List Mgmt. 2023 List Management and Trading (Part 2)

[PeterSalt]

Do you have a link to the article? I can't find anything on Google or the AFL website. Not doubting you, just trying to find the article you referenced.

From the article below:

"For instance, it would have allowed Adelaide to list one of Rory Sloane or Taylor Walker as a veteran for 2024 and opened up another spot on their primary list. The idea was designed to keep veterans in the game without sacrificing a list spot that a youngster may have taken, with the veteran’s full payments still counted in the salary cap."

Roos target pick one, Dee to go on, big Dog to stay

Check out all the latest trade news from around the League

www.afl.com.au

There's a link in the post above

 

[DJ75]

If you’re including stuff like the GC priority pick, then McAdams 3 week suspension for winding player but it “looked bad” has to be here. could easily argue it started a spiral this year resulting in him leaving.

Speaking of which, how many weeks did Charlie get for breaking Murphy’s ribs in the GF? That was worse than McAdams bump

 

[BigBoSS_Riot]

Speaking of which, how many weeks did Charlie get for breaking Murphy’s ribs in the GF? That was worse than McAdams bump

Broke *Howe's ribs.

He didn't get fined.

 

[KinderSmock]

Any truth to the rumour that Nathan Kreuger might be coming across to the Crows? You're very welcome to have him if this is true.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Any truth to the rumour that Nathan Kreuger might be coming across to the Crows? You're very welcome to have him if this is true.

No, we are trading in Burgess instead.

 

[Pugsley]

Do we take a punt on Cooper Murley?

 

[George CantStandYa]

Why would Geelong look at trading this?

 

[DJ75]

Broke *Howe's ribs.

He didn't get fined.

Ah that’s right, it was Howe.
So..um…WTF?!
Not even a fine? If Charlie played for us he would be looking at 6 months.

 

[Soggy2112]

Ah that’s right, it was Howe.
So..um…WTF?!
Not even a fine? If Charlie played for us he would be looking at 6 months.

Anyone got a video link for this?

 

[BigBoSS_Riot]

Ah that’s right, it was Howe.
So..um…WTF?!
Not even a fine? If Charlie played for us he would be looking at 6 months.

I honestly don't think the bump by Cameron was that bad, it just had an unfortunate end result. The problem being, if you apply the matrix, it should be two weeks minimum (careless, severe impact, body contact). One of an innumerable number of examples that proves that the matrix doesn't work the way it should, and needs to go.

The fact is, McAdam got scapegoated. His bump was at most worthy of one week, but because he was a lesser known player, he was an easy target for the AFL to show how much they care about head protection. No wonder he wants to go to Melbourne, given Pickett got a week less for a worse action.

 

[BigBoSS_Riot]

Anyone got a video link for this?

Charlie Cameron puts a big bump on Jeremy Howe

Charlie Cameron bumps Jeremy Howe leading him to be taken off the field.

7news.com.au

 

[baldandbroke]

I honestly don't think the bump by Cameron was that bad, it just had an unfortunate end result. The problem being, if you apply the matrix, it should be two weeks minimum (careless, severe impact, body contact). One of an innumerable number of examples that proves that the matrix doesn't work the way it should, and needs to go.

The fact is, McAdam got scapegoated. His bump was at most worthy of one week, but because he was a lesser known player, he was an easy target for the AFL to show how much they care about head protection. No wonder he wants to go to Melbourne, given Pickett got a week less for a worse action.

McAdam deserved zero weeks for that.

The guy had the ball - he did not hit him high.

McAdam got done for “potential to cause injury”.

Joke.

 

[Amacca 23]

McAdam deserved zero weeks for that.

The guy had the ball - he did not hit him high.

McAdam got done for “potential to cause injury”.

Joke.

Worst decision of the year when you look at that and then mc adam get a fractured cheek bone and they say nothing to see here v sydney

On SM-G996B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Big Dub]

Why would Geelong look at trading this?

They only have the one pick, and still need to take 3 selections in the draft. Pick 10, 20 something and 40 something is better than pick 7 and 2 picks in the 60s/ 70s.

They might also have their eye on a player they think that they can get after pick 7.

 

[1970crow]

When we talk of moving players from the main list to the rookie list ....there is an issue that we need to be aware of ...that's the players free agency status

Not our problem, it’s the acquiring club that inherits the new lifetime FA status. Our risk remains only the Greenwood experience. But with Sloane and Murphy, the risk is nil, losing them would cost us nothing.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Not our problem, it’s the acquiring club that inherits the new lifetime FA status. Our risk remains only the Greenwood experience. But with Sloane and Murphy, the risk is nil, losing them would cost us nothing.

It is our problem .....if we delist a player, with the view of rookie listing him ....that action instigates lifetime Free Agency, as far as I can see

 

[conVINCEd]

It is our problem .....if we delist a player, with the view of rookie listing him ....that action instigates lifetime Free Agency, as far as I can see

And why would we care about that if we not fussed by the prospect of losing them?

 

[George CantStandYa]

We will give them a second rounder for Hayward

 

[craig crowing]

With a few clubs like Swans ,Geelong ,Saints etc needing reasonable draft picks to secure players they want. Surely a opportunity with the many good picks we have already, plus McAdam, Doedee and even from EH gives us a opportunity to entice a player to cover needs or maybe a young fringe player club rates .
Just seems strange to let so many players go and not having answers to cover.

 

[BigBoSS_Riot]

We will give them a second rounder for Hayward

Hasn't Hayward already knocked us back? That's what I'd heard.

 

[Redline]

With a few clubs like Swans ,Geelong ,Saints etc needing reasonable draft picks to secure players they want. Surely a opportunity with the many good picks we have already, plus McAdam, Doedee and even from EH gives us a opportunity to entice a player to cover needs or maybe a young fringe player club rates .
Just seems strange to let so many players go and not having answers to cover.

I have no idea who but I still think we will bring in one more besides Burgess. Not sure they will be best 22 though.

It feels like we need some of the bigger pick swaps to happen and go from there.

 

[Viva la Mattner]

Need to try and get that pick 4 from Suns
Future first , Doedee compo and 20

Then offer 9 and 25 to Geelong who are looking to move down for 7

4- McKercher
7- Watson

 

[Crow till I die]

Need to try and get that pick 4 from Suns
Future first , Doedee compo and 20

Then offer 9 and 25 to Geelong who are looking to move down for 7

4- McKercher
7- Watson

Why do GC do that IF the reported offer from the dogs is 10, 17 and F1 with a few 3rd rounders for points going back to the dogs - that beats our offer above

 

[Vader]

It is our problem .....if we delist a player, with the view of rookie listing him ....that action instigates lifetime Free Agency, as far as I can see

It does, which is why you only do it for players you don't mind losing.

 

[Vader]

Need to try and get that pick 4 from Suns
Future first , Doedee compo and 20

Then offer 9 and 25 to Geelong who are looking to move down for 7

4- McKercher
7- Watson

The Dogs are already offering the Suns more than that for pick 4. It's not happening for Adelaide.

 

[Redline]

The Dogs are already offering the Suns more than that for pick 4. It's not happening for Adelaide.

It's a good deal for GC. That should be us next year if Welsh continues to look like a high pick.