List Mgmt. 2021 Trade and List Management thread III. IN: CCJ

[kool kangas]

After listening to the Q&A interview l have no doubt that North have a game plan to get the players that they want and back up plans also in regards to if they player they are after is taken before them. Trades will only be done if its to our advantage ,and, if not then North keep the picks that they have and it also sounds like we will be getting someone in the PSD....So l'm happy with the way things are travelling atm..

 

[King Corey]

Again I have no issue lynch as a coach

my issue is lynch taking a spot on the afl playing list over a rookie or potential msd player etc

I don't see why you questioning the status quo here is getting backlash. We're forgoing a rookie spot in favour of a development coach.

It's not the end of the world but considering in the last decade we find a "player" about once in every 8 draft & rookie picks, then you'd hope the club has done some solid risk analysis on effectively giving up a pick.

 

[krakouers]

I don't see why you questioning the status quo here is getting backlash. We're forgoing a rookie spot in favour of a development coach.

It's not the end of the world but considering in the last decade we find a "player" about once in every 8 draft & rookie picks, then you'd hope the club has done some solid risk analysis on effectively giving up a pick.

If he retires mid way through the season, we could pay him out for the next <insert Contract Length> ? And it could free up a MSD spot?

 

[Devington]

I don't see why you questioning the status quo here is getting backlash. We're forgoing a rookie spot in favour of a development coach.

It's not the end of the world but considering in the last decade we find a "player" about once in every 8 draft & rookie picks, then you'd hope the club has done some solid risk analysis on effectively giving up a pick.

It's a good debate. There are obvious pros and cons to the decision. Personally I'm happy with the decision but I understand that it's not ideal and even if it has benefits it does come with a cost. I think we'll probably gain more by ensuring Lynch gets here and is on the rookie list than if we grabbed one more player, but it's just an opinion on a decision that we might well come to regret.

If he retires mid way through the season, we could pay him out for the next <insert Contract Length> ? And it could free up a MSD spot?

As lovely as that sounds I suspect the AFL would actually raise an eyebrow, unlike the actual signing of Lynch to the rookie list in an obvious attempt to partially skirt around the soft cap.

 

[King Corey]

If he retires mid way through the season, we could pay him out for the next <insert Contract Length> ? And it could free up a MSD spot?

Quite possibly. Just notice that sometimes a poster merely questioning a club decision gets derided for no real reason.

The big picture might well be what you say. They've assessed the talent pool, only see a depth of X players across both drafts and figure pick #19 in the rookie draft has no great opportunity cost. And they have a transition plan for Tom in the exact manner you describe.

 

[Sticksphat]

Again I have no issue lynch as a coach

my issue is lynch taking a spot on the afl playing list over a rookie or potential msd player etc

I take the view that by having Lynch on the playing list we can fit an extra coach or support staff under the soft cap. I feel extra support there with a young list is better value all around than another rookie pick.

 

[Nutjob]

if other teams can manage to fit staff in the soft cap without listing them on the rookie list (bar port) I can’t see why we cant

Other clubs are doing the same thing. Port did it with Goldsack and Brisbane did it with Hodge and there could be others. We are tight with our soft cap and have a massive hole to fill with our player salary, it’s smart business.

From all reports he is a very switched on guy and Adelaide themselves offered him a coaching role.

You can look at what we lose out of this which is a rookie spot for a young kid. But he could potentially help develop our current young crop to be better players compared to if he was never there.

I also think he is a decent player and would be great support for our young forward line on and off the field.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[krakouers]

Quite possibly. Just notice that sometimes a poster merely questioning a club decision gets derided for no real reason.
The big picture might well be what you say. They've assessed the talent pool, only see a depth of X players across both drafts and figure pick #19 in the rookie draft has no great opportunity cost. And they have a transition plan for Tom in the exact manner you describe.

I take the view that by having Lynch on the playing list we can fit an extra coach or support staff under the soft cap. I feel extra support there with a young list is better value all around than another rookie pick.

Hopefully we end up with as minimal injuries as possible and we don't have to utilize replacement players but I can understand if the club is hesitant on players who haven't had much exposure for the last two years. Think we could do with an open list spot.

As lovely as that sounds I suspect the AFL would actually raise an eyebrow, unlike the actual signing of Lynch to the rookie list in an obvious attempt to partially skirt around the soft cap.

Its still acceptable, as long as we cover all the requirements, he can get paid out for the term of his contract and get retained on the VFL list cheaply, you could get a deal where he doesn't get a full coaches salary to circumvent the soft cap and not exceed the salary cap
Just looking at possible solutions that could result in freeing up a list spot if need be. FWIW I don't think its a bad thing to have Lynch but I can understand why some may be skeptic

 

[Nutjob]

Well yeah we could have but lynch taking a spot

4 spots will be used in the national draft

you’d imagine we use rookie pick number 1 also
Then there’s the chance still of a dfa or psd which could include the best 18 year old not drafted

We will get a LTI. Tell me the last year we didn’t have one by the half way point of the year.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[The Dingrel]

Lynch will play games in the afl.

Also if ham was not up to it , why did they wait so long to delist him.

6mth contract? Are you referring to announcing it to the public?

 

[The Nostradamus]

I don't see why you questioning the status quo here is getting backlash. We're forgoing a rookie spot in favour of a development coach.

It's not the end of the world but considering in the last decade we find a "player" about once in every 8 draft & rookie picks, then you'd hope the club has done some solid risk analysis on effectively giving up a pick.

Quite possibly. Just notice that sometimes a poster merely questioning a club decision gets derided for no real reason.

The big picture might well be what you say. They've assessed the talent pool, only see a depth of X players across both drafts and figure pick #19 in the rookie draft has no great opportunity cost. And they have a transition plan for Tom in the exact manner you describe.

Well said

this might be a surprise to people but the club doesn’t always make the right decisions

and pick 19 in the rookie draft they may be undervaluing

ideally we would have both an extra rookie pick and lynch join as a dev coach only

which begs the question how tight is our soft cap? Could there have been a way to smooth his contract to all fit in the soft cap or are we seriously at the very last dollar of it?

 

[krakouers]

which begs the question how tight is our soft cap? Could there have been a way to smooth his contract to all fit in the soft cap or are we seriously at the very last dollar of it?

We may not be that tight, but have a view that what we do spend needs to be reviewed, and the ability to utilize our salary cap space in this fashion may be more appealing than in the soft cap.

Have gone on a bit of a recruitment spree the last couple of years off field too

 

[El Triggso]

Well said

this might be a surprise to people but the club doesn’t always make the right decisions

and pick 19 in the rookie draft they may be undervaluing

ideally we would have both an extra rookie pick and lynch join as a dev coach only

which begs the question how tight is our soft cap? Could there have been a way to smooth his contract to all fit in the soft cap or are we seriously at the very last dollar of it?

Agree that the club aren’t beyond reproach.

In this case it’s no doubt more than a binary choice of Lynch v a ‘genuine’ Rookie.

I assume it’s more like; Lynch + a brand new conditioning team + ??? versus a ‘genuine’ rookie.

To milk the system for the betterment of the whole list, it’s more sense obviously to list Lynch rather than the new conditioning bloke.

 

[SonofSamsquanch]

We will get a LTI.

Corr insurance (and I'm not saying anything about getting Lion on the line.... Back to you in the box Chappelli).

 

[giantroo]

 

[krakouers]

Loading up for Ashcroft

 

[giantroo]

Looks like TC will get another chance

 

[Shinboner1]

Looks like TC will get another chance

To be fair he is very good cover for a team looking to push for finals and in need of a stopgap.
Does much better as the #1 ruckman with a forward-ruck as cover during rotations.

 

[Ligma]

Looks like TC will get another chance

So happy for him!

 

[LB2Snake]

Loading up for Ashcroft

Plays at my son’s school. He’s a jet. So is the younger brother who is my son’s year. Played firsts this year and he’s in year 9.

 

[Kangaroos techno]

Lynch will play games in the afl.

Judging by his interview when it was first floated he isn't all that keen to play.

Priority is development and play VFL if he needs to. Sounds like that is the priority and he knows he can get himself up for VFL but a different story for AFL games. Probably more to his niggling foot injury.

 

[Shinboner1]

Not sure we need brander tbh
Being courted by GWS and other clubs atm too.
Doesn't really provide much outside of being tall and can run.

 

[The Filth Wizard]

Not sure we need brander tbh
Being courted by GWS and other clubs atm too.
Doesn't really provide much outside of being tall and can run.
View attachment 1265814
View attachment 1265815

Yeah, he's really got no position, so he can't be anything we need. The more I look at the list of players that have been delisted (without assurances to be relisted) the only one I can see us really looking at is Jack Lonie (he's decent and a bit manic when hungry) but I'm not enthused across the board.

 

[Shinboner1]

Yeah, he's really got no position, so he can't be anything we need. The more I look at the list of players that have been delisted (without assurances to be relisted) the only one I can see us really looking at is Jack Lonie (he's decent and a bit manic when hungry) but I'm not enthused across the board.

Just take a pressure small forward in the draft.

 

[The Filth Wizard]

Just take a pressure small forward in the draft.

Yep. This is what I'd rather see. If we get to the rookie draft with an extra pick after pick 1 then maybe a delisted free agent but there's not a single one I think is worth a senior spot.