Analysis 2016 List Management Discussion

[The_Wookie]

Still on par with McEvoy imo and he netted St Kilda pick 18 and Savage.

McEvoy aint a top class rukcman either. And he was fit.

 

[DangerousD]

Sorry to burst your bubble but Kruezer won't be at the Bulldogs. Sydney & GWS are heavily into him. He wants to stay at the club but told Silvagni that he would go elsewhere if it was further the club. Delisting or trading Kerridge is probably the dumbest thing I've read on this forum.

Both of those teams have 2 rucks each, what would Kruz add to them?

 

[Blue_Fusion]

One of the main reasons for loading up next year methinks.

Next year's top 10 is looking good. But how are we going to get multiple top 10 picks for next year?

I think next year we definitely should try and package our 2018 first rounder with a player for another 2017 top 10 pick. That could get us an additional one but I'd want us to have at least 3.

Do you think it's worth trying to use our first pick this year to get another early pick next year? Do you think Lions would be interested?

Kreuzer to GWS for a late 1st rounder. Touhy to Sydney for another late first rounder. Package the two late first rounders for a 2017 first? Which club would bite? I would try and gamble it with Norf. They look set to plummet down the ladder so it could be a good move.

Walk into next year with our first pick along with another 3 early picks.

But the big problem with that is next year, we'll only have the current list and possibly the GWS players to move forward with throughout the season. It could hold us back another season.

Truth is we never know how these drafts will turn out. I recall 2006 being hyped as a mega draft but in 05 I think there were better players from the top end. It could really backfire if next year's crop isn't all it's talked up to be and this year's crop fires...

 

[The Bighouse]

That ****s us. It ****s us royally.

It all but kills our ability to trade a bunch of shit late round picks for an earlier pick (worth less total points).

**** **** **** ****.

Two for one deals are about the only way we can rort the system now. That, and getting excess picks off the expansion sides now, in exchange for future picks.

****.

The Brisbane scenario from last year with them having their 1st pick at #41 was interesting. You now need to de-list enough players to have the same amount of picks (my only thought was that if they work the rookie list to their advantage / numbers) counting out the multiple late picks shuffled up for academy players with the discount.

 

[Blue Baggers]

We still 100% sure he will be a Blue?

He's getting games now and recent rumours of Collingwood in the mix.

Good to see that GWS have now developed him to be able to play as a KPP at a decent standard, something he wasn't able to do until this recent string of games.

He will 100% be a blue next year and we will not be trading our first pick.

 

[Malifice]

The Brisbane scenario from last year with them having their 1st pick at #41 was interesting. You now need to de-list enough players to have the same amount of picks (my only thought was that if they work the rookie list to their advantage / numbers) counting out the multiple late picks shuffled up for academy players with the discount.

And the expansion clubs (or anyone else for that matter) wont want to trade out (say) a single 2000 point value 1st rounder for (3-4 picks later on) worth 2500 points.

They need a spare list spot for every one of those later picks.

If they take 12 shit picks to the draft, they'll need 12 spare spots on their list going into it.

What they'll look to do now is trade out excess picks for future 1st rounders, and players.

Its shut the door on our ability to bundle 2nds and thirds for 1sts, and greatly diminished the value of our exess 3rd rounder.

Literally the only way we can improve our position in the draft now is to trade a player for a 1st rounder, or a low 1st for two later ones.

First they change the PP system on us. Then they rip this out from under our feet. Give us a ****ing break for once.

 

[Funk]

That ****s us. It ****s us royally.

It all but kills our ability to trade a bunch of shit late round picks for an earlier pick (worth less total points).

**** **** **** ****.

Two for one deals are about the only way we can rort the system now. That, and getting excess picks off the expansion sides now, in exchange for future picks.

****.

Maybe not Mal.

Can we can do one large transaction instead of 2 separate?

4 players plus a pick for 5 later draft picks.

Achieves same outcome for us - 5 in and 5 out.

How does it impact GWS?

 

[Smalls0304]

Our best chance of trading Kruezer would be to GC. They are in desperate need of a mature ruckman. We could possibly snag Melbourne's first round off them as they wont use it anyway because of academy selections. Something like Kruezer + 23 for 9. They have enough 2nd picks to cover it so they dont really lose anything. For them its like a late 2nd for Kruezer.

 

[slashin_velvet]

Doesn't gws still have more list spots than other sides anyway? May mean they can take a bunch of later picks to the draft, and just not hit list capacity?

 

[Jimmae]

Won't that now screw up their ability to keep the Academy kids?

I know it complicates things a little further but why does it make things that much harder?

It means they have to trade a pick for a pick for the most part. It's really dumb.

I would contend that it helps GWS4 style trades which available extra spots on their list

True, but they're going to want that value in useful picks, and they're not going to want to waste points. If they have 5 list spots and 4 academy kids, they need to bare minimum spread the estimated points load across the five picks.

That ****s us. It ****s us royally.

It all but kills our ability to trade a bunch of shit late round picks for an earlier pick (worth less total points).

**** **** **** ****.

Two for one deals are about the only way we can rort the system now. That, and getting excess picks off the expansion sides now, in exchange for future picks.

****.

This. The worst part about is that I'm not even sure there was ever such a restriction on pick numbers until now, and if there was that's really disappointing to see from the perspective of flexibility on the night when you still have uncontracted players and people on your draft board that you're willing to give a shot.

They really need to bring live trading in and calm the **** down about hoarding picks.

 

[Gingerbread man]

will probably get shot down fir this but any chance Blues will go after Michael Hibberd ?

I will get shot for this but any chance blues will look at jack grimes

 

[Unknown Origin]

Our best chance of trading Kruezer would be to GC. They are in desperate need of a mature ruckman. We could possibly snag Melbourne's first round off them as they wont use it anyway because of academy selections. Something like Kruezer + 23 for 9. They have enough 2nd picks to cover it so they dont really lose anything. For them its like a late 2nd for Kruezer.

I like this

 

[fizzkakz]

Draft 'loophole' to remain despite some clubs' concerns



And trading with GWS and GC just got a lot harder.

Another AFL knee jerk. These guys are unbelievable. Imagine if you tried to run a business like this..

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[Malifice]

Maybe not Mal.

Can we can do one large transaction instead of 2 separate?

4 players plus a pick for 5 later draft picks.

Achieves same outcome for us - 5 in and 5 out.

How does it impact GWS?

They have a shrinking list and need to move players out as it is to create spare list spots.

They wont want 5 shitty draft picks as it means in order to use them they'll need 5 free spots on thier list (plus academy slots open).

I anticipate they'll work around it by trading very heavily into the early part of next years draft. Exess points this year carry over into the following years draft, so its a sneaky way to maximise your value this year and not have to hit the draft with a million crap draft picks (to pay for your points) and a million free list spots needed as well.

Rather than pay for points with late round picks this year, you let them carry over into the following year.

 

[DangerousD]

That ****s us. It ****s us royally.

It all but kills our ability to trade a bunch of shit late round picks for an earlier pick (worth less total points).

**** **** **** ****.

Two for one deals are about the only way we can rort the system now. That, and getting excess picks off the expansion sides now, in exchange for future picks.

****.

Where is that article? It seems to really disadvantage the academies

 

[AB_Blue]

Really don't think MK will be traded as has to agree to be traded due to being in contract.

If he says no....it's dead.

I highly doubt he would be in the VFL next year if he was still in a navy blue 8 jumper.

 

[BlueTongue]

I think Matty is worth more to us than what would be offered for him.

Heart and soul type player

For Sure. As the fans show (KROOOOOOOOZZ) every time he does something special.
Totally a clubman and loves playing for the jumper. I still don't think we've seen the best of Matty Kreuzer yet due to his horrible luck with injury, but you just KNOW, he would do something match winning in a Grand Final desperation situation...

 

[Malifice]

What it means for us:

Ordinarily GWS would swap out some of their 1st round picks by trading them out for a bunch of later picks worth more points. Say a 1st rounder (worth 1,000 points) to a club for a bunch of thirds (worth 1250 points).

This then enables them to pay for their academy boys with the points from later picks, and trade out excess picks (at the start of the draft) to other clubs in exchange for future 1st rounders (to rinse and repeat the following year).

They could pay for those 4 x 1st round academy boys with a bunch of worthless later picks, and convert the extra points they make on each deal into a never ending cycle of extra 1st rounders.

With this rule, this is a shit deal for them as they now have to move out 1 player (and have one free list spot) for every pick they take to the draft (even though they only intend on using those picks for 4 players).

It ****s us just as bad, becuase we were one of the clubs that might look to ontrade some middle tier players for 2nd and 3rds (and we already have a spare third rounder) and then trade a bundle of these later picks to them for an extra early 1st rounder.

Normally we could improve our draft position, while they get more points. Its a win/ win.

That option is now off the table.

GWS now can't enter the draft with more picks than list vacancies (and they're already needing to release players as is with a bulging NEAFL squad and a shrinking list and cap size).

They take 5 picks to the draft, they need 5 vacant list spots. They want to take 20 x 2nd and 3rd rounders worth double the points, they need 20 list vacancies.

Its shut the door on the main way we could improve our draft position this year and next.

Its terrible news for us. The only good news is its also bad for the expansion sides.

 

[BlueTongue]

Last season we picked up what I believe will be a 250 game CHB. We also picked up Curnow who has shown plenty in his limited playing time. He has a bit of X factor about him and regarding McKay, people far more knowledgeable than me think he could be the best of the lot. This is a midfielders draft so lets stock up. Next years seems to be a stronger KPP draft so let's top up.
Baghdad wasn't built in a day my Arab friend!!

I got that distinct impression he was something special in the limited gametime I saw him play in the preseason match. Looks very lively and like he know what he is doing.

 

[LordLucifer]

Next year's top 10 is looking good. But how are we going to get multiple top 10 picks for next year?

I think next year we definitely should try and package our 2018 first rounder with a player for another 2017 top 10 pick. That could get us an additional one but I'd want us to have at least 3.

Do you think it's worth trying to use our first pick this year to get another early pick next year? Do you think Lions would be interested?

Kreuzer to GWS for a late 1st rounder. Touhy to Sydney for another late first rounder. Package the two late first rounders for a 2017 first? Which club would bite? I would try and gamble it with Norf. They look set to plummet down the ladder so it could be a good move.

Walk into next year with our first pick along with another 3 early picks.

But the big problem with that is next year, we'll only have the current list and possibly the GWS players to move forward with throughout the season. It could hold us back another season.

Truth is we never know how these drafts will turn out. I recall 2006 being hyped as a mega draft but in 05 I think there were better players from the top end. It could really backfire if next year's crop isn't all it's talked up to be and this year's crop fires...

LEVEL TWO NAB AFL ACADEMY (draft-eligible 2017)
Vic Country: Tyrone Hayes, Aaron Darling, Kane Farrell, Aidan Quigley, Lochie O’Brien, Hunter Clark, Luke Davies-Uniake, Oscar Clavarino, James Worpel, Tom De Koning;
Vic Metro: Jack Higgins, Lachlan Fogarty, Patrick Naish, Joel Garner, Jaidyn Stephenson, Sam Hayes
South Australia: Jordan Houlahan, Darcy Fogarty, Thomas Schmusch, Callum Coleman-Jones, Andrew McPherson;
Western Australia: Jake Patmore;
NSW-ACT: Charlie Spargo, Jack Powell, Jarrod Brander, Nathan Richards;
Queensland: Jack Clayton, Connor Ballenden, Brayden Crossley;
Northern Territory: Dominic Grant.

LEVEL ONE NAB AFL ACADEMY (draft-eligible 2018)
NSW-ACT: Matthew Walker, Nick Blakey;
Queensland: Bailey Scott;
Tasmania: Chance Jones, Tarryn Thomas;
Northern Territory: Michael Mummery;
Western Australia: Ian Hill, Tom Joyce, Sydney Stack, Jason Carter;
Vic Country: Sam Walsh (St Joseph’s), Zane Barzen, Jye Caldwell, Sam Fletcher, Hudson Garoni;
Vic Metro: Rhylee West, Jack Bytel, Max King, Ben King;
South Australia: Izak Rankine, Connor Rozee, Jackson Hately, Jack Lukosius, Hugo Munn, Ruben Flinn, Luke Valente.

 

[Gingerbread man]

What it means for us:

Ordinarily GWS would swap out some of their 1st round picks by trading them out for a bunch of later picks worth more points. Say a 1st rounder (worth 1,000 points) to a club for a bunch of thirds (worth 1250 points).

This then enables them to pay for their academy boys with the points from later picks, and trade out excess picks (at the start of the draft) to other clubs in exchange for future 1st rounders (to rinse and repeat the following year).

They could pay for those 4 x 1st round academy boys with a bunch of worthless later picks, and convert the extra points they make on each deal into a never ending cycle of extra 1st rounders.

With this rule, this is a shit deal for them as they now have to move out 1 player (and have one free list spot) for every pick they take to the draft (even though they only intend on using those picks for 4 players).

It ****s us just as bad, becuase we were one of the clubs that might look to ontrade some middle tier players for 2nd and 3rds (and we already have a spare third rounder) and then trade a bundle of these later picks to them for an extra early 1st rounder.

Normally we could improve our draft position, while they get more points. Its a win/ win.

That option is now off the table.

GWS now can't enter the draft with more picks than list vacancies (and they're already needing to release players as is with a bulging NEAFL squad and a shrinking list and cap size).

They take 5 picks to the draft, they need 5 vacant list spots. They want to take 20 x 2nd and 3rd rounders worth double the points, they need 20 list vacancies.

Its shut the door on the main way we could improve our draft position this year and next.

Its terrible news for us. The only good news is its also bad for the expansion sides.

I know this does not work well for us but something had to be done to slow the northern academies down getting 1,2,3 or 4 players each year for unders.

Lucky we made the most of this last year.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

What it means for us:

Ordinarily GWS would swap out some of their 1st round picks by trading them out for a bunch of later picks worth more points. Say a 1st rounder (worth 1,000 points) to a club for a bunch of thirds (worth 1250 points).

This then enables them to pay for their academy boys with the points from later picks, and trade out excess picks (at the start of the draft) to other clubs in exchange for future 1st rounders (to rinse and repeat the following year).

They could pay for those 4 x 1st round academy boys with a bunch of worthless later picks, and convert the extra points they make on each deal into a never ending cycle of extra 1st rounders.

With this rule, this is a shit deal for them as they now have to move out 1 player (and have one free list spot) for every pick they take to the draft (even though they only intend on using those picks for 4 players).

It ****s us just as bad, becuase we were one of the clubs that might look to ontrade some middle tier players for 2nd and 3rds (and we already have a spare third rounder) and then trade a bundle of these later picks to them for an extra early 1st rounder.

Normally we could improve our draft position, while they get more points. Its a win/ win.

That option is now off the table.

GWS now can't enter the draft with more picks than list vacancies (and they're already needing to release players as is with a bulging NEAFL squad and a shrinking list and cap size).

They take 5 picks to the draft, they need 5 vacant list spots. They want to take 20 x 2nd and 3rd rounders worth double the points, they need 20 list vacancies.

Its shut the door on the main way we could improve our draft position this year and next.

Its terrible news for us. The only good news is its also bad for the expansion sides.

That's certainly bad, but isn't there still a little loophole with GWS, correct me if i'm wrong but GWS still have an expanded list size, that theyre currently not using. Theve got like 2 extra spots on their list at the moment.

That means they could take two extra second rounders in they don't plan on filling.

Which means we can still get one trade off right?

 

[Malifice]

That's certainly bad, but isn't there still a little loophole with GWS, correct me if i'm wrong but GWS still have an expanded list size, that theyre currently not using. Theve got like 2 extra spots on their list at the moment.

That means they could take two extra second rounders in they don't plan on filling.

Which means we can still get one trade off right?

Goes down in size this year and the next. Why they're keen on doing the 4 for 1 deals.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

What it means for us:

Ordinarily GWS would swap out some of their 1st round picks by trading them out for a bunch of later picks worth more points. Say a 1st rounder (worth 1,000 points) to a club for a bunch of thirds (worth 1250 points).

This then enables them to pay for their academy boys with the points from later picks, and trade out excess picks (at the start of the draft) to other clubs in exchange for future 1st rounders (to rinse and repeat the following year).

They could pay for those 4 x 1st round academy boys with a bunch of worthless later picks, and convert the extra points they make on each deal into a never ending cycle of extra 1st rounders.

With this rule, this is a shit deal for them as they now have to move out 1 player (and have one free list spot) for every pick they take to the draft (even though they only intend on using those picks for 4 players).

It ****s us just as bad, becuase we were one of the clubs that might look to ontrade some middle tier players for 2nd and 3rds (and we already have a spare third rounder) and then trade a bundle of these later picks to them for an extra early 1st rounder.

Normally we could improve our draft position, while they get more points. Its a win/ win.

That option is now off the table.

GWS now can't enter the draft with more picks than list vacancies (and they're already needing to release players as is with a bulging NEAFL squad and a shrinking list and cap size).

They take 5 picks to the draft, they need 5 vacant list spots. They want to take 20 x 2nd and 3rd rounders worth double the points, they need 20 list vacancies.

Its shut the door on the main way we could improve our draft position this year and next.

Its terrible news for us. The only good news is its also bad for the expansion sides.

The only thing that's going to help us now is if the corrupt idiots finally give clubs who haven't made finals for X amount of years an extra pick at the end of the first round.

I wonder why they won't make that decision effective immediately, they'll probably wait for us to scrape into the finals before it comes into action dirty *****.

 

[Old navy]

What it means for us:

Ordinarily GWS would swap out some of their 1st round picks by trading them out for a bunch of later picks worth more points. Say a 1st rounder (worth 1,000 points) to a club for a bunch of thirds (worth 1250 points).

This then enables them to pay for their academy boys with the points from later picks, and trade out excess picks (at the start of the draft) to other clubs in exchange for future 1st rounders (to rinse and repeat the following year).

They could pay for those 4 x 1st round academy boys with a bunch of worthless later picks, and convert the extra points they make on each deal into a never ending cycle of extra 1st rounders.

With this rule, this is a shit deal for them as they now have to move out 1 player (and have one free list spot) for every pick they take to the draft (even though they only intend on using those picks for 4 players).

It ****s us just as bad, becuase we were one of the clubs that might look to ontrade some middle tier players for 2nd and 3rds (and we already have a spare third rounder) and then trade a bundle of these later picks to them for an extra early 1st rounder.

Normally we could improve our draft position, while they get more points. Its a win/ win.

That option is now off the table.

GWS now can't enter the draft with more picks than list vacancies (and they're already needing to release players as is with a bulging NEAFL squad and a shrinking list and cap size).

They take 5 picks to the draft, they need 5 vacant list spots. They want to take 20 x 2nd and 3rd rounders worth double the points, they need 20 list vacancies.

Its shut the door on the main way we could improve our draft position this year and next.

Its terrible news for us. The only good news is its also bad for the expansion sides.

The only glimmer of good news I can take out of this for us, is that our future 2nd rounder would be much more valuable to them now.
Very few clubs would be willing to trade there first rounder in next years draft, with the 20% discount they get our future 2nd rounder would be very close to a future late first rounder, for them anyway.
We could ask for 1 of there 3 firsts rounders this year for our future 2nd rounder
We could be cheeky and ask for there Collingwood pick(7/8) or there Geelong pick (15/16) and Tomlinson