Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. 2021 Trade Thread - Part I

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Delisted;
-

Traded;
-

Retired;
Jake Carlisle
Shaun McKernan

Current Players Out of Contract;
3. Zak Jones - Link
6. Sebastian Ross (RFA) - Link
7. Luke Dunstan (RFA) - Link
13. Jack Lonie - Link
15. Jack Billings (RFA) - Link
18. Patrick Ryder - Link
24. James Frawley - Link
25. Dean Kent - Link
38. Oscar Clavarino - Link
39. Darragh Joyce - Link
41. Paul Hunter - Link
42. Max Heath - Link
45. Sam Alabakis - Link


To see the full list (it gets updated regularly) visit this thread;

List & Contract Status

SENIOR LIST 1. Jack Higgins 2. Marcus Windhager 3. Zak Jones 4. Lance Collard 5. Brad Crouch 6. Sebastian Ross 7. Nasiah Wanganeen-Milera 8. Bradley Hill 9. Jack Steele 10. Mitchito Owens 11. Hunter Clark 12. Max King 13. Ryan Byrnes 14. Liam Stocker 15. Paddy Dow 16. Daniel Butler 17. Isaac...
www.bigfooty.com www.bigfooty.com
 
lewdogs said:
He was a gun mid in juniors so who knows... probably needs a bigger tank.

Got a feeling a few might get themselves super fit next off season. This season could be the wake up call we need.
Click to expand...

I keep feeling we are building something special...this year might be the best piece of all in a macabre sort of way.
 
FWIW, pick 7 is equivalent in points to picks 39, 40, 41, AND 42. If you had the chance, would you do that this year? One into four? With all the retirements and delistings, it might be the year to consider something along those lines. Or 7 for 32+33+34, so all in the second round. Or 44+45+46+47+48. How many do we want to take? How about a mix, 19+44+45?

It shows the possiblities. Of course the lower we finish, the more we have to work with.

Unfortunately, by the end of this season our list will not only still be missing quality, but quantity as well. I think we have a better chance of finding guns with multiple later picks than a single high pick, that's just far too risky, especially where our list is at.
 
Munga said:
FWIW, pick 7 is equivalent in points to picks 39, 40, 41, AND 42. If you had the chance, would you do that this year? One into four? With all the retirements and delistings, it might be the year to consider something along those lines. Or 7 for 32+33+34, so all in the second round. Or 44+45+46+47+48. How many do we want to take? How about a mix, 19+44+45?

It shows the possiblities. Of course the lower we finish, the more we have to work with.

Unfortunately, by the end of this season our list will not only still be missing quality, but quantity as well. I think we have a better chance of finding guns with multiple later picks than a single high pick, that's just far too risky, especially where our list is at.
Click to expand...

We’ll have a top 8 pick.
We’d better use it. The best player we can get and preferably a mid. You want a gun you pick as high up as possible.
worry about the rest after.
 
Munga said:
FWIW, pick 7 is equivalent in points to picks 39, 40, 41, AND 42. If you had the chance, would you do that this year? One into four? With all the retirements and delistings, it might be the year to consider something along those lines. Or 7 for 32+33+34, so all in the second round. Or 44+45+46+47+48. How many do we want to take? How about a mix, 19+44+45?

It shows the possiblities. Of course the lower we finish, the more we have to work with.

Unfortunately, by the end of this season our list will not only still be missing quality, but quantity as well. I think we have a better chance of finding guns with multiple later picks than a single high pick, that's just far too risky, especially where our list is at.
Click to expand...

I absolutely hate this notion. Would I rather a bont, petracca, cripps, macrae, Grundy.......or Ben Long, mason redman, Harley basic and mitchell hibberd??


You can't recreate class, you just can't, I'm sorry but the idea is just silly. You could get a player like bont who is worth much more than 4 GOPs...
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

KingsRansom said:
I absolutely hate this notion. Would I rather a bont, petracca, cripps, macrae, Grundy.......or Ben Long, mason redman, Harley basic and mitchell hibberd??
You can't recreate class, you just can't, I'm sorry but the idea is just silly. You could get a player like bont who is worth much more than 4 GOPs...
Click to expand...

Sure that's fair enough. I wouldn't be suggesting it most years, but we're looking at bringing in at least 8 players, nearly all would be from the draft.

So we keep pick 7 and 44 and take the rest in the 70s. Is that better for our list? Pick 7 no guarantee to be a star. But let's assume pick 7 will be a very good player, pick 44 is about 50% chance of being ok, the rest is a raffle. Is bringing in just one high chance of a very good player worth it? Does that leave our list in better shape, just one player?

I like Port's strategy. They've rebuilt their list around later picks. Taking stacks of players every year, trading out the excess that brings in more picks, working their way up the draft order year on year. They take an average of at least 6 players from the drafts every single year (since 2012). They're churning out the talent over there.

Just my opinion, but this year I would take multiple picks outside the first round over just pick 7. If we were in good shape and challenging it would be different, take the best quality. But we need the list to be competitive, 8+ players going out and only 1 quality coming in won't cut it. 5 picks in the 40s, even at 50% success would be better and give more options and competition. Or some variation thereof. Having said that, I have no idea of the draft depth and quality this year, we just have to make it fit and work the best we can. Also depends on any compo we receive, so this is a factor.

Player - Pick
Clurey 29
Impey 21
Byrne-Jones 52
Amon 68
S.Gray R29
Howard 56
Bonner 37
Snelling R10
Houston R45
Marshall 16
Powell-Pepper 18
Drew 33
Ladhams R9
Butters 12
Duursma 18
Bergman 14
Giogiades 18
 
Munga said:
Sure that's fair enough. I wouldn't be suggesting it most years, but we're looking at bringing in at least 8 players, nearly all would be from the draft.

So we keep pick 7 and 44 and take the rest in the 70s. Is that better for our list? Pick 7 no guarantee to be a star. But let's assume pick 7 will be a very good player, pick 44 is about 50% chance of being ok, the rest is a raffle. Is bringing in just one high chance of a very good player worth it? Does that leave our list in better shape, just one player?

I like Port's strategy. They've rebuilt their list around later picks. Taking stacks of players every year, trading out the excess that brings in more picks, working their way up the draft order year on year. They take an average of at least 6 players from the drafts every single year (since 2012). They're churning out the talent over there.

Just my opinion, but this year I would take multiple picks outside the first round over just pick 7. If we were in good shape and challenging it would be different, take the best quality. But we need the list to be competitive, 8+ players going out and only 1 quality coming in won't cut it. 5 picks in the 40s, even at 50% success would be better and give more options and competition. Or some variation thereof. Having said that, I have no idea of the draft depth and quality this year, we just have to make it fit and work the best we can. Also depends on any compo we receive, so this is a factor.

Player - Pick
Clurey 29
Impey 21
Byrne-Jones 52
Amon 68
S.Gray R29
Howard 56
Bonner 37
Snelling R10
Houston R45
Marshall 16
Powell-Pepper 18
Drew 33
Ladhams R9
Butters 12
Duursma 18
Bergman 14
Giogiades 18
Click to expand...
If you have a top 10 pick you use it unless you know you can get a player you want a little bit later. Or you’re in the window and trade that for a player ect. They’re priceless for the future.. we thought we were in the window and plainly misjudged that call. A top 10 pick has a far greater strike rate of becoming and elite player than 3 picks outside the top 30 for example.

For mime - we have to try and get another top 10 pick, however that may be. If we get band 2 for Billing’s and bundle that up with something else for a pick upgrade.
 
Billings is 26 next year. Very important when it comes to free agency consideration and compensation. I'm sure we will offer him a good contract, I doubt we will offer him a great contract.

It then comes down to whether any other clubs think he's worth the extra $100/150K a year over 4 years to get him to move from St Kilda.
 
pebblesofsand said:
Billings is 26 next year. Very important when it comes to free agency consideration and compensation. I'm sure we will offer him a good contract, I doubt we will offer him a great contract.

It then comes down to whether any other clubs think he's worth the extra $100/150K a year over 4 years to get him to move from St Kilda.
Click to expand...
My honest gut feeling is he and the club know the outcome already. Which is why we’ve offered King the sizeable contract extension early.
 
Munga said:
4 retire. Another 4 delisted. Take as many kids as possible. Fill the gaps from the "fill" column. I'm being generous with some fills and keeps, but the number of reitred and delisted is hefty enough. One or two moneyball picks would be good too where needed, not the "break glass" type (more Wilkie's less McKernan's).


NameFinal YearYears Service*StatusAction
Ben Long20226Non-Free AgentFill
Ben Paton20225Non-Free AgentKeep. Although he might not be the same again
Brad Crouch20255Non-Free AgentKeep
Bradley Hill20256Non-Free AgentStuck with him. Can only hope he'll become a better player than he's ever been
Callum Wilkie20235Non-Free AgentKeep
Daniel Butler20223Non-Free AgentKeep
Daniel Hannebery20235Non-Free AgentCooked but won't be delisted with two years left
Daniel McKenzie20228Restricted Free AgentFill
Darragh Joyce20215Non-Free AgentKeep
Dean Kent20213Non-Free AgentFill
Dougal Howard20245Non-Free AgentKeep
Dylan Roberton20219Restricted Free AgentRetired
Hunter Clark20236Non-Free AgentKeep
Jack Billings20218Restricted Free AgentDon't sell the farm to keep, let him walk otherwise
Jack Bytel20224Non-Free AgentKeep
Jack Higgins20211Non-Free AgentKeep
Jack Lonie20217Non-Free AgentKeep
Jack Sinclair20217Non-Free AgentKeep
Jack Steele20226Non-Free AgentKeep
Jade Gresham20238Restricted Free AgentKeep. Although he might not be the same again. Open to trade/FA if he doesn't get up
Jake Carlisle20216Non-Free AgentRetire
James Frawley20211Non-Free AgentRetire
Jarryn Geary202115Unrestricted Free AgentRetire
Jimmy Webster202211Unrestricted Free AgentKeep
Josh Battle20226Non-Free AgentI want to keep him, but struggling like many this year
Leo Connolly20212Non-Free AgentKeep
Luke Dunstan20218Restricted Free AgentDelist
Mason Wood20211Non-Free AgentDelist
Matthew Allison20222Non-Free AgentKeep
Max King20224Non-Free AgentKeep
Nicholas Coffield20236Non-Free AgentKeep
Oscar Clavarino20214Non-Free AgentKeep
Patrick Ryder20212Non-Free AgentKeep if he wants to go on
Paul Hunter20211Non-Free AgentFill
Rowan Marshall20226Non-Free AgentKeep
Ryan Byrnes20223Non-Free AgentKeep
Sam Alabakis20213Non-Free AgentDelist
Sebastian Ross202110Restricted Free AgentApparently close to re-signing
Shaun McKernan20211Non-Free AgentDelist
Tim Membrey202410Restricted Free AgentKeep
Tom Highmore20222Non-Free AgentKeep
Zak Jones20212Non-Free AgentThe next Hanners. Plan to go forward without him on the field! Warning, should not be offered a large conract!!!
Click to expand...
There is a minimum of 9 off that list that need letting go. And I have been generous to a few.

still don’t know why wewouldn’t look at another 2 young mods/ Dey defenders in the MSD on 18 month contracts rather than take excessive amount of Kids on 2 year contracts in the main draft at years end.

I hope we are looking to pick some
Value from other clubs lists like Chol, Coleman Jones, Narkle, Wallis, McLean, Dan Rioli,
 
Mikka84 said:
My honest gut feeling is he and the club know the outcome already. Which is why we’ve offered King the sizeable contract extension early.
Click to expand...
Not so sure. Like I said it will depend on what offers arise. Can't see him (or anybody else in his wage bracket) jumping ship for the sake of an extra $50k a year.

The situation will be exactly the same as Bruce - a reasonable offer will be put to him by us, if another club thinks he's worth much more to them than us then they will up the ante.

$100K a year on top of what we offer (or a year longer on the contract) + Billings being 26 would get us Band 1 compo.

If that was the case, he'll be gone.
 
Can we leave the extracurricular Hanners stuff in the bin, shouldn't really be discussing something that serious in open forum. Bill give it a rest.
 
Munga said:
FWIW, pick 7 is equivalent in points to picks 39, 40, 41, AND 42. If you had the chance, would you do that this year? One into four? With all the retirements and delistings, it might be the year to consider something along those lines. Or 7 for 32+33+34, so all in the second round. Or 44+45+46+47+48. How many do we want to take? How about a mix, 19+44+45?

It shows the possiblities. Of course the lower we finish, the more we have to work with.

Unfortunately, by the end of this season our list will not only still be missing quality, but quantity as well. I think we have a better chance of finding guns with multiple later picks than a single high pick, that's just far too risky, especially where our list is at.
Click to expand...
We swapped 6 for 12 and 18 two years ago. If we end up with a top ten picked based on our finishing position I’d still want to be in the first round and have an early second at worst.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Munga said:
FWIW, pick 7 is equivalent in points to picks 39, 40, 41, AND 42. If you had the chance, would you do that this year? One into four? With all the retirements and delistings, it might be the year to consider something along those lines. Or 7 for 32+33+34, so all in the second round. Or 44+45+46+47+48. How many do we want to take? How about a mix, 19+44+45?

It shows the possiblities. Of course the lower we finish, the more we have to work with.

Unfortunately, by the end of this season our list will not only still be missing quality, but quantity as well. I think we have a better chance of finding guns with multiple later picks than a single high pick, that's just far too risky, especially where our list is at.
Click to expand...
I understand your reasoning, my only difference with your argument is that I would not be looking for equivalent value in picks but greater value.
For example: 21 + 23 + 34 for 7.
Negotiating 101.
Then barter something out.
Whatever the outcome, it will be somewhere between our opening position and that of the partner’s.
However, I’m probably like everybody else, not my preference to split 7 this year. I don’t think the list is strong enough for us to get the full benefit (per your Port analogy).
 
KingsRansom said:
I absolutely hate this notion. Would I rather a bont, petracca, cripps, macrae, Grundy.......or Ben Long, mason redman, Harley basic and mitchell hibberd??


You can't recreate class, you just can't, I'm sorry but the idea is just silly. You could get a player like bont who is worth much more than 4 GOPs...
Click to expand...

No one has or ever will trade a top 10 pick for 4 picks in the late 2nd round.

Forget about points value... thats for father sons, academy nominations, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Someone mentioned that Battle maybe going end of the year , well TBH if we could get a late first to mid second say 16-26 i would take it , most on here keep blaming being played out of position for his form , im not so sure of that .
I think he is slow , runs on tracks and cant turn, no doubt he tries but i just think he is limited.
Billings would also be on the table for a pick of similar 12-20 , he has peaked and is taking us no where , we need to hit the draft for quality kids not hacks as that has proven to be a total waste of time , im happy to be in a similar ladder position next year provided we draft kids
 
CaptainRisky said:
Someone mentioned that Battle maybe going end of the year , well TBH if we could get a late first to mid second say 16-26 i would take it , most on here keep blaming being played out of position for his form , im not so sure of that .
I think he is slow , runs on tracks and cant turn, no doubt he tries but i just think he is limited.
Billings would also be on the table for a pick of similar 12-20 , he has peaked and is taking us no where , we need to hit the draft for quality kids not hacks as that has proven to be a total waste of time , im happy to be in a similar ladder position next year provided we draft kids
Click to expand...
Josh Battle is an interesting one Captain. When he is in the play he looks great, he looks strong, is generally a beautiful kick and good overhead. Like Blake Acres a lot of us Sainters are seduced by his size and his occasional brilliance. The real issue for me he does not get to the right spots enough to influence the game and the reason for that is his leg speed. Style over substance maybe?
 
busso_mick said:
Josh Battle is an interesting one Captain. When he is in the play he looks great, he looks strong, is generally a beautiful kick and good overhead. Like Blake Acres a lot of us Sainters are seduced by his size and his occasional brilliance. The real issue for me he does not get to the right spots enough to influence the game and the reason for that is his leg speed. Style over substance maybe?
Click to expand...
You maybe right about being seduced , At the same age Blake has him easily covered which is a bit disturbing

Josh Battle and Blake Acres AFL Stats Comparison

Josh Battle and Blake Acres AFL Stats Comparison.
www.footywire.com www.footywire.com
 
Mikka84 said:
Can we discuss Joff’s extracurricular holidays? Because that’s bothering me a lot.
Click to expand...
No, I am back in covidville, with grey skies, 11 degs, takeaway coffee, and masks.

If I was in my 40's not my 60's I would head North.

Anyhoo love how people think we will only have pick 8 and 44 like dps are static and never move [emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

CaptainRisky said:
You maybe right about being seduced , At the same age Blake has him easily covered which is a bit disturbing

Josh Battle and Blake Acres AFL Stats Comparison

Josh Battle and Blake Acres AFL Stats Comparison.
www.footywire.com www.footywire.com
Click to expand...
I think they should send him back where he actually looked like a potential 200 game player. It’s a shame we have very little tall forward stock that are consistently competitive in the air.
 
busso_mick said:
Josh Battle is an interesting one Captain. When he is in the play he looks great, he looks strong, is generally a beautiful kick and good overhead. Like Blake Acres a lot of us Sainters are seduced by his size and his occasional brilliance. The real issue for me he does not get to the right spots enough to influence the game and the reason for that is his leg speed. Style over substance maybe?
Click to expand...

I think the poor bugger needs to stop being thrown around so much before we get ANY solid evidence to suggest one way or another if he's quality.

He stunk it up yesterday as a fwd, but went into the game presumably planning to play back all day before wood went down.

Not only does his role change week to week- now it's changing quarter to quarter!

He killed it at CHB for practically a full season (as a what 20yo?) and in the very few games he's been given a chance to play solely forward (without this wing nonsense); has shown signs of being a decent prospect fwd.

Acres never got close to playing at the level battle did at chb in terms of consistency or quality. Aside from both being tossed around positionally, they are not alike.
 
pebblesofsand said:
Not so sure. Like I said it will depend on what offers arise. Can't see him (or anybody else in his wage bracket) jumping ship for the sake of an extra $50k a year.

The situation will be exactly the same as Bruce - a reasonable offer will be put to him by us, if another club thinks he's worth much more to them than us then they will up the ante.

$100K a year on top of what we offer (or a year longer on the contract) + Billings being 26 would get us Band 1 compo.

If that was the case, he'll be gone.
Click to expand...
You will probably be spot on aswell.

we have 2 players in our best 22 we can afford to lose.

Battle because we seem to have his type in abundance - he has good value and there would be a number of clubs who would see really good value for a mid first - early second.

JB. Not because he isn’t a good player, but he isn’t the difference in us making finals or not. His value to someone else as you touched on should get us a band 1. If it doesn’t, you re-sign him as the value is probably inline with what we think/offer.

the other bloke you could consider is Long, but he is a real favourite of Ratten and I have no doubt he will see him as a redemption project next year. But nonetheless he had offers from Melbourne and Essendon in the past and other clubs will look at him and think the talent is worthy of the punt.

all comes down to how much you want to cut and what value there is in the delisted crop this off season to build out our list.

for example GWS and The Suns always delist talented players that would represent value in late list spots.
 
The_Steadier said:
I think the poor bugger needs to stop being thrown around so much before we get ANY solid evidence to suggest one way or another if he's quality.

He stunk it up yesterday as a fwd, but went into the game presumably planning to play back all day before wood went down.

Not only does his role change week to week- now it's changing quarter to quarter!

He killed it at CHB for practically a full season (as a what 20yo?) and in the very few games he's been given a chance to play solely forward (without this wing nonsense); has shown signs of being a decent prospect fwd.

Acres never got close to playing at the level battle did at chb in terms of consistency or quality. Aside from both being tossed around positionally, they are not alike.
Click to expand...
Some good points there about Josh, his pace would be less of a handicap in the backline. He certainly did impress at CHB a few years back and I am not sure why he hasn't been tried there since.
 
I think once you accept that Billings isn’t going to be the consistent match winner we thought he’d be we can just take him for what he is which is a good outside mid who uses the ball well and kicks the odd goal. If he got us a pick that was straight after ours I’d drive him to wherever he wanted to go but no team is going to pay him enough to get us that compo so I think we’d be better off keeping him. Ideally your outside mids aren’t as slow as him but what can you do.

If Battle goes knowing Ratts that probably just means Wood goes to a wing and that’s something I don’t want to see.
 
I don't understand the Billings trade talk, If he was to ask for one sure but as one of the most consistent players for us this year and probably our best kick whatever we would get unless it was a top ten pick (which won't happen) would not be worth his loss.
With the likes of Battle and co you want to use as currency they really have none and remember a season doesn't reflect a career. Players have crap years we need to be un-stkilda like and not pull the trigger so quickly.
The mid-season draft was never going to make us magically a contender this year so I think our recruiting was fine, I like the idea of dropping players like King and Butler to light a fire under them and make the fight for their spots like Bevo does, but making wholesale changers now I think is ridiculous.
Our Backline has been decimated with injury this year and our fwds can't hit the backside of a barn two things that can easily be rectified. I would like to see our younger players given a go over Frawley, Wood and McKernan if they earn it but it was understandable with how we finished last season why we did what we did.
We need to remember we are playing without Gresh, Hann, Jones, Carlisle, Roberton, Marshall, Paton and with a tired but goated Ryder. I don't see us to far away from competing seriously again when we get our crap together.
The only missteps I think we have made in the last couple of years is the way we bent over for the Doggies and Freo on the Bruce and Hill trades. I wanted us to be stronger on what we wanted for Bruce and should of walked away from the Hill trade when they wanted so much. But there is no point complaining on what is done and we should look to the future.
In summation not ever player will be a gun but what some bring to our team can lift us up more then a selfish star and we need to understand this year has been crap and try and make the most of it rather then pushing over the desk and calling for a 27th rebuild.
bf3a4e06d8088cda79ce5ab0b46d3013.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Fehring
List Mgmt. 2025 Trade Thread
2 3 4
Replies
93
Views
10K
goodie23
goodie23
Hubnester
  • Locked
List Mgmt. 2025 List Management Discussion - Part IV
399 400 401 402 403
Replies
10K
Views
450K
Saintos The ITK
Saintos The ITK
Hubnester
  • Locked
List Mgmt. 2025 List Management Discussion - Part 3
386 387 388 389 390
Replies
10K
Views
423K
Chief
Chief
Hubnester
List Mgmt. 2025 List Management Discussion - Part V
217 218 219 220 221
Replies
6K
Views
252K
Saintos The ITK
Saintos The ITK
Tommy Wigs
  • Locked
List Mgmt. 2025 List Management discussion - part 2
583 584 585 586 587
Replies
15K
Views
609K
Gavinmitchell11
G
Hubnester
Rumour Rumours & Confirmed - Trades, Free Agency & Draft [NO DISCUSSION]
2
Replies
37
Views
9K
StFly
StFly
SainterinSydney
List Mgmt. 2024 Trade Thread - No.3
149 150 151 152 153
Replies
4K
Views
193K
Mr Platinum
Mr Platinum

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top