List Mgmt. 2023 List Management thread

[Snuffaluphagus]

Mod notice after Mr Bob did a lot of annoying work in moving days of posts out of here. As we are heading into offseason, this thread is for 2023 list management only. Getting upset on previous trades can be taken to the vent thread. Lets keep this thread on track in the part of the year it's actually relevant

 

[Joao]

I heard the McClure top 10 thing and was going to link it here as evidence that he's actually a top bloke.

I am personally hoping that they get 19 for Gresham and we get that.

 

[DragoDelph]

I heard the McClure top 10 thing and was going to link it here as evidence that he's actually a top bloke.

I am personally hoping that they get 19 for Gresham and we get that.

It's interesting listening to some of the old war stories.

The times he was right, and was run out of town for it, or was right, and things changed at the last second making him look the goose. He'd be good to have a beer with, which, for anyone in Melbourne, is a possibility.

They're hosting a long lunch during trade week.

 

[freo_leo29]

I swear they do this to get everyone worked up. Like, how can anyone so connected to the AFL think he's worth at least pick 10.

His theory was he was 10 4 years ago and he has shown that value over his past half season

The atleast was in reference to Cleary saying 20 iirc

 

[Joao]

It's interesting listening to some of the old war stories.

The times he was right, and was run out of town for it, or was right, and things changed at the last second making him look the goose. He'd be good to have a beer with, which, for anyone in Melbourne, is a possibility.

They're hosting a long lunch during trade week.

He has a ridiculously smug face on TV and sounds it on radio, but I'd go to that thing if I was in Melbourne to see. Got a feeling he's not as bad as he sounds.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

His theory was he was 10 4 years ago and he has shown that value over his past half season

The atleast was in reference to Cleary saying 20 iirc

Yeah, Cleary thinking he was going to shoot down 20 as too high was hilarious. At least I'm getting comfortable it's going to be a pick around 20. There's lots of ways for Saints to get a pick around 20 as well so shouldnt be too hard. Going to be funny getting more for him then Langdon and Acres

 

[freo_leo29]

Brad Hill and Cera was definately a win for him. Saints and Carlton's opening offers in both casees were ridicuous unders from memory.

We were wined, dined and absolutely ****ed from behind in the cerra deal


We just lucked out with amiss to feel some small bit of redemption

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

We were wined, dined and absolutely ****ed from behind in the cerra deal


We just lucked out with amiss to feel some small bit of redemption

I am angrily vindicated on thinking the trade at the time was bullshit. We just give up on uncontracted players

 

[DragoDelph]

Wow.
Seems everyone meets the Hawks and Sam Mitchell, then tells them to get ducked.

 

[gungho]

Brad Hill and Cera was definately a win for him. Saints and Carlton's opening offers in both casees were ridicuous unders from memory.

We traded Cerra for pick 6. That's not a win for a 22 year old drafted at pick 5 and progressing really well.
Brad Hill was a really weird one. Ultimately, trading him out was probably the best thing that ever happened at the club because it gave us the picks that turned into 3 or 4 best 22 players. (I'm not so sure I'd be crediting Bell for that - was more the drafting team wisely using the picks they had).
I reckon Belly has had shockers last year with Acres, Logue, and to a lesser extent Lobb.

 

[Serongadongdong]

I highly doubt Cox, Darcy or Schultz will extend before Christmas. Lots of rumors of them contemplating going home so wouldn't be surprised if that is true. This is why I am harsh on JLo because if we miss finals again next year, you can bet we will lose a player or two because of it. Anyway, the golden rule is unless CTD confirms the rumor, than it ain't true

this aged well


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Joao]

We've been bent over every time a player is OOC and the team they are going to finished below us. But we've done fine when they are contracted.

Henry is a good test case because OOC but no PSD threat. If we don't get something in the teens, I'll be ****ed.

 

[freo_leo29]

I am angrily vindicated on thinking the trade at the time was bullshit. We just give up on uncontracted players

That covid uncertainty really ****ed us too

Clubs seemed to not be in the market that year, lists had just been cut the prior year etc


We really got boned in that

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

We've been bent over every time a player is OOC and the team they are going to finished below us. But we've done fine when they are contracted.

Henry is a good test case because OOC but no PSD threat. If we don't get something in the teens, I'll be ****ed.

We're up to the teens now?

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

We traded Cerra for pick 6. That's not a win for a 22 year old drafted at pick 5 and progressing really well.
Brad Hill was a really weird one. Ultimately, trading him out was probably the best thing that ever happened at the club because it gave us the picks that turned into 3 or 4 best 22 players. (I'm not so sure I'd be crediting Bell for that - was more the drafting team wisely using the picks they had).
I reckon Belly has had shockers last year with Acres, Logue, and to a lesser extent Lobb.

Acres absolutely, Logue we were really up s**t creek so it is whatever but Lobb? Why Lobb?

 

[Sully90]

We're up to the teens now?

It will be pick 1 or bust by the time trade week opens.

 

[Joao]

We're up to the teens now?

Well I mean 18/19 but I'll take 13 if we can get it. Especially knowing that its going back ~5 places on draft night.

 

[gungho]

Acres absolutely, Logue we were really up s**t creek so it is whatever but Lobb? Why Lobb?

Yeah, probably not Lobb but no way should we have got a future 3rd and future 2nd for Acres and Logue.
When the Vic media comes out with "trade of the year" headlines for the Acres deal, that means we have been royally sc##wed.

 

[Joao]

Yeah, probably not Lobb but no way should we have got a future 3rd and future 2nd for Acres and Logue.
When the Vic media comes out with "trade of the year" headlines for the Acres deal, that should be warning enough that we have been royally s##wed.

You're never getting value for a bloke going to the spooners. The PSD threat is real and I think we did as well as we could hope for.

The whole Acres trade price was weird at the time and still is. I guess lowballing him on the money played into it. I'm not losing sleep over it though.

 

[Superkoops]

We traded Cerra for pick 6. That's not a win for a 22 year old drafted at pick 5 and progressing really well.
Brad Hill was a really weird one. Ultimately, trading him out was probably the best thing that ever happened at the club because it gave us the picks that turned into 3 or 4 best 22 players. (I'm not so sure I'd be crediting Bell for that - was more the drafting team wisely using the picks they had).
I reckon Belly has had shockers last year with Acres, Logue, and to a lesser extent Lobb.

Cerra was pick 6 and a pick in the early 40’s. We were hoping that would be a F2 change but had to settle with him being OOC. Slight under but nothing drastic.

Lobb we received two second rounders for.

Logue pick 21 and pick 40. We gave something small back (F4 - that we would unlikely use) to North. I realise Tucker was in that deal but he isn’t worth pick 40 and if out of contract would be not dissimilar to Ryley Bonner at Port. A good chance of being delisted. I think you could say based on pts value pick 19 Logue and pick 48-52 Tucker. Logue out of contract but a reasonable deal for mine.

Acres agree wholeheartedly- we just balls that up.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

You're never getting value for a bloke going to the spooners. The PSD threat is real and I think we did as well as we could hope for.

The whole Acres trade price was weird at the time and still is. I guess lowballing him on the money played into it. I'm not losing sleep over it though.

Plus they had compensation they specifically had to use in a trade, just had no bargaining power in anyway. Tucker for pick 40 effectively helps the overall trade as well.

 

[Joao]

Plus they had compensation they specifically had to use in a trade, just had no bargaining power in anyway. Tucker for pick 40 effectively helps the overall trade as well.

Tucker for 40 is highway robbery. So that definitely tips it into respectable territory.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Cerra was pick 6 and a pick in the early 40’s. We were hoping that would be a F2 change but had to settle with him being OOC. Slight under but nothing drastic.

Lobb we received two second rounders for.

Logue pick 21 and pick 39. We gave something small back (F4 - that we would unlikely use) to North. I realise Tucker was in that deal but he isn’t worth pick 39 and if out f contract would be not dissimilar to Ryley Bonnet at Port. A good chance of being delisted. I think you could say based on pts value pick 19 Logue and pick 48-52 Tucker. Logue out of contract but a reasonable deal for mine.

Acres agree wholeheartedly- we just balls that up.

I maintain, Cerra should have been the two firsts with a 2nd back per like the history of losing young gun mids.

Sidenote, I've also flipped on "that" McCarthy deal. It was s**t, I'm not including incredible drafting in trade scenario valuations any more

 

[ubiquitous226]

I swear they do this to get everyone worked up. Like, how can anyone so connected to the AFL think he's worth at least pick 10.

I mean nothing surprises me after hearing Weideman and pick 3 linked together.

 

[Superkoops]

I maintain, Cerra should have been the two firsts with a 2nd back per like the history of losing young gun mids.

Sidenote, I've also flipped on "that" McCarthy deal. It was s**t, I'm not including incredible drafting in trade scenario valuations any more

Happy to be corrected but majority of those two first deals didn’t involve a top 10 pick.

I think pick 6(8) and a good second (around 25) would have been par. Even in those deals with top 10 and a mid 20’s pick something has gone back the other way.

I agree that it was unders. No way Carlton give us 6, F1 and get a F2 back. No chance in hell. We were driving hard for F2 but they obviously threw around pre-season draft threat.

 

[ubiquitous226]

I maintain, Cerra should have been the two firsts with a 2nd back per like the history of losing young gun mids.

Sidenote, I've also flipped on "that" McCarthy deal. It was s**t, I'm not including incredible drafting in trade scenario valuations any more

The one that irked me with the Cerra deal is I think it should have been 6+F2 or 6+F1 -> F2, while when we did the Jackson deal it should have been 13 + F1 -> F2 but we actually paid 13+F1+F2 with only a couple of third rounders coming back.