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

 

[Square Peg]

If you're a masochist, an easy pleasure hit would be to go on the Melbourne board and suggest Brodie for Pickett straight swap. I am pretty shit at predicting trade value, but they wouldn't do this would they?

 

[theGav56]

If you're a masochist, an easy pleasure hit would be to go on the Melbourne board and suggest Brodie for Pickett straight swap. I am pretty s**t at predicting trade value, but they wouldn't do this would they?

No they wouldn't. I think it would be close apart from the fact they would have little interest in a specialist inside mid. Brodie wouldn't be best 22 for them. May need to throw in Banfield and Colyer?

 

[Square Peg]

No they wouldn't. I think it would be close apart from the fact they would have little interest in a specialist inside mid. Brodie wouldn't be best 22 for them. May need to throw in Banfield and Colyer?

Make it happen Gav

 

[Vimal Anand]

I disagree and think he would equate to the Clark trade or a player such as Pickett. But if he isn't valued, then all the more to fast track Erasmus and Johnson.

I can see a similar contract situation to Acres: An offer another club could significantly better

But I have a feeling brodie may stay at Freo bit more time at an Unders contract

 

[theGav56]

But I have a feeling brodie may stay at Freo bit more time at an Unders contract

You may well be right. What he should consider is whether he will be best 22 next year or not. Acres would have stayed if he wasn't offered a much better contract and with it a more likely regular game. Logue too.

 

[Taylor]

We would need Brodie to be offered $650,000 to $800,000 a year for four years by a club like Essendon and still contracted for 2024.

I think he will be important for us this year so I don't think we would want to lose him by the end of the year but it would work out very well for all parties involved.

I'd like to keep him.

 

[pK75]

You may well be right. What he should consider is whether he will be best 22 next year or not. Acres would have stayed if he wasn't offered a much better contract and with it a more likely regular game. Logue too.

I love your optimism about Erasmus and Johnson but there is no way they will be replacing Brodie’s output next year, right now we have 2 contested bulls in our team, Brodie and Fyfe, last year it was Brodie and Mundy. It takes a mature body to take the 15-20 crunching tackles a game they are expected to take. Brayshaw and JOM can both pinch hit in the role but neither can do it majority of the time.
Johnson and/or Erasmus may well develop into that player but they’d be at least 22-23yo before the threw them in there for the whole game.
Clearly we disagree, but for mine, Brodie is irreplaceable for the next 2-3 years at least.
If you want to trade from an area we have a surplus in, look at the half back line. We have 6 players fighting for 3 positions. Some of whom have much greater trade value than Brodie.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

No they wouldn't. I think it would be close apart from the fact they would have little interest in a specialist inside mid. Brodie wouldn't be best 22 for them. May need to throw in Banfield and Colyer?

I’ve kind of given up on having any idea what list managers are doing trading for players but I think you’d basically need the North 2nd round pick and Brodie to get Pickett. If Rankine is worth a top 5 pick, Pickett has to be worth a pick around 10 surely.

 

[Purple Jesus]

We would need Brodie to be offered $650,000 to $800,000 a year for four years by a club like Essendon and still contracted for 2024.

I think he will be important for us this year so I don't think we would want to lose him by the end of the year but it would work out very well for all parties involved.

I'd like to keep him.

I’d like to keep him as well.

But there are a lot of teams crying out for a good extractor like him.

Trade him to one of the shit ones, get a decent draft pick and then use that to bring in a bona fide goal kicking star.

Win-win-win?

 

[Purple Jesus]

I love your optimism about Erasmus and Johnson but there is no way they will be replacing Brodie’s output next year, right now we have 2 contested bulls in our team, Brodie and Fyfe, last year it was Brodie and Mundy. It takes a mature body to take the 15-20 crunching tackles a game they are expected to take. Brayshaw and JOM can both pinch hit in the role but neither can do it majority of the time.
Johnson and/or Erasmus may well develop into that player but they’d be at least 22-23yo before the threw them in there for the whole game.
Clearly we disagree, but for mine, Brodie is irreplaceable for the next 2-3 years at least.
If you want to trade from an area we have a surplus in, look at the half back line. We have 6 players fighting for 3 positions. Some of whom have much greater trade value than Brodie.

I think Erasmus will surprise you there. More like 12 months away. Could even be as early as later this season. Once he and Johnno establish themselves, they’re going to be hard to move.

 

[theGav56]

I think Erasmus will surprise you there. More like 12 months away. Could even be as early as later this season. Once he and Johnno establish themselves, they’re going to be hard to move.

Brayshaw and Cerra had a dozen or more games under their belts at the same age as Erasmus. Both he and Johnson are looking physically and mentally as capable of playing as them.

 

[Purple Jesus]

Brayshaw and Cerra had a dozen or more games under their belts at the same age as Erasmus. Both he and Johnson are looking physically and mentally as capable of playing as them.

Perhaps even more so at the same age. I remember us all lamenting how ‘meh’ Brayshaw and Cerra were looking a few years into being fast tracked.

 

[theGav56]

We would need Brodie to be offered $650,000 to $800,000 a year for four years by a club like Essendon and still contracted for 2024.

I think he will be important for us this year so I don't think we would want to lose him by the end of the year but it would work out very well for all parties involved.

I'd like to keep him.

If we have players emerging and threatening his position the certainty of a 4 year deal on a more modest salary may be enough to tempt him.

If we did offer 2 x $350k, and I suggest that could be possible with our list, he could be gettable. Our list will be targeted because of the contracts of our high end.

We just lost two best 22 players because we lowballed them, and I think that can happen again. I'd like it to get us some better trade deals.

 

[theGav56]

Perhaps even more so at the same age. I remember us all lamenting how ‘meh’ Brayshaw and Cerra were looking a few years into being fast tracked.

They did play more or less every possible game since they walked in the door.

 

[Taylor]

There was a cost to giving game time to young players, fast tracking their experience. At the time it pushed capable AFL players out of the side who went and dominated the WAFL. I'd like to see similar dominance at Peel Thunder without the AFL side needing to lose half a season in a row.

The hand of cards we have now will be different to the one at the end of the season.

 

[Van_Dyke]

If you're a masochist, an easy pleasure hit would be to go on the Melbourne board and suggest Brodie for Pickett straight swap. I am pretty s**t at predicting trade value, but they wouldn't do this would they?

straight swap would be robbery

I’ve kind of given up on having any idea what list managers are doing trading for players but I think you’d basically need the North 2nd round pick and Brodie to get Pickett. If Rankine is worth a top 5 pick, Pickett has to be worth a pick around 10 surely.

would Melbourne even be interested in Brodie seeing they aren’t short of mids and they’re mainly in the same age bracket (or a touch older) as him.

 

[arsesmart]

Perhaps even more so at the same age. I remember us all lamenting how ‘meh’ Brayshaw and Cerra were looking a few years into being fast tracked.

Well the "us all lamenting" is a massive stretch. How about "some of us"?

Brayshaw and Cerra had a dozen or more games under their belts at the same age as Erasmus. Both he and Johnson are looking physically and mentally as capable of playing as them.

Very hard to measure/compare (although the original comparison was to Brodie), but still very different tasks required and expectations. Certainly in terms of the available development spots.

 

[mattis117]

Perhaps even more so at the same age. I remember us all lamenting how ‘meh’ Brayshaw and Cerra were looking a few years into being fast tracked.

Lol, speak for yourself.

 

[Lach72]

I disagree and think he would equate to the Clark trade or a player such as Pickett. But if he isn't valued, then all the more to fast track Erasmus and Johnson.

I can see a similar contract situation to Acres: An offer another club could significantly better

Yeah that aint happening. I just see no way where Brodie => Pickett without significant draft pick pain

I think we're at the stage now where I'm largely comfortable with the list.
I wouldn't mind sitting and gradually replenishing the Colyer/Wilson older types through the draft.

Really comfortable for Ras and Johnno to earn their spots now.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

straight swap would be robbery

would Melbourne even be interested in Brodie seeing they aren’t short of mids and they’re mainly in the same age bracket (or a touch older) as him.

I doubt it but just talking on net value. I think we've rehabilitated the Suns out of Brodie enough to be worth a pick around 20 given his age. So in the fantasy land where we do get Pickett, two picks around 20 would be close enough value I THINK (I say that having been adamant we wouldnt need to pay as much as we did for Jackson so what do I know).

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Yeah that aint happening. I just see no way where Brodie => Pickett without significant draft pick pain

I think we're at the stage now where I'm largely comfortable with the list.
I wouldn't mind sitting and gradually replenishing the Colyer/Wilson older types through the draft.

Really comfortable for Ras and Johnno to earn their spots now.

It's cap space now right? We've shelled out for Jackson on a sheer talent basis (arguable whether he's exactly the type we needed despite the premium price on him), so how much space do we have left? I think elite sides have a core 15ish players they bend over backwards to keep and 10 players they want to keep if they can but wish them well if they get a stupid offer from somewhere (ie a Logue or Brodie). There is the rest of the list which is a combo of vets you know you arent losing unless you want and development projects.

So the question none of us can answer is do we have the capspace to go for one more top 10 player like a Naughton or Pickett to address the final deficiency or are we capped out?

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

To follow on from this, I thought it'd be an interesting exercise to try to group them, so I've given it a shot. Highlighted players are the ones I'd consider others might find contentious but I suppose the key question you have to ask for each of these players is, if another club offered 20% - 30% more than you are (ie Logue, Acres), would you meet half way to keep or let them go?

Table can be copy and pasted if anyone wants to have a go themselves, I've given the untouchables a position to demonstrate that their are very few forwards I think you could put in untouchable.

Do Everything to Keep	Preferred Keep	Vets / Depth	Development
Amiss (F)	Brodie	Fyfe	Erasmus
Brayshaw (M)	Schultz	Walters	Johnson
Jackson (?)	Switkowski	Colyer	Knobel
Cox (D)	Aish	Hamling	Sturt
Serong (M)	Taberner	Wilson	Henry
Chapman (D)	Walker	Reidy	Emmett
Young (D)		Corbett	Draper
Darcy (R)		Hughes	Benning
Clark (D)		Wagner	Worner
Ryan (D)		Banfield	Williams
O'Driscoll (M)		Pearce	Kuek
Frederick (F)			Davies
O'Meara (M)
Treacy (F)

 

[Square Peg]

Is untouchable meant to mean we wouldn't trade them for any price? I get the idea, but technically I would suggest very few players are untradeable if the price we're offered is stupid enough.
Excluding because of age Fyfe and Walters that were previously in that category, personally I would currently only put Darcy and Cox into that rarefied air in that they can't really be adequately replaced as players. Then of course a big number behind them that are elite players we clearly want to keep but not to the point where they're untouchable if the offer is stupid enough.

 

[Square Peg]

Untouchable: Cox, Darcy
Nearly untouchable: Serong, Young, Brayshaw, Pearce
Would be stupid to trade as the potential upside is so huge (but not untouchable): Amiss, Chapman, Jackson, NO'D
The rest are either unexposed, or exposed enough to know they're not untouchable

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Is untouchable meant to mean we wouldn't trade them for any price? I get the idea, but technically I would suggest very few players are untradeable if the price we're offered is stupid enough.
Excluding because of age Fyfe and Walters that were previously in that category, personally I would currently only put Darcy and Cox into that rarefied air in that they can't really be adequately replaced as players. Then of course a big number behind them that are elite players we clearly want to keep but not to the point where they're untouchable if the offer is stupid enough.

Trying to keep it in the realms of possibility. Pretty sure all players are tradeable if some other club is completely stupid but can’t remember the last time a player was shipped against their will to bring in someone else (Burton from Hawks maybe) and Lachie Weller deals are a very big exception. Basically “untouchable” in list management terms would be meeting halfway from some other teams Logue type offer. Kinda a step before the actual trade negotiations

So, players your prepared to pay a bit more than your comfortable to keep around.