence still using a first round pick.

 

[Deadly Darcy]

I'm not saying he's done a bad job. Just that if we want to remain at the top of the mountain, it's a lot harder to stay there when you're picking last in the first round of the draft and teams start poaching your depth players. We are just very lucky we have Dalrymple. The best drafter in the AFL. And one of the best clubs for player development in the land.

If Longergan doesn't get retained by the cats, I wonder if JMac would want a look at him to fill a spot on the list similar to what Goodes and Adcock did. We shown some interest in him a couple of years ago. Could be a good option for some depth in case Adams gets injured next year, or Cordy or Collins aren't quite up to it.

Aren't you lobbing gentle stones at the bloke who identified and brought "fourth quarter repeat desperation measures kept the ball alive for an important GF winning goal Biggs" and "Buddy is my GF Bitch Hamling" into our club for a packet of twisties and a can of coke respectively?

No pleasing some people

 

[Yojimbo]

Xavier Richards- 195 cm and 91 kg
12 games, 141 disposals, 59 marks, 13 goals, 7 behinds.

Only switched forward this year in the NEAFL.
Good size right price, buy.

 

[compact72]

Toby Nankervis requested trade to tigers

 

[Doggy]

Nankervis requested trsde to Richmond

 

[Mofra]

Nah we can do that because we're trading in a first rounder hence still using a first round pick.

We'd have to give up a very, very good player to get their pick 7 as well as Pearce. Stringer, Hunter, Dahlhaus good.

 

[stefoid]

Xavier Richards- 195 cm and 91 kg
12 games, 141 disposals, 59 marks, 13 goals, 7 behinds.

Only switched forward this year in the NEAFL.
Good size right price, buy.

packet of chips and a can of COLA.

 

[BRWB]

It's interesting that some supporters believe the Hawks and Geelong dynasties came about through progressive trading. Not true, they came about through drafting, development and more importantly player retention.

In fact aggressive trading has basically stuffed the Hawks for the next period trading out the first 2 in THIS years b&f, Sydney are losing a substantial part of their mid tier players and the Cats cannot fit in players who want to go there after last years trading period. The Hawks and Cats built their dynasties they are now clawing to stay relevant.

We also have 2 rookie spots available to continue to develop our list

Seen you post something similar before. Couldn't disagree more. Roughead excepted, the Hawks basically traded for their entire spine post the 2008 flag. Plus Burgoyne. Off the top of my head.

Gibson - 2nd or 3rd tall - B And F winner in a flag year
Lake - KPD - Norm Smith Medalist
McEvoy - no 1 ruck
Hale - ruck fwd
Gunston - 2nd tall fwd.
Frawley - KPD

 

[Yojimbo]

It's interesting that some supporters believe the Hawks and Geelong dynasties came about through progressive trading. Not true, they came about through drafting, development and more importantly player retention.

In fact aggressive trading has basically stuffed the Hawks for the next period trading out the first 2 in THIS years b&f, Sydney are losing a substantial part of their mid tier players and the Cats cannot fit in players who want to go there after last years trading period. The Hawks and Cats built their dynasties they are now clawing to stay relevant.

We also have 2 rookie spots available to continue to develop our list

Hannibal, Genghis Khan, The persian empire, Adolf Hitler and even
Kylie Minogue all dynasties come to an end eventually.

 

[Rookie]

interesting, but hes been playing liked he is totally cooked at geelong - hard to see him turning it on for us. Over the long term, cycling new players through the rookie system is going to enable us to uncover JJs and Dalhauses. We shouldnt fill it with geriatric stop-gaps unless we are really scraping the barrel in one area.

I reckon using the rookie list to bring in break-glass-in-emergency types is exactly what the rookie list is there for when you're in contention. A mature body who can fill a role and ensure you don't get utterly smashed in a certain position is much more important than having a skinny teenager who would have gone at the equivalent of pick 130 on the list.

Let's say we decide we don't want to go into a season with Toyd, Roguhie and Campbell as our only ruck options - which is pretty reasonable considering Toyd may make himself irreplaceable up forward. We're much better off having a cheap-as-chips rookie backup we can move on in a year on our rookie list than overpaying, both in salary, list spot and on the trade table, for a guy like Nankervis to play third fiddle. Minson has played multiple games in 15 and 16 despite being third choice ruck, having a rookie-listed, fairly adequate ruck depth on the rookie list basically takes Minson's spot. Adcock was recruited to fill a role in case we lost a lot of experience down back. He filled a role for a year, we moved on, he moved on.

Totally okay for us to use the rookie list for depth IMO.

 

[Tommycash]

I can't understand all the hate for JMac suddenly. Guy builds our second premiership list, gets hammered for not doing enough.

 

[Norm De Guerre]

Toby Nankervis requested trade to tigers

When you look at their ruck stocks, its his logical destination.

I can't understand all the hate for JMac suddenly. Guy builds our second premiership list, gets hammered for not doing enough.

Im not sure its hate so much as its the annual BigFooty trade week narrative of do something, do anything!

Go to just about any team board and you'll see the same thing. People tend to get very antsy this time of year.

 

[Ozil]

Still waiting for JMac to do a deal.
How many trades has he actually done in his time as list manager? Minus the Boyd deal where Gordon came over the top of.

Suckling (FA)
26 for Crameri
Lake & 27 for 21 and 41
6 and Griffen for Boyd
11 for 20 and 21 (pushed back by compo)
37 for Biggs and 39.
44 for Stevens.
Hamling (DFA)
Jones for 46

That's off the top of my head, there could be more.

The bloke knows what he's doing. We did barely anything last trade period and we went on to win the flag.

 

[lachy]

Seen you post something similar before. Couldn't disagree more. Roughead excepted, the Hawks basically traded for their entire spine post the 2008 flag. Plus Burgoyne. Off the top of my head.

Gibson - 2nd or 3rd tall - B And F winner in a flag year
Lake - KPD - Norm Smith Medalist
McEvoy - no 1 ruck
Hale - ruck fwd
Gunston - 2nd tall fwd.
Frawley - KPD

Hawthorn brought all of the above in well after the stage our list development is at.

All of the players listed above with the exception Burgoyne and Gibson were brought in at least 2 years mostly 4 years after our current young list profile.

Their 2008 premiership side which was 1 year in advance of our current list profile had 2 traded in players in Guerra and Dew. You could also argue Croad. The entirety of the rest of their list was drafted and developed. Our current premiership team actually has more players from other clubs.

The players you have mentioned were brought in once their core had been there for 10 years, therefore they were happy to be paid less to keep the core together and maintain their ability to challenge. Ours has barely been there for 4 and still has massive internal development. We start trading in now we simply will not be able to retain our core. We will need to top up trade in 3 to 4 years, not now particularly with what is available and the Hawks did not at the same time of development

 

[Zgope1]

Nankervis would've been so silly to come to us- "here, come be ruck depth"

 

[G-Mo77]

I can't understand all the hate for JMac suddenly. Guy builds our second premiership list, gets hammered for not doing enough.

People just want a trade for the sake of a trade. I'd rather have a stable list than a revolving door of players coming in and out.

We won the flag just over 2 weeks ago.

 

[stefoid]

I reckon using the rookie list to bring in break-glass-in-emergency types is exactly what the rookie list is there for when you're in contention. A mature body who can fill a role and ensure you don't get utterly smashed in a certain position is much more important than having a skinny teenager who would have gone at the equivalent of pick 130 on the list.

Let's say we decide we don't want to go into a season with Toyd, Roguhie and Campbell as our only ruck options - which is pretty reasonable considering Toyd may make himself irreplaceable up forward. We're much better off having a cheap-as-chips rookie backup we can move on in a year on our rookie list than overpaying, both in salary, list spot and on the trade table, for a guy like Nankervis to play third fiddle. Minson has played multiple games in 15 and 16 despite being third choice ruck, having a rookie-listed, fairly adequate ruck depth on the rookie list basically takes Minson's spot. Adcock was recruited to fill a role in case we lost a lot of experience down back. He filled a role for a year, we moved on, he moved on.

Totally okay for us to use the rookie list for depth IMO.

hard to disagree - its a balancing act between short and long term.

Perhaps the main thing is, what quality of players are you going to get with the pitch 'hey, come and sit on our rookie list and run around in the VFL all year unless we really need you to play 3 or 4 games, which we hope you wont have to'? Basically just warm bodies, in which case you are probably better off playing your own youngsters. Goodes and Adcock a case in point there. I understood the reasoning behind them, but with perfect hindsight, their younger replacements were better options to step up, both short and long term. They were just too cooked.

Now with Ruck, for instance, yes, we lost a warm body in Goetz, so there is a case there for a replacement, because we are scraping the bottom of the barrel in that department.

3rd edit (interesting topic): I think you are better rookie-ing youngsters who are happy to be there, and have scope and drive to improve rather than oldies who are happy to be there - an oldy who is happy to take on that role is very suspect, IMO. Mentally, they are already in retirement mode.

 

[CaptainMurphy]

If Richards gets more for Sydney than Hamling gets for us I'll be ****ing sick

 

[Mofra]

I reckon using the rookie list to bring in break-glass-in-emergency types is exactly what the rookie list is there for when you're in contention. A mature body who can fill a role and ensure you don't get utterly smashed in a certain position is much more important than having a skinny teenager who would have gone at the equivalent of pick 130 on the list.

Or a low % chance to make it we really want to have a look at.

2010 was one of the most woeful drafts on record, most clubs stunk it up. We got free kicks in Wallis & Libba in the first two rounds, and took "skinny teenagers" in the rookie draft - JJ & Dahlhaus. We nailed it with taking kids.
It's a balancing act.

 

[stefoid]

Or a low % chance to make it we really want to have a look at.

2010 was one of the most woeful drafts on record, most clubs stunk it up. We got free kicks in Wallis & Libba in the first two rounds, and took "skinny teenagers" in the rookie draft - JJ & Dahlhaus. We nailed it with taking kids.
It's a balancing act.

yep. And I think I have just convinced myself in my previous post that bringing in old guys who are happy to be rookies is a mistake. If you need the warm bodies because you lack depth, choose a youngster with drive and scope to improve, not someone settling into retirement ala Goodes/Adcock.