List Mgmt. 2021 List Management: Academy, Contracts, Trading & Draft

Remove this Banner Ad

Some more trade and draft resources. Courtesy of Lore.

Key Off-Season Dates
This is a comprehensive list including dates for draft combines, list lodgements, delisted free agency windows and return to train dates. I had to collate these from three different club websites because the AFL is lazy af and doesn't have it on their website, so thought it might be helpful to share:

AFL TRADE, DRAFT AND FREE AGENCY DATES 2021

AFL TRADE, DRAFT AND FREE AGENCY DATES 2021

Grand Final
Saturday September 25

Draft Combine – Vic Country
Friday October 1

Restricted and Unrestricted Free Agency Window
Friday October 1 – Friday October 8

Delisted Free Agency Window 1
Wednesday October 3 - Friday October 15

Trade Period (picks and players)
Monday October 4 (9am) – Wednesday October 13 (7.30pm)

Draft Combines (States and Regions)
VM: Saturday October 9 (tbc)
Qld: Sunday October 10
Tas: Monday October 11
SA: Saturday October 16
WA: Sunday October 17
NSW & ACT: tbc
NT: will join SA or Qld

Trade Period (picks only)
Monday October 18 – Monday November 15

List Lodgement 1
Friday October 29

Delisted Free Agency Window 2
Wednesday November 3 – Tuesday November 9

List Lodgement 2 (Final date for primary list delistings)
Wednesday November 10

Delisted Free Agency Window 3
Thursday November 11 – Monday November 15

AFL Pre-Season Commences (First to fourth year players)
Monday November 22

National Draft
Round 1: Wednesday November 24 (7pm)
Round 2–end: Thursday November 25 (7pm)

Preseason and Rookie Drafts
Friday November 26 (3.20pm)

Final List Lodgement
Monday November 29

Pre-Season Commences (All other players)
Monday December 6

Pre-Season Supplemental Selection Period (SSP)
December - March (tbc)

Pre-Season Christmas Break
Sunday December 19 - Sunday January 9

Draft Order & Future Pick Tracker



FAQs & Resources Thread

It has an index at the top with threadmarks so it's easy to find what you're looking for – or easier than scrolling through 250 pages of AFL Rules, Regulations and CBA pdfs anyway.

These sorts of questions are all answered along with a bunch of other resources made by posters from across BigFooty (feel free to add to it!):
www.bigfooty.com

Resource - FAQs: Rules, Regulations and Resources for Player Movements in the AFL

List sizes Club age and height profiles Salary cap information Trading rules including salary dumps Father/son & academy draft bids Free agency compensation formula & more
www.bigfooty.com www.bigfooty.com

GWS List Summary

Senior List

33: 36 less delisted Shipley & Hutchesson, delisted Wehr (to be reselected in rookie draft), traded Finlayson, plus DFA signing of Brander. 3 to 5 spots available at ND.

1 Phil Davis - 2022
2 Jacob Hopper - 2023
3 Stephen Coniglio - 2026
4 Toby Greene - 2026
5 Tanner Bruhn - 2022
6 Lachie Whitfield - 2027
7 Lachlan Ash - 2023
8 Callan Ward - 2022
9 Ryan Angwin - 2022
10 Jacob Wehr - 2022 [delisted with an agreement to select in the rookie draft]
11 Brayden Preuss - 2023
12 Tom Green - 2023
13 Isaac Cumming - 2022
14 Tim Taranto - 2022
15 Sam Taylor - 2025
16 Brent Daniels - 2025
18 Conor Stone - 2024
19 Nick Haynes - 2024
22 Josh Kelly - 2029
23 Jesse Hogan - 2022
24 Matthew De Boer - 2022
25 Lachlan Keeffe - 2022
26 Jake Riccardi - 2023
27 Harry Himmelberg - 2023
29 Cam Fleeton - 2022
30 Matt Flynn - 2023
32 Kieran Briggs - 2022
33 Xavier O'Halloran - 2022
36 Harry Perryman - 2022
37 Ian Hill - 2022
39 Connor Idun - 2022
40 Adam Kennedy - 2022
44 Jack Buckley - 2022

+ Jarrod Brander - 2022 (selected in first DFA window)

Rookie List - A

4: 7 less delisted Reid & Buntine, retired Shane Mumford. 0 to 2 spots available for rookie draft.

28 Zach Sproule - 2022
38 Daniel Lloyd - 2022
42 Jake Stein - 2022
45 James Peatling - 2022

Rookie List - B

2: full

35 Will Shaw - 2022
46 Callum M Brown - 2022 (Irish international rookie, extended 1 year under COVID rules)
 
Last edited:
Andre the Giant said:
Unless Bruhn is prepared to re-sign and prove the draft night vision wrong he should be put on the backburner. He really should have re-signed by now.

I think he’s a good player but fans and clubs value loyalty. Hopefully he does the honourable thing soon.
Click to expand...
JFC he's played one season and is now in his first off season, probably tryna figure out how to balance having a break with maintaining fitness, I reckon alarm bells are warranted in August next year but at this stage we dont even know if GWS have approached him to re-sign
 
PMBangers said:
JFC he's played one season and is now in his first off season, probably tryna figure out how to balance having a break with maintaining fitness, I reckon alarm bells are warranted in August next year but at this stage we dont even know if GWS have approached him to re-sign
Click to expand...
Of course we would have.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

PMBangers said:
JFC he's played one season and is now in his first off season, probably tryna figure out how to balance having a break with maintaining fitness, I reckon alarm bells are warranted in August next year but at this stage we dont even know if GWS have approached him to re-sign
Click to expand...

I guess what I’m saying mate is that we have to play percentages, sometimes the kids do wait a little longer, it’s been a messed up COVID environment and some leeway is there.

But we do know there were doubts after the draft night reaction and Stone re-committed so offers have been tabled. He said he was looking to do something end of this year so hopefully that eventuates.

His management group are known to push their kids to try to sign at least one extension beyond the original deal so hopefully they do this and he does another 2 years.

If he hasn’t signed within a month of next season I would start planning away from him.

If there were any doubts from discussions or the end of season review then we would be foolish not to take Callaghan.

We probably should take him anyway as he does look the surest bet and remember Taranto is out of contract next year and will be heavily in demand.

For team balance TT might be the sacrificial lamb along with the looming salary cap crunch.
 
Marcel Proust said:
"
Rich give: #7,#15 & 2022 Rich 2nd Round
Rich receive: #2 and GWS 2022 3rd Round"

What are your thoughts on that one? From the afl podcasts
Click to expand...
It all comes down to what AC decides the priority is of course. If Callaghan is too good to pass up the whole point is done. But for the sake of bigfooty let’s say we are keen on a few options (Andrews/gibcus/rachele/) it’s likely we will still get one of them at 7 so that trade might work for us

However…. If the rumored hawks trade is a possibility then obv that’s the priority
 
Last edited:
The more I think about it, the more I like Gibcus for our first pick. It would shore up our tall defence for the next ten years.

Guys like XOH are growing into their roles on the wing etc., so I don’t reckon we really need Callaghan.

I know we have Buckley, but how do we know how he’s going to go after such a big injury.
Taylor and Gibcus as our two back men…
Pretty tempting.
 
If they take Callaghan and he turns out to be a dud it’s a forgivable mistake as he is the consensus pick for our selection.

If we take Andrew, Rachele or Gibcus we could make a case but they could look silly reaches if they don’t work out.

If we take one of the latter via our pick or through a trade down and Callaghan turns out a superior play or star it will be an unforgivable mistake.

The percentage play is Callaghan.
 
The percentage play is to take either Callaghan or Rachele at our first selection as one of either Gibcus or Mac will likely still be on the board long enough for us to move our 2nd pick to get the tall as well. While if we go with one of the talls at our 1st selection both Callaghan and Rachele will go too early to be a chance at getting one of them.
 
Andre the Giant said:
If they take Callaghan and he turns out to be a dud it’s a forgivable mistake as he is the consensus pick for our selection.

If we take Andrew, Rachele or Gibcus we could make a case but they could look silly reaches if they don’t work out.

If we take one of the latter via our pick or through a trade down and Callaghan turns out a superior play or star it will be an unforgivable mistake.

The percentage play is Callaghan.
Click to expand...
I'm probably most aligned to these thoughts, although I can see the pros & cons of selecting each of the 4 main options. I don't think we have too many midfielders, and indeed, the skills that Callaghan would bring would certainly benefit our current team balance which is a bit too inside really. Of course, he may push one of the current mids out, but if that improves the team then so be it.

captainMyCaptain said:
The percentage play is to take either Callaghan or Rachele at our first selection as one of either Gibcus or Mac will likely still be on the board long enough for us to move our 2nd pick to get the tall as well. While if we go with one of the talls at our 1st selection both Callaghan and Rachele will go too early to be a chance at getting one of them.
Click to expand...
I'm conscious of this too, that all may not be lost for one of the talls by taking the highest talent first. A nice possibility at least.
 
captainMyCaptain said:
The percentage play is to take either Callaghan or Rachele at our first selection as one of either Gibcus or Mac will likely still be on the board long enough for us to move our 2nd pick to get the tall as well. While if we go with one of the talls at our 1st selection both Callaghan and Rachele will go too early to be a chance at getting one of them.
Click to expand...
I think rachele over Callaghan only if we have traded down with gold coast or to convert 2,13 to 4,8
 
sydney_gws said:
I think rachele over Callaghan only if we have traded down with gold coast or to convert 2,13 to 4,8
Click to expand...
Yes, I can live with that too - particularly the latter. Rachele as a small forward with midfield potential plus one of the talls might provide a more balanced addition to the list. IMHO, it would effectively rely on GWS seeing Lachie Ash as equivalent to Fin Callaghan in terms of the skills & role he can play.
 
Andre the Giant said:
If they take Callaghan and he turns out to be a dud it’s a forgivable mistake as he is the consensus pick for our selection.

If we take Andrew, Rachele or Gibcus we could make a case but they could look silly reaches if they don’t work out.

If we take one of the latter via our pick or through a trade down and Callaghan turns out a superior play or star it will be an unforgivable mistake.

The percentage play is Callaghan.
Click to expand...
I reckon the question here is why do you care if we “look silly”

Occasionally early players bust. But did Melbourne look silly cos or trengrove or Toupas?

They looked silly cos of the result. But the league accepts some players don’t turn out as expected. Do we look silly regarding ahern and picket?

It’s a luck of the draw thing… nobody can predict the future and in a covid affected year it’s a free shot
 
Danny88 said:
I reckon the question here is why do you care if we “look silly”

Occasionally early players bust. But did Melbourne look silly cos or trengrove or Toupas?

They looked silly cos of the result. But the league accepts some players don’t turn out as expected. Do we look silly regarding ahern and picket?

It’s a luck of the draw thing… nobody can predict the future and in a covid affected year it’s a free shot
Click to expand...

This is an ignorant post.

If you are involved in talent evaluation in any field it is accepted you will not always get it right.

You are in effect a risk manager. What determines risk is the information, the known vs the unknown. I do it in my job, don’t get it right all the time, but make calculated decisions taking into account risk vs reward.

Some mistakes we make are forgivable because the information makes the decision line ball, other times there are clear differences or even red flags which mean if you take the risk you can be open to heavy criticism.

Im not saying I know Callaghan is a better player than Andrew. Andrew could end up a champion, but on the information that is clearly out there Callaghan is the best available option at our selection. This isn’t just my view but the view of many talent evaluators in the space.

When Silvagni ignored the information and our list needs and failed to select Brody Grundy with 5 selections in the top 14 picks he took a risk as Grundy was a consensus top 3 selection. He got it wrong and history tells us it was an horrific mistake.

At the top of the draft you should always take the best player, if you get cute and start picking just for assumed needs you can make terrible errors.

I won’t be slashing wrists if we take any of the mentioned guys but some carry far more risk than others which is the thrust of my post.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Andre the Giant said:
other times there are clear differences or even red flags which mean if you take the risk you can be open to heavy criticism.
Click to expand...

see, to me “I want to play for the dogs and I’ve spoken to Bevo about it” is one of the redest of red red flags I think I’ve ever seen waved in front of my face.

I don’t care how good he is, or will become, if we draft him we get two years and two years only out of him. Is it worth it then?
I suppose it’s symmetrical - 2 years for a pick 2.

personally, I don’t think it’s worth it.
 
Ichabod Noodle said:
see, to me “I want to play for the dogs and I’ve spoken to Bevo about it” is one of the redest of red red flags I think I’ve ever seen waved in front of my face.

I don’t care how good he is, or will become, if we draft him we get two years and two years only out of him. Is it worth it then?
I suppose it’s symmetrical - 2 years for a pick 2.

personally, I don’t think it’s worth it.
Click to expand...

Did you listen to the interview and the context in which he said that? He was just led into talking about the connection and said in an off the cuff manner it would be nice.

This wasn’t like Archie Perkins who flat out said he would prefer to stay in Victoria or Bailey Smith who had a medical report saying he had a condition that required him to be close to his family.

Callaghan is as much a risk as Andrew, Gibcus or Rachele. If any of them dont get a game or get injured or fail to make friends they may want to go home.

The challenge is providing an environment where they settle and want to buy in. I wouldn’t buy too much into the SEN click bait tweet.
 
Andre the Giant said:
This is an ignorant post.

If you are involved in talent evaluation in any field it is accepted you will not always get it right.

You are in effect a risk manager. What determines risk is the information, the known vs the unknown. I do it in my job, don’t get it right all the time, but make calculated decisions taking into account risk vs reward.

Some mistakes we make are forgivable because the information makes the decision line ball, other times there are clear differences or even red flags which mean if you take the risk you can be open to heavy criticism.

Im not saying I know Callaghan is a better player than Andrew. Andrew could end up a champion, but on the information that is clearly out there Callaghan is the best available option at our selection. This isn’t just my view but the view of many talent evaluators in the space.

When Silvagni ignored the information and our list needs and failed to select Brody Grundy with 5 selections in the top 14 picks he took a risk as Grundy was a consensus top 3 selection. He got it wrong and history tells us it was an horrific mistake.

At the top of the draft you should always take the best player, if you get cute and start picking just for assumed needs you can make terrible errors.

I won’t be slashing wrists if we take any of the mentioned guys but some carry far more risk than others which is the thrust of my post.
Click to expand...
An ignorant post? You are a twat
 
David C said:
It's pretty close between the two, there will be arguments both ways. I think both clubs are happy with their selection and they are both ahead of McGrath (at this stage) for mine.
Click to expand...

Absolutely .... And Shai would be around the top 5 in that draft too .... although Tom Stewart is the standout No. 1
 
Last edited:
Orange crush said:
Absolutely .... And Shai would be around the top 5 in that draft too .... although Tom Stewart is the standout No. 1
Click to expand...
Tom Stewart for what he has done so far, but he is 28 now so probably won't have as long career as Taranto, Mcluggage, McGrath ( and all 3 of those have probably not peaked yet).
 
sydney_gws said:
Tom Stewart for what he has done so far, but he is 28 now so probably won't have as long career as Taranto, Mcluggage, McGrath ( and all 3 of those have probably not peaked yet).
Click to expand...

Can only judge on what they’ve done .... but I’m still happier with TT than the other mids
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Giant Strides
  • Sticky
List Mgmt. 2024 GWS Giants List Management - Academy, Free Agent, Trade & Draft
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
256
Views
16K
Danny88
Danny88
Giant Strides
List Mgmt. 2023 GWS Giants List Management - Academy, Free Agent, Trade, Draft
110 111 112 113 114
Replies
3K
Views
93K
Orange crush
Orange crush
Giant Strides
List Mgmt. AFLW Trade & Draft 2023
2
Replies
47
Views
2K
captainMyCaptain
captainMyCaptain
Giant Strides
Welcome 2023 National Draft #59 - Harvey Thomas (Turvey Park FC, NSW, Allies, Wesley College, Oakleigh Chargers, GWS Academy)
Replies
1
Views
516
Giant Pete
Giant Pete
Giant Strides
Welcome 2023 Cat B Rookie Selection - Nathan Wardius (Rand-Walbundrie-Walla FC, former GWS Academy)
Replies
0
Views
400
Giant Strides
Giant Strides
Giant Strides
Welcome 2023 AFLW National Draft Pick #40 - Indigo Linde (Eastern Ranges)
Replies
0
Views
979
Giant Strides
Giant Strides
Giant Strides
Welcome 2023 AFLW National Draft #3 - Kaitlyn Srhoj (Peel Thunder, WA)
Replies
1
Views
558
Giant Strides
Giant Strides

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top