List Mgmt. 2020 List Management

[ABigOlDoofus]

I think last year the Swans probably thought we can hold him and convince his this is the place best for him but if another year and he has the same request the club would need to consider that. Can only ask

Just don't want to do a reverse Gibbs where we cave into the pressure to get the trade across the line and give up a small fortune for him.

 

[Eiffel 65]

We will be into him, big time, but what I have been trying to point out all year is cost v output should always be considered

At most, he is worth a pick in the 7-10 range only, any more and we should walk away

I wouldn't even pay that.

 

[Eiffel 65]

Interesting how the commentators repeatedly said tonight that our biggest problem is our ball movement and transition inside forward 50.

Never at any stage did they say our #1 priority is a small forward.

Also note the commentators really rate Fisher as a small forward.

We should be avoiding Papley at all costs. Where was he when the game was on the line. Absolutely nowhere!

 

[Salt Lake Cities]

Reckon it would be pick swaps. No campaigner offers 2 x 1st for a small forward.

Few AFL media types spouting 2 firsts of late, crush, and I’m not having it

 

[Arr0w]

Anyone trading SPS?

 

[Eiffel 65]

3 goals in 7 weeks for a small forward, I ain’t coughing up 2 first rounders for that, even if the media says we must

This years first straight up, no change. Walk away if they demand more...

Still too much.

You need to understand what you're giving up.

If one of Tanner Bruhn, Elijah Hollands or Will Phillips is available at our pick, that would be a far better outcome than Papley.

 

[THE_GUN]

Just don't want to do a reverse Gibbs where we cave into the pressure to get the trade across the line and give up a small fortune for him.

He is not Gibbs and doesnt have the Gibbs habits , 10 year player thats a fighter. You dont go wrong with players like that

I would be happy to give up our 1st & 2nd rounder for him if he wanted to come to Richmond

 

[Jeremias]

Interesting how the commentators repeatedly said tonight that our biggest problem is our ball movement and transition inside forward 50.

Never at any stage did they say our #1 priority is a small forward.

This is just not true.

At least once the commentators bemoaned our lack of small forwards waiting at the feet of our talls. Think it was a contest with Harry bringing it to ground against 2 Sydney opponents.

In fact from memory one of the commentators mentioned that Papley is the exact type we're missing up there.

 

[Bokan]

If Plowman picks up Papley tonight, it will be like the Hindenburg disaster “oh the humanity”.

How did that go ?

On CPH1877 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Eiffel 65]

He is not Gibbs and doesnt have the Gibbs habits , 10 year player thats a fighter. You dont go wrong with players like that

I would be happy to give up our 1st & 2nd rounder for him if he wanted to come to Richmond

Your first rounder could well be pick #19-20 after the priority and compensation picks, which could get pushed back into the mid 20's after academy bids.

Your second rounder will be in the 40's.

There's a big difference between Richmond and Carlton picks at the moment.

 

[Eiffel 65]

This is just not true.

At least once the commentators bemoaned our lack of small forwards waiting at the feet of our talls. Think it was a contest with Harry bringing it to ground against 2 Sydney opponents.

In fact from memory one of the commentators mentioned that Papley is the exact type we're missing up there.

That was one contest.

Hmmm, Papley is the exact type we need is he?

Because he was hardly sighted in the second half. Even if he was in our team, I highly doubt he would have been at the fall of the ball anyway. I can say that with confidence because he wasn't at the fall of the ball when Sydney's tall forwards were competing.

One contest doesn't make a need, however, our inability to hit up targets inside forward 50 over the course of multiple seasons does.

 

[THE_GUN]

Your first rounder could well be pick #19-20 after the priority and compensation picks, which could get pushed back into the mid 20's after academy bids.

Your second rounder will be in the 40's.

There's a big difference between Richmond and Carlton picks at the moment.

Carltons 1st rounder i would assume to be around #10-#12 which is good deal for carlton to trade for Papley
Draft picks are just numbers until you place a players name next to it then its a player comparison and usually when you select a player with pick #10-#12 and you get a Papley - You would take that 9/10.

Academy pick's effecting the pick number is really a distortion of the draft as these players are never available to clubs if they are any good and usually get matched by the teams they are allocated to.

 

[Stamos]

Papley bahahaha

To be fair, if he comes to us he'll only have to play on Plow at training

 

[Salt Lake Cities]

Still too much.

You need to understand what you're giving up.

If one of Tanner Bruhn, Elijah Hollands or Will Phillips is available at our pick, that would be a far better outcome than Papley.

I’ve got absolutely no idea about the U/18’s this season mate

My knowledge on them usually comes from the championships on Foxtel and posters on here that I’ve followed in that regard over the years

I’m all about getting 2 or 3 finished articles in this off-season, doesn’t necessarily have to be a Papley either

 

[Eiffel 65]

Carltons 1st rounder i would assume to be around #10-#12 which is good deal for carlton to trade for Papley
Draft picks are just numbers until you place a players name next to it then its a player comparison and usually when you select a player with pick #10-#12 and you get a Papley - You would take that 9/10.

Academy pick's effecting the pick number is really a distortion of the draft as these players are never available to clubs if they are any good and usually get matched by the teams they are allocated to.

We've got other areas of the ground we need to improve. A small forward is not a high priority.

Zac Fisher is really starting to come on as our small forward. Owies looked lively tonight too.

Papley has kicked 3 goals since round 8. He's massively overrated and pumped up by the media because they sense a 'blockbuster trade' for someone who's merely a good player.

Honestly, the guys in the media saying we need a small forward and is our #1 priority have no idea what we've got on our list.

Even just look at tonight's game:

Zac Fisher: 16 disposals, 1 tackle and 1 goal.
Tom Papley: 10 disposals, 1 tackle and 0 goals.

If we trade for Papley, we'll be buying at his highest value and probably get burnt in the long term, just like what's happening now with McGovern.

 

[Jeremias]

That was one contest.

And a whole one time more than it never having been mentioned, which is what you claimed and what I was responding to.

Because he was hardly sighted in the second half. Even if he was in our team, I highly doubt he would have been at the fall of the ball anyway. I can say that with confidence because he wasn't at the fall of the ball when Sydney's tall forwards were competing.

He was well beaten tonight by an often maligned footballer who put in a terrific performance.

But the truth be told had he kicked 6 and won the game for the Swans you'd still find some silly metric to talk his game down, such is your desire to not bring him to the club.

As for this 'confidence' you speak of, please. Spare us. Suggesting he wouldn't do something because he doesn't do it currently without acknowledging the different sides, structures, game styles, needs etc. is as shallow as it gets.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

That was one contest.

Hmmm, Papley is the exact type we need is he?

Because he was hardly sighted in the second half. Even if he was in our team, I highly doubt he would have been at the fall of the ball anyway. I can say that with confidence because he wasn't at the fall of the ball when Sydney's tall forwards were competing.

One contest doesn't make a need, however, our inability to hit up targets inside forward 50 over the course of multiple seasons does.

Papley was effectively playing on all of Jones, Simpson and Doc as the only forward whilst the rest of his team mates were flooding back to shut down the game.

He had next to no chance of having a meaningful influence on the result.

Next year the plan is to have him at the feet of McKay and Charlie in front of quick ball movement. Far more desirable than sitting under Sam Reid.

A pure small forward is absolutely a need. I reckon if we fill that role it’ll allow the likes of Fish and Cuners to push up a bit more and deliver it in themselves, fixing our inside 50 issue.

 

[Bleez40]

Early in the year Papley was playing a pseudo key forward role. Now that Sam Reid and McLean/McCartin have returned to Sydney's forward line, Papley has been targeted far less inside 50 and his form has suffered. Sydney will no doubt use his early season form to demand a high price but I hope we aren't sucked in. Saying that, he can clearly still be a dangerous crumbing small forward and a partnership with Fisher would be exciting.

Small forwards are now more valued in the game and that has translated into the draft as well, with Kysiah Picket going pick 12 and Weightman at pick 15. Our first rounder will probably fall around 8-10 given the likely earlier bids and I still think we come out slightly on top for a player that is proven and has shown match winning quality but anything over this is probably too much.

 

[bluegrass]

Hi

Sorry didnt realise that he has had a shoulder injury for years which has prevented him from putting his body on the line, effected his disposal as well as his lack of effort.....my bad

 

[Eiffel 65]

And a whole one time more than it never having been mentioned, which is what you claimed and what I was responding to.



He was well beaten tonight by an often maligned footballer who put in a terrific performance.

But the truth be told had he kicked 6 and won the game for the Swans you'd still find some silly metric to talk his game down, such is your desire to not bring him to the club.

As for this 'confidence' you speak of, please. Spare us. Suggesting he wouldn't do something because he doesn't do it currently without acknowledging the different sides, structures, game styles, needs etc. is as shallow as it gets.

I'm going to have a look at the replay tomorrow. I don't ever recall the commentators specifically saying Tom Papley or a small forward is exactly what we need. I know the play you're talking about, and I just don't recall them specifically mentioning Tom Papley or a small forward as the missing piece of the puzzle for us.

The reality is he didn't kick 6. He didn't kick any and has only kicked 3 goals since round 8. He was beaten by a maligned footballer because he's not the elite player that some are making him out to be. This isn't a one off. He's been beaten by his opponents over the last two months. He's just a good footballer and people thinking he's the one missing piece for us need a reality check because it's simply not the case. If we're looking for a pressure forward, Papley just isn't right for us. Some of his defensive efforts were atrocious tonight. Went to ground and didn't chase hard when he didn't have the ball. The moment Papley fell over and allowed plowman to walk around him was absolutely disgraceful. He has got to be better than that.

Watch the coverage again. Pregame, the actual game and post game commentary on Fox Sports and the you'll find the main point of discussion was our ball use heading inside forward 50. This is now becoming the main discussion point on other shows such as On The Couch and Footy Classified. They're not saying a small forward is our biggest area of concern anymore.

Zac Fisher played a far better game than Papley tonight and Owies looked lively. Owies could well have ended up having a few shots on goal if he executed those tackles properly. It's something to work on, but his defensive pressure looked pretty good to me. Give him a bit more time and he'll be a very good player. Just needs a bit more time to adjust but he looks a likely type.

Once again, I'm going to tell you that I believe Zac Fisher will be a better small forward than Papley with a full preseason training in the position. Your interest in Papley is either coming from underestimating Fisher's ability or overrating Papley's ability. It's one of the two.

Bring Papley across on the big coin and we're going to have a large chunk (in excess of 15% of our salary cap) tied up in two players who may only get you a combined total of 15 possessions and 1 goal per game. You won't win too many flags with that list strategy (referring to McGovern and Papley).

 

[reubsblues]

There's no way I'd give up more than 1 st round pick for papley and tbh there are plenty of other small forwards around that would cost next to nothing for me our number one priority is more midfield class Kelly Viney and Wines should be our targets

 

[reubsblues]

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

 

[Eiffel 65]

Papley was effectively playing on all of Jones, Simpson and Doc as the only forward whilst the rest of his team mates were flooding back to shut down the game.

He had next to no chance of having a meaningful influence on the result.

Next year the plan is to have him at the feet of McKay and Charlie in front of quick ball movement. Far more desirable than sitting under Sam Reid.

A pure small forward is absolutely a need. I reckon if we fill that role it’ll allow the likes of Fish and Cuners to push up a bit more and deliver it in themselves, fixing our inside 50 issue.

Your expected output is not matching reality.

This is the exact same situation as trading for Mitch McGovern.

Whatever way you look at the McGovern trade, he was never worth anywhere near what we paid for him. We gave up a lot based on potential for a player at 25 years of age who had only played 48 games.

Just take the Papley blinkers off for a second and reflect on our on field performances. We have a small forward. His name is Zac Fisher and he's currently playing better football than Papley. Did you not see his opportunistic goal tonight?

 

[Eiffel 65]

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

Did you see McAdam tonight? He was electric. Exactly the type of player we need at the moment.

Unfortunately we gave him up like a set of steak knives in that trade.

We could have had Duursma and McAdam should we have sat on our hands and not traded with the Crows.

 

[Stamos]

Watch the coverage again. Pregame, the actual game and post game commentary on Fox Sports and the you'll find the main point of discussion was our ball use heading inside forward 50. This is now becoming the main discussion point on other shows such as On The Couch and Footy Classified. They're not saying a small forward is our biggest area of concern anymore.

Zac Fisher played a far better game than Papley tonight and Owies looked lively. Owies could well have ended up having a few shots on goal if he executed those tackles properly. It's something to work on, but his defensive pressure looked pretty good to me. Give him a bit more time and he'll be a very good player. Just needs a bit more time to adjust but he looks a likely type.

Good small forwards mean it is less important how the ball enters 50. Did we crumb a pack all night?
I really like Fisher, but he's not enough. And I'm hopeful for Owies, but there's no way we can rest our hope on him yet.
We are severely lacking small forwards who can pressure the opposition in the most meaningful way, which is kicking goals, particularly from the crumb.

If you can find another good one who wants to come to us and would be cheaper than Papley, by all means make a suggestion. But it is not simply a midfield issue.