List Mgmt. Contracts/Trade Thread - 2025 Edition Vol 3

[Keys]

Quick Links

• Draft thread
• Player contract status
• Draft prospect video highlights (thanks to noobermensch)

List Changes - 2025

Spoiler

In:

• Brandon Starcevich arrives at West Coast in a three team deal
• Tylar Young (Richmond) arrived at West Coast in exchange for Pick 38.
• Deven Robertson (Brisbane) has agreed to join West Coast and will be signed on to the rookie list after being delisted by Brisbane

Out:

• Oscar Allen joins Brisbane as a FA - West Coast receive Pick 2 as compensation
• Liam Ryan and a 2027 R3 pick has been traded to St Kilda for a 2026 R2 pick
• Campbell Chesser has been traded to Carlton for Pick 41
• Jayden Hunt announces retirement
• Jack Petruccelle, Callum Jamieson and Loch Rawlinson not offered new contracts
• Coen Livingstone joins the list of players not offered a new contract

Players Out of Contract - 2025 (0)

Spoiler

• Jamie Cripps and Malakai Champion seem to have been offered new contracts despite there being no official announcement. Means that all players out of contract for 2025 have been given new contracts despite or removed from the playing list

2025 Draft Order

Spoiler

Current Draft Picks:
Round 1: 1, 2, 13
Round 2: 34, 41
Round 3: 53, 58 (These picks are in excess of available list spots so will be forfeited if we don’t consolidate our 2025 picks up the order or trade some for future picks)

List Spots Available (39 of 48):
• Main list (33 of 38) - 5* (in: Starcevich, Young out: Allen, Ryan, Chesser, Hunt, Petruccelle, Jamieson)
• Cat A rookie list (5 of 8) - 3* (in: Robertson (pending), out: Rawlinson)
• Cat B rookie list (1 of 2) - 2 (out: Livingstone)

* Based on Dewar being upgraded after the maximum 3 years on the rookie list. Hutchinson may also have been upgraded but this isn’t confirmed - if it is we will have 4 main and 4 rookie list spots open

* Matthew Clarke has stated we have 5 main list spots

Matt Clarke wraps up the trade period - 6PR

 

[Shmiddy15]

Come 2026 we’ll have 12 new players on an overall list of 48

Newton and McCarthy effectively covered the retirements of Sheed and Gov when they were taken in the MSD

Eight players moved on in the postseason - Allen (FA), Ryan and Chesser (Trade) with Hunt (Retired/Delisted) and Jamieson, Rawlinson, Livingstone and Petruccelle all delisted

Kelly (2 years - should’ve been 1), Cole (1 year), Brock (2 years), Bazzo (1 year), Dewar 3 years - could’ve been 2) and Newton (1 year) were all rightly given new contracts although a couple arguably got a year more than they needed to. In the absence of any official announcement, we also have to assume that Cripps and Champion have been given one year extensions

There’s also the curious case of Jack Hutchinson who was given a (generous) 3 years extension from 2026 through to 2029 despite there being nothing I can find to say his original 2025 contract from the MSD had been extended to 2026

Even for a team in a rebuild it’s a reasonably high turnover of players (8) that arguably would have been more had the AFL not given us the 4 extra rookie spots

So 12 new players with Starcevich and Young added as trades and Robertson committed to joining the club via SSP/DFA as a rookie. Leaves 9 vacant spots across the various lists - 5 on the main list to the best of our knowledge, 3 Cat A rookies and 1 Cat B

With the draft hand we have and potential NGA and F/S additions we really should be going into the draft with 6 open spots rather than 5 - something that could easily have been achieved by delisting Cripps and redrafting him onto the rookie list. Exactly why the club didn’t do so will likely remain a mystery- if that decision bites Clarke on the arse because we miss out on either Banfield or Evans due to an inability to match then he’ll deserve every bit of criticism that comes his way

Having 6 spots would have given us the ability to add 3x R1 draft picks, an extra pick around 30 or match a possible bid on Williams and have two places in reserve to match a possible bid on both Banfield and Evans. As it stands we could lose one of those two if they are both bid on unless we don’t match for Williams and use pick 34/41 in some other way - trade up pick 13 this year or into next year

We would then still have 2 rookie list spots for SSP signings

Walley will fill the Cat B opening

Overall, it’s been a good trade period and build up to the draft noting that pick swaps can still be done until the end of next week. The decision not to move a player to the rookie list is a black mark though, the significance of which won’t be known until after the draft - it will be inconsequential if one or both of Banfield/Evans don’t attract a bid

Thanks for the summary as always Keys. Is the 5 main list spots assuming Hutch has been upgraded, or assuming he stays a rookie?

 

[Farmer Lister]

Come 2026 we’ll have 12 new players on an overall list of 48

Newton and McCarthy effectively covered the retirements of Sheed and Gov when they were taken in the MSD

Eight players moved on in the postseason - Allen (FA), Ryan and Chesser (Trade) with Hunt (Retired/Delisted) and Jamieson, Rawlinson, Livingstone and Petruccelle all delisted

Kelly (2 years - should’ve been 1), Cole (1 year), Brock (2 years), Bazzo (1 year), Dewar 3 years - could’ve been 2) and Newton (1 year) were all rightly given new contracts although a couple arguably got a year more than they needed to. In the absence of any official announcement, we also have to assume that Cripps and Champion have been given one year extensions

There’s also the curious case of Jack Hutchinson who was given a (generous) 3 years extension from 2026 through to 2029 despite there being nothing I can find to say his original 2025 contract from the MSD had been extended to 2026

Even for a team in a rebuild it’s a reasonably high turnover of players (8) that arguably would have been more had the AFL not given us the 4 extra rookie spots

So 12 new players with Starcevich and Young added as trades and Robertson committed to joining the club via SSP/DFA as a rookie. Leaves 9 vacant spots across the various lists - 5 on the main list to the best of our knowledge, 3 Cat A rookies and 1 Cat B

With the draft hand we have and potential NGA and F/S additions we really should be going into the draft with 6 open spots rather than 5 - something that could easily have been achieved by delisting Cripps and redrafting him onto the rookie list. Exactly why the club didn’t do so will likely remain a mystery- if that decision bites Clarke on the arse because we miss out on either Banfield or Evans due to an inability to match then he’ll deserve every bit of criticism that comes his way

Having 6 spots would have given us the ability to add 3x R1 draft picks, an extra pick around 30 or match a possible bid on Williams and have two places in reserve to match a possible bid on both Banfield and Evans. As it stands we could lose one of those two if they are both bid on unless we don’t match for Williams and use pick 34/41 in some other way - trade up pick 13 this year or into next year

We would then still have 2 rookie list spots for SSP signings

Walley will fill the Cat B opening

Overall, it’s been a good trade period and build up to the draft noting that pick swaps can still be done until the end of next week. The decision not to move a player to the rookie list is a black mark though, the significance of which won’t be known until after the draft - it will be inconsequential if one or both of Banfield/Evans don’t attract a bid

They must be pretty certain that only one NGA will attract a bid, either that or they're only planning to take 3 in the draft, otherwise they've put themselves under pressure for no reason. Pretty silly really.

 

[flamingEMBERS]

If our NGA players don't make our list I hope the WAFL clubs release them to play Beagles and develop there.

And on a side note clubs should be able to trade the draft rights of NGA players even before they are drafted.

 

[Coasters7]

When's their pick going to end up, early to mid 20s?

Surely you'd match the bid.

Absolutely. Then run the risk that both Evans and Banfield get bid on which is unnecessary.

We’ve likely got one of Banfield or Evans pencilled in for the rookie list but moving Cripps gives us the flexibility to cover surprise bids.

The same 3 players are on our list either way but not moving a player to the rookie list seems like a mistake given it literally has no impact on salary or playing minutes.

 

[Byron_Clanger]

Absolutely. Then run the risk that both Evans and Banfield get bid on which is unnecessary.

We’ve likely got one of Banfield or Evans pencilled in for the rookie list but moving Cripps gives us the flexibility to cover surprise bids.

The same 3 players are on our list either way but not moving a player to the rookie list seems like a mistake given it literally has no impact on salary or playing minutes.

Yeah, I think the only player that's getting bid on is Williams. Recollecting mock drafts and top 50 power rankings over the last month I don't see Evans or Banfield anywhere. On RookieMe Banfield's draft range is 40-60 and Evans is 30-50 so maybe someone will be a little shit on Evans but Williams is the only real guarantee.

 

[Coasters7]

Yeah, I think the only player that's getting bid on is Williams. Recollecting mock drafts and top 50 power rankings over the last month I don't see Evans or Banfield anywhere. On RookieMe Banfield's draft range is 40-60 and Evans is 30-50 so maybe someone will be a little shit on Evans but Williams is the only real guarantee.

Mocks don’t mean much come draft night though. If a team has an extra spot and thinks Banfield or Evans are better than anything they’ll get in the rookie draft then they’ll take them.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

If we miss out on someone we want because we left Cripps on the senior list, we're one day closer to someone from the brand new recruiting team getting the arse for making the same old dumb calls like the old crew.

Would be keen to hear the justification.

 

[amazingjoshy]

If we miss out on someone we want because we left Cripps on the senior list, we're one day closer to someone from the brand new recruiting team getting the arse for making the same old dumb calls like the old crew.

Would be keen to hear the justification.

It might not even be needed?

Noone is totally clear on who is on the rookie list and who's not or how many list spots we actually have

 

[rebel23]

Gut feel is we end up with all our NGAs.

I think we match a Williams bid in the late 20s. No other bids except maybe on Evans who some clubs might see the value in him for a late pick given his potential.

Walley lasts and Banfield I think despite his late run also lasts

Why would we want to.
WA were pretty bad in the champs... And our NGA players weren't even in the best 10 players for the state.

Just match Banfield and let the rest go.

 

[Elite Pete]

There's another option to explain the lack of opening an extra spot. We don't rate the draft, take two round one selections only (1 and 2) and trade 13 into 2026.

Or, that's plan A, but if someone we love is at 13 we take them (being happy to let the last NGA go if necessary). Otherwise we trade it out to 2026.

Can take the delisted player (Cripps) then in the psd if there wasn’t a better option in the main draft.

 

[tigger_ferret]

The number of poor decisions this team has made over the last few years, I rate the Cripps to the rookie list on the lower end of the scale.

The negative is we may miss a player rated in the 50 odd range of a shallow draft, or we miss absolutely nothing.

 

[eaglevision]

It is possible there are some non football related reasons that we are not prepared to take 1-2 of our NGAs onto the main list regardless of where a bid is received.

 

[Knifey Spoony]

The only reasons I can think of to not move a player to the rookie list:

1: We have a strong draft hand next year with our first, two seconds and I believe three highly regarded NGAs and want hold that spot over for next year, especially as we will need to begin cutting the kids who haven't quite made it from the last few drafts.

2: We believe a deal for a future pick, like a very hypothetical 2 and 13 for Essendon's 5 and F1 (as an example) and will only take two 'live' picks into this draft.

 

[chaddy22]

I'm pretty annoyed we haven't cleared list spots for flexibility in the draft.
Our hands really are tied now for our linked players if multiple bids come, and we've lost a lot of flexibility in being able to take a slider/extra pick if somebody good was still around at our fourth pick.

This is the type of weak list management that I used to give the club the benefit of the doubt around, but át this point I can only assume it's another foolish move.

I disagree. This is a weak draft which nearly everyone agrees and maybe lucky if 50 picks to be used.
Common sense says that we need to have enough picks for next year.
I don't want to use draft capitol on our Nga's unless they are best option at that point.
We have extra spots for rookies for a reason.
Nearly everyone will be unhappy as we don't have enough spots for all the players this whole board wants

 

[Boohemian]

List management know what the deal is. They know how many list spots are available, and know we may miss out on NGAs if any bids come in.

NGAs are well known to the club. If we're prepared to roll the dice on them, then they probably don't rate them that strongly.

Easy to say they've made an error in not shifting Cripps to the rookie list, but they obviously have other plans in place, and different priorities.

 

[twce13]

List management know what the deal is. They know how many list spots are available, and know we may miss out on NGAs if any bids come in.

NGAs are well known to the club. If we're prepared to roll the dice on them, then they probably don't rate them that strongly.

Easy to say they've made an error in not shifting Cripps to the rookie list, but they obviously have other plans in place, and different priorities.

Obviously you are absolutely correct, but the idea that matthew Clarke can’t figure out the #s and requirements to match bids of all these guys is just too great of a narrative not to melt over.

 

[RustyShacklefordFalcon]

List management know what the deal is. They know how many list spots are available, and know we may miss out on NGAs if any bids come in.

NGAs are well known to the club. If we're prepared to roll the dice on them, then they probably don't rate them that strongly.

Easy to say they've made an error in not shifting Cripps to the rookie list, but they obviously have other plans in place, and different priorities.

Yep its almost as if they could be planning the list with not just this year in mind, but the next year and beyond. Amazing to think!

 

[chaddy22]

People complaining about list management need to think.
Delisting Barnett with one year to go.Is that good list management.
Delisting Johnston with one year to go.Is that good list management.
Delisting Owies with two years left Is that good list management.
If Cripps has been offered a one year extension. Is delisting him good list management.
Yet that are the suggestions of a desperate few who can't see the big picture that this isn't the draft to go big.
Last year yes and hopefully next year as well.

 

[Wooshaaaa]

It is possible there are some non football related reasons that we are not prepared to take 1-2 of our NGAs onto the main list regardless of where a bid is received.

Yep

 

[Godfather32]

People complaining about list management need to think.
Delisting Barnett with one year to go.Is that good list management.
Delisting Johnston with one year to go.Is that good list management.
Delisting Owies with two years left Is that good list management.
If Cripps has been offered a one year extension. Is delisting him good list management.
Yet that are the suggestions of a desperate few who can't see the big picture that this isn't the draft to go big.
Last year yes and hopefully next year as well.

You're de-listing them with the promise to re-rookie them, not de-listing them permanently, GWS have just done the exact thing with 2 guys. Would have given us a lot more flexibility to match bids and also pick up any sliders we may have liked at the end of the draft.

 

[Coasters7]

People complaining about list management need to think.
Delisting Barnett with one year to go.Is that good list management.
Delisting Johnston with one year to go.Is that good list management.
Delisting Owies with two years left Is that good list management.
If Cripps has been offered a one year extension. Is delisting him good list management.
Yet that are the suggestions of a desperate few who can't see the big picture that this isn't the draft to go big.
Last year yes and hopefully next year as well.

Other teams are delisting contracted players that are far better than those 4.

That’s also with the promise of picking them back up as mentioned above.

I’d be happy enough paying out all 4 contracts. Delisting and picking them back up (if needed) should have been the minimum requirement.

 

[Hook461123]

Maybe we have made plans for the rookie spots and we are more keen on getting some of the delisted guys rather than our NGA. Saying that I hope we at least match a bid on Banfield if it comes.

5 draft picks and 3 rookies is still a good influx.

3 first rounders + Williams&Banfield
Dev, Macrea, Shoenburg
Cat b of Evans or Walley depending on who makes it through.

 

[Farmer Lister]

Delisting Owies with two years left Is that good list management.

Yes.

 

[ghostbat12]

List management know what the deal is. They know how many list spots are available, and know we may miss out on NGAs if any bids come in.

NGAs are well known to the club. If we're prepared to roll the dice on them, then they probably don't rate them that strongly.

Easy to say they've made an error in not shifting Cripps to the rookie list, but they obviously have other plans in place, and different priorities.

I think the main question people need to ask is whether these NGA's, father sons are worth investing a 2 year contract in, including other clubs. that will dictate whether they get drafted in ND and whether we match. so who isnt worth a 2 year contract?

 

[cookiesncream]

Maybe we have made plans for the rookie spots and we are more keen on getting some of the delisted guys rather than our NGA. Saying that I hope we at least match a bid on Banfield if it comes.

5 draft picks and 3 rookies is still a good influx.

3 first rounders + Williams&Banfield
Dev, Macrea, Shoenburg
Cat b of Evans or Walley depending on who makes it through.

I think you are right.

Would not be surprised if we do not match Williams. Be interesting to see how far pick 34 comes in with bids and what talent is available.

The list already has Champion, Long, Newton, Brockman, Cripps, Owies, and players like Baker who may play more forward.

We could rookie a Schoenburg who is a mid fwd and Berry who has been mentioned by the media is a small fwd.

Though some currently listed may not be as talented as Williams in that role, our list profile and list needs probably do not cater to drafting all the NGA's.