List Mgmt. 2020 List Management

[Blue__Balls]

It would be great, but some serious one way traffic there. Witherden is the same age as Fish, would you trade fish to move up 4 spots in the draft?

What do the Dogs get out of moving 5 spots up the draft order? There academy player is regarded as the number 1 pick, they get him regardless. Mclean is 24 years old, would you trade David Cuningham to move from pick 15 to pick 10?

If the picks were 15 and 18 for Papley,I wouldn’t be giving any change if I was the Swans either.

Icertainly like the players, but I wouldn’t do any of those trades If I was at the other club.

Clubs overvalue their own, that's pretty well accepted I assume.

Would we trade Cuningham for a 5-spot upgrade? Maybe not, but other sides aren't going to value him much more. Especially if he wasn't getting a game for us. Look at it this way - if, three weeks ago, Essendon came to us and offered 10 for 15 and Kennedy, would we do it? Probably. From a WB reasoning perspective - their draft hand at this stage is their first rounder, no second rounder, theirs and Adelaide's third rounders, and no fourth rounder. They can't afford to match a bid at Pick 1 - they'd be looking at carrying a 400+ pt deficit into next year's first round. There's an argument there to offload some fringe players to upgrade whatever picks they can this season.

The Witherden trade is a little more complex than a 4 spot upgrade. It's Pick 18 (or 19, or 20, or whatever it is that Brisbane end up with - and they've got their first and Port's to choose from), for a future first. Out of a more compromised draft with a late first, and into a less compromised draft, with hopefully more insight into players - and an element of risk into what pick number they get. We assume it'll be 12-15, but we could easily miss the 8 again with some poor luck and they walk away with a top 10 pick.

15 and 18 for Papley would be the guts of that last trade, no idea what pick shuffling we'd potentially throw in. Probably something that suits both sides.

 

[smashbox gill]

Good luck stopping Kemp once he has taken 5 steps.

It is a big centre square set up with Kemp/Crippa/Setters.

Has the ability to be anything. Kouta 3.0 (CC is 2.0)

BK and CC should be 2 great ins in 2021.

There is no need for us to chase B graders or Newnes types in the trade period . With the players on our list we have that covered. Only look at players that are stars.

Cripps = Cripps
Setters = Bont?
Kemp = Fyfe?

 

[Juddrockz]

Bit harder for players to push for selection with the VFL season being canned for the year.

Would like Dow, LOB and Stocker to get a crack in the seniors at some point this season, but I guess if we are aiming for finals, that may be difficult.

Its a huge issue with the vfl season cancelled.The young kids just sitting on the outter waiting to get a call up may opt to choose to go elsewhere to get game time. I wouldnt be suprised if some of our young talent want to move to another club.
A football career has a small window in a person's life,has to be made the most of.

 

[Arr0w]

Has Jack Martin's strong start to his career at CFC perhaps negated the urgency around needing Papley? Additionally Cunningham, Gibbons Murphy have shown an ability to play that smallish forward role..

If we are going to give up 2 x first round picks it needs to be for a midfielder.

Yeap

People forget what it could release. Get a quality mid and Martin spends more time forward, same can be said if others continue to progress well through the middle 2nd half of the year

Our issue isn't scoring from inside 50, where we are ranked 6th, it's getting it in forward 50, ranked bottom 6

 

[HARKER]

Yeap

People forget what it could release. Get a quality mid and Martin spends more time forward, same can be said if others continue to progress well through the middle 2nd half of the year

Our issue isn't scoring from inside 50, where we are ranked 6th, it's getting it in forward 50, ranked bottom 6

We're tracking ahead of our opponents though - 351 vs 337 so far this year.
All sorts of conditions may account for being bottom 6, but it's important you get in more than your opponents and we're currently ahead.

Maximising the efforts for going forward is obviously very important and more important than simply getting the ball forward.
More players that can kick or create goals, the better.

 

[Arr0w]

We're tracking ahead of our opponents though - 351 vs 337 so far this year.
All sorts of conditions may account for being bottom 6, but it's important you get in more than your opponents and we're currently ahead.

Maximising the efforts for going forward is obviously very important and more important than simply getting the ball forward.
More players that can kick or create goals, the better.

Yeah

Get another quality mid, or the progression of others and Martin spends as much time forward as Papley this year

Pretty simple

 

[Blue__Balls]

Its a huge issue with the vfl season cancelled.The young kids just sitting on the outter waiting to get a call up may opt to choose to go elsewhere to get game time. I wouldnt be suprised if some of our young talent want to move to another club.
A football career has a small window in a person's life,has to be made the most of.

Same goes for every club's depth/developing players though.

 

[BlueJet]

I wouldn’t agree with this at all, you are trading for the player and what he can bring to the table, his stats and role this year compared to others, shows that he can play different roles and be good at them, depending on what the team needs.

We are not going to through our forward structure out the window because we pick a certain player, cost is irrelevant, he will play a role that the coaches see fit, he definitely wouldn’t be the main focus.

We picked up Jack Martin based on the player we knew he was, not the player he was last year. Papley is playing a different role, his numbers reflect that.

I didn't put it out there for anyone to have to agree with.
It's my perspective that Papley, the version of him that everyone is presently lusting after, that the club will be paying a significant outlay for, doesn't apply significant fwd 50 pressure - which again, was the point of my initial comment.

We're kidding though if we believe that the teams structures & gameplan aren't dependent on the players that the club has available.

 

[thylacine60]

In other news. I still feel like Judas for renouncing my preseason love for Setters. I did it three times before the rooster crowed.

The first was a preseason game. The second was the first game of the year. The final was the Melbourne game. The prophecy was right all along. You are the second coming. And I denied you.

Please forgive me WillJesus.

Got a falling on sword floating around here somewhere, W.

 

[Blue__Balls]

I didn't put it out there for anyone to have to agree with.
It's my perspective that Papley, the version of him that everyone is presently lusting after, that the club will be paying a significant outlay for, doesn't apply significant fwd 50 pressure - which again, was the point of my initial comment.

Que?

We wanted him last year, too, we haven't suddenly been seduced by him in 2020.

Last year he was getting more disposals, more marks, more tackles, more inside 50s, more goal assists, more clearances, more one percenters, more bounces, more score involvements, more metres gained...

Statistically - all he's done this year is kicked more goals with less/worse supply, because he's playing almost a lone hand in Sydney's forward line with bugger all support and less freedom to push up the ground and win the ball.

I'll take 2019 Papley every day of the week, thanks.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

Then we either package those picks for a higher one - or we tell them to do it if that's what they want. Live trading means they can get a read on the draft as it plays out before committing to using those picks, they could even flip them for future picks to clubs desperate for specific players this year.

That being said, they'll have Picks 3 and 22 at this stage and 50+ at this stage. 3 gets them the player of their choice. A bid probably comes for one of their academy players around 10 - they match with 15. A bid probably comes for their next academy player in the late teens - they match with 18. They get to keep 22 and use it on a decent player. 4 players inside the top 25.

Without trading for more picks, they'll use Pick 3, then have to cough up all their later picks (from 22 through to the end of the draft) for a bid around 10. They may even go into deficit on their first pick next year. if the bid comes before 10. Then they miss out on their second academy player (probable late first round bid). Both their academy players are mid/forwards, by the way. Gulden in particular sounds a lot like Papley...

There's a lot to be gained in late teens picks for Sydney.

I doubt they are going to give away Papley just to make sure they don’t go into deficit next year which means Papley only returns an upgrade of a pick.
the thing is it’s not up to them it’s upto the team trading for Papley to get them what they want. They aren’t going to trade him in the hope that things turn out well for them in the bidding. Absolute worst case i can see for them is to trade Papley for a future first and a second and third this year.

It’s hard to see how they get value for him unless they are getting a very early pick (top 5) or are going to on trade for players. It’s almost inevitable that they will get two very highly rated kids in this years draft, plus another handy kid regardless if they trade Papley. If they are going to lose him then they will want to increase that return not just get an upgrade on their first next season

 

[Blue__Balls]

I doubt they are going to give away Papley just to make sure they don’t go into deficit next year which means Papley only returns an upgrade of a pick.
the thing is it’s not up to them it’s upto the team trading for Papley to get them what they want. They aren’t going to trade him in the hope that things turn out well for them in the bidding. Absolute worst case i can see for them is to trade Papley for a future first and a second and third this year.

It’s hard to see how they get value for him unless they are getting a very early pick (top 5) or are going to on trade for players. It’s almost inevitable that they will get two very highly rated kids in this years draft, plus another handy kid regardless if they trade Papley. If they are going to lose him then they will want to increase that return not just get an upgrade on their first next season

Either I wasn't clear, or you've misread.

Picks 15 and 18 for Papley is potentially a net gain of Errol Gulden (Sydney's second rated academy player, estimated somewhere in the last first round), Pick 22, and possibly not going into deficit on their first rounder next year, compared to what stands to happen without any other trades taking place.

Sure - they might keep Papley and offload other players, or swap picks. Who knows. But from a value perspective, Picks 15 and 18 actually get Sydney a fair bit for the loss of one player.

 

[Arr0w]

Either I wasn't clear, or you've misread.

Picks 15 and 18 for Papley is potentially a net gain of Errol Gulden (Sydney's second rated academy player, estimated somewhere in the last first round), Pick 22, and possibly not going into deficit on their first rounder next year, compared to what stands to happen without any other trades taking place.

Sure - they might keep Papley and offload other players, or swap picks. Who knows. But from a value perspective, Picks 15 and 18 actually get Sydney a fair bit for the loss of one player.

Pick 15 and 22? Where are these picks coming from?

 

[Blue__Balls]

Pick 15 and 22? Where are these picks coming from?

Cliff notes:

Trade 10 to WB for 15 and McLean - as it stands, matching a bid for Ugle-Hagan at Pick 1 wipes their entire draft and puts them 400pts in deficit on their 2021 first rounder. Flicking a couple of fringe players would be the obvious solution. McLean a good fit for our needs.

Trade our future first to Brisbane for 18 and Witherden - Brisbane have their own and Port's first rounders, good chance one of them is ~18, they lose a fringe player and a late first in a compromised draft, get a future first in what would presumably be a slightly stronger draft, and roll the dice on us not going deep into finals to ensure that pick is somewhere from 8-14. Witherden a solid, 21yo defender with a low, penetrating kick.

Trade 15 and 18 for Papley. Shuffle late/future picks in whatever way makes it palatable for both clubs.

Swans now have 3, 15, 18, 22. Use 3 at the draft, 15 matches a bid for Campbell, 18 or 22 match a bid for Gulden (depending on where it comes) and the other gets used on a kid. Alternative is they use 3 at the draft, use 22 and their later picks to match a Campbell bid, and potentially miss on Gulden and another draftee in the top 22(ish).

EDIT: Probably should add - in any of these trade scenarios, any minor imbalance could presumably be overcome with later pick swaps.

 

[Juddrockz]

Same goes for every club's depth/developing players though.

Yeah i realise that. I was referring to our young talent. Cant keep them all.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

Either I wasn't clear, or you've misread.

Picks 15 and 18 for Papley is potentially a net gain of Errol Gulden (Sydney's second rated academy player, estimated somewhere in the last first round), Pick 22, and possibly not going into deficit on their first rounder next year, compared to what stands to happen without any other trades taking place.

Sure - they might keep Papley and offload other players, or swap picks. Who knows. But from a value perspective, Picks 15 and 18 actually get Sydney a fair bit for the loss of one player.

What if he gets a bid at 5 for example. It eats up 15 and pushes 18 back to probably the 30’s then the next kid gets a bid before 22. They have blown all their good picks matching.
that’s why I say they would be mad to take a risk. It’s not up to them, clubs will be falling over themselves for Papley so they would be stupid to risk giving him away on the hope that clubs don’t bid early.

 

[BlueJet]

Que?

We wanted him last year, too, we haven't suddenly been seduced by him in 2020.

Last year he was getting more disposals, more marks, more tackles, more inside 50s, more goal assists, more clearances, more one percenters, more bounces, more score involvements, more metres gained...

Statistically - all he's done this year is kicked more goals with less/worse supply, because he's playing almost a lone hand in Sydney's forward line with bugger all support and less freedom to push up the ground and win the ball.

I'll take 2019 Papley every day of the week, thanks.

Que indeed..
The hype, on this board and elsewhere is much greater this year than last.
Funnily enough, the asking price from the Swans is also expected to go up.

I'm not & never have denied that we held interest last year, coz well.. duh!
My comment was that the Papley that has currently got ppl in a froth isn't a pressure forward.
Self-explanatory I'd have thought but I look forward to someone else arguing a point that I haven't made.

 

[Blue__Balls]

What if he gets a bid at 5 for example. It eats up 15 and pushes 18 back to probably the 30’s then the next kid gets a bid before 22. They have blown all their good picks matching.
that’s why I say they would be mad to take a risk. It’s not up to them, clubs will be falling over themselves for Papley so they would be stupid to risk giving him away on the hope that clubs don’t bid early.

That doesn't change anything.

What if the bid comes at 5 and they haven't done the trade with us?

They match the bid with every pick they have, they carry a 500pt deficit into 2021, and they miss on their second academy player (Gulden).

In that (worst case) scenario of a top 5 bid, Papley gets them Gulden, Pick 33, and avoids a big downgrade on their future first rounder.
More likely, he gets them Gulden, another pick around 20, and avoids a small downgrade on their future first rounder.

It's a good return for a small forward, yeah.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Que indeed..
The hype, on this board and elsewhere is much greater this year than last.
Funnily enough, the asking price from the Swans is also expected to go up.

I'm not & never have denied that we held interest last year, coz well.. duh!
My comment was that the Papley that has currently got ppl in a froth isn't a pressure forward.
Self-explanatory I'd have thought but I look forward to someone else arguing a point that I haven't made.

I think you need to be a little clearer.

You say Papley isn't a pressure forward based on this year's stats. Last year, his pressure stats were significantly better because that's the role he was playing. If we trade Papley, we can have either/both versions. The pressuring goal-sneak, or the viable target. He costs more this year? Maybe. Last year we were prepared to give up Pick 9 for him - I suspect if a trade gets done this year it'll be for something thereabouts. Top 10 pick, or a combination of later picks.

 

[HARKER]

Yeap

People forget what it could release. Get a quality mid and Martin spends more time forward, same can be said if others continue to progress well through the middle 2nd half of the year

Our issue isn't scoring from inside 50, where we are ranked 6th, it's getting it in forward 50, ranked bottom 6

Let's just look at it this way -

a. Papley has kicked 19 goals to date and would replace one of Gibbons or Cuningham forward, who have collectively kicked 12 goals so lets's split that down the centre to 6 goals. That's 13 goals in front. Let's now apportion those goals across all games and we find that we win another 2 games, leaving us sitting on 6 wins and 2 losses. Of course it doesn't work that way but we're talking about a huge difference here.

b. Is our midfield going to get better given the depth of young midfielders? Are opposition teams going to clock things up more than we can next year?
If so, which teams can we expect to become so much better than ours?

There's no one simple way but if I had to balance out where I'd prefer the talent, I know where it would be.
The other thing with someone like Papley is that he can lead. We have 2 leaders in the backline, 2 leaders in the midfield but no real leaders forward.
Do we need them? Maybe.

I don't see us having as much a problem at getting the ball forward as I see us maximising our efforts, when in there.
We'll likely get better next year with CCurnow forward but even more likely that at least a couple of the array of mids we have, will take a real step forward.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

That doesn't change anything.

What if the bid comes at 5 and they haven't done the trade with us?

They match the bid with every pick they have, they carry a 500pt deficit into 2021, and they miss on their second academy player (Gulden).

In that (worst case) scenario of a top 5 bid, Papley gets them Gulden, Pick 33, and avoids a big downgrade on their future first rounder.
More likely, he gets them Gulden, another pick around 20, and avoids a small downgrade on their future first rounder.

It's a good return for a small forward, yeah.

Not at all imo. They have the whipping hand they should be able to manufacture a much better result then that.

 

[BlueJet]

I think you need to be a little clearer.

You say Papley isn't a pressure forward based on this year's stats. Last year, his pressure stats were significantly better because that's the role he was playing. If we trade Papley, we can have either/both versions. The pressuring goal-sneak, or the viable target. He costs more this year? Maybe. Last year we were prepared to give up Pick 9 for him - I suspect if a trade gets done this year it'll be for something thereabouts. Top 10 pick, or a combination of later picks.

I've been very clear - it's attempts to argue my point that have introduced external factors that have muddied the waters in context to the discussion.
I even went so far to highlight that he isnt playing as a traditional small forward which would go some way to explaining the differential in output.

Either way, he's a very handy player & I'd like to see a significant increase in the pressure we apply inside forward 50 whether that's via Papley, Honey or another recruit.
In Cripps and Martin (& hopefully Papley) we have players that can hurt the opposition from stoppages or turnovers inside f50, something that I feel we dont do enough of at present.

 

[DangerousD]

Club's overvalue their own, that's pretty well accepted I assume.

Would we trade Cuningham for a 5-spot upgrade? Maybe not, but other sides aren't going to value him much more. Especially if he wasn't getting a game for us. Look at it this way - if, three weeks ago, Essendon came to us and offered 10 for 15 and Kennedy, would we do it? Probably. From a WB reasoning perspective - their draft hand at this stage is their first rounder, no second rounder, theirs and Adelaide's third rounders, and no fourth rounder. They can't afford to match a bid at Pick 1 - they'd be looking at carrying a 400+ pt deficit into next year's first round. There's an argument there to offload some fringe players to upgrade whatever picks they can this season.

The Witherden trade is a little more complex than a 4 spot upgrade. It's Pick 18 (or 19, or 20, or whatever it is that Brisbane end up with - and they've got their first and Port's to choose from), for a future first. Out of a more compromised draft with a late first, and into a less compromised draft, with hopefully more insight into players - and an element of risk into what pick number they get. We assume it'll be 12-15, but we could easily miss the 8 again with some poor luck and they walk away with a top 10 pick.

15 and 18 for Papley would be the guts of that last trade, no idea what pick shuffling we'd potentially throw in. Probably something that suits both sides.

I guess in the hypotheticals you’re mentioned, I’d value a second rounder more than a 4-5 pick upgrade.
On Witherden, would Brisbane accept a second rounder? he was an early 20s pick and is contracted.

Time will tell guess

 

[HARKER]

Just as an aside -

GWS are widely regarded as having the best midfield in the league, other than the ruck-man
So far this year, they have not once won the inside forward 50 count and not just lost them, but by a long way.

Maybe the numbers are wrong, but I have 268 for and 368 against.....and this is the best midfield going?
There's something wrong there...surely.

 

[Blue__Balls]

I've been very clear - it's attempts to argue my point that have introduced external factors that have muddied the waters in context to the discussion.
I even went so far to highlight that he isnt playing as a traditional small forward which would go some way to explaining the differential in output.

Either way, he's a very handy player & I'd like to see a significant increase in the pressure we apply inside forward 50 whether that's via Papley, Honey or another recruit.
In Cripps and Martin (& hopefully Papley) we have players that can hurt the opposition from stoppages or turnovers inside f50, something that I feel we dont do enough of at present.

OK - I'm just not sure exactly what the point your making about the change in output is.

Yes, his role has changed this year. He's getting less ball, applying less pressure, and getting involved in less scoring chains (earlier in the chain). But as evidenced by his previous few years, he absolutely can apply pressure, whilst winning the ball, whilst kicking goals, whilst creating goals.

We're not talking about two Papley's, he's the same bloke. His value goes up because he's shown that when his team is on the rocks he's capable of digging deep and playing a lone hand in a diabolical forward line. It's not about buying an undersized key forward, it's about buying a complete footballer who can fill a variety of roles and provide multiple avenues to goal.

Agree with you that pairing him with someone more defensive might be good for balance. I don't know who that is on our list or on the market though.