Analysis 2016 List Management Discussion

[Funk]

Soooo Jamo has def retired then?
Absolutely loved the bloke but sadly along with Walker I didn't have him as part of the plan going forward in 2017.

TBH I wish Thomas would finish up as well.
And I am not a Thomas bashar either.
I just honestly think he doesn't offer anything anymore and he just breaks down way to often.

Were Walker and Jamo given 2 year extensions at the end of 2015?

I recall they were - and given the state of their bodies was very surprised at the time.

I suspect there will something in the fine print we don't know about as the entire situation makes no sense to me.

 

[Jimmae]

Some feedback please.

Byrne will be upgraded on to the senior list come draft time, what pick can we use on him? Can we use our 4th or 5th round selection?

He's added onto the senior list before we're allocated picks, so he effectively costs our last pick.

 

[LordLucifer]

The AFL came out and said in relation to Franklin at the Swans that even if he retires then the Swans have to include all the money in their cap. Is this a case of just making shit up due to sour grapes or will they make all clubs do this for all players? Im not sure how it's possible to have one set of rules for some but not others.

If this was to eventuate and the AFL just swept it under the carpet, the fallout would be so massive that they wouldn't be able to handle it.

 

[ferrisb]

Were Walker and Jamo given 2 year extensions at the end of 2015?

I recall they were - and given the state of their bodies was very surprised at the time.

I suspect there will something in the fine print we don't know about as the entire situation makes no sense to me.

Both given 3 yr extensions in 2014.

Proven senior players who were 27 and 28 at the time. Nothing wrong with that.

We had every reason to think they would play out their contracts.

The end came suddenly for both of them.

Unfortunate, but it happens.

 

[LordLucifer]

Both given 3 yr extensions in 2014.

Proven senior players who were 27 and 28 at the time. Nothing wrong with that.

We had every reason to think they would play out their contracts.

The end came suddenly for both of them.

Unfortunate, but it happens.

It certainly is unfortunate, however, most players suffer the same fate. Normally once a player nears or passes 30yo, at some point they seem to go from fully fit to broken down & hobbling in a short amount of time. The pace of the game is usually the first thing that catches them out.

 

[ferrisb]

If this was to eventuate and the AFL just swept it under the carpet, the fallout would be so massive that they wouldn't be able to handle it.

Sorry Sheiky, I'd love to agree but can't.

The AFL has been fairly complicit in covering up / excusing a team-wide systematic doping program for three years and while they haven't come out smelling like roses, it has hardly buried them.

I can't see how a retiring player payout could bring them crashing down.

If I could take a picture of everything the afl has swept under the carpet, it would look like a fukurri rug sitting atop Mt Everest...

 

[Funk]

Both given 3 yr extensions in 2014.

Proven senior players who were 27 and 28 at the time. Nothing wrong with that.

We had every reason to think they would play out their contracts.

The end came suddenly for both of them.

Unfortunate, but it happens.

Thanks Ferris.

I still thought it dumb at the time - giving 28 year old players 3 year deals is not the wisest thing to do.

Doubt SOS will be doing it in future.

 

[HARKER]

1. We wont take on more than four rookies. Remember, we took only two players last year.
We may not want to take on more than a couple, but we may well have to.
Gowers & JGM are pretty sure to remain and even Gallucci may now get a reprieve.
Korchek remains on the Cat. B list...........no problem.

2. When you put a draftee on the main list, that makes for a 2 year minimum commitment.
Do we really want to load up on kids we don't think will make it, for a 2 year period, just to meet requirements? Why would we do that?
Byrne & Sheehan get upgraded so let's just say take Walker & Jamisons place.

3. So, now the main list:
Foster, Smith, Dick, Tutt very unlikely to survive.
DVR & Whiley may have been on a knifes edge, but who knows now although one or two are still likely to go.
Everitt, Buckley & Graham also on a knifes edge, although one or two may be traded.

4. Possible tradees with currency:
Tuohy & Casboult

Lots of players there and here's the thing:
Even at this early stage, we now have up to 6 spots available on the main list.
Out of DVR, Whiley, Everitt, Buckley, Graham and Sheehan: Who's the best player? I'd bank on Sheehan and for that reason and if his body is fine, then why wouldn't we keep him?

 

[DangerousD]

It certainly is unfortunate, however, most players suffer the same fate. Normally once a player nears or passes 30yo, at some point they seem to go from fully fit to broken down & hobbling in a short amount of time. The pace of the game is usually the first thing that catches them out.

Murphy?

 

[Jimmae]

HARKER it might be more of a case of what little senior list space we have after all these mooted trades, rather than us giving 2 year commitments to anyone after pick 50 or 60 in the draft.

Regardless, we've got one open Cat A and two Cat B rookie slots at the minimum.

 

[DangerousD]

1. We wont take on more than four rookies. Remember, we took only two players last year.
We may not want to take on more than a couple, but we may well have to.
Gowers & JGM are pretty sure to remain and even Gallucci may now get a reprieve.
Korchek remains on the Cat. B list...........no problem.

2. When you put a draftee on the main list, that makes for a 2 year minimum commitment.
Do we really want to load up on kids we don't think will make it, for a 2 year period, just to meet requirements? Why would we do that?
Byrne & Sheehan get upgraded so let's just say take Walker & Jamisons place.

3. So, now the main list:
Foster, Smith, Dick, Tutt very unlikely to survive.
DVR & Whiley may have been on a knifes edge, but who knows now although one or two are still likely to go.
Everitt, Buckley & Graham also on a knifes edge, although one or two may be traded.

4. Possible tradees with currency:
Tuohy & Casboult

Lots of players there and here's the thing:
Even at this early stage, we now have up to 6 spots available on the main list.
Out of DVR, Whiley, Everitt, Buckley, Graham and Sheehan: Who's the best player? I'd bank on Sheehan and for that reason and if his body is fine, then why wouldn't we keep him?

Is there any possibility of keeping Sheehan but not on the main list? Can he be de-listed and re-rookie listed?

 

[HARKER]

HARKER it might be more of a case of what little senior list space we have after all these mooted trades, rather than us giving 2 year commitments to anyone after pick 50 or 60 in the draft.

Regardless, we've got one open Cat A and two Cat B rookie slots at the minimum.

There won't be too many 4 for 1's.........maybe not even 3 for 1's

Move on all the players we may want, and way too many spots open up.

Anyway, my point was in relation to Sheehan. All considered...and if he is in good health, why would we be keen to move him on? Makes no sense.

 

[HARKER]

Is there any possibility of keeping Sheehan but not on the main list? Can he be de-listed and re-rookie listed?

If his body is deemed to be OK, I'd back him in for 2 years.
As I pointed out, who on that list is better than him and are we going to get a pick #80+ that can do what he's capable of?

I am though unsure whether we can delist and re-rookie but even if that was possible, it just doesn't feel right.

 

[LordLucifer]

Sorry Sheiky, I'd love to agree but can't.

The AFL has been fairly complicit in covering up / excusing a team-wide systematic doping program for three years and while they haven't come out smelling like roses, it has hardly buried them.

I can't see how a retiring player payout could bring them crashing down.

If I could take a picture of everything the afl has swept under the carpet, it would look like a fukurri rug sitting atop Mt Everest...

It was wishful thinking on my part ........

After the furore over the Swans getting the COLA, I would be expecting a massive poo-fight if they were allowed to do some creative accounting which saw them breach the salary cap without penalty.

You are probably right though, Gilligan & Co would be making sure nothing happened no matter how much Eddie McGuire squealed.

 

[Sinjin Smith]

If this was to eventuate and the AFL just swept it under the carpet, the fallout would be so massive that they wouldn't be able to handle it.

When there was all that media talk about Tom Boyd taking a paycut to help facilitate a potential move for Hurley, I wondered, if it was to eventuate, how the AFL would handle that considering the Franklin situation. It would open up a massive can of worms.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

The AFL came out and said in relation to Franklin at the Swans that even if he retires then the Swans have to include all the money in their cap. Is this a case of just making shit up due to sour grapes or will they make all clubs do this for all players? Im not sure how it's possible to have one set of rules for some but not others.

When you offer huge money to lure a free agent on a 9 year contract, when that player will be 36 at the end of the contract, you have to be held to account. Not the same as a one club player retiring a year early.

 

[Iamcarlton]

1. We wont take on more than four rookies. Remember, we took only two players last year.
We may not want to take on more than a couple, but we may well have to.
Gowers & JGM are pretty sure to remain and even Gallucci may now get a reprieve.
Korchek remains on the Cat. B list...........no problem.

2. When you put a draftee on the main list, that makes for a 2 year minimum commitment.
Do we really want to load up on kids we don't think will make it, for a 2 year period, just to meet requirements? Why would we do that?
Byrne & Sheehan get upgraded so let's just say take Walker & Jamisons place.

3. So, now the main list:
Foster, Smith, Dick, Tutt very unlikely to survive.
DVR & Whiley may have been on a knifes edge, but who knows now although one or two are still likely to go.
Everitt, Buckley & Graham also on a knifes edge, although one or two may be traded.

4. Possible tradees with currency:
Tuohy & Casboult

Lots of players there and here's the thing:
Even at this early stage, we now have up to 6 spots available on the main list.
Out of DVR, Whiley, Everitt, Buckley, Graham and Sheehan: Who's the best player? I'd bank on Sheehan and for that reason and if his body is fine, then why wouldn't we keep him?

But he hasnt proven that his body is fine hasnt been able to get on the ground for more than 2 weeks in the past 2 years . Get to an end of the season and you cant get your body up then whats to say it wont happen again . He needed to play a patch of footy this year and good consistent footy to warrant another year i believe . Im afraid his time is up . Id be dirty if i was a whiley graham buckley DVR or even dick who have all played good consistent reserves footy, If i was one of them and got delisted and saw sheehan stay .

 

[Soapy V]

Anyway, my point was in relation to Sheehan. All considered...and if he is in good health, why would we be keen to move him on? Makes no sense.

its a big call to keep sheehan but i would be okay if they did. upgrade him on a one year deal at low money and it would certainly help our salary cap especially if we add another 4-6 players through the draft.

 

[rp84]

If his body is deemed to be OK, I'd back him in for 2 years.
As I pointed out, who on that list is better than him and are we going to get a pick #80+ that can do what he's capable of?

I am though unsure whether we can delist and re-rookie but even if that was possible, it just doesn't feel right.

You have an obsession with sheehan. No way he gets 2 years IMO. Absolutely no runs on the board, and is no spring chicken.

Delist. Re-rookie at best.

 

[Iamcarlton]

You have an obsession with sheehan. No way he gets 2 years IMO. Absolutely no runs on the board, and is no spring chicken.

Delist. Re-rookie at best.

Not sure he can be re-rookied think its a 2 year contract or nothing .

 

[rp84]

Not sure he can be re-rookied think its a 2 year contract or nothing .

Cant re-rookie through rookie draft?

Seems unusual.

 

[Iamcarlton]

You can but i think club can only have a player as a rookie for a certain number of years and has to be upgraded at that point could be wrong of course .

 

[teagueyubeauty]

Who is taking all the moula next year and in 2018? I think we were well under this year, add another mill...wow

Now, I'm being slightly facetious here, but say we got Boyd and knocked off 3 mill of that contract in 2 years. Dogs agreed to pay 25% of total remaining contract, by year 3 on our list he could be down near the 400-500k mark.

Just food for thought!!

 

[HARKER]

You have an obsession with sheehan. No way he gets 2 years IMO. Absolutely no runs on the board, and is no spring chicken.

Delist. Re-rookie at best.

Yeah, that's it....I'm obsessed.
Nothing to do with football ability.........it's just a personal obsession.

You couldn't get through with what I put forward as you may have had to think about it..........and that's not easy

 

[rp84]

Yeah, that's it....I'm obsessed.
Nothing to do with football ability.........it's just a personal obsession.

You couldn't get through with what I put forward as you may have had to think about it..........and that's not easy

Haha ok, thinly veiled swipe attempt at my intelligence. Seems like a very measured and mature response. Fool.