List Mgmt. 2022 List Management and trading thread

[Scorpus]

I saw this format on the West Coast board and thought it might help understand our current list position

 

[Scorpus]

I thought this was interesting from the latest AFL.com.au piece

"Adelaide is understood to have the fewest uncontracted players by a significant margin and needs to make decisions on only 10 footballers still without deals for next year"

Some clubs have 20+ out of contract with an average around 14 to 18.

Surely as a bad team we should have a lot more players uncontracted and ready to move on if necessary

 

[Thetrader15]

“He fits nicely in our age profile given we need to add some quality players in that age bracket and history shows the very best SANFL players can transfer to the AFL and have an impact.”

I'm trying to think of some examples here...Jack Hayes, Callum Wilkie

44

Callum Wilkie

Age

29

Ht

191cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.2

4star

K

9.8

4star

HB

4.4

3star

M

4.5

4star

T

1.8

4star

MG

221.3

3star

D

12.6

3star

K

9.0

4star

HB

3.6

2star

M

2.6

3star

T

1.4

2star

MG

223.1

3star

D

14.0

4star

K

8.4

4star

HB

5.6

4star

M

4.6

5star

T

2.2

4star

MG

170.0

3star

and James Rowe are about the only mature age players I can think of who've fit that bracket.

 

[Thetrader15]

I thought this was interesting from the latest AFL.com.au piece

"Adelaide is understood to have the fewest uncontracted players by a significant margin and needs to make decisions on only 10 footballers still without deals for next year"

Some clubs have 20+ out of contract with an average around 14 to 18.

Surely as a bad team we should have a lot more players uncontracted and ready to move on if necessary

Sign up the younger kids on slightly longer contracts so you can have more cap space to spend on mature, top end AFL players like Dawson.

 

[Vader]

I thought this was interesting from the latest AFL.com.au piece

"Adelaide is understood to have the fewest uncontracted players by a significant margin and needs to make decisions on only 10 footballers still without deals for next year"

Some clubs have 20+ out of contract with an average around 14 to 18.

Surely as a bad team we should have a lot more players uncontracted and ready to move on if necessary

We're not a bad team because we have bad players. We're a bad team because we're the youngest & least experienced team list in the entire competition. There's a major difference there.

Those young players have generally been contracted well into the future, allowing them time to develop.

 

[Golumless]

I thought this was interesting from the latest AFL.com.au piece

"Adelaide is understood to have the fewest uncontracted players by a significant margin and needs to make decisions on only 10 footballers still without deals for next year"

Some clubs have 20+ out of contract with an average around 14 to 18.

Surely as a bad team we should have a lot more players uncontracted and ready to move on if necessary

Nope. We signed up just about everyone who was young to contracts past 2022. Factor in that we have a ridiculous amount of kids and that's how we ended up in this predicament.

Of course, there are only probably two-three guys worth resigning at this point of that out of contract list.

 

[betterthanu]

Not sure why people are upset about who we drafted for 6 months. Any decent long term prospect would have nominated 18 months which we don't have the space for unless Seed had committed to retirement.

 

[Thetrader15]

We're not a bad team because we have bad players. We're a bad team because we're the youngest & least experienced team list in the entire competition. There's a major difference there.

Those young players have generally been contracted well into the future, allowing them time to develop.

And I think this is the theory of going for a mature player from the SANFL.

 

[jackster83]

We're not a bad team because we have bad players. We're a bad team because we're the youngest & least experienced team list in the entire competition. There's a major difference there.

I think it's both. There's no point having experience of you have **** all talent.

Putting all our midfield eggs in the Crouch x2 basket ****ed us.

Wasted early picks on Gallucci, Fog, Milera, Jones and McAsey has set us back a fair bit. Pedlar also looks more like the sort of player you draft in the third round rather than a mid first rounder.

Going to be another 2-3 years of hitting the draft hard and then another 3-4 years before we have enough experience to start winning games consistently (assuming we don't waste the picks).

 

[Mr_Moogle]

I would have preferred we'd taken a ruck.

 

[I Lost My Keays]

Not sure why people are upset about who we drafted for 6 months. Any decent long term prospect would have nominated 18 months which we don't have the space for unless Seed had committed to retirement.

What’s the point on drafting him? He’s not going to be playing in the seniors, he’s only a top up for SANFL

 

[Scorpus]

We're not a bad team because we have bad players. We're a bad team because we're the youngest & least experienced team list in the entire competition. There's a major difference there.

Those young players have generally been contracted well into the future, allowing them time to develop.

While that's true, we do have a lot of very average players signed beyond this year.

Like I personally think Worrell is a promising player, but why is he signed until the end of next year if we have no intention of playing him?

Of course that's just one example, we also have guys like Brown and Crouch signed up

 

[jackster83]

While that's true, we do have a lot of very average players signed beyond this year.

Like I personally think Worrell is a promising player, but why is he signed until the end of next year if we have no intention of playing him?

Of course that's just one example, we also have guys like Brown and Crouch signed up

Yep, we've given a lot of job security to guys like Murphy, McPherson, Milera and Murray.

 

[GROTTO]

I would have preferred we'd taken a ruck.

Im surprised we didnt go after another small key forward.

 

[Scorpus]

Yep, we've given a lot of job security to guys like Murphy, McPherson, Milera and Murray.

All of those contracts are pretty bizarre. Was anyone coming after Murphy or Murray? Not sure why they needed multiple years.

I would have thought in a rebuild having a lot of list flexibility is a good thing and you can recontract based on consistent performances

 

[GROTTO]

I think it's both. There's no point having experience of you have duck all talent.

Putting all our midfield eggs in the Crouch x2 basket ****ed us.

Wasted early picks on Gallucci, Fog, Milera, Jones and McAsey has set us back a fair bit. Pedlar also looks more like the sort of player you draft in the third round rather than a mid first rounder.

Going to be another 2-3 years of hitting the draft hard and then another 3-4 years before we have enough experience to start winning games consistently (assuming we don't waste the picks).

Yes its combination of the Crouch bro's and absolutely nailing in failing with those 5 picks of Gallucci, Fog,Milera, Jones and McAsey that has really hurt us and our redevelopment. You begin to see why it took the Dees and Blues multiple rebuilds to get it right.

Took some effort to get all those eggs lined up in a row to f**k it up, but we managed to pull it off.

Even if we nailed just one of the those 5 picks with an elite player, it would have made a world of difference. If you look at the players that were selected straight after around those picks, that surely would have been in our calculations, the disaster of picking them, hurts even more so.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

All of those contracts are pretty bizarre. Was anyone coming after Murphy or Murray? Not sure why they needed multiple years.

I would have thought in a rebuild having a lot of list flexibility is a good thing and you can recontract based on consistent performances

Not if you believe you have the right cattle ....in fact having surety of your list, via contracts, is a good thing

You're being cautious, because they're still developing & haven't seen the final products .....Murphy's still just 23

Currently, we have a lot of players being rotated thru the team & in differing roles .....I can see what the Coach's are trying to do, put games into players ....a lot of players ....the trade-off ATM is you don't get yet, the team gelling as a cohesive unit

PLUS ....our KPP are still not producing consistently ....and that's HUGE factor in performance outcomes

 

[Scorpus]

Not if you believe you have the right cattle ....in fact having surety of your list, via contracts, is a good thing

You're being cautious, because they're still developing & haven't seen the final products .....Murphy's still just 23

Currently, we have a lot of players being rotated thru the team & in differing roles .....I can see what the Coach's are trying to do, put games into players ....a lot of players ....the trade-off ATM is you don't get yet, the team gelling as a cohesive unit

PLUS ....our KPP are still not producing consistently ....and that's HUGE on performance outcomes

Do we have the right cattle? I don't think we do.

 

[GreyCrow]

Sack Reid

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Do we have the right cattle? I don't think we do.

Yes ....there's still a couple of missing pieces ....these should be covered off in the next couple of Draft & Trade periods

A CHB is still a need .....no-one has a stake in that role yet

A "Class" Ruckman ....ROB has not shown consistency of performance, to show he's the man

A Tall midfielder ...although you could argue Dawson could take that role on ....I'm talking more an inside tall mid though

 

[GreyCrow]

Not if you believe you have the right cattle ....in fact having surety of your list, via contracts, is a good thing

You're being cautious, because they're still developing & haven't seen the final products .....Murphy's still just 23

Currently, we have a lot of players being rotated thru the team & in differing roles .....I can see what the Coach's are trying to do, put games into players ....a lot of players ....the trade-off ATM is you don't get yet, the team gelling as a cohesive unit

PLUS ....our KPP are still not producing consistently ....and that's HUGE on performance outcomes

I disagree.

Why sign players if you can't see the long term development?

The team gelling or not has nothing to do with contracts. Maybe LTCs give the player comfort - but at what cost to the overall list management.

You should be getting the LTCs after 23 not to get you to 23

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I disagree.

Why sign players if you can't see the long term development?

The team gelling or not has nothing to do with contracts. Maybe LTCs give the player comfort - but at what cost to the overall list management.

You should be getting the LTCs after 23 not to get you to 23

Supporters can't .....but Footy Dept obviously can ...there's a lot of experience in our Footy Dept

 

[GreyCrow]

Supporters can't .....but Footy Dept obviously can ...there's a lot of experience in our Footy Dept

I'm actually fearful you said this with a straight face

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I'm actually fearful you said this with a straight face

I did ....I'm happy with the list moves & development .....I'm not happy with Crouch, ROB, Frampton (delist)

 

[Skippos]

I thought this was interesting from the latest AFL.com.au piece

"Adelaide is understood to have the fewest uncontracted players by a significant margin and needs to make decisions on only 10 footballers still without deals for next year"

Some clubs have 20+ out of contract with an average around 14 to 18.

Surely as a bad team we should have a lot more players uncontracted and ready to move on if necessary

I just saw that quote and jumped online to make almost the same point.

That we're the 'league leader' for uncontracted players is not a good thing. There's a reason other clubs aren't in the same situation. Especially given our list is....not particularly strong.

The result is our hands are tied and some very ordinary players have security beyond what they deserve because we're petrified of blokes leaving. Just such a backwards way to manage our list.

 

[Skippos]

And just thinking about how we handled last night's MSD again, and everything about it is perplexing. Especially the decision to move Seedsman to the inactive list to free up a second selection.

Doing that indicated that there was at least a 'reality' where we could see ourselves making two selections; probably someone we had on our short list being available at that pick. We'd have known that Culley, D'Ambrosio & Dawson were top few material, so they wouldn't have been the ones we had eyes on.

So either we opened up that selection for no discernible reason, or we were hoping one of Derkson, Ramsden, Faulkhead, Teakle, Carmichael, Bauer, Hall-Kahan, Williams, Durdin, Kuek & Menzie were available at that second selection, and if they were, we'd have activated it and selected them.

Knowing that Turner as a 25 year old SANFL player with one excellent game and then a career body of work of being 'at but not above the level' would be unlikely to be taken by other clubs, why wouldn't we have taken whichever of the above was the bloke we were hoping came through to the second pick first and then relied on the likely scenario that Turner slipped to our second pick?

It just feels like very ordinary strategy and management from a team who have often showed a staggering lack of strategy and tact when it comes to drafting.

I guess the only thing worth noting is that bar Culley who's probably a top 20 type and D'Ambrosio who maybe was a top 30-35 type, I don't reckon anyone drafted in this MSD goes anywhere inside the top 45 in a real life ND. I think fans occasionally forget how slim these pickings are - we're talking about blokes who overwhelmingly would be rookie draft types at the end of the year. So as much as the lack of tact is frustrating - it probably doesn't matter much materially.