List Mgmt. 2020 List Management, Free Agency & Trade thread

[Chief]

This is Part 1

The thread is continued in part 2:

List Mgmt. - 2020 List Management, Free Agency & Trade thread - Part 2

This Part 2 Continued from Part 1: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/2020-list-management-free-agency-trade-thread.1241035/ What type of players does our list need? Pace, Skill, Class and and goal threat. A winger, forward flank and forward pocket are the 3 positions that we need, plus...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Ysaye]

something funny?

I thought you were making an Adam Cerra Draftee joke (remembering back to when people on this board were complaining about picking him because they though his kicking was loopy) - my bad. Have to say it hasn't stood out to me that Chapman's kicking is particularly loopy.

 

[Dockeroo]

Would you rather Banfield for another year in the rookie list or Kaine Baldwin as a rookie selection if he slipped through (Twomey seemed to suggest he may go undrafted the other day)?

 

[CapitalA]

Would you rather Banfield for another year in the rookie list or Kaine Baldwin as a rookie selection if he slipped through (Twomey seemed to suggest he may go undrafted the other day)?

We still have 1 spot even if we have Banfield on the rookie so kind of irrelevant. might be more to whether we get Haddow and C.Walker we need to move Thomas to the cat A rookies.

 

[Square Peg]

It's beyond belief that there are otherwise intelligent posters on here trying to justify retaining Banfield. There is no justification, in the context of who we've delisted already and the picks we have it's nothing but s**t list management.

 

[E Shed]

My first thought on Chapmen was also that his kicking is a bit up & under. He certainly weights the ball nicely & appears to know how to kick to advantage but I didn’t see any examples of him kicking it flat & directly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Big Flappy]

Banfield has been in the round 1 best 22 for all three years he has been on the list.

If nothing else it seems to indicate he is doing something right with regards to performing and setting standards during preseason.

 

[Sully90]

It's beyond belief that there are otherwise intelligent posters on here trying to justify retaining Banfield. There is no justification, in the context of who we've delisted already and the picks we have it's nothing but sh*t list management.

It's beyond belief that there are otherwise intelligent posters on here trying to justify delisting Banfield. There is no justification, in the context of who we've retained already and the picks we have it's nothing but s**t list management.

Wow that was easy.

 

[Superkoops]

Is it all worth getting worked up about a second round rookie pick vs Banfield in a highly compromised draft?

Last season we delisted Dixon and North and had one cat-a rookie spot. With first round rookie selection we added Jarvis Pina before adding Dixon and North.

Looks like true to form we are doing the same. Having first round rookie selection before adding Bewley and Banfield.

If Banfield isn’t rookied we have a second round rookie pick. Prob around pick 32 after 60 selections in ND, 2 prelisted GC boys and some cat-B rookie’s added prior to the Rookie draft. So in effect about the 100th or so player selected in the drafts vs Banfield.

 

[Freomaniac]

The superstar AFL free agents of 2021 — and the teams already chasing them

The superstar AFL free agents of 2021 — and the teams already chasing them

www.foxsports.com.au

No Cookies | Herald Sun

No Cookies

www.heraldsun.com.au

Are there any free agents we should target?



Left field here are a few suggestions. Cripps is the obvious target.


TOM LYNCH - handy 3rd tall, would be good for 2 years.

Restricted free agent, 146 games

The veteran forward, 30, will have given the Crows 10 years of service at the end of next season. Has played 146 games for Adelaide since making his debut with the club in 2012. Kicked six goals from his 13 matches in 2020.




BRODIE SMITH - provides great run and carry. Maybe could be a winger for us .

Unrestricted free agent, 183 games

The 28-year-old is entering his 11th season with the Crows in 2021. The defender and 2014 All-Australian has played 183 games since making his debut in 2011. Had an elite ranking for metres gained in the league this year.


Out of contract players worth a look.


Zac Fisher (2016 Pick #27) 175cm/68kg - MID
CARLTON - Until 2021

Sam Petrevski-Seton

10

Sam Petrevski-seton

Age

26

Ht

182cm

Wt

81kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.2

4star

K

9.7

4star

HB

6.6

4star

M

3.6

4star

T

4.2

5star

G

0.3

3star

D

14.4

3star

K

9.5

4star

HB

4.9

3star

M

3.1

3star

T

2.0

3star

G

0.0

1star

D

13.4

4star

K

10.0

4star

HB

3.4

3star

M

2.8

3star

T

5.0

5star

G

0.4

3star

(2016 Pick #6) 180cm/74kg - MID
CARLTON - Until 2021

Wil Powell

27

Wil Powell

Age

24

Ht

188cm

Wt

87kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

11.2

3star

K

6.0

2star

HB

5.2

4star

M

2.8

3star

T

2.2

4star

MG

161.0

3star

D

11.8

3star

K

5.2

2star

HB

6.7

4star

M

1.7

2star

T

1.2

2star

MG

156.7

3star

D

8.8

3star

K

5.6

3star

HB

3.2

3star

M

2.6

3star

T

1.6

4star

MG

133.2

3star

(2017 Pick #19) 185cm/70kg - FWD/MID
GOLD COAST - Until 2021

Brandon Starevich (2017 Pick #18) 187cm/85kg - MID
BRISBANE - Until 2021

I wouldnt mind tom Lynch as a stop gap or as a depth player for a couple of seasons. Would be an experienced 2nd tall or 3rd tall forward.

Broadie Smith would be good for 2-3 seasons as well, especially if we make finals

 

[freo_leo29]

Yeah but we don't have to pick a 2nd rookie pick, we can use smart list management and give that money to one of our other players as list sizes aren't locked this year.

Give one of our youngsters who are up for a big raise (Cez, Bray, Logue etc) an early raise to save some cap space for next year when Serong/Young/Henry get their raises

Just use it as a flow on effect

 

[Joao]

Happy for Banners and hopefully proves us all wrong but **** me if that list spot couldn't be used better.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Happy for Banners and hopefully proves us all wrong but **** me if that list spot couldn't be used better.

This is a common theme for us. We waste list spots.

 

[malpaso]

Someone like Banfield you don't hang onto, especially if it's the last place on the list. Take a punt that you unearth a talent from somewhere that's been overlooked. Banfield setting preseason standards and getting in the Round 1 22 says more about where we've been at for 3 years.

 

[TheLastCall]

Is it all worth getting worked up about a second round rookie pick vs Banfield in a highly compromised draft?

Last season we delisted Dixon and North and had one cat-a rookie spot. With first round rookie selection we added Jarvis Pina before adding Dixon and North.

Looks like true to form we are doing the same. Having first round rookie selection before adding Bewley and Banfield.

If Banfield isn’t rookied we have a second round rookie pick. Prob around pick 32 after 60 selections in ND, 2 prelisted GC boys and some cat-B rookie’s added prior to the Rookie draft. So in effect about the 100th or so player selected in the drafts vs Banfield.

Because of the list cuts, there is speculation that only about 50-60 players will be picked this year.

 

[Joao]

Because of the list cuts, there is speculation that only about 50-60 players will be picked this year.

You can figure out the maximum number by looking at the number of list spots available at each club. It will be a bit less than that as well given the SSP. I think it is 63 but they are estimating more like 50-55 at the ND.

 

[Taylor]

I don't think you can make a case that there will be better players available at the pick we would re-select Banfield with our last choice in the rookie draft. Different players, absolutely, but by that point we are buying a car we not only couldn't take for a test drive - we aren't even able to see if the engine starts.

You can make a case that filling the rookie list position with a player when we don't need to fill that spot at all in order to save some money would be a wasted opportunity.

It would take something really special to rise like a phoenix from the rookie list back to the senior list at the end of next season, that last year on the rookie list appears to be a transition out of the squad for most clubs.

I'm sure there will be a story of a rookie listed player in this draft that goes on to be a star which will be used as the case study for why Banfield's one year was super costly, not because we could have taken that rookie player but because we might have picked another one later as well.

I think our second pick in this draft is much more important than the last rookie pick, and I don't see how we have one of those yet before the academy boys get bids.

 

[Monument Hills]

If I had my way (and those pesky things like draft picks and points and other teams aside) I would select Cox, Brandon, Western, Neale, and Chris W as rookie.

Couple of cracks at new height, two very fast and athletic twins, and Western to do Westerny things.

 

[wayToGo_]

If I had my way (and those pesky things like draft picks and points and other teams aside) I would select Cox, Brandon, Western, Neale, and Chris W as rookie.

Couple of cracks at new height, two very fast and athletic twins, and Western to do Westerny things.

I'd be pretty happy with that but you could pick a rookie plus Chris Walker (as a Cat B) if you wanted. We have 6 spots total free even if we keep all of Schultz, Bewley, Banfield and Thomas. 2 of those names will have to move to the rookie list to have 4 ND picks though.

 

[salim malik]

With Western and Henry plus Walters why do we need Schultz ?
Imo Schultz will not be part of a finals side.
Great he lays the occasional tackle but that's the extent of his talents.

 

[Taylor]

With Western and Henry plus Walters why do we need Schultz ?

He is the only one listed there who was fit all last season.

 

[salim malik]

He is the only one listed there who was fit all last season.

So being fit not talent gets you a game.
Jeez I hope not.

 

[A New Hope]

I don't think you can make a case that there will be better players available at the pick we would re-select Banfield with our last choice in the rookie draft. Different players, absolutely, but by that point we are buying a car we not only couldn't take for a test drive - we aren't even able to see if the engine starts.

You can make a case that filling the rookie list position with a player when we don't need to fill that spot at all in order to save some money would be a wasted opportunity.

It would take something really special to rise like a phoenix from the rookie list back to the senior list at the end of next season, that last year on the rookie list appears to be a transition out of the squad for most clubs.

I'm sure there will be a story of a rookie listed player in this draft that goes on to be a star which will be used as the case study for why Banfield's one year was super costly, not because we could have taken that rookie player but because we might have picked another one later as well.

I think our second pick in this draft is much more important than the last rookie pick, and I don't see how we have one of those yet before the academy boys get bids.

All of this.

Better the Devil you know.

 

[go_the_dockers]

I don't think you can make a case that there will be better players available at the pick we would re-select Banfield with our last choice in the rookie draft. Different players, absolutely, but by that point we are buying a car we not only couldn't take for a test drive - we aren't even able to see if the engine starts.

You can make a case that filling the rookie list position with a player when we don't need to fill that spot at all in order to save some money would be a wasted opportunity.

It would take something really special to rise like a phoenix from the rookie list back to the senior list at the end of next season, that last year on the rookie list appears to be a transition out of the squad for most clubs.

I'm sure there will be a story of a rookie listed player in this draft that goes on to be a star which will be used as the case study for why Banfield's one year was super costly, not because we could have taken that rookie player but because we might have picked another one later as well.

I think our second pick in this draft is much more important than the last rookie pick, and I don't see how we have one of those yet before the academy boys get bids.

If you are know your current car is not up to standard, and you can replace it with the mystery box why not at least try.

If the player does not work out, try a new player next year.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Put me in the perplexed about Banfield bracket. Seems like a ripping kid but he'll never have the "speed" for AFL football and I would have thought we were 100% better off taking a punt on someone else rather than carry him on the list. Guaranteed there will be kids who miss out this year that are drafted next year (or years down the track) and go to be handy players. Would rather spend a list spot on someone with 5% chance of making then someone we know isnt going to

 

[Big Flappy]

So being fit not talent gets you a game.
Jeez I hope not.

Tough to get a game if you aren’t fit