List Mgmt. 2020 List Management

[Curnowhan]

Definitely worth a phone call then!


I have always been a massive fan of Josh Kelly and if we got him I'd be doing flips off the wall! Not many players i'd pay two 1sts for but Jelly is one.

I'm not sure your argument is on a solid foundation - it seems somewhat, I don't know, wobbly

 

[TheLeftFooters]

I'm not sure your argument is on a solid foundation - it seems somewhat, I don't know, wobbly

Hardly call it an argument, more an opinion. I think you'll find a few opinions on big footy.

 

[PostPaolo]

Random musings:

- I think with likely list size reductions, it would be highly unlikely for us to acquire more than 2 players through trade/free agency.
- I'd sooner retain Polson than Simmo in 2021 - love Kade, but keeping him on a smaller list would be irresponsible and unfair to the blokes coming through.
- I want us to make an active play for Witherden, give him Willo's spot at HB, and push Willo up the ground.
- Williams impressed me last night, don't think we get him, but if Papley comes off the table then Zac is the one to go for.

Left field but like the look of 2nd year Noah Answerth at Brisbane, seems like just like Witherden they're stacked with small defenders with a fully fit list.

 

[Bryce Bubbles]

Round 7, 2017 against Collingwood. That was - in some ways - a better performance from fewer possessions. Made kicks and hit handpasses that no-one should be able to find a target. Clearly best afield. He's played other games in similar fashion, but none quite so good.

You're welcome to your opinion, but it's wrong.

thanks for the info. It's hard to know how he will turn out for us...

 

[Blue__Balls]

Left field but like the look of 2nd year Noah Answerth at Brisbane, seems like just like Witherden they're stacked with small defenders with a fully fit list.

Liked the little I saw of him last year as well.

However I'd personally prefer we steer clear of players under 21. Immediate impact is the most important factor this off season. Bring in one or two players who immediately and significantly improve the performance of the senior side.

Papley and Witherden, or Williams and Rioli. Or removing the names - a pairing of one very highly rated mature player, and one who is solid, not elite, old enough to slot straight in to an area of need but young enough to still have scope for improvement.

 

[gbatman]

I think this is definitely a year to trade top picks. With what's going on I get the feeling that clubs will value top picks but after the first round everything will be much of a muchness.

Plenty of holes in our team. I think in regards to big tall midfielders we have more than enough. As for shorter stocky quick centermen, that's an area we can improve. I think a wingman could be an area to look into, not that we are desperate here but if the chance comes up then worth a look. A small forward who has pace, kicks goals and applies elite pressure is next.

Fortunate we have all these players in reserve and with the potential to mature and come in so probably not a great need for role players. I think we need to look at what elite types are out there. Unfortunately there may not be many available but who knows.

Looking back, Collingwood, Brisbane and Richmond both traded early picks for top players to build pretty good teams. 7 and 65 for Treloar. Pick 6 for Prestia. Cameron pick 12, pick 6 and 19 Neale.

A lot of clubs get to the end of a rebuild, are happy with the young players on their list and begin trading in the missing pieces. Just how we can get that done remains the question. Would love to acquire another late first round pick or early second round pick but reality is we are likely to bring in one top end player this year and another next year. That would be a good and realistic result IMO.

 

[katmanblue]

Random musings:

- I think with likely list size reductions, it would be highly unlikely for us to acquire more than 2 players through trade/free agency.
- I'd sooner retain Polson than Simmo in 2021 - love Kade, but keeping him on a smaller list would be irresponsible and unfair to the blokes coming through.
- I want us to make an active play for Witherden, give him Willo's spot at HB, and push Willo up the ground.
- Williams impressed me last night, don't think we get him, but if Papley comes off the table then Zac is the one to go for.

Why do you think list sizes will likely be reduced? This was floated right at the start but hasn't been mentioned since. Except on here. In fact the opposite was spoken about.

Do you have any more timely information on this?

On SM-N960F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[smashbox gill]

Josh Kelly is exactly what we need and I would pay $1m for him over paying $800k for Papley. We can front load his contract as we have room.

Papley will likely cost more than just a 1st round pick and if I’m paying that I’d rather go Kelly.

We need line breakers with good foot skills and Kelly is the best in the league at this.

 

[KnaveyBlue]

When can we start talking draftees?

Perkins sounds like he'd be a great fit for us, but Cox also looks tempting and may be right around our pick the way we'e going.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

When can we start talking draftees?

Perkins sounds like he'd be a great fit for us, but Cox also looks tempting and may be right around our pick the way we'e going.

I dunno about that, the lower the pick, the bettee odds we can jet a Papley or Ollie Wines (I think Josh Kelly is a pipe dream, besides he is a free agent next season)

 

[DangerousD]

Yes, and I agreed with the decision at the time because no small forward is worth that much!

It's also a mite disingenuous, as Eddie has stated that, had Carlton paid him an extra 50 thousand a year on top of what they were already paying - not to match, just enough to give him enough financial incentive to remain - he'd have stayed. Eddie is actually an example of the above; we didn't have the room to spare for him within the salary cap, we couldn't afford him and Daisy at the same time, so he left and Daisy came in.

Totally lost me here, no small forward is worth that much. Eddie will go down as one of the greatest forwards of all time, whether it be small or tall. Does the fact they predominantly operate in the front half of the ground mean they are worth less than a kid who operates in a seperate part? Why not just asses who’s a better player? Also not all mids kick goals, some barely kick goals at all, so they work maybe two thirds of the ground.

Your paragraph regarding Eddie is the point I was making, we didn’t value him enough to pay what he was worth, we wouldn’t even add $50,000 more to get close to what he was worth and we prioritised a footballer who was inferior, regardless of position. The idea that non Kemp position forwards aren’t worth much $$$$ is outdated, each player regardless of position should be paid according to the impact they have on the team. Regardless of position, if you don’t think Papley will represent enough of an impact to pay $600,000-$700,000 that’s fine, but to say no small forward is worth that is strange.

Yes, I am. Having 5-8 players kick 30 is better than 2-3 kicking 40+.

I didn’t mention anywhere about trading out any players, why would bringing in Papley mean only 2-3 players kick 40 plus goals and how do you get 5-8 players kicking 30 by not bringing him in? I get the theory, but to get 5-8 players to kick 30, you need to actually have players on the list who can kick 30 plus goals. This year we have zero.

 

[DangerousD]

Josh Kelly has had injury problems and would command close to 1 million P/A on an open market..

At his age, not worth it. Tim Taranto on the other hand, yes please, come to Papa !!!

You mean at 25 years old?

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

You mean at 25 years old?

I thought he was 27 ?

Anyhow, I do not believe he is realistically on the market at any rate

 

[DangerousD]

I thought he was 27 ?

Anyhow, I do not believe he is realistically on the market at any rate

Someone there will be, they can’t keep upping the $$$$ of every good player and nothing of value go out. Might not be Kelly, Cameron maybe, Greene maybe, Perryman, but you won’t be getting much cap relief off those guys.

 

[Eiffel 65]

When can we start talking draftees?

Perkins sounds like he'd be a great fit for us, but Cox also looks tempting and may be right around our pick the way we'e going.

I'm keen for our draft pundits to get the conversation flowing too.

Perkins sounds like he's got everything we need. Speed, agility and massive vertical leap. Yes please!

Twomey has also likened Oliver Henry to a Connor Rozee type. Would fit into our side nicely too.

Also find it interesting that on the latest AFL exchange podcast, when talking about what North should do with their draft picks, he was more in favour of them drafting Elijah Hollands (the midfielder with pizzazz) than trading for Tom Papley.

The top end of this draft appears to have a lot of x-factor. This is something we should not ignore.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Someone there will be, they can’t keep upping the $$$$ of every good player and nothing of value go out. Might not be Kelly, Cameron maybe, Greene maybe, Perryman, but you won’t be getting much cap relief off those guys.

Williams, Perryman, possibly Caldwell will be jettisoned to keep their gun core intact. Giants have not lost an A Grade player/talent yet (Treloar/Shiel/Adams etc are not A Graders)

Happy to be proven wrong though.

 

[Eiffel 65]

The difference Imo would be that there would be 10 vic clubs willing to move heaven and earth for Kelly and pay up. Papley has about 3-4 suitors at the most.

Kelly is what every single club in the league is looking for. Great user, runner and inside and out mid.

But if the Swans turn around and say he's contracted for another 3 years, he's our most valuable player and we don't want to put him on the trade table, nor do we want him to leave, that artificially inflates his price.

Kelly may have to go pending a cap squeeze. That's the difference.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Why do you think list sizes will likely be reduced? This was floated right at the start but hasn't been mentioned since. Except on here. In fact the opposite was spoken about.

Do you have any more timely information on this?

On SM-N960F using BigFooty.com mobile app

I'm just going off some suggestions here that it was likely to happen, though to a lesser extent than initially thought. Have had a quick search, and while there's nothing concrete as yet it certainly seems to be pretty widely accepted that list sizes will reduce over the next few years. Can't imagine we'll be wanting to go all out on trading players in, given that quality players are likely going to be moving for 3+ year contracts. Especially if we're still expected to take 3 players at the draft.

Makes more sense to target one or two players we know for sure will improve us in areas we need that improvement most, cycle some fringe players for draftees to manage the salary cap, and focus on development within.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Williams, Perryman, possibly Caldwell will be jettisoned to keep their gun core intact. Giants have not lost an A Grade player/talent yet (Treloar/Shiel/Adams etc are not A Graders)

Happy to be proven wrong though.

At risk of kicking off a huge kerfuffle about how everyone defines "A Graders" - in what universe are Treloar and Adams not in that category?

And proving you wrong will prove to be impossible, as odds are this is entirely contingent on what bar you set for someone to be an A Grader.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

At risk of kicking off a huge kerfuffle about how everyone defines "A Graders" - in what universe are Treloar and Adams not in that category?


And proving you wrong will prove to be impossible, as odds are this is entirely contingent on what bar you set for someone to be an A Grader.

Adams is a butcher of the footy, and Treloar's consistency is an on going problem.

I stand by my criteria of A Grade players to the hilt, do you honestly believe the Giants would be doing any better if they still had Adams and or Treloar.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Adams is a butcher of the footy, and Treloar's consistency is an on going problem.

I stand by my criteria of A Grade players to the hilt, do you honestly believe the Giants would be doing any better if they still had Adams and or Treloar.

Do I think GWS would be doing better than 25pts against the Swans NEAFL side? Yes, yes I do.

Is Cripps an A Grader in your criteria?

 

[Gethelred]

Totally lost me here, no small forward is worth that much. Eddie will go down as one of the greatest forwards of all time, whether it be small or tall. Does the fact they predominantly operate in the front half of the ground mean they are worth less than a kid who operates in a seperate part? Why not just asses who’s a better player? Also not all mids kick goals, some barely kick goals at all, so they work maybe two thirds of the ground.

Because - as things stand - games are won more from the midfield than they are from the forward half. There are maybe 3-4 forwards in the comp capable of being the sole reason their team gets up, and even they don't do it very often. Teams aren't getting 'Buddied' every week anymore.

You want to be spending your salary cap where it's most effective. Butler is having such a good season because of his output versus what is being paid for him to play and what they used to get him; it's a context thing.

Your paragraph regarding Eddie is the point I was making, we didn’t value him enough to pay what he was worth, we wouldn’t even add $50,000 more to get close to what he was worth and we prioritised a footballer who was inferior, regardless of position. The idea that non Kemp position forwards aren’t worth much $$$$ is outdated, each player regardless of position should be paid according to the impact they have on the team. Regardless of position, if you don’t think Papley will represent enough of an impact to pay $600,000-$700,000 that’s fine, but to say no small forward is worth that is strange.

... which is why this website is interesting. The Eddie situation demonstrates both arguments; I'd argue it favours mine more than yours, though.

Did Adelaide win a flag off the back of overpaying for Eddie's best years? Or did they have numerous players squeezed out financially because they couldn't match Eddie, then Jenkins, then Gibbs, then Lever? Sure, you've got the camp, but their salary cap was completely out of control. Correspondingly, we couldn't afford to pay Eddie that 50 thousand - not if we wanted to sign Daisy - so he left for a team that was offering substantially more.

Salary cap control has wound up being a cornerstone of premiership sides. Geelong had their famous 'no-one gets more than Joel', Hawthorn players actively and publicly spoke of getting paid unders to chase success; Richmond point blank refused to pay Dusty more than they wanted to in 2015 when his contract first hit the market, and let him try to shop himself around. Keeping players around despite offering them less than opposition can is vital to successful teams. So we need to have a little leeway in what contracts we make, and we need to monitor our spending as we improve to give us a degree of safety when players' contracts end.

I didn’t mention anywhere about trading out any players, why would bringing in Papley mean only 2-3 players kick 40 plus goals and how do you get 5-8 players kicking 30 by not bringing him in? I get the theory, but to get 5-8 players to kick 30, you need to actually have players on the list who can kick 30 plus goals. This year we have zero.

You might not have mentioned it, but the implication in your post is that we need to add to the forward half players who can kick those 40+ goals a season, of which Papley is one.

Forward line players are paid a premium, and while I agree that there should be some outlay our midfield is the area of most need currently; midfield and transition. Now, I'd love it if Ramsay and/or LOB suddenly turn up next year and start channeling Tadhg Kennelly and/or Andrew Mackie and/or Andrew Gaff, but I prefer to play the percentages as far as list management goes.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Do I think GWS would be doing better than 25pts against the Swans NEAFL side? Yes, yes I do.

Is Cripps an A Grader in your criteria?

Yes. But our only one at this stage (Weitering and Martin are close to it)

My definition of A Grade is the total elite/upper end talent of the league (of which there is only about 25-30 max)

Just my opinion though.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

But if the Swans turn around and say he's contracted for another 3 years, he's our most valuable player and we don't want to put him on the trade table, nor do we want him to leave, that artificially inflates his price.

Kelly may have to go pending a cap squeeze. That's the difference.

It would be the same situation as Shiel but a much better player. Every club would be desperate for him and would pay through the nose for him

 

[Blue__Balls]

Yes. But our only one at this stage (Weitering and Martin are close to it)

My definition of A Grade is the total elite/upper end talent of the league (of which there is only about 25-30 max)

Just my opinion though.

But Cripps has a tendency to butcher the ball and has been very inconsistent...

And hang on...Treloar, Adams and Shiel aren't A-Grade, but Jack Martin is close to it?! Elmer, come on mate, there's some incredible bias on display here.