List Mgmt. 2020 List Management

[Aphrodite]

JeSOS Footywire is not accurate.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Still enjoying this fascination with Papley

Now we are leaning on, if Papley was in a better side, his output would be better. That can be true to some extent, but it is minimal and certainly doesn't change his value, which it seems has gone down to a more realistic value

Couple of weeks ago, Taberner and Dixon were averaging the same number of goals, yet, Dockers were averaging 11 less inside 50's

Does that mean Taberner would kick more goals in a better side and or is worth more than a Dixon? Clearly not

Reality is starting to kick in, Papley is worth +/- a mid first only

Interesting part, he still isn't the best valued and or most versatile small forward

Implying that those who want Papley want to sell the farm for him.

It’s always been our first round pick for me. Whether that’s 7 or 10 or 12. When a gun player (in a position of need) wants to come and wants to buy into what you’re doing you get the deal done.

 

[Arr0w]

Implying that those who want Papley want to sell the farm for him.

It’s always been our first round pick for me. Whether that’s 7 or 10 or 12. When a gun player (in a position of need) wants to come and wants to buy into what you’re doing you get the deal done.

You and I may agree on his value, but others were stating much more while it was "coleman papley"

Here is thing, trade periods should be the sum of all parts, as one player doesn't make you dramatically better

Lions brought in a B/C grade type in McCarthy as a forward that could do stints around the ball, but it allowed them enough currency to target Neale

Saints picked up Butler for a 4th rounder, better output by position than Jones who was effectively a late 2nd, better output than Hill, especially considering cost

You don't give up midfield currency on a small forward

 

[HARKER]

You and I may agree on his value, but others were stating much more while it was "coleman papley"

Here is thing, trade periods should be the sum of all parts, as one player doesn't make you dramatically better

Lions brought in a B/C grade type in McCarthy as a forward that could do stints around the ball, but it allowed them enough currency to target Neale

Saints picked up Butler for a 4th rounder, better output by position than Jones who was effectively a late 2nd, better output than Hill, especially considering cost

You don't give up midfield currency on a small forward

Don't worry about all these 'others'
Why do we do this all the time? It's those 'others' that have it wrong...always those dirty others.
Let's see what pans out before we pay out on all these all-too-often unmentionables.

No matter what we do....if...if...the situation is open, we cannot let go of next years first.
No problem losing this years first but next years first must be kept intact for what may front up when we know more about our squad.

 

[Arr0w]

Don't worry about all these 'others'
Why do we do this all the time? It's those 'others' that have it wrong...always those dirty others.
Let's see what pans out before we pay out on all these all-too-often unmentionables.

No matter what we do....if...if...the situation is open, we cannot let go of next years first.
No problem losing this years first but next years first must be kept intact for what may front up when we know more about our squad.

Shouldn't mention "others"? How else do you debate a situation if you don't include the scope of what people were suggesting we give up?

Happy to trade next year's first, if it gains us the "right" pieces

 

[HARKER]

Shouldn't mention "others"? How else do you debate a situation if you don't include the scope of what people were suggesting we give up?
Happy to trade next year's first, if it gains us the "right" pieces

All we're doing here is playing List Manager and how can any of us get it all right, if the people in charge can't always do so?

For me -

This years first and even next years second for Papley may be seen to be too much , but I'd do it because it makes us immediately better.
Should we know that we have Williams, it makes that exercise even somewhat easier given the value going out for what's coming in.
I don't think we need to be too stingy or steadfast, given our list. If the right deal is there to be done, then do it and move on.

Next years first though: We'll have a much better idea where we stand in the pecking order at next years end and even to a point after the pre-season.
Reserve that first and whatever else may have to go along with it, for all being well....the final piece of the puzzle.
Who knows what that may yet be. It may be a KPD for all we know right now. Be careful with that first, is what I'd do.

 

[DangerousD]

Hi I’m DangerousD and I have a problem, I was seduced by Papleys great start to the season and in a desperate attempt to gain his services, I was more than happy to part with two first rounders (provided we got something back), how could I have been so stupid? It’s madness, I just want the Carlton football club to be great again and got carried away.

Tom seems like a nice guy and I’d still love him at the club, but my hand is up, I acknowledge my errors and am seeking help, I’ll do my best for it not to happen again.

Thanks for having me and thanks for letting me get that off my chest.

 

[Arr0w]

All we're doing here is playing List Manager and how can any of us get it all right, if the people in charge can't always do so?

For me -

This years first and even next years second for Papley may be seen to be too much , but I'd do it because it makes us immediately better.
Should we know that we have Williams, it makes that exercise even somewhat easier given the value going out for what's coming in.
I don't think we need to be too stingy or steadfast, given our list. If the right deal is there to be done, then do it and move on.

Next years first though: We'll have a much better idea where we stand in the pecking order at next years end and even to a point after the pre-season.
Reserve that first and whatever else may have to go along with it, for all being well....the final piece of the puzzle.
Who knows what that may yet be. It may be a KPD for all we know right now. Be careful with that first, is what I'd do.

I would do it differently

Target Williams as a FA

I would offer this year's 1st to the Lions for Witherden and their 1st

Then one of the following options

1. Lions 1st and possibly exchanging later picks for Parfitt, who has more versatility

2. Lions 1st for Narkle and a 2nd

3 Jack Lonie for a late pick, where we can target the right mid for the 2 1st rounders we still have

 

[HARKER]

I would do it differently

Target Williams as a FA
I would offer this year's 1st to the Lions for Witherden and their 1st

Then one of the following options
1. Lions 1st and possibly exchanging later picks for Parfitt, who has more versatility
2. Lions 1st for Narkle and a 2nd
3 Jack Lonie for a late pick, where we can target the right mid for the 2 1st rounders we still have

OK, but that looks too heavy on 'maybe' players to me.
Again I don't see the need for depth for depths sake. Just get the right players from the get go and develop what we have.

What would a team look like next year with Williams, Narkle, Parfitt, Lonie and Witherden involved.
We know that when we recruit players, we generally find starting spots for them over what we have.

Out of what you've put forward and besides the obvious Williams, I'd be having a look at Parfitt. The others not so much so....but you have an interesting take.

 

[GT619]

I would do it differently

Target Williams as a FA

I would offer this year's 1st to the Lions for Witherden and their 1st

Then one of the following options

1. Lions 1st and possibly exchanging later picks for Parfitt, who has more versatility

2. Lions 1st for Narkle and a 2nd

3 Jack Lonie for a late pick, where we can target the right mid for the 2 1st rounders we still have

I'm big fan of parfitt

 

[BigBreakfast]

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!

Getting Plowed!

 

[Arr0w]

OK, but that looks too heavy on 'maybe' players to me.
Again I don't see the need for depth for depths sake. Just get the right players from the get go and develop what we have.

What would a team look like next year with Williams, Narkle, Parfitt, Lonie and Witherden involved.
We know that when we recruit players, we generally find starting spots for them over what we have.

Out of what you've put forward and besides the obvious Williams, I'd be having a look at Parfitt. The others not so much so....but you have an interesting take.

Perhaps I didn't outline it clearly

Williams, Witherden

Then 1 of Parfitt, Narkle or Lonie

Williams is a natural replacement for Murphy, Witherden for Simmo

Anyone of the other 3 would be starting 22 IMHO, considered a replacement for Betts, all of whom have more versatility

So it really doesn't increase the numbers

 

[Karma Train]

I would do it differently

Target Williams as a FA

I would offer this year's 1st to the Lions for Witherden and their 1st

Then one of the following options

1. Lions 1st and possibly exchanging later picks for Parfitt, who has more versatility

2. Lions 1st for Narkle and a 2nd

3 Jack Lonie for a late pick, where we can target the right mid for the 2 1st rounders we still have

A first round pick should not be used for players like Witherden & Narkle. A 2nd should suffice for Witherden. As for Narkle - a 3rd round pick is also enough. And I would not touch Lonie. You are paying way overs.

 

[Jeremias]

2. Lions 1st for Narkle and a 2nd

Please no.

Happy to look at Narkle, but he's a fringe, out of contract, soon to be 23 year old.

Very open to moving a first round pick but for the right player only, and Narkle is not the right player. He's not worth any more than a 3rd round pick.

 

[Arr0w]

A first round pick should not be used for players like Witherden & Narkle. A 2nd should suffice for Witherden. As for Narkle - a 3rd round pick is also enough. And I would not touch Lonie. You are paying way overs.

Perhaps revisit what I posted

With a this year's 1st you could acquire Witherden, Narkle and a 2nd rounder

Not touch Lonie, like Butler being worth only a 4th rounder?

Were you also in the camp of McCarthy not worth picking up for a 4th rounder?

Anyone of those players would be in our side right now

 

[swuzzlebubble]

With a this year's 1st you could acquire Witherden, Narkle and a 2nd

I think we need one match winner more than a few role players.

 

[Arr0w]

Please no.

Happy to look at Narkle, but he's a fringe, out of contract, soon to be 23 year old.

Very open to moving a first round pick but for the right player only, and Narkle is not the right player. He's not worth any more than a 3rd round pick.

Lions 1st, I reiterate Lion's 1st

Why would you think Narkle is a fringe player, is it possible they have better options?

Narkle is a walkup start in our side

 

[Arr0w]

I think we need one match winner more than a few role players.

We have plenty of match winners

 

[Karma Train]

Perhaps revisit what I posted

With a this year's 1st you could acquire Witherden, Narkle and a 2nd rounder

Not touch Lonie, like Butler being worth only a 4th rounder?

Were you also in the camp of McCarthy not worth picking up for a 4th rounder?

Anyone of those players would be in our side right now

No I would not give up a first rounder to secure those types. How about keep our first rounder and get Witherdon with a 2nd? Makes more sense to me.As for Narkle - why would you bother? Does he add much to what we already have? Rather give games to Dow, Stocker and LOB to be honest. I actually liked McCarthy and would give up a 4th for him. But I don't rate Lonie at all. Selfish, limited footballer. Butler showed a lot more than him.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

We have plenty of match winners

Cottrell and Newnes?

 

[Arr0w]

No I would not give up a first rounder to secure those types. How about keep our first rounder and get Witherdon with a 2nd? Makes more sense to me.As for Narkle - why would you bother? Does he add much to what we already have? Rather give games to Dow, Stocker and LOB to be honest. I actually liked McCarthy and would give up a 4th for him. But I don't rate Lonie at all. Selfish, limited footballer. Butler showed a lot more than him.

I disagree

None of Dow, Stocker or LOB are natural forwards, just like Cuners

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Those arguing the McGovern trade may be missing the intangibles of the trade. Someone who had value nominated us. This was an important step in getting other players to the club. He was certainly better for the Crows than he has been for us so far so I'm not going to judge his price based on where he currently is.

I don't necessarily think the same haggling that got the Crows #13 was also available to us at the time we needed it. I also don't think McAdam was valued as a top 20 picks by most clubs as has been suggested. He simply didn't have the body of work as a Tim Kelly or Liam Ryan behind him.

 

[Arr0w]

Cottrell and Newnes?

Charlie, Harry, Fisher, Kemp, Honey, Stocker etc all have xfactor

And I would classify the likes of Parfitt and Nakle as fit soldiers either

 

[Karma Train]

I disagree

None of Dow, Stocker or LOB are natural forwards, just like Cuners

True they are not natural forwards. But is Lonie AFL standard? Not for me.

 

[Arr0w]

True they are not natural forwards. But is Lonie AFL standard? Not for me.

Butler is keeping him out of the side, that's no disgrace

Everytime he plays, he hits the scoreboard more often than not, applies good pressure and tackles and has a massive tank