List Mgmt. 2025 List Management 📃

[sweethoney]

Odd way to look at it. He turns into a 200cm midfielder as soon as the ball hits the ground which is unlikely almost every other ruckman in the game. He averages more disposals than any other ruck (outside of Gawn) and also has the most inside-50's than any other ruck in the game.

Maybe we should have pitto in the ruck and Tdk ruck rover? It seemed to work for freo the other week against Gold Coast in bits I seen

 

[bringdoullback]

Agree but before the end of the season I would like to see a significant change in how we play...in particular our f50 entries...

As of now, change the game plan to a modern style and instruct/practice/strongly police our f50 entries to the point where if during the game a player mindlessly blazes away/dump/hack/long bombs it into f50 said player gets dragged to the bench and cops and earful from the coach - if they recommit the same offence they get subbed from the game and automatically omitted from next game. They only return once they've demonstrated consistently that they think about their kicks into f50 at VFL level over 3 consecutive games. This rule applies to ALL players!

Once this happens we can then decide if "Kemp is not that guy" or any other player for that matter does not fit our new game style.

Then we go and find the missing pieces - trade/draft etc

I have a slightly different view. As a team you need different modes depending on the situation.

When we are playing (by design, or conditions, or opposition driven) playing a contested territory offence, we need to set up for the bomb with talls providing a contest and smalls positioned to get crumb or trap ball inside. I think we are ok at this style but its all too predictable for oppositions. Against certain opposition who defend well against this approach we need different ball movement.

When we are playing a spread from contest style, (again because that's what's needed) we use out outside runners to hit leading targets and kick to space. We don't have or use the right midfield mix for this approach. and i mean positioning, skills and rotations. Jagga 100% was meant to fill a void here.

When we get a turn over, usually incept mark in the back half, we move quickly to deliver into f50.

The coaches already know this of course, but I feel we are too defensive in our setups. So that we can't score from turnover and because we are too slow or we bomb forward and our smalls are not in position to crumb and trap.

Change personal, and we change the modes we attack. That then should lead to less defensive setups and more confidence in f50 entries.

 

[DangerousD]

Odd way to look at it. He turns into a 200cm midfielder as soon as the ball hits the ground which is unlikely almost every other ruckman in the game. He averages more disposals than any other ruck (outside of Gawn) and also has the most inside-50's than any other ruck in the game.

Whatever he does or doesnt do, however he looks or whatever role he plays isn’t really important, what’s important is his output and how much that output is worth.

To date, Tom has never been in the top 6 ranked players on our list, his best ever season saw him finish 7th in our B&F, now i expect him to beat that this year, but i dont see him winning it.

If im paying $1M or more for a ruck, they’d want to be one of my sides best players, one of the leagues best and be producing more than what he is currently.

If Saints hadn’t offered $1.7M, i dont think we would have offered $1M

 

[Just Kreuzing]

He is a gun athlete who isn't a good kicker. He relies on his athleticism mostly.

Exactly great agility & athleticism for his position but poor by foot and not a great mark.

If he had Simon Madden’s kicking skills & marking he could justifiably command 1.7mil in today’s footy.

 

[BlueJet]

These calls of saying TDK is no superstar... what have you been watching? He's a gun. Moves like a mid. No wonder other teams want him.

He's quality & there's plenty of potential but superstar is a stretch IMO. Marshall & Grundy are better and I wouldn't consider either superstars but that may just be me.
As others have highlighted previously, go through his matchup every week & it's not as though he's dominant. In a sense he's a 6'7 Marc Murphy, he's great at getting out on the spread offensively but also allows plenty of room for his opponent to do their thing.
Do I see that as being worthy of offering record terms for a ruckman when we have a number of deficiencies still?
No, not remotely

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

You're right, but here is an important question to consider:

Has a team recently won a premiership with a ruckman that plays the way TDK does?

2024 - Darcy Fort - NO
2023 - Darcy Cameron - NO
2022 - Stanley/Blicavs - NO/YES
2021 - Max Gawn - YES
2020 - Toby Nankervis - NO
2019 - Toby Nankervis - NO
2018 - Lycett/Vardy - NO
2017 - Toby Nankervis - NO

Cameron is similar it’s just that the coaches use them differently after a stoppage.

 

[circusdevil]

If St Kilda are offering the stupid $$ so as they can get Tom without a trade and then get rid of Marshall and Steele to get picks to hit the draft (as is rumoured), then Tom is in for a world of pain at the Saints over the short term.

 

[Blue__Balls]

You write decision is loyalty-motivated. That means you were talking about being loyal

You're clearly not understanding. I posed multiple scenarios - leaving for St Kilda would be financially motivated, leaving for Geelong would be success or lifestyle motivated, staying at Carlton would be loyalty motivated. He doesn't have to be loyal, it doesn't gain him anything, but some players feel that way anyway. Our pitch is less money than St Kilda, nowhere near the surf coast, and a club that are battling to achieve even consistent competence let alone excellence - ergo...staying would be based on a sense of loyalty to the club or his teammates.

 

[HereComesJuddy]

If St Kilda are offering the stupid $$ so as they can get Tom without a trade and then get rid of Marshall and Steele to get picks to hit the draft (as is rumoured), then Tom is in for a world of pain at the Saints over the short term.

We can bag out St Kilda all day long but I think them going after TDK is a smart move. Yes the money bandied around of 1.7 million a year can seem ridiculous. The Saints have been paying minimum chips when it comes to their cap and at a guess, would have around 2.5 million ready to burn with the build up paying only 95%

Every chance they pay Tom that 2.5 million as it will need to be spent, plus at least 1.5 of their 2026 TPP. So if Tom’s estimate income of 12 million over 7 years, then after the 2026 season, they will only need to pay him approx 8 million over the final 6 years (which on average per year would be 1.333 million) which isn’t a crazy number considering a lot of contracts for stars will be over 1 million a year.

The saints also have a few young players I rate on their list that with another year of development will certainly push aside of any drop if they did infact let Steele and Marshall leave. They will also arm themselves with a few more picks from those trades and look to go to the draft or even chase players like Bergman etc.

We can shit can them all day long, but it’s smart list management to pay overs for Tom, not lose any picks, then trade out Marshall and Steele to bolster their youth once again.

 

[Red Bull]

Steele

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

We can bag out St Kilda all day long but I think them going after TDK is a smart move. Yes the money bandied around of 1.7 million a year can seem ridiculous. The Saints have been paying minimum chips when it comes to their cap and at a guess, would have around 2.5 million ready to burn with the build up paying only 95%

Every chance they pay Tom that 2.5 million as it will need to be spent, plus at least 1.5 of their 2026 TPP. So if Tom’s estimate income of 12 million over 7 years, then after the 2026 season, they will only need to pay him approx 8 million over the final 6 years (which on average per year would be 1.333 million) which isn’t a crazy number considering a lot of contracts for stars will be over 1 million a year.

The saints also have a few young players I rate on their list that with another year of development will certainly push aside of any drop if they did infact let Steele and Marshall leave. They will also arm themselves with a few more picks from those trades and look to go to the draft or even chase players like Bergman etc.

We can shit can them all day long, but it’s smart list management to pay overs for Tom, not lose any picks, then trade out Marshall and Steele to bolster their youth once again.

If they can turn Marshall into Bergman they have done well imo. People say they should spread that money out but they never seem to put up names or the cost to get them

 

[4flagsin5yrs]

Darcy Cameron makes zero sense to me, good player but would turn 31 in the middle of his 1st season with us.

Big Harry Madden played till he was 36?

 

[4flagsin5yrs]

He's quality & there's plenty of potential but superstar is a stretch IMO. Marshall & Grundy are better and I wouldn't consider either superstars but that may just be me.
As others have highlighted previously, go through his matchup every week & it's not as though he's dominant. In a sense he's a 6'7 Marc Murphy, he's great at getting out on the spread offensively but also allows plenty of room for his opponent to do their thing.
Do I see that as being worthy of offering record terms for a ruckman when we have a number of deficiencies still?
No, not remotely

Grundy was better, not now.

 

[ferrisb]

As a general rule i don’t think players do this, they sign for what they are worth at the time, it would be very rare for a player to sign for a few hundred less because they hadn’t lived up to expectations previously, I’ve added some stuff on Charlie below, there is no way a kid in his 3rd year after not performing should have been offered $800,000 per year

Charlie Curnow in 2018 signed a 4 year deal with us for a reported $800,000 per year. He signed this deal when he’d kicked 35 goals for the club.

In the first 3 years of that deal, he played 15 games before playing 22 in year 4.

He then signed a big 7 year deal reported at around $1M

Players get paid on output and potential. Young players get paid mostly on potential.

I have had a major problem with this for years, but from a different angle.

Most people take umbrage with paying players for what they MIGHT be. And there is a huge risk that the player doesn't live up to the hype/contract.

What bothers me even more is even if the player DOES end up being a great player, you have paid them significantly while you wait for that to happen. So even when you do get value, you end up with crappy value (in a sense).

 

[Juddernaut08]

He's quality & there's plenty of potential but superstar is a stretch IMO. Marshall & Grundy are better and I wouldn't consider either superstars but that may just be me.
As others have highlighted previously, go through his matchup every week & it's not as though he's dominant. In a sense he's a 6'7 Marc Murphy, he's great at getting out on the spread offensively but also allows plenty of room for his opponent to do their thing.
Do I see that as being worthy of offering record terms for a ruckman when we have a number of deficiencies still?
No, not remotely

This is so, so true.

He plays very offensively minded so gets a lot of touches and looks flashy.

But so often, even his 'lesser' opponents also play influential games. TDK kicks his share of goals, but how often do his opponents bob up for 1 or 2 against him?

The net gain from playing him vs someone who is less flashy but more accountable (and cheaper) wouldn't be that much IMO.

He's very far from having the brains, consistency and dominance of Gawn.

 

[Pablito]

No to Cameron for me. Too old and slightly overrated. Good in a good system. Will struggle in ours.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Players get paid on output and potential. Young players get paid mostly on potential.

I have had a major problem with this for years, but from a different angle.

Most people take umbrage with paying players for what they MIGHT be. And there is a huge risk that the player doesn't live up to the hype/contract.

What bothers me even more is even if the player DOES end up being a great player, you have paid them significantly while you wait for that to happen. So even when you do get value, you end up with crappy value (in a sense).

Yep. And the problem is, if you're not willing to pony up for that potential, some other club will and you can lose them...

 

[Blue_Fusion]

No to Cameron for me. Too old and slightly overrated. Good in a good system. Will struggle in ours.

While I agree with you, can you tell me which player will thrive in our system?

Perhaps an aging player who only plays well against us?

 

[Coops93]

Marshall & Grundy are better and I wouldn't consider either superstars but that may just be me.

TDK this year has been better than both, easily. He's the no.3 rated ruckman in the comp behind Jackson and Xerri. He's been elite this yr. Let's not forget he absolutely towelled Xerri up last time they played, who is rated no.1 (and fairly so, imo)

Grundy is rated 7th and Marshall isn't even in the top 20. Let's not kick the guy because he's considering leaving

 

[ferrisb]

While I agree with you, can you tell me which player will thrive in our system?

Perhaps an aging player who only plays well against us?

By definition that player will then no longer play well against anybody...

 

[Pablito]

While I agree with you, can you tell me which player will thrive in our system?

Perhaps an aging player who only plays well against us?

Nah id rather someone about to hit their straps to boslter Pitto and HOK.

Reidy (Freo), Visentini (Essendon), Smith (Dogs), Pike (Cats) all out of contract and in the right age bracket. I'd expect one or 2 from that group to pop next year.

Not sure how good each one is tbh, but just an example that we could potentially pinch one and hopefully they'd be ready in 6-12 months.

Instead of picking a ruck who's already peaked and might not have more than 18 months of good footy in him.

I guess it depends on the clubs faith in Pitto and HOK holding the fort for a while?

 

[Blue_Fusion]

By definition that player will then no longer play well against anybody...

They spoil Carlton's day... Carlton will spoil their career

 

[Coona Blues]

Players get paid on output and potential. Young players get paid mostly on potential.

I have had a major problem with this for years, but from a different angle.

Most people take umbrage with paying players for what they MIGHT be. And there is a huge risk that the player doesn't live up to the hype/contract.

What bothers me even more is even if the player DOES end up being a great player, you have paid them significantly while you wait for that to happen. So even when you do get value, you end up with crappy value (in a sense).

Boring bean counter

 

[ITCHY EYEBALLS]

I think pretty much everyone thinks TDK is a superstar.

But almost everyone says 'We shouldn't pay him $1.7M/yr'
And some people are saying 'Even though he's a gun, I wouldn't pay any ruck $1M+/yr'
And some others are suggesting we already have too many ~$1M/yr players

All three are reasonable comments.

I don't

The old Captn Blood description fits him perfectly atm.
Good Ordinary Player.

He may develop into a star, even a superstar, but he's not there yet imo.

 

[Benaly28]

Two things.

How would people feel if we offered TDK $1.3M to stay

And

How do we rate Bergman?