List Mgmt. 2025 List Management Discussion - Part 3

[Hubnester]

2025 List Management Discussion - Part 3

Now that our season is over, and news is starting to break - it's time for a fresh thread.

This thread is to discuss all things list management - trades, draft, free agency, delistings and more.
As we are now officially in our off-season, we'll be wanting to keep this thread more strictly on-topic than the previous iterations.
Be respectful. You are allowed to disagree with someone - but play the ball, not the man. Repeat offenders will have their posting rights revoked.

Thanks to Lore once again for this incredibly useful spreadsheet.

2025 KEY DATES
Free Agency Period: Friday, October 3rd - Friday, October 10th
Trade Period: Monday, October 6th - Wednesday, October 15th
AFL Draft: Wednesday, November 19th - Thursday, November 20th

See Also:
2025 Year in Review Rumours & Confirmed Movements 2025 Draft Discussion
​

 

[nikkig98]

I see your restraint of trade and raise a breach of contract.

Your move now Mr Wilkie

 

[Verdun66]

I saw an interview with Stephenson not long ago. I thought he was quite impressive. I sympathized with his point that North tried to make him something he wasn’t. And that is a more physical player. He is an outside player with skill.

He was an idiot at Collingwood. But for someone (not us) he could be quite handy. Reckon he was matured quite a bit. Sounded that way to me.

 

[sasaint]

Tauru will be a gun without question. Had an epic year for an 18 year old (still 18) with no pre season or early year hitouts.

He will be ragdolling (done it already this year) blokes left and right whilist owning the air in no time.

In his first or second game at Sandy he blocked a senior opposition player and got rubbed out for it. I thought the call was a bit harsh at the time, but the block itself was a thing of beauty to see. The opposition player dropped like a ton of bricks. Tauru is one solid boy.

 

[Saintscomemarchingin]

I reckon we've almost moved past Henry. He's really wing/HHF and Hall and Windhager have probably overtaken for those spots and with Ryan coming in and Garcia performing things are getting tight. Hill maybe phased out potentially if he performs better but he was so far back in the VFL he looks like he's going to struggle to get back and leap frog others. Even Collard looked ahead of him.

Henry if fit & confident in his body again, takes Hill's spot.
Hope he gets back to his best, exciting to watch when up & about.
Only 24y.o, so you are going early in writing him off.

 

[Verdun66]

In his first or second game at Sandy he blocked a senior opposition player and got rubbed out for it. I thought the call was a bit harsh at the time, but the block itself was a thing of beauty to see. The opposition player dropped like a ton of bricks. Tauru is one solid boy.

I still reckon that suspension was a crock of s**t.

 

[Joffaboy]

I saw an interview with Stephenson not long ago. I thought he was quite impressive. I sympathized with his point that North tried to make him something he wasn’t. And that is a more physical player. He is an outside player with skill.

He was an idiot at Collingwood. But for someone (not us) he could be quite handy. Reckon he was matured quite a bit. Sounded that way to me.

If he was any more outside, he would have had to pay to get in.

 

[gringo2011]

Freijah + Croft + F1 is a realistic and not terrible haul I think

Then on-trade one of our F1s for Flanders?

I'm asking for more. If they are desperate they have to hand us a king's ransom. We set back our plans for a finals significantly and undo our whole top up strategy if he walks out.

Wilkie is elite and the best one on one defender in the comp. We'd be insane to let him go full stop.

 

[BrutThough]

Would the Dogs notice if we sent them Howard instead?

 

[nikkig98]

I'm asking for more. If they are desperate they have to hand us a king's ransom. We set back our plans for a finals significantly and undo our whole top up strategy if he walks out.

Wilkie is elite and the best one on one defender in the comp. We'd be insane to let him go full stop.

Especially seeing as Wilkie fills the most pressing need for a team that we HAVE to beat next year to make the top 8. That in itself makes Wilkie worth more than in a trade than his inherent quality as a player in a vaccuum (which, as you said is elite)

 

[gringo2011]

Flanders is a good player but he's also a classic case of someone who instantly becomes better because they might be traded. He a B to B+ mid.

He was absolutely A grade last year. This year he fell back to earth a lot this season but probably because he lost his position and wasn't able to contribute at the same level. He's behind Anderson, Miller and Rowell and they are feeding Davies in now too. He's really been pushed out by Rioli off HB now as well.

 

[phantom13]

If he was any more outside, he would have had to pay to get in.

I watched him last season v us and he got ****ing towelled up a treat by nearly every bloke that went near the wing that day.

To be fair he looked totally devoid of confidence and zeemed to have none of his pace and evaiseness that he had at the pies but he wouldnt have gotten a game in the VFL at that point.

 

[Joffaboy]

I'm asking for more. If they are desperate they have to hand us a king's ransom. We set back our plans for a finals significantly and undo our whole top up strategy if he walks out.

Wilkie is elite and the best one on one defender in the comp. We'd be insane to let him go full stop.

100% agree on everything above.
I would under no circumstances be trading Wilkie, but considering I am not the St.Kilda LM, I would be reaming them for the biggest overpay in history.
We lost an AA in Battle, then got totally exposed when Howard went down. We get some decent backmen for 26 then lose a second AA backman in two years?

We have two years to convince NAZ to stay. It would be a major blow in that endeavour if Wilkie isn't there.

We would have to win the trade by a ridiculous amount for it to be even remotely palatable.

Reckon he will be offered an extension with a hefty raise and the captaincy. If he doesn't like it, renegotiate in 2 years at 32 and maybe diminished prospects.

 

[TheNewEnsign]

This isn’t quite right. Most people can walk away from a job, sure, but AFL players are in a very closed, tightly regulated competition. And it’s not like they’re the only ones with limits, plenty of professions have enforceable restraints. Doctors often can’t practice within a certain radius after leaving a clinic, lawyers deal with conflict of interest restrictions, IT consultants are barred from taking clients to competitors. The AFL isn’t some weird outlier, the same principle applies wherever an employer has invested heavily in training, branding, or customer relationships.


And the idea that restraints are “virtually always unenforceable” is oversimplifying it. Under Australian law, restraints are presumed void, but they can and do get enforced if they’re reasonable and protect a legitimate business interest, things like confidential info, client connections, goodwill or specialist training.

OK so to be clear, I used 'restraint of trade' to mean 'the ability to practice a person's normal occupation'. I said 'virtually unenforceable' as a function of how often employers include purported restraint on performing one's normal occupation vs. how often that particular restraint would be enforceable.

Your comment above raises restraints in the context of non-solicitation and IP protection which are proper and reasonable but that's not what I was talking about. I'm talking about literally the ability to ply your trade. 'Goodwill' implies a business purchase / sale of some sort so wouldn't seem relevant to an AFL player.

 

[stavro#4]

I'm asking for more. If they are desperate they have to hand us a king's ransom. We set back our plans for a finals significantly and undo our whole top up strategy if he walks out.

Wilkie is elite and the best one on one defender in the comp. We'd be insane to let him go full stop.

I still have no understanding as to how the dogs actually think this plays out.

Wilkie says yes, make me a pug.

Dogs offer p10 and p28.

We say no.

They offer p10 and F1.

We say no.

We say Sam Darcy.

They say no.

Like wtf

 

[stavro#4]

For all you Windy Pervs.

 

[phantom13]

Would the Dogs notice if we sent them Howard instead?

Im mildly suprised theyre not considering Doogs.

I get that A grade talent is the preference but they need literally anything match fit.

 

[Saintscomemarchingin]

He was absolutely A grade last year. This year he fell back to earth a lot this season but probably because he lost his position and wasn't able to contribute at the same level. He's behind Anderson, Miller and Rowell and they are feeding Davies in now too. He's really been pushed out by Rioli off HB now as well.

What about taking? Davies

 

[gringo2011]

The only reason he'd leave would be if he loses faith in our medical staff

Grew up a Saints supporter, recently signed a long-term deal, apparently took unders to stay at the club he loves, repaying the loyalty we've shown to him, re-signings of all our key pieces

Something would have to go terribly wrong

People would have said all that about Daniher I guess. Frustration can kick in at some point and players need to mentally refresh.

 

[Red White Black]

The 2025 mass St Kilda exodus

 

[gringo2011]

What about taking? Davies

I don't hate it. He's a bit of an almost type. He's still a project and probably don't have many spots for those left now.

 

[phantom13]

I still have no understanding as to how the dogs actually think this plays out.

Wilkie says yes, make me a pug.

Dogs offer p10 and p28.

We say no.

They offer p10 and F1.

We say no.

We say Sam Darcy.

They say no.

Like wtf

Yeh i gotta agree.

I get Port and the crows thought they could get unders on Nas cause he was out of contract and honestly we all sort of assumed as much but theres no correlation to that here.

Wilkie is contracted, still hasnt requested and even if he did is extremely unlikely to go full Zac Merett. No doubt wed tell Wilkie we will look into it since he requested (and probably agree to give him a little bump) but we go into that discussion expecting absolutely ****ing ridiculous overs and nothing less.

Frankly even your suggestion of Sanders and Friejah can **** right off as far as im concerned.

 

[Saintscomemarchingin]

Im mildly suprised theyre not considering Doogs.

I get that A grade talent is the preference but they need literally anything match fit.

Has missed alot of games through lnjury the past two seasons

 

[Count_Zero]

That’s not great, what do they have to trade ?

Harry DeMattia. A young, quick player who can't break into the Pies midfield.

 

[SinCitySainter]

The overlay to a lot of player movements in the last ~ten years (or maybe, underlay is a better term) and why clubs facilitate player's requests is the AFL is (rightly) very worried that a player will go nuclear and bring a restraint of trade action against the club / AFL; they may well win and it would break the current system apart.

Pretty much every person on this board who is employed has the option of going to their employer tomorrow and resigning, and then can choose a new employer in the same field (and don't bring up supposed restrain of trade clauses in normal contracts, they are virtually always unenforceable except in niche circumstances). It is very unusual that AFL players cannot do that, the clubs understand that and that's why almost always a deal gets done if a player truly wants out.

No, this is simply not correct.

Firstly, AFL players are contractors not standard salaried staff. An AFL club cannot cut a players contract short without paying the contract the same as the player cannot simply get out of the contract by giving a notice period. Contracts can be terminated by mutual agreement or if one party breaks the terms of the agreement but a contract cannot be unilaterally terminated by one party unless their are defined clauses within the contract that allow that.

Secondly, there are no grounds for restraint of trade because any player is free to refuse an AFL contract and play in the SANFL or WAFL or Ovens and Murray league. No you won't get paid as much but less money is not grounds for restraint of trade. It would be like arguing restraint of trade because IBM won't transfer you from Melbourne to the San Francisco office.

 

[akaifu]

What about taking? Davies

Was reported earlier this week that he will stay and see out his contract