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

 

[MRB37]

It's not like the AFL at all to be in a trade period and not having yet decided if teams will be required to upgrade certain players or not. Absolutely professional to leave teams in the dark about how many list spots they'll have or need for next year at this time of the year. A+, bang up job as usual by those in charge.

 

[jackster83]

It's not like the AFL at all to be in a trade period and not having yet decided if teams will be required to upgrade certain players or not. Absolutely professional to leave teams in the dark about how many list spots they'll have or need for next year at this time of the year. A+, bang up job as usual by those in charge.

Probably waiting to see what Geelong and Carlton want.

 

[Vader]

It's not like the AFL at all to be in a trade period and not having yet decided if teams will be required to upgrade certain players or not. Absolutely professional to leave teams in the dark about how many list spots they'll have or need for next year at this time of the year. A+, bang up job as usual by those in charge.

To be fair, I can't rule out the possibility that they HAVE told the clubs, they just haven't put out any media releases to inform the general public.

Of course, that's only marginally less incompetent.

 

[Mostyn]

Was there any actual report about us wanting Sparrow?

Couple of media mentions I think, but I guess we have no idea how serious.

 

[Redline]

View attachment 1833317

As it currently sits, we have 1, maybe 2 free list spots, depending on Parnell. You can almost guarantee we'll re-rookie at least 1 player, possibly 2.

All clubs do it so there is nothing wrong with delisting and putting players on the rookie list but we really shouldn't be this tight for list spots.

It doesn't sound like there will be much opportunity to combine our three picks and move up so we might need to try and get pick 20 pushed in 2024? It would Be a waste to use pick 20 as an upgrade. Is that how you see it?

 

[arrowman]

View attachment 1833317

As it currently sits, we have 1, maybe 2 free list spots, depending on Parnell. You can almost guarantee we'll re-rookie at least 1 player, possibly 2.

Thanks for that.

OK, this is kind of stating the obvious, but thinking out loud: Assuming Parnell has to be promoted, we need to move at least one player to the rookie list; we have picks 10, 14 and 20, all of value, so we will use them all in some manner - so either we move a second player to the rookie list (i.e. use 3 draft picks) or we trade up the board using 10/14/20, down to 2 picks.

I'm going to bet we go with the latter i.e. trade those 3 picks down to 2 and move up the board. Possibly involving our F1 for a bigger move. And that will happen on draft night, not before.

Draft thread needs a poll

It doesn't sound like there will be much opportunity to combine our three picks and move up so we might need to try and get pick 20 pushed in 2024? It would Be a waste to use pick 20 as an upgrade. Is that how you see it?

We must surely use pick 20 in some way; I wonder how much value we would get for it if we tried to trade it for a 2024 pick in an allegedly deeper draft.

 

[Crow-eater]

All clubs do it so there is nothing wrong with delisting and putting players on the rookie list but we really shouldn't be this tight for list spots.

It doesn't sound like there will be much opportunity to combine our three picks and move up so we might need to try and get pick 20 pushed in 2024? It would Be a waste to use pick 20 as an upgrade. Is that how you see it?

To use all 3 picks it only requires 2 players to move to the rookie list. Only 1 if the Parnell thing eventuates (I have a feeling it will, considering we were after a player in the McAdam trade)

We no longer use actual picks to upgrade players, it happens automatically, so if it comes to it on draft night, and we have 20, but no list spots, then It'll be traded into 2024, 100%.

 

[Vader]

We no longer use actual picks to upgrade players, it happens automatically, so if it comes to it on draft night, and we have 20, but no list spots, then It'll be traded into 2024, 100%.

If we don't have 3x senior list vacancies, then we won't be able to take #20 into the draft - we would have to forfeit it.

Teams can't take more picks into the draft than they have senior list vacancies.

 

[cmndstab]

So then why have stated we will only accept a player to then accept a draft pick?

Is that what we stated, though?

My memory is we said our preference is to get a player, not that we would only accept a player.

 

[Bearded Clam]

No bow and Arrow with that one

I have a untestable theory that if it wasnt for his pathetic bow and arrow his career would be over by now..

It sort of became a talking point that directed attention his way and its always positive attention as its linked to kicking a goal..

Ensures he always makes the highlight reels even if he’s quiet for the rest of the game..

I think he’s achieved little more than Mchenry has..

 

[George CantStandYa]

Is that what we stated, though?

My memory is we said our preference is to get a player, not that we would only accept a player.

Did we? Not my recollection

 

[Mostyn]

Is that what we stated, though?

My memory is we said our preference is to get a player, not that we would only accept a player.

The comments that we wanted a player were coming through the media.

 

[Gtowncrow]

melbourne's future second was offered days ago, i don't whey we couldn't have asked for sydney's second instead. or a second and a third

I'm happier with MFC second compared to Sydney.
Melbourne has significant problems inside their club...and now their key forward not wanting to be there.

Sydney 2024 > MFC 2024
...methinks

 

[Big Dub]

Its a well known list management strategy that you target players 18 months out of contract - Yes Mick you were right we did get into Eddies ear but Carlton blew it for the sake of $50k - as alleged

Now I dont know when we tried to get Redman/Cox - but it does seem we asked last year - but the rest seem to be late asks

Petty - we went after a cooked Oliver first so there would have been no money at all for Petty - now maybe he was our target for 2025 but this year feels like a saving face exercise

Oliver - yep we had 2 days to formulate something

I'm unaware of what moves we made to get Day but that he stayed at Hawks says a bit about how he views either club - or maybe its how we viewed Day?

Burgess? I'm not sure he was on our radar at all until GC said ' psst how bout it''

tl:dr the club said we would target established players - our success hinges on a player contracted for 2 years at another club

Although asking Petty this year is still us targeting him for next (pre-agent) year . . .

 

[Firewalker]

The fact the club has ended up keeping Himmelberg makes this trade period a horrid 2 week long event.

Also disappointed with the club’s scouting that they again got caught up on the just SA players train & didn’t think there were any other rough diamonds who were at least worth looking at, just for an example a Hugo Ralphsmith who I rate just signed a 1-year last chance saloon deal at Richmond this week and surely would’ve came over for a longer deal and provided some genuine leg speed the club still lack on the outside.

The off-season departures whilst not dramatically team changing still weakens the overall team and again with no replacements puts pressure on the player development team who haven’t exactly delivered in spades over the recent past.

Doubt there’s any delisted free agents the club will take either so will just be relying on the pretty underwhelming James Borlase making it through to the rookie draft…

 

[Danger in Texas]

Also disappointed with the club’s scouting that they again got caught up on the just SA players train & didn’t think there were any other rough diamonds who were at least worth looking at, just for an example a Hugo Ralphsmith who I rate just signed a 1-year last chance saloon deal at Richmond this week and surely would’ve came over for a longer deal and provided some genuine leg speed the club still lack on the outside.

Yeah this is what I was talking about last night, Ralphsmith is a good example of a guy we could’ve tried to get the best out of. I like him too

 

[Mostyn]

C'mon. Hugo Ralphsmith is hot garbage.

We can't possibly be resorting to talking about Ralphsmith.

 

[DJ75]

We don't know tbh. Most likely not at this point, but the AFL haven't said yes or no either way.

Incredible that with 1 day to go in trade period and that haven’t made a decision. Laughable

 

[Firewalker]

C'mon. Hugo Ralphsmith is hot garbage.

We can't possibly be resorting to talking about Ralphsmith.

What evidence is that really based on? He’s never got a true go at it for Richmond thanks to the likes of Rioli, Baker, Vlastuin and Short all being used at half back.

He’s also just one example of a player severely undervalued with some standout physical tendencies that in the modern day game can be utilised as a difference maker especially off halfback, just look at the job Markov did for Collingwood this year, was delisted and no one really rated him yet provided a point of difference that was valued by a premiership side.

 

[Danger in Texas]

I dunno about hot garbage, seems you've been looking at too many of another posters input to be using such phrases....but I'd much sooner see what we've got with Luke Nankervis, Brayden Cook, Billy Dowling, Zac Taylor, Lachlan Gollant and Hugh Bond rather than bringing in just äny"player that can't get games at other clubs at this point in our rebuild..

You were very keen on Dow

 

[Firewalker]

I dunno about hot garbage, seems you've been looking at too many of another posters input to be using such phrases....but I'd much sooner see what we've got with Luke Nankervis, Brayden Cook, Billy Dowling, Zac Taylor, Lachlan Gollant and Hugh Bond rather than bringing in just äny"player that can't get games at other clubs at this point in our rebuild..

Look I want to see a lot of those guys get a go too but there are just holes in the list that these guys have the inability to cover such as a extremely quick rebounding defender/halfback or a genuine small forward with craft & goal sense. Those are the 2 specialist areas on the list that there hasn’t been any attempt to fill that you can at least look around around the league and find out if there might be someone undervalued that can do those specific roles.

 

[rabidcrow]

Can we all just enjoy the trade period dumpster fire over at Alberton at the moment:
They've had nearly a fortnight and haven't got anything done yet. 1 day and 4 hours to go;
1. Zerk Thatcher - still no deal with Essendon and might send him to the draft
2. Ratugolea - still no deal with Geelong and might send him to the draft (to be fair, they have offered pick 25 which is reasonable)
3. Ivan Soldo

13

Ivan Soldo

Age

29

Ht

204cm

Wt

110kg

Pos.

Ruck

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.0

2star

K

3.9

2star

HB

4.1

3star

CL

2.4

4star

HO

24.2

5star

D

7.3

2star

K

3.1

1star

HB

4.1

3star

CL

2.4

4star

HO

23.0

5star

D

6.4

2star

K

3.0

1star

HB

3.4

3star

CL

1.6

4star

HO

21.4

5star

- no deal yet, contracted player at Richmond.
4. Jordan Sweet - no deal yet with the Bulldogs
5. Xavier Duursma

28

Xavier Duursma

Age

25

Ht

186cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.5

5star

K

10.0

4star

HB

8.5

5star

M

5.4

5star

T

2.1

4star

CL

1.6

4star

D

13.0

3star

K

8.8

4star

HB

4.3

3star

M

3.8

4star

T

2.3

3star

CL

0.5

3star

D

16.8

4star

K

8.4

4star

HB

8.4

5star

M

4.8

5star

T

2.0

4star

CL

1.6

4star

- talented wing/flank, wants to get out of Port Adelaide

All playing out for the drama. Port will get all those deals done - even Soldo seems likely now


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

He's not worth more, and the future second is more useful to us than a second this year. We have three picks already in the first round.

I think he is worth more, the second Melbourne got from Sydney is a future pick.

We talked up getting a player and to walk away without even getting a minor improvement on existing offer is pretty lame

 

[rabidcrow]

That’s true but when the clubs putting it out there we only want a player and then we end taking the pick, what message we sending to the rest of the clubs?

It’s not the first time our bluffs are seen for what they are.

The Crouch bluff hurts our rep. This one - happens to clubs all the time - I don’t think it adds on. I may change that opinion if the Cats get significantly more than pick 25 though


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[George CantStandYa]

The Crouch bluff hurts our rep. This one - happens to clubs all the time - I don’t think it adds on. I may change that opinion if the Cats get significantly more than pick 25 though


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

The Keath one as well