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

 

[FreoRicci]

We should be looking at Liam Ryan as a crumbing option.

Absolutely not.
You think Hogan with the minor things he did couldn’t last?
Wait til the shit Ryan did gets out, and he continues the pattern. He’s not getting the protection West Coast pay I mean sponsored by Channel 7 get.

 

[rgauci]

It’s quite amazing how poor some peoples understanding of the list management list spot squeeze is.
I’ve been crunching the numbers on this for months and it’s practically impossible for hamling to remain.
Not unless Sturt and Henry are both traded. And possible even someone else too.

If posters want a scapegoat for this situation - blame the club for providing excessively long deals to players in the 27-35 ranked bracket on the list. That is the only reason for this.

I don’t think it’s as bad as you perceive.

OUT: Colyer, Benning, Wilson which is obvious.

3 ND list spots

Upgrade Treacy… leaves

2 ND selections, and 1 rookie selection.

We could then delist any of the following, Reidy, Williams, Corbett, Emmett and I don’t imagine anyone would draft them, we could add to rookie list if needed or if already on rookie list, just delist.

I thought the AFL changed the rules so you can move players to the rookie draft from the main draft without them becoming delisted. This could work for older players like Fyfe, Walters, JOM as they know they are on their last contracts.

Also could run the gauntlet on Brodie, Banfield, Hughes and delist them also and relist as rookies.

I think they can easily get inventive and keep whoever they want too.

 

[freo_leo29]

Unless all the bottom four sides get to add one NGA player immediately to their rookie list

I've gotta ask, do you actually believe half the stuff you come up with or are you just a lover of ideas?

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

I don’t think it’s as bad as you perceive.

OUT: Colyer, Benning, Wilson which is obvious.

3 ND list spots

Upgrade Treacy… leaves

2 ND selections, and 1 rookie selection.

We could then delist any of the following, Reidy, Williams, Corbett, Emmett and I don’t imagine anyone would draft them.

I thought the AFL changed the rules so you can move players to the rookie draft from the main draft without them becoming delisted. This could work for older players like Fyfe, Walters, JOM as they know they are on their last contracts.

Also could run the gauntlet on Brodie, Banfield, Hughes and delist them also and relist as rookies.

I think they can easily get inventive and keep whoever they want too.

The problem isnt getting enough spots for the minimum draft picks, that's easy, it's just that clubs always turnover more than 4 players and we as supporters dont wont to lose any of the other uncontracted players

 

[rgauci]

The problem isnt getting enough spots for the minimum draft picks, that's easy, it's just that clubs always turnover more than 4 players and we as supporters dont wont to lose any of the other uncontracted players

Personally I’d do the following:

Delist: Wilson, Colyer, Benning, Corbett (add to rookie list), Emmett (add to rookie list), Hamling (add to rookie list), Reidy (rookie) and Williams (cat B rookie).

Upgrade Treacy….

This would leave us

5 ND spots and 0 rookie spots.

Gone for good: Wilson, Colyer, Benning, Reidy and Williams …. 3 players shifted from main list to rookie spot (Hamling, Emmett, Corbett).

 

[Taylor]

I've gotta ask, do you actually believe half the stuff you come up with or are you just a lover of ideas?

Some people just wanna watch the world burn.

 

[Taylor]

I'd like to retain Williams please. He isn't even on the list, he exists outside it with Draper. He has a very high ceiling if he can get out of the Tony Notte

Tony Notte

Age

35

Ht

194cm

Wt

71kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

6.5

2star

K

3.0

1star

HB

3.5

3star

M

0.5

1star

T

0.0

1star

G

0.0

1star

No current season stats available

D

6.5

2star

K

3.0

1star

HB

3.5

3star

M

0.5

1star

T

0.0

1star

G

0.0

1star

gym for guys who wanna get big.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Personally I’d do the following:

Delist: Wilson, Colyer, Benning, Corbett (add to rookie list), Emmett (add to rookie list), Hamling (add to rookie list), Reidy (rookie) and Williams (cat B rookie).

Upgrade Treacy….

This would leave us

5 ND spots and 0 rookie spots.

Gone for good: Wilson, Colyer, Benning, Reidy and Williams …. 3 players shifted from main list to rookie spot (Hamling, Emmett, Corbett).

Williams doesnt impact the main or rookie list as a Cat B rookie. There is no reason to delist and given what he's shown in his league games, that seems a bad idea anyway...

Scham had a similar opinion on Reidy but we really cant go into next year with only 2 actual AFL ruckman (Knobel is going to be nowhere near it)

 

[Dockeroo]

I don’t think it’s as bad as you perceive.

OUT: Colyer, Benning, Wilson which is obvious.

3 ND list spots

Upgrade Treacy… leaves

2 ND selections, and 1 rookie selection.

We could then delist any of the following, Reidy, Williams, Corbett, Emmett and I don’t imagine anyone would draft them, we could add to rookie list if needed or if already on rookie list, just delist.

I thought the AFL changed the rules so you can move players to the rookie draft from the main draft without them becoming delisted. This could work for older players like Fyfe, Walters, JOM as they know they are on their last contracts.

Also could run the gauntlet on Brodie, Banfield, Hughes and delist them also and relist as rookies.

I think they can easily get inventive and keep whoever they want too.

Firstly forget Williams.
He’s a cat B rookie. That’s like a separate list of up to 3 players we can have. The number of players on Cat B list has no impact on main or Cat A rookie list.
Therefore delisting Williams solves nothing.

Secondly you are forgetting Banfield also needs to be upgraded. That’s another min list spot gone.

But finally and most importantly as Snuff says, it would be unprecedented for an AFL club to turnover less than 6 players in an off season. It hasn’t happened in years.

Every club is active in trade week each year to some degree too, which hasn’t been considered in your scenario above. We would be working on several prospective recruits as would everyone else.


Question - find me that last AFL club to change just 4 players from their total playing lists year to year?

I think you will be looking for a long time.

 

[rgauci]

Williams doesnt impact the main or rookie list as a Cat B rookie. There is no reason to delist and given what he's shown in his league games, that seems a bad idea anyway...

Scham had a similar opinion on Reidy but we really cant go into next year with only 2 actual AFL ruckman (Knobel is going to be nowhere near it)

I think the afl changed the rules and you can only have 6 rookies, Cat B or otherwise.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

I think the afl changed the rules and you can only have 6 rookies, Cat B or otherwise.

I dont think so given this from a 2022 fox article

The maximum list size for AFL clubs is 44, including up to two category B rookies, since changes were made in late 2020.

The combination ranges from 36-38 senior-listed players, then between four and six category A rookies, while category B rookies can increase a list to 44.

The 2nd sentence indicates the Cat B list is outside the rest of the list which would makes sense otherwise I dont know any difference between the two

 

[freo_leo29]

Firstly forget Williams.
He’s a cat B rookie. That’s like a separate list of up to 3 players we can have. The number of players on Cat B list has no impact on main or Cat A rookie list.
Therefore delisting Williams solves nothing.

Secondly you are forgetting Banfield also needs to be upgraded. That’s another min list spot gone.

But finally and most importantly as Snuff says, it would be unprecedented for an AFL club to turnover less than 6 players in an off season. It hasn’t happened in years.

Every club is active in trade week each year to some degree too, which hasn’t been considered in your scenario above. We would be working on several prospective recruits as would everyone else.


Question - find me that last AFL club to change just 4 players from their total playing lists year to year?

I think you will be looking for a long time.

Unfortunately the AFL changed the rules of Cat B to only 2 players (plus there may be a concession for an "alternate talent player" but the wording in the rules is weird)


Means Williams spot is at risk IF we have an NGA we are looking to take this year (that slides out of the national draft)

 

[rgauci]

I dont think so given this from a 2022 fox article

The maximum list size for AFL clubs is 44, including up to two category B rookies, since changes were made in late 2020.

The combination ranges from 36-38 senior-listed players, then between four and six category A rookies, while category B rookies can increase a list to 44.

The 2nd sentence indicates the Cat B list is outside the rest of the list which would makes sense otherwise I dont know any difference between the two

Am I right in assuming Draper is the other cat B….

 

[Taylor]

Draper is locked in for his full three years as a cat B

 

[Dockeroo]

Ok I’ve crunched the number here.
In the last 10 seasons since 2013,
18 x 10 clubs have made list changes so that’s 180 observations in this analysis.

No team in that 180 examples has ever turned over less than 5 players from their previous years playing list.

A small handful have made 5 changes

• 2013 western bulldogs
• 2019 western bulldogs
• 2020 richmond

That’s it. Everyone else made 6 or more. In fact, 6 is pretty rare too. It’s usually 8 or 9.

 

[Taylor]

You can see that reflected in the number if out of contract players per club being about a third in the current year, a third to two thirds in the year following current year and then very few contracted for three or more years.

 

[Dockeroo]

You can see that reflected in the number if out of contract players per club being about a third in the current year, a third to two thirds in the year following current year and then very few contracted for three or more years.

That’s right but for some reason we are being too generous IMO with lower ranked players.
Example - 2 more years for Josh draper. Why? One was more than sufficient for the kid.
3 more years for Will Brodie?
The 3 year deal Ethan Hughes received
The 2 year deal Banfield received
The 2 year deal worner received
The 3 or was it 4 year deal Blakely got in 2019
The 4 year deal O’Meara received
Stefan giro getting a 2 year extension in 2019 to 2021

All of the above examples could have been signed with one year less, without losing any of them.
The long term deals are for your Serong, young, Brayshaw, amiss, jackson, Darcy types.

 

[apuchar]

Reidy
Conrad Williams
Colyer
Wilson
Benning


Hamling and Sturt are 50/50 at this point.

Reckon we retain Reidy if we trade Darcy. I think we convert Darcy into a first and a quality mid. He doesn’t have the aerobic capacity and taps to no one. Cash in while the currency is high.

Conrad Williams?? What is that based on?

 

[Superkoops]

Corbett and Hamling could be considered as delisting and being added to rookie list. That offsets Treacy and Banfield being promoted.

Henry seems like a good chance to leave and we can look for an opportunity to bring in one more.

Colyer, Wilson, Benning - three Delistings for 3 ND selections

Reidy not sure - we would need to replace with a ready to go ruck.

Sturt preferably re-signed but a possibility of going as well.

That is 5-6 changes. I doubt there will much more than that.

 

[King Tenz]

That’s right but for some reason we are being too generous IMO with lower ranked players.
Example - 2 more years for Josh draper. Why? One was more than sufficient for the kid.
3 more years for Will Brodie?
The 3 year deal Ethan Hughes received
The 2 year deal Banfield received
The 2 year deal worner received
The 3 or was it 4 year deal Blakely got in 2019
The 4 year deal O’Meara received
Stefan giro getting a 2 year extension in 2019 to 2021

All of the above examples could have been signed with one year less, without losing any of them.
The long term deals are for your Serong, young, Brayshaw, amiss, jackson, Darcy types.

Some of these are especially egregious. Like who is chasing Ethan Hughes to the point we needed to put a 3 year contract on his head?

 

[s_wd6]

I will never understood how Hughes got three years. No part of it made sense. His best role for the team was 'courageous'. We had Duman and Watson as backup in his position, Cox starting to show a lot as a defender, Ryan was AA. Logue, Hamling, Pearce all injured but even that doesn't warrant the three years he got.

 

[apuchar]

I will never understood how Hughes got three years. No part of it made sense. His best role for the team was 'courageous'. We had Duman and Watson as backup in his position, Cox starting to show a lot as a defender, Ryan was AA. Logue, Hamling, Pearce all injured but even that doesn't warrant the three years he got.

He had a very good year and the club probably over-reacted to it. Some clubs had interest in him as we had to pick him up early in the rookie draft otherwise he was expected to be taken iirc.

 

[freo_leo29]

Hughes had just come off 2 seasons where he missed a total of 1 game

Then played every game in 2021 til injury


Club thought he was locked B22, when you think about it, with the exclusion of last season he has been locked B22 since the start of 2019

 

[King Tenz]

Hughes had just come off 2 seasons where he missed a total of 1 game

Then played every game in 2021 til injury


Club thought he was locked B22, when you think about it, with the exclusion of last season he has been locked B22 since the start of 2019

I hear you, I do. But many teams have guys like Hughes who play a fair bit but aren't very good. No one was chasing Hughes to force our hand and give up a long term contract.

 

[s_wd6]

Hughes had just come off 2 seasons where he missed a total of 1 game

Then played every game in 2021 til injury


Club thought he was locked B22, when you think about it, with the exclusion of last season he has been locked B22 since the start of 2019

But he seems like a very replaceable b22 player. Like I don’t think he would make a huge difference whether he’s playing or not