2020 Trade & List Management discussion

[Vader]

So we've essentially rated one year of a 32-year-old Mackay ahead of anyone taken beyond pick 23 in this draft including most of our NGA players.

Why are we bothering with the rookie draft then? There's clearly no one worth taking

The 2020 draft is significantly riskier for the clubs, given that they have zero form lines on 60% of the players being drafted. Most of these kids haven't played a game in 12 months, and considerably more for some of them (those who missed games due to injury in 2019).

Selecting players in the RD carries less risk - they're paid less, and we can delist them after only 12 months if they don't work out.

It makes a lot of sense to keep our powder dry for 2021, for a number of reasons:

• We can fill those remaining list spots using the mid-season drafts, once we finally see the Victorian kids in action and get a form line on their development.
• List sizes are expected to return to normal at the end of the year, giving us 2 free list positions without having to make any additional delistings.
• The 2021 draft is reputedly very, very strong - so it makes sense to be going deep in that draft, and shallow in this one.

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

The 2020 draft is significantly riskier for the clubs, given that they have zero form lines on 60% of the players being drafted. Most of these kids haven't played a game in 12 months, and considerably more for some of them (those who missed games due to injury in 2019).

Selecting players in the RD carries less risk - they're paid less, and we can delist them after only 12 months if they don't work out.

It makes a lot of sense to keep our powder dry for 2021, for a number of reasons:

• We can fill those remaining list spots using the mid-season drafts, once we finally see the Victorian kids in action and get a form line on their development.
• List sizes are expected to return to normal at the end of the year, giving us 2 free list positions without having to make any additional delistings.
• The 2021 draft is reputedly very, very strong - so it makes sense to be going deep in that draft, and shallow in this one.

Are you David Mackay

14

David Mackay

Age

37

Ht

181cm

Wt

78kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.0

4star

K

9.2

4star

HB

7.7

5star

M

3.2

3star

T

3.2

5star

MG

315.4

4star

D

16.5

4star

K

7.0

3star

HB

9.5

5star

M

2.5

3star

T

2.0

3star

MG

265.5

4star

D

12.0

3star

K

6.2

3star

HB

5.8

4star

M

4.6

5star

T

1.2

3star

?

 

[Sanders]

Any decent judge that works in industry disagrees

hilarious to think you don’t think this is as deeper rebuild as happens in the league

let’s see our Ave age and games played round 1 and compare to previous years and also to the rest of the comp

who are these mysterious decent judges? Seriously, who?

a rebuild and an everything must go sale at 50% off are not compatible

 

[Sanders]

You think we tried to keep Keath Greenwood Hartigan CEY etc ?

you think our rebuild was based on getting 50c on the dollar

it was a fire sale, unplanned, with no ground work to get value, most likely for cap purposes

I mean sheesh, talk about terrible takes

 

[Sanders]

Edwards upside for 10 years v 1 year of we know what the ceiling is with MacKay.

you’re being silly now

 

[1970crow]

He is on the bench ATM, and I think that is about right. He still draws a defender and adds leadership and knowledge. We aren't going to win many so it's really down to does he add to the development of the Kids like Fog and Big easy? and right now being a foil and an extra voice is his role, His days of being a dominant forward are gone but I still think has has something to add. If he doesn't play we look way too inexperienced up forward.

In 2020 our conversion of inside 50's to scoring shots was better without Tex in the side. His leadership is meaningless, it has no positive impact on our forward line performance at all. If he's not holding his spot based on football output then he is of no use. I'd hazard a guess that our defensive pressure was better without him as well. But that's a guess.

 

[1970crow]

The side was about right.

Don't need Kelly in there, swap him with Schoenberg as we've got enough defender types in there.

We know Tex will play R1 even if he shouldn't but other than that I don't see much wrong with the side. Maybe Pick 1 comes in on the bench for him if we have the balls. We seem to play our first pick in R1 in recent years.

That is very close to the side that will play if all available. Kelly is hard to judge, dropped twice this year but brought back immediately both times. Hard to get a feel on how he's rated by Nicks. Mackay might come into that 22 for Kelly or Hamill. I think Sholl and McPherson are safe and have moved ahead of Dmac. It's weird, how do you finish last and not find a spot for a pick 1? We know Tex should make way if it's a forward, but it'll be Fog or we'll go with 4 tall forwards plus Lynch. And we'll wonder why opponent transition from our 50 is so unpressured and why our mids can't keep up all game.

 

[1970crow]

Looking at our Projected starting side is why I find all the pessimism about where we finish next year quite bemusing. That is a side that is definitely capable of winning 10+ games. Obviously it depends largely on injury, as our depth is certainly thin at this point, and on having a good pre season where Nicks can get his game plan properly integrated, but when you look at say the full back line of Doedee, Talia and Brown, then that is as good as any team has.

there are a few obvious mistakes, like Schoenberg will be in and Stengle is way ahead of Jones as a small forward, but generally I’m looking forward to seeing how they perform.

Who is Schoenberg in for though? The 2 that are obviously not best 22 now and also have no future are Tex and Kelly. We know Tex will play all year regardless of form. Kelly I think is most likely but our coaching group seem to lneed at least 5 genuine defenders in our backline group. So if Kelly is out, I'm not sure it's Schoenberg and a shuffle coming in.

 

[1970crow]

Why ?? Clearly we don't rate Luke highly enough to bother locking him in as he wouldn't be in the 4 picks we plan to use.

What if someone we do rate slides to a pick that we now can't use. It doesn't have to be Luke in that example, it could be a Sloane or Neale still available at 56 that we have to hope make it to the rookie draft. It's not binary, it's not Edwards or not, we've got a talent order with at least 40 names on it. What if someone in our top 30 is still there at 56? You still believe signing Dmac was a good idea for our rebuild?

 

[1970crow]

Any decent judge that works in industry disagrees

hilarious to think you don’t think this is as deeper rebuild as happens in the league

let’s see our Ave age and games played round 1 and compare to previous years and also to the rest of the comp

The argument isn't whether it's a rebuild or how deep it has turned out to be, it's the degree to which it was planned. Which it wasn't as we had contracts in front of almost all our departing players, including completely cooked Sauce. Only Dougie was forcibly retired. We didn't hit a rebuild button end of 2019 and make list decisions accordingly. In round 1, Mackay was the only senior player without a severely interrupted preseason that wasn't selected. Our rebuild didn't start until we realised how totally shit our best 22 was.

 

[1970crow]

It’s like you never watched the 2019 trade period and 2020 season and are immersed in our 2018/19 seasons still

Oh my. So we were rebuilding end of 2017 when we traded out Cameron and Lever? Just because players are traded doesn't mean we're rebuilding, especially if those players have contracts in front of them but choose to not sign.

 

[1970crow]

You think we tried to keep Keath Greenwood Hartigan CEY etc ?

What if they signed the contracts we had in front of them?

 

[1970crow]

I'd be very surprised if he's not good enough for a rookie spot at worst. That's why you list him.

I thought he had to accept the listing. If so, perhaps he's told us he wouldn't. Tyson made it clear that he believed the listing of Jackson ruined his career. No surprise if they were to have knocked us back if we'd asked.

 

[Sanders]

The argument isn't whether it's a rebuild or how deep it has turned out to be, it's the degree to which it was planned. Which it wasn't as we had contracts in front of almost all our departing players, including completely cooked Sauce. Only Dougie was forcibly retired. We didn't hit a rebuild button end of 2019 and make list decisions accordingly. In round 1, Mackay was the only senior player without a severely interrupted preseason that wasn't selected. Our rebuild didn't start until we realised how totally sh*t our best 22 was.

how is this so hard

it wasn’t planned, and it was botched

our sucky start to 2020 lead to us raising the rebuild flag

 

[1970crow]

Then you've probably not watched him hard enough.

He's not adding anything to our list.

That's an interesting take. I know he's sliding, but he's still considered a 3rd round selection at worst. Why do you believe Mackay is a better choice for our future prospects?

I'm not really fussed on Edwards either way and focussing on him misses the point. What if any kid we had in the top 25 is still around at 40 and our only list spots are for the kids we did plan to match bids on? We miss out on a kid we rated at 25 or an academy kid we wanted. Or am I missing something?

 

[1970crow]

The club obviously sees more upside in 1 year of DMac than they do for pick 40 or 56 in the draft. Edwards isn't even good enough to be a part of that discussion.

And the club never gets it wrong either, so there's no point having alternate opinions and discussing them on a forum. Fact is that Mackay should not have been signed until after the draft just in case a rated kid slipped through and was available at 40 or 56. Mackay taking a list spot ahead of some scrubber out of the rookie draft will have no impact on future success either way. But missing out on a player that we actually rated as being list spot worthy might. Mackay should have been extended after the draft.

And I'll be saying the same about Tex next year, if he wants to play on and risk lots of SANFL time, fine. But make sure there's no rated talent that slips in the draft first. There's no risk extending him after the draft, nobody is stealing him from under our nose.

 

[1970crow]

Nah, he should have been moved on, nothing about the decision makes any sense for a team in rebuild mode.

At least pick him up with the last rookie spot once you're certain he's the best option still on the table. That's all I ask. Opportunity cost could be huge, if Rendell had that one extra late pick he'd have not had to hope Neale slipped through to the rookie draft.

 

[1970crow]

I feel he's a potential bridge between old + young. Lots of our experienced players i feel might be in a bit of a boys club... dmac from all accounts is professional and hard working... but also approachable and less intimidating for the youngsters than some of the others. If hes minimum wage i see it as a positive healing step for our culture issues.

We cant deny we have some offield issues and need to nurture a new group coming through, this new group is going to establish our new culture. Im ok if dmac helps shape it, theres worse options

As a senior player wouldn't he have contributed already to our culture issues? It's strange how people refer to these culture issues but then want to hang on to every senior player in order correct it. It's kind of like wanting Chapman to stay on as Chairman to lead us out of the worst state the club has ever been in. It's very difficult to get my head around. Do people not realise the cause is rarely the solution.

 

[1970crow]

Are you David Mackay

14

David Mackay

Age

37

Ht

181cm

Wt

78kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.0

4star

K

9.2

4star

HB

7.7

5star

M

3.2

3star

T

3.2

5star

MG

315.4

4star

D

16.5

4star

K

7.0

3star

HB

9.5

5star

M

2.5

3star

T

2.0

3star

MG

265.5

4star

D

12.0

3star

K

6.2

3star

HB

5.8

4star

M

4.6

5star

T

1.2

3star

?

No, David Mackay

14

David Mackay

Age

37

Ht

181cm

Wt

78kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.0

4star

K

9.2

4star

HB

7.7

5star

M

3.2

3star

T

3.2

5star

MG

315.4

4star

D

16.5

4star

K

7.0

3star

HB

9.5

5star

M

2.5

3star

T

2.0

3star

MG

265.5

4star

D

12.0

3star

K

6.2

3star

HB

5.8

4star

M

4.6

5star

T

1.2

3star

can deduct 48 from 50 and not arrive at 4. Vader cannot.

 

[1970crow]

you think our rebuild was based on getting 50c on the dollar

it was a fire sale, unplanned, with no ground work to get value, most likely for cap purposes

I mean sheesh, talk about terrible takes

Pies rebuilding as we speak. That's correct isn't it Jeffcrowe ?

 

[Mismatched]

The 2020 draft is significantly riskier for the clubs, given that they have zero form lines on 60% of the players being drafted. Most of these kids haven't played a game in 12 months, and considerably more for some of them (those who missed games due to injury in 2019).

Selecting players in the RD carries less risk - they're paid less, and we can delist them after only 12 months if they don't work out.

It makes a lot of sense to keep our powder dry for 2021, for a number of reasons:

• We can fill those remaining list spots using the mid-season drafts, once we finally see the Victorian kids in action and get a form line on their development.
• List sizes are expected to return to normal at the end of the year, giving us 2 free list positions without having to make any additional delistings.
• The 2021 draft is reputedly very, very strong - so it makes sense to be going deep in that draft, and shallow in this one.

Yeah exactly this, and those guys that did manage some football, still have less exposed form than normal years, most notably the lack of U18 champs where they get to strut their stuff against players their own age/standing. This makes this draft extremely risky, especially selecting much out of the 1st round, when these selections receive 2 year contracts.

Unfortunately ideally this would have been the year to go big in the ND for rebuild purposes, however COVID has shat all over that plan, better off saving list spots for next year and loading up then.

 

[Mismatched]

And the club never gets it wrong either, so there's no point having alternate opinions and discussing them on a forum. Fact is that Mackay should not have been signed until after the draft just in case a rated kid slipped through and was available at 40 or 56. Mackay taking a list spot ahead of some scrubber out of the rookie draft will have no impact on future success either way. But missing out on a player that we actually rated as being list spot worthy might. Mackay should have been extended after the draft.

And I'll be saying the same about Tex next year, if he wants to play on and risk lots of SANFL time, fine. But make sure there's no rated talent that slips in the draft first. There's no risk extending him after the draft, nobody is stealing him from under our nose.

You do realise we will still have free list spots at 40 and 56 despite maintaining Mackay.

Currently we have 7 free ND list spots which equates to: picks 1, 9, 22, 23, 40, 56 and 66.

Now 66 will be held for Hately, but at this stage we're likely to either take 3 and Borlase, or 4 and Borlase, which leaves 1, possibly 2 spots we could use for the unanticipated slider. We did this with Ben Davis

40

Ben Davis

Age

28

Ht

189cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

D/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

6.0

1star

K

3.5

1star

HB

2.5

2star

M

2.0

2star

T

1.5

3star

MG

169.0

3star

D

5.0

1star

K

4.0

1star

HB

1.0

1star

M

2.0

2star

T

2.0

3star

MG

169.0

3star

D

6.0

2star

K

3.5

2star

HB

2.5

3star

M

2.0

3star

T

1.5

4star

MG

169.0

3star

in 2016, planned on only taking 4 players, but Davis was available at our 5th so we grabbed him.

Personally I'm a bit disappointed about keeping Mackay, but I can see the reasoning. I do hope though that he's there largely as a development coach/SANFL player.

 

[hey shorty]

You do realise we will still have free list spots at 40 and 56 despite maintaining Mackay.

Currently we have 7 free ND list spots which equates to: picks 1, 9, 22, 23, 40, 56 and 66.

Now 66 will be held for Hately, but at this stage we're likely to either take 3 and Borlase, or 4 and Borlase, which leaves 1, possibly 2 spots we could use for the unanticipated slider. We did this with Ben Davis

40

Ben Davis

Age

28

Ht

189cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

D/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

6.0

1star

K

3.5

1star

HB

2.5

2star

M

2.0

2star

T

1.5

3star

MG

169.0

3star

D

5.0

1star

K

4.0

1star

HB

1.0

1star

M

2.0

2star

T

2.0

3star

MG

169.0

3star

D

6.0

2star

K

3.5

2star

HB

2.5

3star

M

2.0

3star

T

1.5

4star

MG

169.0

3star

in 2016, planned on only taking 4 players, but Davis was available at our 5th so we grabbed him.

Personally I'm a bit disappointed about keeping Mackay, but I can see the reasoning. I do hope though that he's there largely as a development coach/SANFL player.

He clearly doesn't realise that, he can be a bit hazy on detail.

 

[1970crow]

You do realise we will still have free list spots at 40 and 56 despite maintaining Mackay.

Currently we have 7 free ND list spots which equates to: picks 1, 9, 22, 23, 40, 56 and 66.

Now 66 will be held for Hately, but at this stage we're likely to either take 3 and Borlase, or 4 and Borlase, which leaves 1, possibly 2 spots we could use for the unanticipated slider. We did this with Ben Davis

40

Ben Davis

Age

28

Ht

189cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

D/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

6.0

1star

K

3.5

1star

HB

2.5

2star

M

2.0

2star

T

1.5

3star

MG

169.0

3star

D

5.0

1star

K

4.0

1star

HB

1.0

1star

M

2.0

2star

T

2.0

3star

MG

169.0

3star

D

6.0

2star

K

3.5

2star

HB

2.5

3star

M

2.0

3star

T

1.5

4star

MG

169.0

3star

in 2016, planned on only taking 4 players, but Davis was available at our 5th so we grabbed him.

Personally I'm a bit disappointed about keeping Mackay, but I can see the reasoning. I do hope though that he's there largely as a development coach/SANFL player.

It's the same argument, we've got 1 list spot after getting Hately in the PSD and using our picks to 23. Not opening up for a second slider at 56 is the same mistake. We should be selecting at 40 anyway and doing that fills the list. We should have waited till after the draft and we could have rookied him just in case. And I said 40 or 56, so my numbers are exactly the same as yours. How could you not realise that?

 

[1970crow]

He clearly doesn't realise that, he can be a bit hazy on detail.

How could I not realise it when I specifically mentioned both those picks in my post. God you can be as dumb as Vader with maths.

31 players plus Hately = 32 + 4 picks to 23 = 36 + Borlase = 37. We can't use both 40 and 56 for sliders if Borlase isn't bid on prior to that. It's a pretty simple concept, but then you're not known for your ability to comprehend. Now, we lose nothing by waiting until after the draft to re-contract Mackay and keeping our draft options fully open. And even if we do fill it with a slider, he can go onto the rookie list.

I dare you to explain the benefit derived from having Mackay on the main list instead of the rookie list. Even you understand that there's the potential for it to cost us a slider that we rate, so you should be able to explain the benefit that counteracts that.