2020 Trade & List Management discussion

[crows dude]

List of 38 for next year without rookies. Wow if true how many get cut. How many picks do we want. Say we want 6 picks.

32 players kept
Jones
Murphy
M Crouch
Sloane
Kelly
Seedsman
Talia
Brown
Hamill
Stengle
Walker (SANFL Captain)
McAdam
Worrell
McHenry
Schoenberg
Frampton
Lynch
Keays
Laird
Milera
Fogarty
Smith
Himmelberg
McAsey
McPherson
O'Connor
Sholl
Doedee
Davis
Butts
O'Brien
Gollant

 

[CROUCH #2]

why are some saying caldwell to the crows? he's victorian. has he indicated he wants to come here?

Add these things up:

1) When your bottom of the ladder

2) In primetime rebuild mode

3) Have the biggest war chest & arsenal to make free agency and trade moves

Then every gettable player is going to be looked at from the club and more so talked about in the media.
The other thing is, player managers talk alot of Sh#t to drive bigger deals for their client's and the journalists cling to it. Then clubs and the recruitment team.do the same to put up a false flag to their real intentions.

I say the only GWS player that is coming our way is Hately.

 

[Golumless]

Well you and I actually have no idea if Brad staying or leaving will have an affect we keep or lose players. Just my opinion it shows zero loyalty to our players and says we will push them out the door if we can. Sometimes doing the right is actually doing the right thing

Football is a cut throat industry in the end of the day, and our goal like all clubs is to win a premiership.

We do though. We've seen why players move time and time again. We do need to show loyalty, yes, but loyalty should not be a case of forcing us to make a relatively poor decision just to keep the band back together.

The question is does Brad or pick 2 (noting by the sounds of it we'll retain Brad if he doesn't get that money) push us closer a premiership? If that answer is pick 2, then you need to move on Brad. The things the club owes its players are to protect their welfare and for the club to do everything in their power to win it all.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

And this is the reason we have a sh*t culture at this footy club..... we can try and blame it on the big wigs etc but it’s actually our fans

Don’t pretend we are doing something for Brad, he knows what he is doing and he wants to stay (probably for a little under what he is actually worth)

If players don’t trust the club to do the right thing by them when they are doing the right thing for the club then why stay here! Then at the drop of a hat the fans say yeah get rid of him, the way supporters talk about Atkins and Mackay is ridiculous, these guys play for the club we support and do the right thing by the club and the fans treat them like garbage. I get why players leave thus club

People said the same when the club made the compassionate decision to retain Sam Shaw on the list so that he'd have access to medical treatment in the new collective bargaining agreement.

This was the sort of culture building decision that would show the players that the club cares about them and would generate loyalty.

Then Charlie, Lever, Gov...

Does having Matt Crouch here mean that we have a s**t culture? Because after all we shipped Vince out to get him.

 

[Mego Red]

People said the same when the club made the compassionate decision to retain Sam Shaw on the list so that he'd have access to medical treatment in the new collective bargaining agreement.

This was the sort of culture building decision that would show the players that the club cares about them and would generate loyalty.

Then Charlie, Lever, Gov...

Does having Matt Crouch here mean that we have a sh*t culture? Because after all we shipped Vince out to get him.

Look - I agree with you, and if pick two is there then we have to let Brad go. There's just a bigger chance that pick two will ultimately contribute more to success than Brad will at this stage of his career.

It is the only time recently where a player has left the club that I've actually felt really conflicted about it, though.

Brad is genuinely our best player. He seems to have deep personal ties to the club and the playing group. It would be fantastic for our group dynamic to keep him.

But I think we just need to be ruthless if we want to reasonably quickly rebound.

 

[Barneythecrab]

If Crouch goes and we get 2nd pick would people be keen with the idea of us swapping our GWS pick to west coast for Dom Sheed? I would love it

 

[BACCS]

Listening to Brad just then I'm now 90-10 that he'll stay. And I'm ok with that.

Really opened up. Loves it here. His partner is scared. Lost her dad recently. He doesn't want to live in Melbourne. Will only move if it's to a genuine contender and even then he doesn't want to.

Should have a listen later if you didn't hear it.

It’s the complete opposite of most players in this situation, very emotional about wanting to stay but realizes it would be very hard for the club to turn down pick 2/3 for him. If the club 100% wanted to keep him he would’ve signed by now.

 

[BACCS]

For all we know, he may never have had any intention of leaving. The club never had any intention of making him. And it's entirely a media created situation that internally didn't actually exist.

I know he can chat to his manager on the phone, but he hasn’t been able to see him in person due to the restrictions. Obviously negotiations started quite late in the season too due to restrictions. The club still hasn’t put forward an offer but might be waiting to see what list sizes are? Can’t believe we are still waiting for that to be confirmed, ridiculous.

 

[Thetrader15]

If Crouch goes and we get 2nd pick would people be keen with the idea of us swapping our GWS pick to west coast for Dom Sheed? I would love it

I don't think we have GWS's 3rd rounder this year, so I'm not sure we can.

 

[Betts are off]

If Crouch goes and we get 2nd pick would people be keen with the idea of us swapping our GWS pick to west coast for Dom Sheed? I would love it

I'd be more keen on swapping our GWS pick for a shot at the 2021 draft. Especially if the list reduction news is to be believed!

 

[Jack McKraken]

Look - I agree with you, and if pick two is there then we have to let Brad go. There's just a bigger chance that pick two will ultimately contribute more to success than Brad will at this stage of his career.

It is the only time recently where a player has left the club that I've actually felt really conflicted about it, though.

Brad is genuinely our best player. He seems to have deep personal ties to the club and the playing group. It would be fantastic for our group dynamic to keep him.

But I think we just need to be ruthless if we want to reasonably quickly rebound.

This is fundamentally it.

Not an easy decision, but one which should be made for the betterment of our club going forward.

 

[Large 1]

Can someone explain the purpose of reducing list sizes? Is the a comparable reduction in salary caps (i.e. is it a cost cutting thing).

Or is it just a chance for the top players to get money.

 

[aabp1978]

My two cents, but does anyone else think that, given the lack of a TAC competition, let alone a national championship, and apparently no consensus in terms of who should go No 2 in the draft (it seems that 4-5 names have been thrown up), that it would be fool hardy to ship Brad Crouch off?

I get the logic if it was this time last year, when you had two clear standouts in Rowell and Anderson (let alone 2018 when you had Walsh, Rankine, King etc), but this year we simply dont have that "exposed form".

In the circumstances, I would have thought the best strategy is simply to sign Brad to a 3 year, 600k odd deal (which I honestly think he would accept). He is a proven commodity and (when not injured) really is the backbone of that midfield. Also remember Rory will retire in the next year or two, so whoever we draft next year (when, most likely, we will have a pick between 1-5 again) will still get time in the centre.

Importantly as well, I think we are slowly improving the culture at the club, which in turn will help us retain players. To ship off a player that clearly wants to be here, in favour of a kid who is, at best, a 50:50 proposition of being a "star", let alone wants to be based in SA, is very dangerous in that regard.

 

[LoBu]

If we do not let Brad Crouch go via RFA then we need to delist somebody else. In fact, by signing Brad Crouch on to another deal, we will have to pay somebody else out of their current contract.

With Brad going, we free up $650,000 which we can use to pay mid-priced contracts to Hately/ Graham/ Cadwell etc.

If he stays, not only do we lose the option to recruit these guys, but we have to pay out another player's contract to get to 38 players, or we cannot recruit Edwards, Newchurch and Borlase.

Most likely I'd pay out Davis (We will likely have to regardless of Crouch- costing $160,000), and Frampton (costing us $160,000) - on top of Jenkins ($300,000). So paying $620,000 in wages plus keeping Crouch on $500,000 to $600,000 is not viable.

Brad understands the AFL industry, and also that life brings about change. He could have signed the contract last year, didn't and now life has gone against him. But he will find new opportunity in Melbourne, maybe he will like life out in Windy Hill/ Geelong? Unfortunately, there is no room for sentimentality, which is why you have a business manager like Chapman as chairman.

Edit: Forgot we are also paying out Gibbs, probably for $350,000 - 50% discount for not playing and for getting a farewell game - total almost $1m in non-playing cap.

 

[hey shorty]

My two cents, but does anyone else think that, given the lack of a TAC competition, let alone a national championship, and apparently no consensus in terms of who should go No 2 in the draft (it seems that 4-5 names have been thrown up), that it would be fool hardy to ship Brad Crouch off?

I get the logic if it was this time last year, when you had two clear standouts in Rowell and Anderson (let alone 2018 when you had Walsh, Rankine, King etc), but this year we simply dont have that "exposed form".

In the circumstances, I would have thought the best strategy is simply to sign Brad to a 3 year, 600k odd deal (which I honestly think he would accept). He is a proven commodity and (when not injured) really is the backbone of that midfield. Also remember Rory will retire in the next year or two, so whoever we draft next year (when, most likely, we will have a pick between 1-5 again) will still get time in the centre.

Importantly as well, I think we are slowly improving the culture at the club, which in turn will help us retain players. To ship off a player that clearly wants to be here, in favour of a kid who is, at best, a 50:50 proposition of being a "star", let alone wants to be based in SA, is very dangerous in that regard.

I can certainly see both sides of the argument, and im surprised to see so many people comfortable with shipping off our best midfielder for a speculative pick particularly when he's still capable of playing a significant role in a rebuild.

That said, I can also see the reasons for doing so, especially when he's likely to attract Band 1 compo which will (hopefully) allow us access to a kid from country Victoria who was actually born and raised here and barracks for us.

I agree on the culture side although the caveat being we need to make the RIGHT decision.

 

[hey shorty]

If we do not let Brad Crouch go via RFA then we need to delist somebody else. In fact, by signing Brad Crouch on to another deal, we will have to pay somebody else out of their current contract.

With Brad going, we free up $650,000 which we can use to pay mid-priced contracts to Hately/ Graham/ Cadwell etc.

If he stays, not only do we lose the option to recruit these guys, but we have to pay out another player's contract to get to 38 players, or we cannot recruit Edwards, Newchurch and Borlase.

Most likely I'd pay out Davis (We will likely have to regardless of Crouch- costing $160,000), and Frampton (costing us $160,000) - on top of Jenkins ($300,000). So paying $620,000 in wages plus keeping Crouch on $500,000 to $600,000 is not viable.

Brad understands the AFL industry, and also that life brings about change. He could have signed the contract last year, didn't and now life has gone against him. But he will find new opportunity in Melbourne, maybe he will like life out in Windy Hill/ Geelong? Unfortunately, there is no room for sentimentality, which is why you have a business manager like Chapman as chairman.

But we don't want Chappy as chairman......

 

[LoBu]

But we don't want Chappy as chairman......

No, and he is gone at the end of the season - he has found his replacement - but this rebuild is his last act.

 

[hey shorty]

No, and he is gone at the end of the season - he has found his replacement - but this rebuild is his last act.

He has little if anything to do with it

 

[LoBu]

He has little if anything to do with it

As if...

On Pixel 3 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[hey shorty]

As if...

On Pixel 3 using BigFooty.com mobile app

He didn't want change, that's why hes outstayed his welcome by 2 extra years.

He begged some of his underlings to be his predecessor and they all told him to get stuffed

 

[Crows I Am]

If we do not let Brad Crouch go via RFA then we need to delist somebody else. In fact, by signing Brad Crouch on to another deal, we will have to pay somebody else out of their current contract.

With Brad going, we free up $650,000 which we can use to pay mid-priced contracts to Hately/ Graham/ Cadwell etc.

If he stays, not only do we lose the option to recruit these guys, but we have to pay out another player's contract to get to 38 players, or we cannot recruit Edwards, Newchurch and Borlase.

Most likely I'd pay out Davis (We will likely have to regardless of Crouch- costing $160,000), and Frampton (costing us $160,000) - on top of Jenkins ($300,000). So paying $620,000 in wages plus keeping Crouch on $500,000 to $600,000 is not viable.

Brad understands the AFL industry, and also that life brings about change. He could have signed the contract last year, didn't and now life has gone against him. But he will find new opportunity in Melbourne, maybe he will like life out in Windy Hill/ Geelong? Unfortunately, there is no room for sentimentality, which is why you have a business manager like Chapman as chairman.

Edit: Forgot we are also paying out Gibbs, probably for $350,000 - 50% discount for not playing and for getting a farewell game - total almost $1m in non-playing cap.

I think we will keep Frampton for at least one more year. He will be our back up ruck next year if ROB goes down injured. He would be a terrible ruck but the only other option is Berg, and we wont want to move him away from the forward line to play permanent ruck. We need to to find another backup before we can cut Frampton unfortunately.

Agree that we should move on Davis though, especially if we have no intention to play him.

 

[Betts are off]

I think we will keep Frampton for at least one more year. He will be our back up ruck next year if ROB goes down injured. He would be a terrible ruck but the only other option is Berg, and we wont want to move him away from the forward line to play permanent ruck. We need to to find another backup before we can cut Frampton unfortunately.

Agree that we should move on Davis though, especially if we have no intention to play him.

I agree, becoming a perma-ruck needs to be Billy's #1 priority this offseason. I don't see his chances of playing getting any better in 2021 if we pick McDonald or Thilthorpe.

Bottom line is if we were to lose ROB next year we are in real trouble regardless if its Billy or Strachan that replaces him. But if list size reduce's next year then the spot that Strachan occupies is too valuable to waste on a guy you pray never gets a game. And with Billy on the list regardless, the decision is pretty much made IMO.

 

[LoBu]

He didn't want change, that's why hes outstayed his welcome by 2 extra years.

He begged some of his underlings to be his predecessor and they all told him to get stuffed

I'm sure you have some level of experience too, but I've never been on a board or reported to a board that does not have a Chairman who is intimately and specifically directing strategy and the execution of this vision (never been on a board with a chairwoman).

I'm absolutely aware of the wave of criticism of Chapman's performance and direction, I think the strategy has been well documented, 2018 was thought to be an injury lead aberration, 2019 the reality, 2020 the rebuild. This is all directed from the board.

His anointed successor died, he has been looking for a replacement and has found one. It's been silly of him to say there was little talent around, there is heaps, you have the whole of Australia. If board members didn't want to take over, that's irrelevant.

 

[spenze]

His anointed successor died, he has been looking for a replacement and has found one. .

That guy died 3 years ago. Think about it for a second...3 years and we haven't been able to find someone with the adequate skill set to take over from Chapman.

 

[Mutineer]

His anointed successor died, he has been looking for a replacement and has found one. It's been silly of him to say there was little talent around, there is heaps, you have the whole of Australia. If board members didn't want to take over, that's irrelevant.

Isn't the Chairman position honorary? Or am I mistaken?

I would have thought that being the case the Chairman would need to be based in SA surely?