List Mgmt. 2024 List Management 📃

[JustaBattler]

I don't see why we went after Williams at all for that money.

Williams and Saad were both massive upgrades to teh Carlton list at the time - remember Docherty was no certainty to ever come back, Marchbank was perpetually injured, McGovern the same ...apart from Weitering and Jones- Carlton had nothing much back there.

I think it was a fundamental misreading of the list and where we were at, as well as what Zac was capable of. We thought he was going to be a gun mid at our footy club, based on one or two (albeit excellent) games at GWS when he played that role.

That didn't turn out to be the case did it? He was awful in that role for us and he's quite honestly been pretty average in general.

Williams was supposed to play midfield as well as HF as a rotation - remember (again) what did our midfield look like at the time - an ageing Murphy, Crpps carrying the team and a first year Walsh - Kennedy was learning to run lines in VFL, SPS/Fisher/Lob and DOw had no come on , Cuninghjam was always injured...

when Williams was on field he was always one of our better players...

Secondly I wholeheartedly disagree that he was worth pick 8. Can you find me any HBF in history that was traded for such a high price, whilst being out of contract? What he's done since doesn't change that we overpaid at the time. Who knows who else we could have had on the list if we split 8, or what other future deals we could have gotten done.

sure, who knows = no one.

We will never know, because Austin paid the highest price ever for a comparable player and folded to Dodoro.

harsh call - Saad has proven his 'cost' I would say ...

I don't know what other teams needs or wants were precisely in that time because it was now 4 trade periods ago, but on paper GWS or Collingwood would appeal as trading buddies.

GWS have a long history of trading into early picks as well as a good trading relationship with us. They had 15 and 18 that year plus all their future selections.

Collingwood had 17, 19 and 30.

Freo had 14 and 27.

I think a better deal could have been struck with Essendon, even if it did include 8.

Seems like options applenty to me and I remember feeling exactly the same way at the time.

speculation - fair enough but speculation

You'd have to ask Blake why he chose us. I assume part of his reasoning was our massive weakness at his best position.

I gave Austin a tick for that, but I won't pretend it was some mastermind, trade coup either.

Acres is on the record as saying he was offered a longer contract - simple as that. I won't criticise Austin or Voss or the Club for being able to attract a better option for a wing than LoB/Cottrell were at the time for ( literally) peanuts...

 

[Gethelred]

I feel Boyd gets a bit overated on here. Quick and a great kick but doesn't win much of the ball. Decent defensively but small so limited on the types he can play on. Not that young.

Don't get me wrong. I like him as a player. I just think if he's in the team it's as a rebounder and he struggles to find the ball. We have better options in that role.

Definately a chance for round 1 but far from locked in the 22 as a lot would have him. Reminds me of how Stocker used to be in everyone's preaseason 22.

I'm hoping Cowan comes on and gets that 7th role in our defence as he's alot more flexible.

See, I think you're missing four things here: TOG, leg speed, intercept possessions, and tackling.

Stocker didn't really take intercept disposals; Boyd is - for a small defender - elite in his ability to intercept the ball, causing a turnover. He is a much better tackler than Stocker, and much (MUCH) faster. And finally, Stocker struggled to play 70% game time; Boyd, during his patch mid season stringing games together, was averaging 86%.

TOG is a force multiplier statistic; less rest for Boyd means more rests for Docherty, Marchbank, Newman and Gov, and has flow on effects to midfield. It's why Cotts is a shoe-in until someone unseats him; Acres can be the matchwinner, but Cotts means Acres, Walsh, Cerra, Kennedy get rests more than another player statistically superior would allow.

It's a team statistic, even if it doesn't seem like it is.

 

[lily of laguna]

I don't know what you mean here, but I think it's pretty clear we are too open with the media or there is a leak and it's hurt us at the trade table IMO. Have you noticed they always seem to be able to confidently report "Carlton are seeking a X round pick for Y player" or "will offer X pick", especially since we've had Austin steering the ship?



Yeah I get that, but i'm really only interested in what WE do as a club. Williams (so far) has been a massive failure, on huge money wouldn't you agree? We have a lot of money tied up in him, for a position that we have quite a lot of depth in. That is on Austin...



I would have split 8 into a pick in the mid teens and a 2nd rounder of some description, which would have easily been able to be achieved; clubs always want to get inside the top 10.

An uncontracted Saad, who had packed his locker if my memory serves me correct, in no way was worth a top 10 pick. He's a great player, but we overpaid. History shows us we overpaid. That is on Austin...



I've got no issue with the Hewett acquisition, was happy with it at the time and I think he's got some things to offer us as a player.



He did though. Freo offered crap money and low years, he would have stayed if they offered what was fair as he is on record saying, rather than us prying him out as part of some plan.

"Fremantle’s low-ball offer forced Blake Acres to head to Carlton despite having a career-best season at the Dockers..."

"Contract talks weren’t going the way I would’ve liked at Freo so I wanted to see what was out there and if there were any other potential good fits for me,”

I give Austin a tick for getting it done, but he absolutely fell into our lap.



Maybe. I just feel that our position was too well known and we had nowhere to go in negotiations, especially for a player who has 2 years remaining on his contract. North had a swag of priority selections they basically needed to trade. We should have done more to wrangle one of them, instead we actually moved back in the draft, to move Fisher on.

I thought it was poor business and was really surprised posters here were celebrating it. I wouldn't have minded keeping Fisher...



I have an issue with some of his decisions and the outcomes for our footy club, all of which I've spoken about replying here and previously. His ability to "build" a list remains to be seen completely.

The demeanour stuff is something that struck me right away with him and my view hasn't changed. Some of the deals he has done strike me as soft negotiating, which for me lines it up with the view of him I have as a person as someone that perhaps is more agreeable than ruthless. I definitelty don't want a Dodoro, but I don't want a list boss that's a push over either...

I'm fine with people disagreeing with that assessment, but it's what I think.

It doesn’t phase me at all that you see the value of the trades/outcomes differently to me.

For example, I think that Saad was well and truly worth what we paid not only in on field output (which is excellent) but also in his value as a great citizen and culture builder within a youngish team!

What I find unpalatable with your comments are the “I would have done this” or “he should have split pick 8 and just given up 1 of those” type comments.

Without being present and seeing the negotiation unfold or understanding what the overall strategy was at the time it is just being a keyboard warrior.

It’s easy to say he could have done better or got more out of each transaction, but do you really know that?

The Acres “fell in his lap” statement, do you know if any other clubs made overtures? Do you know when Austin made his approach? Was it just money/contract length that got the deal done? Without this kind of information, it’s easy to dismiss it as dumb luck but in reality anyway player movement takes a lot of planning, negotiation and skill to execute.

So by all means have an opinion on the success or failure of a trade but don’t paint someone as incompetent without the facts!




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Arr0w]

I don't know what you mean here, but I think it's pretty clear we are too open with the media or there is a leak and it's hurt us at the trade table IMO. Have you noticed they always seem to be able to confidently report "Carlton are seeking a X round pick for Y player" or "will offer X pick", especially since we've had Austin steering the ship?

Media gets information on every single club, some of leaks are put out on purpose to drive a preferred outcome

Was told mid year Brockman wanted out and wanted to get to WC. I mean everyone knew

Media ask the question of industry experts, what is player X worth in a trade, response is generally in a reasonable range, so it's not like it is a leak

Yeah I get that, but i'm really only interested in what WE do as a club. Williams (so far) has been a massive failure, on huge money wouldn't you agree? We have a lot of money tied up in him, for a position that we have quite a lot of depth in. That is on Austin...

I am only interested in what WE do too (actually I enjoy the trade/draft period), but was just giving you some context to the industry in regards to FAs.

Again, do you think a so called ruthless operator did well stumping up that type of cash for Ben McKay

It was only due to North matching the bid if they didn't get a 1st round compensation

Back to Williams, I don't see it as a massive failure as he still has time, just like McGovern

I would have split 8 into a pick in the mid teens and a 2nd rounder of some description, which would have easily been able to be achieved; clubs always want to get inside the top 10.

An uncontracted Saad, who had packed his locker if my memory serves me correct, in no way was worth a top 10 pick. He's a great player, but we overpaid. History shows us we overpaid. That is on Austin...

You are still basing this on a deal getting done for a late 1st rounder, which would have been unlikely given Saad's ability and fitness to stay on the park

The pick was used on Zach Reid, think that deal looks pretty goid at the moment

I've got no issue with the Hewett acquisition, was happy with it at the time and I think he's got some things to offer us as a player.

I agree, a vital role player

He did though. Freo offered crap money and low years, he would have stayed if they offered what was fair as he is on record saying, rather than us prying him out as part of some plan.

"Fremantle’s low-ball offer forced Blake Acres to head to Carlton despite having a career-best season at the Dockers..."

"Contract talks weren’t going the way I would’ve liked at Freo so I wanted to see what was out there and if there were any other potential good fits for me,”

I give Austin a tick for getting it done, but he absolutely fell into our lap.

16 other clubs, had the opportunity to entice Acres, they didn't and we benefited from putting up a fair and reasonable offer

What were these other so called ruthless, competent list managers doing missing out on a player of his calibre, costing only 350K a year

Maybe. I just feel that our position was too well known and we had nowhere to go in negotiations, especially for a player who has 2 years remaining on his contract. North had a swag of priority selections they basically needed to trade. We should have done more to wrangle one of them, instead we actually moved back in the draft, to move Fisher on.

I thought it was poor business and was really surprised posters here were celebrating it. I wouldn't have minded keeping Fisher...

Fisher was traded for what he was worth, a mid to late 2nd rounder. We may have been able to squeeze out more, but that would have required us paying some of his salary, for a guy that had fallen in the pecking order

I have an issue with some of his decisions and the outcomes for our footy club, all of which I've spoken about replying here and previously. His ability to "build" a list remains to be seen completely.

I think I can add criticism in seeing all sides of a trade and its short to longterm strategy. So far, Austin has added vital components from best 22 locks to cheap role players and depth.

I see our list in that 3-6 range, I no longer see wholes, just upgrade opportunities

The demeanour stuff is something that struck me right away with him and my view hasn't changed. Some of the deals he has done strike me as soft negotiating, which for me lines it up with the view of him I have as a person as someone that perhaps is more agreeable than ruthless. I definitelty don't want a Dodoro, but I don't want a list boss that's a push over either...

I think your perception of a person that you have never spoken to, or involved in a deal, has made you prejudge him as a negotiator

I couldn't care less if he had a voice like Peewee Herman as long as he continues to improve our list

I'm fine with people disagreeing with that assessment, but it's what I think.

No issue with a differing view

 

[Elmer_Judd]

Williams if healthy, is a massive bonus for us next season..

Still a classy player..Our list bats pretty deep these days, and it's a testament to Austin and Agresta for helping build our depth, esp one that is in sync with Vossy and our coaching panel.

Trading out previous best 22 players in Fisher and Dow was a luxury we couldn't afford previously, but it's a sign how far we have come with our list management.

Best list this club has had since 1995, of that I have no doubt. We are primed to win a flag in the next few years.. I see no reason to be cynical/negative at all.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Surely I've build the Pom credits by now lol

Do we surmise from point C under the Rookie B category, that 1 of the 3 must be from Ireland, rather than only 1 can be from Ireland?

I've seen it written both ways in places so that created some confusion?

You've certainly built plenty of credits for the work you have done in the Blues community Pommy, but some of those were used to erase the automatic debit that Poms generally start with when it comes to we convicts.

Quick, renounce all things Piers Morgan and we're sweet.

 

[Pommylovescarlton]

Do we surmise from point C under the Rookie B category, that 1 of the 3 must be from Ireland, rather than only 1 can be from Ireland?

I've seen it written both ways in places so that created some confusion?

You've certainly built plenty of credits for the work you have done in the Blues community Pommy, but some of those were used to erase the automatic debit that Poms generally start with when it comes to we convicts.

Quick, renounce all things Piers Morgan and we're sweet.

This is the one I cannot answer!

Essendon listed two Irish players, but reading the age article I posted that had the director of Irish football and the AFL scouts this is a recognised pathway for Irish players and saints Collingwood and us will basically run our own camps as a NGA substitute as the 3 Melbourne clubs listed have a pants success rate of kids coming from the academy.

So I would assume as the documentation presented to the media this year (I posted) and the players it's 3 Cat B and like madden at GWS (the AFL float the rule Cat B to max out at 3 providing they meet the pathway and also meet less than 6 on rookie A)

So If you held a gun to my head and say why can Carlton have 2 X Irish kids I would say as we're doing the AFL a favour and building exposure in Ireland (been big news from being approached by a journo in Ireland) we can manipulate this rule and they listed them on the AFL international rookies not Irish rookies (they specify) that it bypasses the law and is basically under the unusual pathway program so therefore us saints and pies will be able to effectively add 3 players as long as we have 44 players.

Cat B is completely cooked since covid that now you can effectively stay on there forever within restraints if both parties agree (player and club)

It's a confusing law, and something I still see conflict of, however 8 clubs since 2020 when they amended the rookie list to be floating list, have had 3 cat Bs and some not actually falling into the pre agreed requirements. Like pies had 4 at one stage when they reported it was max 2. And there is no rhyme and reason as they had Cat A spots available the benefit is Cat B are all outside cap and capped at minimum payment where a cat A can be paid with 50% outside cap. So I'd guess no one really cares at AFL house.

Present a problem moving forward that everything needs to align, NGA bidding j heard two pundits suggest you can pick n mix to match, which is against AFL rules it works 1 to 100 on order regardless of value etc and I've heard multiple sources say 3 2 cat bs etc,

But only passing on what I know and have seen or been told by people in industry (how I learn I hound them for information to understand laws)

Also I hate piers he ain't a pom imo and I'm sorry my team's don't float everyone's boat

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

I would have split 8 into a pick in the mid teens and a 2nd rounder of some description, which would have easily been able to be achieved; clubs always want to get inside the top 10.

An uncontracted Saad, who had packed his locker if my memory serves me correct, in no way was worth a top 10 pick. He's a great player, but we overpaid. History shows us we overpaid. That is on Austin...

You do realise re: the Saad trade, that after Essendon were gifted the compensation pick 7 for Daniher, they had the 2 picks immediately before ours. So Dodoro openly said that if we negotiate with any club to try and split pick 8, he'd better our offer with their pick 7 - so we were gazumped.

What should Austin have done then, just packed up and walked away?

First of all, you are incorrect. Jack Carroll was taken at pick 41, which is a pick that we got via Geelong in a seperate deal. We bundled 48 in a deal with Sydney.

You are totally correct here. We essentially traded pick 30 to the Cats for Fog and pick 38 - which we used to pick Jack Carroll.

So we received Fogarty and Carroll for pick 30. Not happy with that?

And we did bundle pick 48 in a deal with Sydney - which we received pick 31 and drafted Corey Durdin. Not happy with that either?

Maybe, I could possibly overlook it if he wasn't a nervous wreck in general every time I see him.

This is from after the most recent trade period; 4 years into the job. He's gripping the table for dear life, constantly gulping and how's that nervous cough/laugh when there is silence? These aren't the traits of a confident man. I'd hate to see what how he bahaves in the throws of a tense trade situation.... I doubt it's beneficial for us.

I would love to play poker against him for piles of money.

I seriously couldn't give a flying **** if he comes out at media conferences wearing a gorilla suit and talking in Klingon, so long as he gets the deals done.

He openly admits himself that speaking to the media isn't his 1 wood - which has NOTHING to do with his negotiation skills at the trade table. Nice attempt to try and assassinate his character though.

Or you could just go to the 20:30 mark of this interview to get a bit of an insight.

Summer Sessions episode two | Nick Austin

We're back on draft week for episode two of our pre-season podcast where Head of List Management Nick Austin joins us to talk about a big week at IKON Park.

www.carltonfc.com.au

 

[marcmurphy3]

To be honest I don't think we lost much giving pick 8 for Saad rather then splitting the pick (even if we could). 2020 was a crapshoot with no underage afl played in Vic. Just look at the players drafted from our pick onwards.

We ended up getting pick 7 (Hollands) from that draft 3 years on for almost nothing. Despite him having achieved little so far I would still take him before most of those taken between pick 10-20.

 

[Kings of Lygon]

No issue with a differing view

I think we've probably covered everything off and just disagree on some things. What do you think?

I think your perception of a person that you have never spoken to, or involved in a deal, has made you prejudge him as a negotiator

I couldn't care less if he had a voice like Peewee Herman as long as he continues to improve our list

I haven't prejudged him, but nothing he's done since my first impression of him has really convinced me to change my view of him as a negotiator. It's safe to say he didn't get off to a good start in 2020, in my books at least.

Until he has a solid 'victory' in a tough trade circumstance, he's a huge watch for me in a critical position. Let's hope he changes my mind and sticks it up me, for all our sakes...

 

[BigFrizz36]

Media gets information on every single club, some of leaks are put out on purpose to drive a preferred outcome

Was told mid year Brockman wanted out and wanted to get to WC. I mean everyone knew

Media ask the question of industry experts, what is player X worth in a trade, response is generally in a reasonable range, so it's not like it is a leak


I am only interested in what WE do too (actually I enjoy the trade/draft period), but was just giving you some context to the industry in regards to FAs.

Again, do you think a so called ruthless operator did well stumping up that type of cash for Ben McKay

It was only due to North matching the bid if they didn't get a 1st round compensation

Back to Williams, I don't see it as a massive failure as he still has time, just like McGovern

You are still basing this on a deal getting done for a late 1st rounder, which would have been unlikely given Saad's ability and fitness to stay on the park

The pick was used on Zach Reid, think that deal looks pretty goid at the moment

I agree, a vital role player


16 other clubs, had the opportunity to entice Acres, they didn't and we benefited from putting up a fair and reasonable offer

What were these other so called ruthless, competent list managers doing missing out on a player of his calibre, costing only 350K a year


Fisher was traded for what he was worth, a mid to late 2nd rounder. We may have been able to squeeze out more, but that would have required us paying some of his salary, for a guy that had fallen in the pecking order


I think I can add criticism in seeing all sides of a trade and its short to longterm strategy. So far, Austin has added vital components from best 22 locks to cheap role players and depth.

I see our list in that 3-6 range, I no longer see wholes, just upgrade opportunities


I think your perception of a person that you have never spoken to, or involved in a deal, has made you prejudge him as a negotiator

I couldn't care less if he had a voice like Peewee Herman as long as he continues to improve our list


No issue with a differing view

You are absolutely spot on. Each individual trade only matters in terms of the overall picture. Our list manager (with the help of our previous list manager who put our spine together) has overseen a period where we gave risen from 12th to 9th to 3rd.

By any definition our list is in a great position. To bemoan the price that was paid for the AA Saad or to downplay the acquisition of Acres seems to indicate a pre conceived idea of Austin as does a perception that he is not a great media performer.

Personally think that turning players surpluss to requirements in Fisher and Dow into Hollands and a second rounder was great business.

Were now in the sweet spot. Most of us are looking forward to enjoying the ride whilst some would prefer to nit pick as to how we got there.

 

[Robertio]

It sounds like you didn't read through it thoroughly enough if your take is that is boils down to 2 things.



I don't see why we went after Williams at all for that money. I think it was a fundamental misreading of the list and where we were at, as well as what Zac was capable of. We thought he was going to be a gun mid at our footy club, based on one or two (albeit excellent) games at GWS when he played that role.

That didn't turn out to be the case did it? He was awful in that role for us and he's quite honestly been pretty average in general.



First of all, you are incorrect. Jack Carroll was taken at pick 41, which is a pick that we got via Geelong in a seperate deal. We bundled 48 in a deal with Sydney.

Secondly I wholeheartedly disagree that he was worth pick 8. Can you find me any HBF in history that was traded for such a high price, whilst being out of contract? What he's done since doesn't change that we overpaid at the time. Who knows who else we could have had on the list if we split 8, or what other future deals we could have gotten done.

We will never know, because Austin paid the highest price ever for a comparable player and folded to Dodoro.

I don't know what other teams needs or wants were precisely in that time because it was now 4 trade periods ago, but on paper GWS or Collingwood would appeal as trading buddies.

GWS have a long history of trading into early picks as well as a good trading relationship with us. They had 15 and 18 that year plus all their future selections.

Collingwood had 17, 19 and 30.

Freo had 14 and 27.

I think a better deal could have been struck with Essendon, even if it did include 8.

Seems like options applenty to me and I remember feeling exactly the same way at the time.



You'd have to ask Blake why he chose us. I assume part of his reasoning was our massive weakness at his best position.

I gave Austin a tick for that, but I won't pretend it was some mastermind, trade coup either.

Pick 8 for not just a HBF but for what he brings with his run IMO was a steal.

 

[BigFrizz36]

I think we've probably covered everything off and just disagree on some things. What do you think?



I haven't prejudged him, but nothing he's done since my first impression of him has really convinced me to change my view of him as a negotiator. It's safe to say he didn't get off to a good start in 2020, in my books at least.

Until he has a solid 'victory' in a tough trade circumstance, he's a huge watch for me in a critical position. Let's hope he changes my mind and sticks it up me, for all our sakes...

I sincerely hope that his modus operandi is not to "change your mind and stick it up you", regardless of the high opinion that you seem to have of yourself and your retrospective knowledge of recruiting.

I hope that he just continues to improve our list

 

[Stamos]

Surely I've build the Pom credits by now lol

That states only 1 Irish as Cat B

Probably the most secretive sport I've ever witnessed

It is utterly absurd that the AFL don't clearly state the list rules so that the supporters can understand them.

 

[Arr0w]

I think we've probably covered everything off and just disagree on some things. What do you think?



I haven't prejudged him, but nothing he's done since my first impression of him has really convinced me to change my view of him as a negotiator. It's safe to say he didn't get off to a good start in 2020, in my books at least.

Until he has a solid 'victory' in a tough trade circumstance, he's a huge watch for me in a critical position. Let's hope he changes my mind and sticks it up me, for all our sakes...

Okay, now I understand where you are coming from in regards to Austin

For me, being a tough negotiatior while important isn't the number one trait of a list manager

I believe it's using the limited resources at your disposal to build a balanced list, a list that was far from balanced when he took over and now has a better quality of player in that 14-28 range

I don't see what Austin has delivered at this point as an overwhelming success, as you constantly need to improve/regenerate your list, but he is not even in the same postcode as failing to deliver on outcomes during his tenure

Not one single acquisition trade or draft of note could be considered a failure, but some positions need more evidence to judge the likelihood of success

 

[Pommylovescarlton]

That states only 1 Irish as Cat B


It is utterly absurd that the AFL don't clearly state the list rules so that the supporters can understand them.

It did indeed but also I presented players handbook and the AFL media kit for 2023 trade and draft that clearly stated 3 cat Bs and another screenshot of multiple clubs with 3 cat Bs, and then the age article with quotes from the AFL and the scouts both Irish boys were cat B and also Essendon with dual cat B Irish players, which only Cillian was Irish cat B other was international (2 seperate codes for cat B)

Also mentioned that it's a unique pathway. Like honestly I don't actually care enough lol but all I can tell you is my understanding, and the evidence of multiple clubs having cat B and also speaking with Ireland reps who tipped me off on it and interviewing the players. It makes no difference in lost management effectively as we will take 2 players and the cat A and B has to equate to 44 with a list. But I'm just surprised everyone is surprised when multiple AFL clubs have had 3 cat Bs since the dawn of Cat B and the media keep pushing the 2 X cat B, also hearing the NGA bidding system suggesting you can pick and mix your picks to match yet the AFL rules and evidence is numerical order!

Like they could be Cat As but I'd go with the Age article as it explained the process, and also the fact 8 clubs have had 3 cat Bs and other Irish guys since the covid amendment. Also the fact they clearly listed it as international rookies, international rookies only fall under B classification hence specified they'd just say rookie listed like with most Cat A announcements "Dom akeui" was listed on signing as his definition for Cat B

 

[Bletch]

That states only 1 Irish as Cat B


It is utterly absurd that the AFL don't clearly state the list rules so that the supporters can understand them.

Pom and I have been chatting offline. AFL is publishing conflicting information on Cat-B rules in different places. Not sure they know the rules themselves.

The excerpt he posted quoting the three Cat-B players has absolutely come from the AFL, and is recent (it's the 2023 draft guide). And yet, the AFL/AFLPA CBA was posted just a month ago and says 2! Go figure!

Guessing now, but think the maximum list size is still 44, with up to 8 Rookies - including up to 6 Cat-A, and up to 3 Cat-B. Maybe. Perhaps. Unless they change the rules tomorrow.

 

[GT619]

What type of Mickey Mouse club do we have to be to recruit Orazio?

Gws

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

That states only 1 Irish as Cat B


It is utterly absurd that the AFL don't clearly state the list rules so that the supporters can understand them.

It's interesting wording in part c - "...each Club may include a maximum of three extra players on its Rookie List provided those players are...International players including one Irish player;"

I actually interpreted that as meaning: if a club is including three extra players who are international, one of them must be Irish - ie you can have more than one Irish player. Which does conform with the AFL looking to encourage more players being signed from the GAA.

It is confusing though....

 

[AndyLucimitis]

To be honest I don't think we lost much giving pick 8 for Saad rather then splitting the pick (even if we could). 2020 was a crapshoot with no underage afl played in Vic. Just look at the players drafted from our pick onwards.

We ended up getting pick 7 (Hollands) from that draft 3 years on for almost nothing. Despite him having achieved little so far I would still take him before most of those taken between pick 10-20.

Would do the Saad deal ten times over.

He bought a dynamism, speed and x- factor to a plodding struggling team.

He is an absolute gun and you could argue one of the top 3 most important players in our side.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[tarczonandjane]

I didn’t like the Saad deal at the time. But to explain myself, I thought it was a bad idea for a side with a losing culture to bring in a guy who had previously knocked us back. It wouldn’t have mattered what we gave up, I would have been dubious.

He’s really embraced us though, and won an AA guernsey while he’s been there. The pick we gave up was about right. (And yes… I was wrong)

 

[goreds]

Orazio is not a high pressure forward type, skills decent, I really don't see his x factor and he has barely played a game in last 2 years Is there something i am missing that makes him a good get???
I dont think we will be hearing BT calling his name much if at all....

Good get if fit…

Pretty obvious that our list manager doesn’t rate our smalls ability to kick goals. We just don’t have a quality small who can get off the chain, just a few pressure smalls who are serviceable…

Oritz, Martin, Hollands, Cunningham, Cotts/??? gives us a flexibility we didn’t have this year…

 

[manang magoos]

It sounds like you didn't read through it thoroughly enough if your take is that is boils down to 2 things.



I don't see why we went after Williams at all for that money. I think it was a fundamental misreading of the list and where we were at, as well as what Zac was capable of. We thought he was going to be a gun mid at our footy club, based on one or two (albeit excellent) games at GWS when he played that role.

That didn't turn out to be the case did it? He was awful in that role for us and he's quite honestly been pretty average in general.



First of all, you are incorrect. Jack Carroll was taken at pick 41, which is a pick that we got via Geelong in a seperate deal. We bundled 48 in a deal with Sydney.

Secondly I wholeheartedly disagree that he was worth pick 8. Can you find me any HBF in history that was traded for such a high price, whilst being out of contract? What he's done since doesn't change that we overpaid at the time. Who knows who else we could have had on the list if we split 8, or what other future deals we could have gotten done.

We will never know, because Austin paid the highest price ever for a comparable player and folded to Dodoro.

I don't know what other teams needs or wants were precisely in that time because it was now 4 trade periods ago, but on paper GWS or Collingwood would appeal as trading buddies.

GWS have a long history of trading into early picks as well as a good trading relationship with us. They had 15 and 18 that year plus all their future selections.

Collingwood had 17, 19 and 30.

Freo had 14 and 27.

I think a better deal could have been struck with Essendon, even if it did include 8.

Seems like options applenty to me and I remember feeling exactly the same way at the time.



You'd have to ask Blake why he chose us. I assume part of his reasoning was our massive weakness at his best position.

I gave Austin a tick for that, but I won't pretend it was some mastermind, trade coup either.

Sounds like it’s time for you to take on the recruiting job then mate seeing as how you know what’s best for the club

 

[Stamos]

It did indeed but also I presented players handbook and the AFL media kit for 2023 trade and draft that clearly stated 3 cat Bs and another screenshot of multiple clubs with 3 cat Bs, and then the age article with quotes from the AFL and the scouts both Irish boys were cat B and also Essendon with dual cat B Irish players, which only Cillian was Irish cat B other was international (2 seperate codes for cat B)

Also mentioned that it's a unique pathway. Like honestly I don't actually care enough lol but all I can tell you is my understanding, and the evidence of multiple clubs having cat B and also speaking with Ireland reps who tipped me off on it and interviewing the players. It makes no difference in lost management effectively as we will take 2 players and the cat A and B has to equate to 44 with a list. But I'm just surprised everyone is surprised when multiple AFL clubs have had 3 cat Bs since the dawn of Cat B and the media keep pushing the 2 X cat B, also hearing the NGA bidding system suggesting you can pick and mix your picks to match yet the AFL rules and evidence is numerical order!

Like they could be Cat As but I'd go with the Age article as it explained the process, and also the fact 8 clubs have had 3 cat Bs and other Irish guys since the covid amendment. Also the fact they clearly listed it as international rookies, international rookies only fall under B classification hence specified they'd just say rookie listed like with most Cat A announcements "Dom akeui" was listed on signing as his definition for Cat B

Cheers.

The lack of clarity from the AFL is farcical. It should be so simple.

So according to your info, if you have a 3rd Cat B, you sacrifice a Cat A spot, ie the total is still max 44?
After the reports that we had signed both Irish as Cat B, I asked David Zita on a chatboard about it, he said both would be signed as Cat B, but 1 would be listed as Cat A. I guess it equates to the same thing, if it's still a max 44, not 45.

 

[djw1952]

That states only 1 Irish as Cat B


It is utterly absurd that the AFL don't clearly state the list rules so that the supporters can understand them.

I guess that gives them the ability to change them on the run just like they do with most things to suit their hidden agendas, with things like their secret herbs and spices format for compensation picks....still cannot handle how NM got pick three for Big Ben Macca, especially based on the small amount of evidence he has shown so far!!! Buddy Franklin only got the Haws pick 19 when he went to the Swans and was only a year older than McKay at the time, with Buddy perhaps a smidgen of talent ahead value wise...... Yep, a really trustworthy system the AFL have in place there.......must have worked with the colonel on that one!!!