List Mgmt. 2014 list discussion - drafts, free agents, trades, retirees, delistings and more

(Log in to remove this ad.)

supahoops

Premiership Player
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Posts
3,417
Likes
3,825
Location
Sector 7g
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Bendigo Bank Cats
Thread starter #530
Bad call on Hartman, sure he only gets half a dozen touches a game but looks composed, generally makes good decisions and his disposal is usually of a high standard.

Much rather that than a kid who's getting 20 touches and 10 clangers.

Give this kid some pre-seasons in the gym, a decent tank, and some confidence - seems like a shy kid who doesn't yet feel part of it all - and he will surprise a few.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Posts
22,931
Likes
15,999
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Aussie cricket team
Bad call on Hartman, sure he only gets half a dozen touches a game but looks composed, generally makes good decisions and his disposal is usually of a high standard.

Much rather that than a kid who's getting 20 touches and 10 clangers.

Give this kid some pre-seasons in the gym, a decent tank, and some confidence - seems like a shy kid who doesn't yet feel part of it all - and he will surprise a few.
I've been watching him and I've been wondering why he was recruited.
He actually looks like a 1/2 back.

Which we dont need.

There is no way he has pace. Well, he isn't quick.
 

Cat Addict

Senior List
Joined
Sep 12, 2012
Posts
287
Likes
213
AFL Club
Geelong
Let me be crystal clear . Trading Varcoe for Pear is a "CrazzyVossy" type trade and I would not do it. But while I or anyone else may say thats good bad poor or crazy trade. Thats doesn't mean you personally are crazy.

See the Pears rational is good. More of it please. Again I would not trade Varcoe for him but Pears would be reasonable. Bur more of a Rivers than a real CPB I think.
Yeah I think we are in for a bit of pain once Lonners goes. Someone like Pears would boost the back line but, in the post Scarlett / Lonergan days we are going to struggle to shut down the Clokes / Franklins of the world. Harry does a great job but he is best played where we can free him up.

Brown looks likely to turn into a good backman, but more a third man up. So unless Hamling can become a great full back, we might be missing someone, unless a free agent comes up or what Wells work his magic again.
 

Cat Addict

Senior List
Joined
Sep 12, 2012
Posts
287
Likes
213
AFL Club
Geelong
Bad call on Hartman, sure he only gets half a dozen touches a game but looks composed, generally makes good decisions and his disposal is usually of a high standard.

Much rather that than a kid who's getting 20 touches and 10 clangers.

Give this kid some pre-seasons in the gym, a decent tank, and some confidence - seems like a shy kid who doesn't yet feel part of it all - and he will surprise a few.
How good is it when pick 70 odd from last years draft is being debated as our only list clogger
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Reg Hickey

Club Legend
Joined
May 29, 2006
Posts
1,747
Likes
678
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
We've got a list clogger BTW.
Hartman.
Hawkins was a list clogger in his first year too. Probably should've gotten rid of him back then.

Blicavs - what did he do last year? Less than Hartman, I'll give you the tip. Should've been dumped, clearly.

A hundred others across every club in the league.

The kid is 18yo FFS, and hadn't played much footy before we picked him up. Give him a chance.
 

supahoops

Premiership Player
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Posts
3,417
Likes
3,825
Location
Sector 7g
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Bendigo Bank Cats
Thread starter #539
I've been watching him and I've been wondering why he was recruited.
He actually looks like a 1/2 back.

Which we dont need.

There is no way he has pace. Well, he isn't quick.
Think he's shown good toe over 15-20 metres - kicks nicely on the run and likes a goal - his problem as I see it is he's generally buggered from any contest that he just hasn't got the tank, and maybe the work-rate, to show it consistently.
 

Turbocat

Premium Platinum
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
Posts
35,940
Likes
31,502
Location
Newtown
AFL Club
Geelong
Think he's shown good toe over 15-20 metres - kicks nicely on the run and likes a goal - his problem as I see it is he's generally buggered from any contest that he just hasn't got the tank, and maybe the work-rate, to show it consistently.
I think he showed an improvement 2nd half of the year , but there is little doubt he is coming from a long way back. Should be on the Rookie list
 

Pivo

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Posts
10,390
Likes
11,036
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
WWT Eagles; Detroit Pistons
Upgrade:
Burbury on 1 yr deal to prove his worth.
(Blitz remain on rookie)
Didn't have too many problems with your post so I've been selective and pulled out the main bit I do have an issue with.

You want to use a list spot on Burbury to "prove his worth"?

What were the last 3 years for? Surely the club would have some idea about whether or not he going to make it.

On top of that, you want Blicavs to remain rookied?

Really not following the logic of this other than you being a Burbury fan.

With the squeeze on, and us "doing right" by Menzel and McIntosh, I'm not too sure we have the luxury of elevating a player just to see if he is any good or not.

While I don't personally have an issue with keeping Blicavs on the rookie list if he is agreeable there is no way Burbury should be elevated ahead of Blicavs.

If we are going to elevate a player off the rookie list, that player should be Blicavs...the rest of the rookies can get in line behind him.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Posts
22,931
Likes
15,999
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Aussie cricket team
Hawkins was a list clogger in his first year too. Probably should've gotten rid of him back then.

Blicavs - what did he do last year? Less than Hartman, I'll give you the tip. Should've been dumped, clearly.

A hundred others across every club in the league.

The kid is 18yo FFS, and hadn't played much footy before we picked him up. Give him a chance.
WTF?

One was a KPP and the other was a rookie
 

Turbocat

Premium Platinum
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
Posts
35,940
Likes
31,502
Location
Newtown
AFL Club
Geelong
While I don't personally have an issue with keeping Blicavs on the rookie list if he is agreeable there is no way Burbury should be elevated ahead of Blicavs.

If we are going to elevate a player off the rookie list, that player should be Blicavs...the rest of the rookies can get in line behind him.
I terms of justice and status , there is no doubt a player who has played in the main side all year should be on the main list. But the silly mechanisms of the AFL mean to move him on the main list will cost another player his spot and vacate his spot that will probably stay vacant.

I'd like to hear some facts on pay for Rookies. Is it prohibited to pay anymore than the set amount?
Now if it is then it gets into the area of contract structure.Id say Geelong would be very willing to give a multi year deal , backloaded if thats what has to be done to comply to AFL rules.

Whether he is a technically a Rookie , International Rookie or main list player , he should know that Geelong gave him a shot and that he has been good for Geelong. A symbiotic relationship is developing and whether he is on list A,B or C he is still getting looked after , getting all the chance to perform that his talent will allow. Now I have not met , know him at all but it would seem rather a short term , cut your nose off to spite your face to demand that your on list A or list B if that means you force the club to delist a possible future teammate.

Of course certain players may be considered to be going , going , gone. The club may want to keep up the list movement but I suspect they are basically happy with most and will only do what they have to do
 

strauchnyy

Club Legend
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Posts
2,465
Likes
4,023
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Didn't have too many problems with your post so I've been selective and pulled out the main bit I do have an issue with.

You want to use a list spot on Burbury to "prove his worth"?

What were the last 3 years for? Surely the club would have some idea about whether or not he going to make it.

On top of that, you want Blicavs to remain rookied?

Really not following the logic of this other than you being a Burbury fan.

With the squeeze on, and us "doing right" by Menzel and McIntosh, I'm not too sure we have the luxury of elevating a player just to see if he is any good or not.

While I don't personally have an issue with keeping Blicavs on the rookie list if he is agreeable there is no way Burbury should be elevated ahead of Blicavs.

If we are going to elevate a player off the rookie list, that player should be Blicavs...the rest of the rookies can get in line behind him.
I don't disagree that the club would've had long enough to assess George and I definitely agree blicavs is ahead of him.

I'm not particularly a burbury fan, but the main premise of my post was that if we don't upgrade burbury now we have to delist him (as so I believe).

As I understand it, blicavs can remain on the rookie list another year and given out list squeeze, it makes sense for him to remain a rookie and give another player an extra year to asses.

If the club senses it causes an issue, by all means upgrade blitz and delist burbury. I was just seeing a creative way in having our cake and eating it to.
 

dazbroncos

Max Rooke Appreciation Society
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Posts
32,648
Likes
48,085
Location
Los Angeles and Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Denver Broncos, Red Bull Racing
Moderator #547
I don't disagree that the club would've had long enough to assess George and I definitely agree blicavs is ahead of him.

I'm not particularly a burbury fan, but the main premise of my post was that if we don't upgrade burbury now we have to delist him (as so I believe).

As I understand it, blicavs can remain on the rookie list another year and given out list squeeze, it makes sense for him to remain a rookie and give another player an extra year to asses.

If the club senses it causes an issue, by all means upgrade blitz and delist burbury. I was just seeing a creative way in having our cake and eating it to.
I think I would rather be a Rookie listed player with a 3 yr backend contract in hand getting senior games each week than a senior listed player on a 1 yr deal not getting senior games with the egg timer running against me each week....

Point being Blitz's position, contract, pay rise and senior selection in hand is probably better IMO than a tenuous senior 1 yr contract.
I guess internally I dont see list status being a big deal when the reality is you are getting paid well, playing and have a 3 yr deal.

(ps - this is all hypothetical of course but attempting to illustrate the potential of how it would work)

GO Catters
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Posts
22,931
Likes
15,999
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Aussie cricket team
I dont hate Hartman or anything.
But I was watching him on Saturday and was thinking "what are his attributes that made us draft him"

Now supa may be correct. He may just lack a tank.

But I was watching him run around off the ball etc. And I just couldn't see it.
He does remind me of someone but I just cant put a finger on who that is.

As for Walker, I dont regard rookies as list cloggers. They are there because you're taking a punt on them.
 
Top Bottom