Analysis 2017 List Management Discussion

[Cripps17]

If Kelly stays, I'd like to see us try to do a similar deal with GWS as last year:

1) Gibbs for Crows #17 + (#52?)

2) #17, #37, #55 for Hopper, Smith, #26

3) #73 for (Salary dump?), #89

Lose Gibbs and go to draft with #3, #26, #52, #89, Hopper, Smith, Palmer II

 

[Iamcarlton]

Not sure i get the angst about landing a big fish arent we all going gaga about landing Josh Kelly ? Kelly and what he would cost us to get him over in both salary and draft picks is exactly the definition of a big fish imo ? So why the angst against the board if that was indeed the directive ? .

 

[Red Bull]

If Kelly stays, I'd like to see us try to do a similar deal with GWS as last year:

1) Gibbs for Crows #17 + (#52?)

2) #17, #37, #55 for Hopper, Smith, #26

3) #73 for (Salary dump?), #89

Lose Gibbs and go to draft with #3, #26, #52, #89, Hopper, Smith, Palmer II

On the leader board ...

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Not sure i get the angst about landing a big fish arent we all going gaga about landing Josh Kelly ? Kelly and what he would cost us to get him over in both salary and draft picks is exactly the definition of a big fish imo ? So why the angst against the board if that was indeed the directive ? .

I don't want to speak for everyone, but personally, whilst I'd love Kelly on board, I'm not too keen on a potential price tag of 2 x 1st rounders and/or $1m per year, or anything greater than a 5 year deal.
That's pretty much going to be ball park for most big fish. If Gibbs leaving is still on the cards, being able to effectively turn Gibbs into Kelly would be ideal, but I'd be offering 5 years at $800k and probably front load it if we can.

 

[My name geoff]

I feel what SOS may be doing is helping GWS get maximum from Kelly from another club. Makes no sense to me why we would have leaks this early if we were truly after a player with such a high profile.

If this is the case, I see Hopper as the more realistic target from GWS. If I know SOS as well as I think I know SOS, he would likely be looking at getting Hopper in and getting us back into the 2nd round of the draft.

At this stage the trade most likely for me would be:

Gibbs > Crows 1st round > Hopper + GWS second round

 

[LanceRomance]

I feel what SOS may be doing is helping GWS get maximum from Kelly from another club. Makes no sense to me why we would have leaks this early if we were truly after a player with such a high profile.

If this is the case, I see Hopper as the more realistic target from GWS. If I know SOS as well as I think I know SOS, he would likely be looking at getting Hopper in and getting us back into the 2nd round of the draft.

At this stage the trade most likely for me would be:

Gibbs > Crows 1st round > Hopper + GWS second round

I don't think the leak came from the blues end tbh

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

Not sure i get the angst about landing a big fish arent we all going gaga about landing Josh Kelly ? Kelly and what he would cost us to get him over in both salary and draft picks is exactly the definition of a big fish imo ? So why the angst against the board if that was indeed the directive ? .

I think it's his age but you are exactly right

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

I feel what SOS may be doing is helping GWS get maximum from Kelly from another club. Makes no sense to me why we would have leaks this early if we were truly after a player with such a high profile.

If this is the case, I see Hopper as the more realistic target from GWS. If I know SOS as well as I think I know SOS, he would likely be looking at getting Hopper in and getting us back into the 2nd round of the draft.

At this stage the trade most likely for me would be:

Gibbs > Crows 1st round > Hopper + GWS second round

GWS won't be giving anything back we would be better trying to get something more from Adelaide

 

[Iamcarlton]

I don't want to speak for everyone, but personally, whilst I'd love Kelly on board, I'm not too keen on a potential price tag of 2 x 1st rounders and/or $1m per year, or anything greater than a 5 year deal.
That's pretty much going to be ball park for most big fish. If Gibbs leaving is still on the cards, being able to effectively turn Gibbs into Kelly would be ideal, but I'd be offering 5 years at $800k and probably front load it if we can.

Think what happens with Gibbs will be the key to our trade period . Im not keen on giving up high draft picks as well but Kelly is a tremendous talent so if Sos feels its right i'll go with that .

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

As in "nudged out to facilitate other trades"?

Gibbs is the one that stands out, but more so because we're assuming he probably still wants out if it's possible. Casboult the other depending on what kind of offers he attracts on the open market as a free agent. Other than that, we don't have a heap of players with value who we'd be happy to part with.

Will be interesting to see if we feel the rebuild is tracking ahead of schedule - in two drafts we've secured Weitering, Curnow, Cuningham, Silvagni, Petrevski-Seton, Williamson and Fisher who all appear to be locked in as starting senior players at the moment. McKay, Macreadie, Polson and Kerr appear to be tracking quite well.

I mean, would SOS have been planning on all 11 of those draftees coming good? I doubt it. The assumption would have been that 3-5 perhaps don't make the grade. So if we've nailed 10 out of 11 picks in two years, we may feel that we only need one more good draft haul before we focus on free agents and role players from other clubs to fill out the list. And if that's the case, we may feel that next year's first rounder is well and truly up for trading if it gets us an extra top 5 pick this year, or a high quality young player.

Is that ' we " the supporters or " we " as in SOS and the list management team? I would be willing to bet that somewhere in SOS's office there is a list of players that he would be most willing to trade in the right situation. And Id go further to say that SOS's list will have more names on it than any list of tradeable assets the supporters can come up with.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Think what happens with Gibbs will be the key to our trade period . Im not keen on giving up high draft picks as well but Kelly is a tremendous talent so if Sos feels its right i'll go with that .

Always.
#trustinsos

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

if we do chase Kelly it'll be a massive call for the club. If our kids don't come then we could really end up with egg on our face. Don't get me wrong I have loved what I've seen of Macreadie, Fisher, Williamson, Cuningham, McKay ect but there have been hundreds of players come into to the AFL in the past and look at least as good and even much better and have never actually made it. Even Cale Morton looked a much better player then SPS in his first season.
Gibbs, Murphy, Simpson, Kruezer along with Doc and Cripps have completely carried us this year. Four of those could be gone or past it in 3 years.
I really have no idea where we are at ATM. It wouldn't surprise me if we kicked on and are playing finals in three years and pushing for flags or if we are seeing another false dawn and we are just at the start of a very long and painful rebuild.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Is that ' we " the supporters or " we " as in SOS and the list management team? I would be willing to bet that somewhere in SOS's office there is a list of players that he would be most willing to trade in the right situation. And Id go further to say that SOS's list will have more names on it than any list of tradeable assets the supporters can come up with.

We, the club. I'll split the senior list based on who could potentially secure us a decent second round pick or better via trade/free agency.

Players without trade value (due to age, limitations or lack of exposed form):
Buckley, Simmo, Rowe, Kerridge, Boekhorst, Lamb, Smedts, Jaksch, Sumner, Palmer, Armfield, Graham, Gorringe, Thomas, White, Kerr, Polson, Macreadie, Pickett

Players with dubious trade value (may hold some value to the right club, based on form or position):
Jones, Phillips, Wright, Casboult

Players with trade value:
Silvagni, Murphy, Gibbs, SPS, Kreuzer, Cripps, McKay, Docherty, Plowman, Marchbank, Weitering, Fisher, Cuningham, Curnow, Williamson, Curnow, Byrne

Italicised names are the ones I think we'd flat out remove from any trade discussion whatsoever, they're young and have been recruited for a reason.
Underlined are the ones we (the BF folk) are at this stage assuming will leave.

In terms of players with value who we might consider trading, there are strong cases for that not to be the case:

Jones appears to be playing good footy again, and complements our other defenders well.
Phillips is our only recognised back-up in the ruck.
Wright would garner limited interest, and is apparently highly regarded within the club.
Murphy is our current captain, and will not be traded unless he wants out, which doesn't appear to be the case.
Kreuzer is our only genuine, AFL-standard starting ruck, and has apparently triggered a clause to remain at the club.
Ed Curnow is unlikely to be forced out if we want to make sure Charlie sticks around. He's also earned his spot on the list by being one of our hardest workers.

Maybe some of those players are on SOS's whiteboard...but I don't see a lot of gain for us in trading them.

If we want to hit this draft hard, it's going to mean maximising the return for Gibbs and potentially Levi, as well as trading future pick/s to improve our standing this season.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

1. Absolutely. The way that was handled was wrong.

2. Absolutely not. Too many people would need to be involved in a conspiracy that would fall apart much too easily.

Re #2 - I know but still incredibly pissed off about some calls we've copped against us over the years

 

[HARKER]

Re #2 - I know but still incredibly pissed off about some calls we've copped against us over the years

Nothing is impossible, but if there was such a directive, it could bring down the AFL as a whole.

Would make the Essendon scandal pale into insignificance................and may require a major overhaul of the AFL integrity commission.

 

[Jeremias]

Not sure i get the angst about landing a big fish arent we all going gaga about landing Josh Kelly ? Kelly and what he would cost us to get him over in both salary and draft picks is exactly the definition of a big fish imo ? So why the angst against the board if that was indeed the directive ? .

I think you're misreading the situation here.

There are few doubts over Kelly's quality. Clearly he's a sensational young footballer who projects as an elite footballer for the next 10 years, and there are many who would love to see him wearing navy blue in 2018 and beyond.

The angst you're referring to comes not from his potential recruitment, but rather the board getting involved in an area they're probably better off leaving to those who know what they're doing.

We've got a long way to go but I think it's fair to say Bolton and SOS are doing a fantastic job. I support what they are doing and think it's only fair that the board do so as well.

If they believe we're well placed to go after Kelly at the end of the year then I am all for doing so. On the flip side, if they think we're better off not going down that path yet, then I'll support staying the course and doing what we have been for the past few years because it's working.

This board has let us down badly before, so naturally this news makes me nervous - even more so given the info posted seems to suggest they think recruiting a big name is the thing we need to fix our membership issues. Have they learned nothing?

 

[Stephene]

I don't think SOS should have a whiteboard...

 

[Kramer1]

Re #2 - I know but still incredibly pissed off about some calls we've copped against us over the years

I think every fan base probably feels the same...except Hawks and WC of course.

A fresh one that springs to mind...Sunday, one minute to go, Charlie Curnow tackles Aiden Corr, who drops the ball stone cold, directly in front of the umpire. Play on.

Next passage of play Bryce Gibbs dives to spoil a loose ball, and one of those stupid below the knee frees, that go against every grain of what's right about football, is paid to Greene...who clearly went large on us at some juicy odds, and sent it deep to nowhere in particular.

Conspiracy? No. Frustratingly inconsistent? Yep.

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

I think every fan base probably feels the same...except Hawks and WC of course.

A fresh one that springs to mind...Sunday, one minute to go, Charlie Curnow tackles Aiden Corr, who drops the ball stone cold, directly in front of the umpire. Play on.

Next passage of play Bryce Gibbs dives to spoil a loose ball, and one of those stupid below the knee frees, that go against every grain of what's right about football, is paid to Greene...who clearly went large on us at some juicy odds, and sent it deep to nowhere in particular.

Conspiracy? No. Frustratingly inconsistent? Yep.

One of our players did exactly the same thing, Cuningham if I remember correctly, and the result was the same, play on. Enough of the biased refereeing crap. All teams have calls go with them and against them at different times, they all even out in the end.

 

[Azul]

One of our players did exactly the same thing, Cuningham if I remember correctly, and the result was the same, play on. Enough of the biased refereeing crap. All teams have calls go with them and against them at different times, they all even out in the end.

We should be demanding a better standard of umpires.
I'm no fan of Alastair 'Jeremy' Clarkson but even a broken watch is right occasionally.

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

We should be demanding a better standard of umpires.
I'm no fan of Alastair 'Jeremy' Clarkson but even a broken watch is right occasionally.

This I don't disagree with, the standards need to be better but I'm far from onboard with the supposed anti Carlton bias from the umpires.

 

[TerryWallet]

Umpire bashing is probably the most tiresome thing in the history of mankind.

They are the best available...and...They do their best.

Biased one eyed fans of every club in the world think they hate THEM.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[Kramer1]

One of our players did exactly the same thing, Cuningham if I remember correctly, and the result was the same, play on. Enough of the biased refereeing crap. All teams have calls go with them and against them at different times, they all even out in the end.

Did I suggest there was bias? Maybe read the post.

We should rightly expect the obvious frees to be paid to a relatively consistent standard. This simple error was very nearly match defining.

 

[Iamcarlton]

I think you're misreading the situation here.

There are few doubts over Kelly's quality. Clearly he's a sensational young footballer who projects as an elite footballer for the next 10 years, and there are many who would love to see him wearing navy blue in 2018 and beyond.

The angst you're referring to comes not from his potential recruitment, but rather the board getting involved in an area they're probably better off leaving to those who know what they're doing.

We've got a long way to go but I think it's fair to say Bolton and SOS are doing a fantastic job. I support what they are doing and think it's only fair that the board do so as well.

If they believe we're well placed to go after Kelly at the end of the year then I am all for doing so. On the flip side, if they think we're better off not going down that path yet, then I'll support staying the course and doing what we have been for the past few years because it's working.

This board has let us down badly before, so naturally this news makes me nervous - even more so given the info posted seems to suggest they think recruiting a big name is the thing we need to fix our membership issues. Have they learned nothing?

Well said , our membership numbers are a big concern for everyone

 

[Blue_Fusion]

One of our players did exactly the same thing, Cuningham if I remember correctly, and the result was the same, play on. Enough of the biased refereeing crap. All teams have calls go with them and against them at different times, they all even out in the end.

I strongly disagree with that.