List Mgmt. 2024 List Management 📃

[Garters]

I’ll be pretty pissed if this eventuates.

It means it’s this…
IN: Pick 31
OUT: Dow, Fisher, pick 39

Surely there has to be something else included in that, if not, we get hugely destroyed. Nearly giving the boys away for free.

They’re both worth a late second/ early third in their own right, IMO.

Blakers we got for a future 3rd and he was in some All Australian squad discussions that last year at Freo was v good.
Neither Dow nor Fisher are starting 22 its not pretty but we do not have a strong bargaining position. Not that I think the above is in any way a good trade.

 

[DangerousD]

Is this a rumour you saw in the media, or private?

This was in a article today and it has been posted on one of the threads but who knows where.

 

[The Flying Doormat]

Values Dow as a mid 4th round, not sure I'd bother

On that valuation, we're better off keeping Dow as insurance.

 

[Stamos]

Blakers we got for a future 3rd and he was in some All Australian squad discussions that last year at Freo was v good.
Neither Dow nor Fisher are starting 22 its not pretty but we do not have a strong bargaining position. Not that I think the above is in any way a good trade.

Yes, but Blacres trade value was so low because Freo offered him 1 year at $180k.
We gave him 3 years for 350k.

Fisher has apparently been offered 4 years with a trigger for a 5th, at 450k+
Saints have offered Dow 3 years.
So Fisher's trade value should be significantly higher than, and Dow's similar to, Acres.

 

[bluebaggerjuls]

How excited are we to grab Holland’s?
I see him as that power med fwd type who can run through the middle competing with Fog and Cunnners for a spot.
For a comparison:
Petracca: 27, 187cm, 94kg
Raynor: 23, 186cm, 93kg
Holland’s: 21, 189, 86kg

Can he become that type of player for us?

doesnt have the burst those players do

 

[HaydossJ]

If we offered a contracted player 5 years and more money to jump across to us we would be asked to pay up.

Jack Martin, similar level of player at the time of trade, similar contract on offer, we had two seconds on the table despite the fact he was uncontracted.

I would be disappointed if a second isn't involved in the Fisher trade.

Dow, we just have to hope the Saints play nice. If they walked him to the draft would another club get in their way? Your evaluation would be pretty spot on.

Not necessarily - it is obvious the club is happy to move Fisher’s contract on.

 

[HaydossJ]

Yes, but Blacres trade value was so low because Freo offered him 1 year at $180k.
We gave him 3 years for 350k.

Fisher has apparently been offered 4 years with a trigger for a 5th, at 450k+
Saints have offered Dow 3 years.
So Fisher's trade value should be significantly higher than, and Dow's similar to, Acres.

If Fisher was OOC this year then I don’t see us offering him much more than what Fremantle offered Acres.

The value of North’s contract to Fisher is only relevant to Zac - to pull him out of a club that he loves. Whether he is offered 2 years or 5 years, is not relevant to his worth at the trade table in this specific circumstance IMO.

 

[Stamos]

Whether he is offered 2 years or 5 years, is not relevant to his worth at the trade table in this specific circumstance IMO.

Of course it is

 

[Stamos]

This was in a article today and it has been posted on one of the threads but who knows where.

Lol, I found it in an article from the Hun I posted in the Draft Thread

Carlton is set to take up to four picks and is open to splitting its first round pick, which has been pushed out to 16 after the club’s stunning end to the season.

 

[WalshYouLegend]

Dow will go to St Kilda on a 3 year deal

Possible for Pick 31 and we give pick 39 (received for Fisher) back

We want solid some picks this year

Wow, what a garbage deal. A pick upgrade from 39 to 31 for a great player. Sounds like SOS hard negotiating to me. No deal. Round 2 Pick outright or they can go get.

 

[HaydossJ]

Of course it is

Why? Fisher leaving, who is on good coin and not best 22, is a positive result in list management terms. If we wanted to keep him, then I would agree with your view. But we don’t.

 

[Stamos]

Why? Fisher leaving, who is on good coin and not best 22, is a positive result in list management terms. If we wanted to keep him, then I would agree with your view. But we don’t.

It's only a positive result in list management terms if we get something good for him. If we don't our depth is weakened, and it's not like his salary is so big as to be hurting us.

 

[ferrisb]

Fisher not quite worth North F2.

What if that is the starting point with a little sweetener from us?

North F2 and F3 for Fisher and our F2....

Basically Fisher for their F2 (or possibly their end of R1 bonus pick) and in return we upgrade their early F3 to our late F2.

I'd really like to get their bonus pick involved as that takes out ladder risk for us (if North miraculously pop a few spots higher). Also takes risk off the table for North as the AFL can't take the pick off them...

 

[ferrisb]

Fisher not quite worth North F2.

What if that is the starting point with a little sweetener from us?

North F2 and F3 for Fisher and our F2....

Basically Fisher for their F2 (or possibly their end of R1 bonus pick) and in return we upgrade their early F3 to our late F2.

I'd really like to get their bonus pick involved as that takes out ladder risk for us (if North miraculously pop a few spots higher). Also takes risk off the table for North as the AFL can't take the pick off them...

Also means we get a bunch more points next year and/or frees us up to trade our F1...

 

[The Bighouse]

Not really North have so many draft picks, don't just give in some unfavourable deal, clearly they want Fisher make them pay a price.

E.g. Darcy Tucker last year

 

[ferrisb]

Fisher and our future first for BOTH of North's end of R1 assistance picks...

Come at me bro (and sis)...

 

[freo_leo29]

Find the Fisher trade strange, why would you leave a potential top 4 side next year for a guaranteed bottom 4 side. The guy is contracted for the next two years why not fight for a spot in your preferred position, guess thats why his departure wont be missed.

His best mate just moved to North last year, probably plays a small part in it

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

I reckon the one thing we can all agree on is that it's all speculation right now....we don't even know if Hollands will even request a trade as it currently stands.

The one thing I always look at though is the trades/drafts as a collective rather than to single each one out. Of course we'd like more for the players we're trading out, but unfortunately it doesn't always pan out that way.

So if we take Soapy and Arr0w's 'rumours' in totality (as well as Cal Twomey) - we'd be trading out Fish and Dow for pick 32, and possibly split pick 16 for 25 and 33 from the Demons, as well as bringing in Hollands for a future 2nd.

That'd leave us with picks 25, 32 and 33 in this year's draft (along with Elijah Hollands) - which is a hell of lot better than having 16, 65 and 73 on draft night IMO. The general consensus by Twomey and others is that this year's draft is a raffle after the first 8 or 9 picks, so there's likely to be plenty of value in the 2nd round - which we'd have three picks.

We also retain our future 1st and 3rd to use for points in 2024. It shouldn't be too hard to get the points required for the Campo twins next year.

 

[zeeCFC]

If we decided to get Oliver, we're hoping we just win every clearance until we win a premiership.

Dees would want minimum two top 10 picks which they could package up for pick 1 and get Reid.

No doubt he'd be great in our side but not sure we can essentially bow out of this draft and the next while filling our whole cap to get more of the same in a contested mid.

Essendon and Cats are probably the best fits but Essendon would get stuck offering BZT and Guelfi for him. Cats and Swans would be all over it.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

I reckon the one thing we can all agree on is that it's all speculation right now....we don't even know if Hollands will even request a trade as it currently stands.

The one thing I always look at though is the trades/drafts as a collective rather than to single each one out. Of course we'd like more for the players we're trading out, but unfortunately it doesn't always pan out that way.

So if we take Soapy and Arr0w's 'rumours' in totality (as well as Cal Twomey) - we'd be trading out Fish and Dow for pick 32, and possibly split pick 16 for 25 and 33 from the Demons, as well as bringing in Hollands for a future 2nd.

That'd leave us with picks 25, 32 and 33 in this year's draft (along with Elijah Hollands) - which is a hell of lot better than having 16, 65 and 73 on draft night IMO. The general consensus by Twomey and others is that this year's draft is a raffle after the first 8 or 9 picks, so there's likely to be plenty of value in the 2nd round - which we'd have three picks.

We also retain our future 1st and 3rd to use for points in 2024. It shouldn't be too hard to get the points required for the Campo twins next year.

65 and 73 are going to come in though. Will probably be two picks in the 50s by the time all the bidding is done and clubs pass on their unused third rounders.

Losing Fisher and Dow, two strong depth players, for pick 32 in this draft, would be a massive fail imo. If the Saints want to play hard ball with Dow then we’ll just have to accept it, but we certainly don’t need to roll over with Fish.

I don’t mind the idea of splitting our pick but that should be done on draft night where it is most valuable and we know what we’re giving up.

 

[HaydossJ]

65 and 73 are going to come in though. Will probably be two picks in the 50s by the time all the bidding is done and clubs pass on their unused third rounders.

Losing Fisher and Dow, two strong depth players, for pick 32 in this draft, would be a massive fail imo. If the Saints want to play hard ball with Dow then we’ll just have to accept it, but we certainly don’t need to roll over with Fish.

I don’t mind the idea of splitting our pick but that should be done on draft night where it is most valuable and we know what we’re giving up.

I’ll tell you what is a massive fail - holding a ‘depth player’ on your list who is on an above average AFL salary just to avoid ‘losing’ a trade. We will do everything we can to squeeze as much out of North as possible, but at the end of the day we will let him go as it beneficial for all parties.

 

[teagueyubeauty]

Why? Fisher leaving, who is on good coin and not best 22, is a positive result in list management terms. If we wanted to keep him, then I would agree with your view. But we don’t.

Generally I would agree however we will be keeping absolutely ALL of the perennially injured which is totally astounding to me.

There seems to be a lot of misplaced faith that all of a sudden they will become even remotely durable on a consistent basis.

They may, however, it seems a bit of blind faith to me when you consider past history with players bodies across the comp as a whole that most of them will go on and play with a somewhat normal injury profile.

Yet, we are moving on 2 players that are historically very durable and have shown they can play best 22 football.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[HaydossJ]

Generally I would agree however we will be keeping absolutely ALL of the perennially injured which is totally astounding to me.

There seems to be a lot of misplaced faith that all of a sudden they will become even remotely durable on a consistent basis.

They may, however, it seems a bit of blind faith to me when you consider past history with players bodies across the comp as a whole that most of them will go on and play with a somewhat normal injury profile.

Yet, we are moving on 2 players that are historically very durable and have shown they can play best 22 football.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Yep I agree with this - I guess the club is hoping we get a rise from Binns, Cowan etc plus maybe 1 or 2 mature ages from other clubs to become new depth.

I’m not fussed on Fish going, but feel we are definitely going to miss Paddy.

 

[GapInIkonPark]

Generally I would agree however we will be keeping absolutely ALL of the perennially injured which is totally astounding to me.

There seems to be a lot of misplaced faith that all of a sudden they will become even remotely durable on a consistent basis.

They may, however, it seems a bit of blind faith to me when you consider past history with players bodies across the comp as a whole that most of them will go on and play with a somewhat normal injury profile.

Yet, we are moving on 2 players that are historically very durable and have shown they can play best 22 football.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

NQR … not keeping Philp

 

[Manhattanite]

Let’s not forget that the Club is open to keeping Dow but on our terms which Dow can choose to accept or reject. Fair enough if he wants to move on for a longer contract (and probably more money). We can blame the club but at the end of the day it’s Dow’s decision.

Also the simple fact is one or at most two other clubs (out of 17) are interested in Dow. So the market is saying he’s not worth much. If Big Footy is right and Dow is worth Pick 30 or 40 then surely another club will come in and offer that and give Dow 3 years. But it’s unlikely that happens - hence we have to probably take what the Saints offer. We can debate all the we want about Dows worth in draft picks but at the end of the day it’s whatever the buyer(s) offer.




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com