List Mgmt. 2020 List Management

[skadoosh]

Really missing having JSOS in the team. He'd play McGovern's role but is much more impacting in the contest. For whatever reason McG gets pushed out of the contest and is outbodied extremely easily. For some strange reason Mitch also likes to go for big bumps rather than tackles.

 

[GT619]

Really missing having JSOS in the team. He'd play McGovern's role but is much more impacting in the contest. For whatever reason McG gets pushed out of the contest and is outbodied extremely easily. For some strange reason Mitch also likes to go for big bumps rather than tackles.

Missing him big time.

 

[Juddernaut08]

Really missing having JSOS in the team. He'd play McGovern's role but is much more impacting in the contest. For whatever reason McG gets pushed out of the contest and is outbodied extremely easily. For some strange reason Mitch also likes to go for big bumps rather than tackles.

when is jsos back

 

[BlueTongue]

I would also cut McG some slack, first game back after some weeks out.
He has shown good glimpses this year and I remember the commitment he showed to get himself into career best shape.
McG is an X factor weapon when up and about.

You don't pay the big bucks we have for 'X factor'. You pay them for consistent and reliable effort & results. Happy to keep Gov on a greatly reduced contract.


On SM-T355Y using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Juddernaut08]

You don't pay the big bucks we have for 'X factor'. You pay them for consistent and reliable effort & results. Happy to keep Gov on a greatly reduced contract.


On SM-T355Y using BigFooty.com mobile app

Id settle for a greatly reduced waistline

 

[Arr0w]

I agree with you in that it's ultimately not a lot and that the pick will blow out, but it's still a first round pick.

And given the likelihood of us being active on the trade table there are plenty of better ways we can use a first round pick, be it our own or tied to the finishing position of another club.

Narkle is coming out of contract and will be 23 before the end of the year. He has been in the AFL system for 4 years and has played 17 games in that time. He's not a part of Geelong's best side, and for the purpose of this discussion it is not relevant that he would be in ours.

That's not someone who would be involved in a trade for a 1st round pick, and Geelong wouldn't be so silly as to expect it.

He's worth a 3rd round pick.

Perhaps I should have been clearer with my last post.

I will concede a late 1st, that floats into the 20's, for Narkle and a 2nd might be excessive, hence, another option would be exchanging a number of later picks. But the total exchange of my original scenario still places his value as a 3rd rounder.

So we agree what he is worth

Like Cuners, Narkle has had a number of injuries, in fact many more, that has restricted him from being a regular.

Not being best 22 in a top side, is not an indication he wouldn't be best 22 in ours, so it is relevant to the discussion

The option of acquiring Narkle, was one of many others, where there is no need to give up midfielder currency on a small forward, so perhaps let's not get caught up with one player

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

The pick was always available at our discretion.

Have a look at the footage. Adelaide were trying to force the trade upon us.

Once again, refer to the example above regarding Harry and Charlie as to why you might switch the order in which you draft with a pair of picks in a tight range.

Exactly listen to that conversation we were all over one guy, the only reason we were interested in the deal was dependent on Stocker being there. We don’t do that trade for Duursma so we would take Stocker at 16 and don’t make the risky deal with Adelaide in that alternate universe to take some other player we were obviously nowhere near as into.

 

[Stamos]

Clearly all the picks were being packaged up to get Sydney's pick 13 for academy points.

Or did you not understand that part of the trade?

But we never had the picks to trade up for #13, which you continually ignore. Adelaide’s #40 was a big part of the trade.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

I like Narkle and are happy for us to chase him but Narkle isn’t a small forward.

 

[HBF]

Similar to Plows job on Cameron last year when he blanketed him out of the game.

Would love to see Plow do this again next week against the Lions.

 

[Stamos]

Not if you have 2 picks in the space of 3 selections and if you know the player you rate higher will be available at your second selection, however the player you rate a spot or two lower won't be because another club rates them higher than you do. Refer to the McKay and Curnow example on how SOS managed to get both, when if he had of taken Charlie at pick 10, we wouldn't have drafted Harry.

We had 1 pick, which was pick 1. SOS always showed a tendency to trade up the draft board. What I'm saying is that we could have bundled those picks to move up to Sydney's pick 13, giving us our second selection, as well as done the live trade with Adelaide to obtain our 3rd selection.

And no, it's not moronic if the club does their research into the players other clubs are more likely to draft. It's actually smart because it increases the likelihood of acquiring all your target players.

Also note that the trade was always getting done if our player was there. If you look at the footage, Adelaide were trying to force the trade onto SOS earlier than he wanted.

You’ve got a bad memory, as well as a bad grasp of what was possible. We were trying to get a trade done with other clubs before Adelaide in order to get Stocker. They weren’t willing to trade until Duyrsma was off the board

 

[Arr0w]

But we never had the picks to trade up for #13, which you continually ignore. Adelaide’s #40 was a big part of the trade.

Pick 40 a big part of the deal? We could of added a future pick

 

[Arr0w]

I like Narkle and are happy for us to chase him but Narkle isn’t a small forward.

That's the bonus though, he is effective in both areas

 

[HBF]

Walters is averaging 18 disposals a game with shortened quarters.

He's playing further up the ground so his scoreboard impact is not going to be as great.

Cameron has been injured. He's in a similar situation to Cripps. Does anyone here honestly think that Cripps isn't carrying an injury that still allows him to play, but significantly impacts his game day performance?

Cripps is 100% injured, which makes it even more strange that he's not playing forward more. Him one on one with most defenders I would back him in most of the time, even to halve the contest.

 

[HBF]

Also McGovern is just about the worst trade this club has ever done, up there with giving up pick 7 for Jacksh and if we give him another contract I'll be furious

I'd be looking to trade him as well. He's surplus to our needs once we get Charlie and Jack back.
He's not even a consideration in my best 22 assuming we have a full list to choose from.

 

[HBF]

I agree with you re Witherden. I've watched a lot of the Lions over the last few years and I can't understand why he's fallen out of favour there. Witherden and Newman could replace Simmo and SPS in defence and free up SPS to spend more time on the ball.

I'd be very keen of Witherden. Him and Doc coming off HB would be fantastic.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Perhaps I should have been clearer with my last post.

I will concede a late 1st, that floats into the 20's, for Narkle and a 2nd might be excessive, hence, another option would be exchanging a number of later picks. But the total exchange of my original scenario still places his value as a 3rd rounder.

So we agree what he is worth

Like Cuners, Narkle has had a number of injuries, in fact many more, that has restricted him from being a regular.

Not being best 22 in a top side, is not an indication he wouldn't be best 22 in ours, so it is relevant to the discussion

The option of acquiring Narkle, was one of many others, where there is no need to give up midfielder currency on a small forward, so perhaps let's not get caught up with one player

You keep talking about keeping our 1st rounder for a midfielder, but haven't seen you mention the mid to target...

Which mid do you think we could throw two 1st rounders at? And don't say something stupid like Petracca... he's not leaving Melbourne.

BTW I know you're on the side of using firsts to bring in multiple players rather than target one, but bringing in players like Parfitt will only add to our frustrations. I've seen him blaze away i50 too many times... only the Cats have the ability to cover for his mistakes and it makes him look better. I can see him fast becoming a whipping boy on here. Sure, he'd give us more than what we're getting from some but he's not the answer to fixing our midfield and f50 entry woes.

Even if we give up our 1st rounder for Parfitt, we'd probably get offered their 2nd rounder as well which will be pick 45+, what are we gonna do with that? Or, our 1st for Parfitt and Narkle? No thanks. Quality over quantity at this stage of our build.

 

[Arr0w]

You keep talking about keeping our 1st rounder for a midfielder, but haven't seen you mention the mid to target...

Which mid do you think we could throw two 1st rounders at? And don't say something stupid like Petracca... he's not leaving Melbourne.

BTW I know you're on the side of using firsts to bring in multiple players rather than target one, but bringing in players like Parfitt will only add to our frustrations. I've seen him blaze away i50 too many times... only the Cats have the ability to cover for his mistakes and it makes him look better. I can see him fast becoming a whipping boy on here. Sure, he'd give us more than what we're getting from some but he's not the answer to fixing our midfield and f50 entry woes.

Even if we give up our 1st rounder for Parfitt, we'd probably get offered their 2nd rounder as well which will be pick 45+, what are we gonna do with that? Or, our 1st for Parfitt and Narkle? No thanks. Quality over quantity at this stage of our build.

Blue, you keep asking posters what they would do and or dissect what people are offering up

Perhaps, start stating who you would prefer to target and the currency involved, then the rest of us will dissect it

Otherwise it's pointless replying to my posts

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

That's the bonus though, he is effective in both areas

Yeh which is why I like him but he isn’t going to be kicking us a lot of goals, much like Martin, Fisher and Cuningham don’t. For me that is also the problem, Martin and Fisher are going to be playing in that high HF role which I imagine we are recruiting Narkle for. Imo he probably just pushed Cuningham out of the side, which probably isn’t a bad thing. It depends if we want to play versatile forwards or more goal kicking forwards, which is up to individual preference I guess.

 

[smashbox gill]

I would also cut McG some slack, first game back after some weeks out.
He has shown good glimpses this year and I remember the commitment he showed to get himself into career best shape.
McG is an X factor weapon when up and about.

He was in supposed career best shape yet still barely impacting games. His supposed best games for the clubs were games where he impacted for 10min and non-existent for the rest. His best games were under 8 possession games. Waste of space

My issues are he's not gonna have much currency. Teague loves him and for some reason is a walk up start therefore is that going to continue. Could potentially mean someone like Kennedy/JSOS miss out.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Blue, you keep asking posters what they would do and or dissect what people are offering up

And? What's wrong with that?

Perhaps, start stating who you would prefer to target and the currency involved, then the rest of us will dissect it

Zac Williams FA

See if we can also shake Kelly loose. 2 first rounders. As far as I'm concerned, this is our best outcome. Adding Williams and Kelly to our midfield should make us a top 6 side next year, if not higher.

If we can't shake Kelly loose, I'd look at Papley and see what they're asking for. Highly unlikely to be 2 first rounders given his last 2 months have been well below his best. We'll most likely end up with pick 8, that should do it. If they're steadfast on getting 2 first rounders, we walk away. Papley would fill our small forward hole for the next 5 years. Pick 8 in this year's draft is worth it. With Harry and Charlie coming back, I reckon he'd thrive in our forward line.

If we walk away from the Swans, the next target would be Ollie Wines. He and Cripps will look after each other and takes most of the grunt work load off our younger brigade. A mix of Cripps, Williams, Wines and Walsh at centre bounces next year I reckon gives us a good mix of strength, speed and endurance. They'd probably want 2 first round picks for him. I'm not opposed to that, especially if we get Williams.

If we can't put our 1st pick toward picking up Kelly, Papley or Wines, we take it to the draft. Unless by miracle another gun mid wants to leave his team and join us.

The players you're targeting we can still easily get without coughing up any first round picks.

We can still very likely bring in guys like Narkle - 3rd rounder and Witherden - 2nd rounder. But I'd try and grab Perryman with our 2nd before Witherden.

Otherwise it's pointless replying to my posts

It isn't pointless when I highlight the fact that all you're interested in doing is going for quantity over quality in areas that aren't really glaring weaknesses in our team. Witherden would be a "nice to have" but spending our 1st on him is crazy talk, even if it means we get the Lions 1st back as well. He has struggled to keep his spot, our 1st doesn't go toward players like that.

 

[Stamos]

Pick 40 a big part of the deal? We could of added a future pick

No, Sydney wanted the points.
Our future 3rd would not get it done, and even if it did, would have left us with no 2nd, 3rd or 4th round picks for 2019.

And nobody, especially in that draft, is trading a very high 3rd (#40) for a future 3rd in a weaker draft.

 

[BluesRule]

If Kreuz is now retired, really hope we keep enough draft currency to get the young Walsh.

Will be a project and take a couple of years but if he has the tenacity of his brother he could be a great complement to TDK and Pitto.

 

[Arr0w]

And? What's wrong with that?



Zac Williams FA

See if we can also shake Kelly loose. 2 first rounders. As far as I'm concerned, this is our best outcome. Adding Williams and Kelly to our midfield should make us a top 6 side next year, if not higher.

If we can't shake Kelly loose, I'd look at Papley and see what they're asking for. Highly unlikely to be 2 first rounders given his last 2 months have been well below his best. We'll most likely end up with pick 8, that should do it. If they're steadfast on getting 2 first rounders, we walk away. Papley would fill our small forward hole for the next 5 years. Pick 8 in this year's draft is worth it. With Harry and Charlie coming back, I reckon he'd thrive in our forward line.

If we walk away from the Swans, the next target would be Ollie Wines. He and Cripps will look after each other and takes most of the grunt work load off our younger brigade. A mix of Cripps, Williams, Wines and Walsh at centre bounces next year I reckon gives us a good mix of strength, speed and endurance. They'd probably want 2 first round picks for him. I'm not opposed to that, especially if we get Williams.

If we can't put our 1st pick toward picking up Kelly, Papley or Wines, we take it to the draft. Unless by miracle another gun mid wants to leave his team and join us.

The players you're targeting we can still easily get without coughing up any first round picks.

We can still very likely bring in guys like Narkle - 3rd rounder and Witherden - 2nd rounder. But I'd try and grab Perryman with our 2nd before Witherden.



It isn't pointless when I highlight the fact that all you're interested in doing is going for quantity over quality in areas that aren't really glaring weaknesses in our team. Witherden would be a "nice to have" but spending our 1st on him is crazy talk, even if it means we get the Lions 1st back as well. He has struggled to keep his spot, our 1st doesn't go toward players like that.

Williams is a no brainer, have been pushing for him for 12 months, so now that he is a free agent, it would be the perfect acquisition

No doubt we will again target Kelly and while he has elite attributes, he is not elite in the areas that we need, which is foot skills/finisher. That along with being 26, I don't believe he is worth 2 1st round picks. If we are willing to part with that sort of currency, I would target Whitfield. I stress, neither is more or less gettable.

GWS are in trouble with cap space, they will either have to unload a couple at the top end or lose a number of players that have been in the system for a few years, such as the likes of Perryman etc

Happy to part with a single 1st rounder for Papley. It's not surprising that his output has declined in recent weeks, he was the most targeted forward in the league, yet their results were still poor. The change in tactics has reduced his goal output, but they are slightly more competitive, only slightly. I still believe that there are better bang for buck options in this areas, which I have already mentioned at length. But yes, Papley at the right price will help us solidify our rise, rather than than dramatically bolstering it

Not closed to targeting a Wines and if we had to hand over a single pick, I wouldn't be unhappy. Personally, Viney still seems a better option as a FA, if we are looking at this type. Personally, I think we will be flush with inside mids, I believe a balanced or outside finisher is more of a need.

I have never promoted quantity over quality, more about bang for buck/cost versus value. Although, we are more than just one player away from being a contender

Just because the likes of Witherden is in and out of the side this year, doesn't make him any less valuable, especially being part of a top 4 club. He is a player of need, while not quick, he adds what we lack, footskills. Don't get too caught up on the trade details, they rarely pan out how we see it here. If you traded for Witherden + Lions 1st, for ours, then I have no issue passing that on to the Swans with a future 1st for Papley, effectively/possiblity of 2 late 1st for Papley. Swans need points, so they would still be open to that trade, as much as a mid 1st

Lastly, every year (around this time) we talk about who is and isn't gettagle, then we get the surprises, of quality players being available. Neale, Shiel, Polec, Hill x 2, Wingard, Omeara, Mitchell. Martin was nearly traded a year prior, Wines name popped up last year. This year will be no different, the main change is that players can now see that we are extremely competitive and look like making the finals next year, so don't be surprised if a contracted player comes out saying he wants in, one that has yet to be mentioned here

 

[Arr0w]

No, Sydney wanted the points.
Our future 3rd would not get it done, and even if it did, would have left us with no 2nd, 3rd or 4th round picks for 2019.

And nobody, especially in that draft, is trading a very high 3rd (#40) for a future 3rd in a weaker draft.

Stamos, be clear, pick 40 was not the crucial aspect of the trade, those points could have been obtained any number of ways