Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. 2024 List Mgmt

  • Thread starter Thread starter ScrappyDo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Okay, since we’ve reached a mutually acceptable contentment on what we need to do, how do we get a top 5 pick?

In order from easiest to hardest. Just some ideas. I haven’t fully considered damage to club or fan base obvs as it is difficult to quantify.

1. Finish bottom 5

Damage is minimal as you have to assume we aren’t doing it on purpose so would happen anyway. As one poster said, May as well lean into and pump early games into kids.

2. Trade future picks into this year

Like WB did to draft Sanders, which I thought was a sensational move. Someone at the kennel knows what’s up and went and just bought a 300 gamer with some magic bean end of first rd picks.

I loved our effort to try and move from 9 to 3 with Clark. I know you’ll say oh well we would’ve missed out on Phillipou or we would’ve drafted Po anyway at 3 but maybe Sheezel or Wardlaw would’ve been better.

3. Free Agency compo for players in prime

Obvious one is Battle. You’d only not match if it generated pick 5. Otherwise keep him.

4. Trade other players of value in contract

Would anyone be interested in Steele for a top pick? North would certainly have a look at it. Hes our fearless skip but He’s one more bad injury away from a half back flank and an early retirement. We should’ve traded Armitage when Richmond came knocking and if someone put up a top 5 pick for Jack, I’d do it. Clearly most difficult path.

Marshall would return a top 5 pick but collateral damage would be pretty large. Heath not ready yet but maybe if he shows enough this could be a risk worth taking. Marshall is Herculean at times but ineffectual often in terms of his primary task of feeding mids. Unless he clears it himself with a scrap kick, the ball is going the other way 3x quicker. Again, another desperate option.

Can’t think of any other ways but I’d be going all in for the first 3 ways asap.

sent frm cracked ifon bf.com
 
Enclosed_Animal said:
Another way to look at the argument above is to ask what we need? Answer is pretty obvious these days: a young very high end mid (probably 2)

To me, the only way to find the type that will make a real difference to us is through the draft. Excluding last year (too soon), players that have appeared in the last 6 or 7 years that would change our situation (and where they were drafted) are below:

Ashcroft (2), Sheezal (3), Wardlaw (4) Horne-Francis (1), Callaghan (3), Daicos (4) Rowell (1) Anderson (2) Walsh (1) Rozee (5) Brayshaw (2) LDU (4).

So 12 inside the top 4 or 5. Something a bit worse than a 50/50 shot

The list of high-end mids that would make a real difference outside of the first few pics in the draft is:

2017 – nobody (worpol best)

2018 – nobody (Cerra best and he went at 5)

2019 – Green (academy), Serong (8) (Flanders next best and he was 11)

2020 – Gulden (academy) An absolute garbage draft, that should never be spoken of

2021 – nobody (Windy best)

2022 – too early to tell

So basically nobody in the last 7 years outside the top 10, and only 2 outside the top 4! Maybe I have missed one here or there. But even so, these are impossible odds!

Inevitably people will respond with a cherry picked example from a decade ago to say you can find mids at any pick (Neale, Merrett, Miller etc). But drafting is clearly a lot better than it was 10+ years ago. These days, to find high-end game changing mids, you NEED a top 4 pick. Otherwise you are just sitting around hoping for the next 'superdraft' like 2002 or 2018 to arrive and deliver us a Dal or Rozee.

Now having a top 4 pick is still no guarantee of course (see multiple posts around this). But looking outside of those pics is just hopes and dreams or silly games of "what about player x" in this random outlier example. As a result you then just resort to praying that Clug or LDU say yes to a dumptruck of cash, or hoping someone falls unseen through our academy (and we dont miss out like we did with McKenzie).

So for me, while I hate the idea of tanking, maybe its time to really consider playing the kids?

I am very against trading good players for a mid-teens pic. That’s just treading water and a culture killer. But is it worth genuinely playing just a few more kids and finishing bottom 4?

And IF we really buy into the above, then maybe we also shop our 2025 first and 2024 second + steak knives to Hawthorn for their first too

Wilson, Pou, NWM, Owens etc are all nice pieces, but increasingly thinking we need to take a really big gamble to actually change anything. And the only gamble I see being worthwhile is getting into those top 4 picks and having at least one shot (ideally 2) at someone of the type listed at the top

And if we do it, it has to be in the next 18 months pre Tassie
Click to expand...


I'd have chad Warner, jai newcombe, will day, Hayden young, Jordan Dawson... among others

None were top 5 picks
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

kernelT said:
Since 2000 we've managed to draft 15 odd players (ND) who have played or look like playing 200 AFL games…

Ball
NDS
Goddard
Fisher
Gilbert
McEvoy
Stanley
Cripps
Ross
Newnes
*Billings
*Acres
*Gresham
*Battle
*King

2021 looking good but early days.

From the rare times we've managed to pick the right players, we've more often than not moved them on or they've walked for little to no gain.

You can argue the toss on where you rank the quality of some of these players, but 200 games is a fair indicator of an excellent career and ROI. It doesn't happen very often and when it does, we usually throw it away like a drunk playing two-up.
Click to expand...

No Montagna huh? Geary?
 
St Neil said:
That is band 1.

Battle would have to take that unless Hawks offered something similar. A contract of $900,000 pa would be band 1.

Looking at the fixture I think we’ll only win 3-4 more matches. Probably finish 15th : pick 4. Band 1 compensation would give us pick 5.

Picks 4 & 5 almost allows us to rebuild the midfield in one draft.
Click to expand...
Andrew Dillon is on record saying he is going to make it very hard for free agents to trigger band one compo. Watch st kilda be screwed by the new rules and get a second round pick
 
joydivision22 said:
Okay, since we’ve reached a mutually acceptable contentment on what we need to do, how do we get a top 5 pick?

In order from easiest to hardest. Just some ideas. I haven’t fully considered damage to club or fan base obvs as it is difficult to quantify.

1. Finish bottom 5

Damage is minimal as you have to assume we aren’t doing it on purpose so would happen anyway. As one poster said, May as well lean into and pump early games into kids.

2. Trade future picks into this year

Like WB did to draft Sanders, which I thought was a sensational move. Someone at the kennel knows what’s up and went and just bought a 300 gamer with some magic bean end of first rd picks.

I loved our effort to try and move from 9 to 3 with Clark. I know you’ll say oh well we would’ve missed out on Phillipou or we would’ve drafted Po anyway at 3 but maybe Sheezel or Wardlaw would’ve been better.

3. Free Agency compo for players in prime

Obvious one is Battle. You’d only not match if it generated pick 5. Otherwise keep him.

4. Trade other players of value in contract

Would anyone be interested in Steele for a top pick? North would certainly have a look at it. Hes our fearless skip but He’s one more bad injury away from a half back flank and an early retirement. We should’ve traded Armitage when Richmond came knocking and if someone put up a top 5 pick for Jack, I’d do it. Clearly most difficult path.

Marshall would return a top 5 pick but collateral damage would be pretty large. Heath not ready yet but maybe if he shows enough this could be a risk worth taking. Marshall is Herculean at times but ineffectual often in terms of his primary task of feeding mids. Unless he clears it himself with a scrap kick, the ball is going the other way 3x quicker. Again, another desperate option.

Can’t think of any other ways but I’d be going all in for the first 3 ways asap.

sent frm cracked ifon bf.com
Click to expand...
Battle is unrestricted so it’s in god’s hands
 
kernelT said:
Since 2000 we've managed to draft 15 odd players (ND) who have played or look like playing 200 AFL games…

Ball
NDS
Goddard
Fisher
Gilbert
McEvoy
Stanley
Cripps
Ross
Newnes
*Billings
*Acres
*Gresham
*Battle
*King

2021 looking good but early days.

From the rare times we've managed to pick the right players, we've more often than not moved them on or they've walked for little to no gain.

You can argue the toss on where you rank the quality of some of these players, but 200 games is a fair indicator of an excellent career and ROI. It doesn't happen very often and when it does, we usually throw it away like a drunk playing two-up.
Click to expand...

Just had a look , the Cats don't seem to have picked many more 200 game players than the Saints, but pretty sure they picked more 300 game players.

Though i didn't count players like Stewart and Parfitt, picked up in 2016 and later.
 
Easiest way to get a better pick , is offer your first rounder plus future first for an earlier first rounder.
You'd want to have someone pretty special in mind though.

Or you can try to be clever and cute like we have before.

Very happy with Wilson this year, so i'm glad we didn't do it this year. Probably only Reid that would be worth that.
 
kernelT said:
Since 2000 we've managed to draft 15 odd players (ND) who have played or look like playing 200 AFL games…

Ball
NDS
Goddard
Fisher
Gilbert
McEvoy
Stanley
Cripps
Ross
Newnes
*Billings
*Acres
*Gresham
*Battle
*King

2021 looking good but early days.

From the rare times we've managed to pick the right players, we've more often than not moved them on or they've walked for little to no gain.

You can argue the toss on where you rank the quality of some of these players, but 200 games is a fair indicator of an excellent career and ROI. It doesn't happen very often and when it does, we usually throw it away like a drunk playing two-up.
Click to expand...


Same with those we've paid up for with picks. Tom Lee, Hickey, Longer, Carlisle, Freeman etc. All cost decent capital. All returned little to nothing back. Even guys like Hind that were promising netted little back and Bruce who was established we got back the picks to get Jones who has been overall disappointing.

We were on a never ending cycle of trying to hock something so that we could win enough to go back to cash converters and but all our shit back.
 
SaintsSeptember said:
Easiest way to get a better pick , is offer your first rounder plus future first for an earlier first rounder.
You'd want to have someone pretty special in mind though.

Or you can try to be clever and cute like we have before.

Very happy with Wilson this year, so i'm glad we didn't do it this year. Probably only Reid that would be worth that.
Click to expand...


Sanders and McKercher both look potential elite as well IMO. Probably could have for one of them but right now we look like we hit that pick out of the park. It's one of those ones that was lucky we didn't trade fora change.

If Collard heads home for less than we gave up the pick for Gresham it will hurt. That's the worry for that last draft to me.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

The recruiters have to read the draft, not just make a trade with the blind hope that we can get some mythical gun with our pick.
In 2012 you get nothing.
In 2017, in hindsight we should have tried to trade 6 and 7 for 1 or 2.
Brayshaw or Rayner. But we probably would have done that and got Paddy Dow.
If we hadn't done the deal with the Hawks we might have got Simpkin or Florent, would make our team marginally better.
Turns out the 2017 draft was kind of putrid for mids.
 
phantom13 said:
100k in 2001 isn’t terrible. Plus it’s not like it’s just one scout.

In any event as the stats show, it’s not much better now with more resources.

Really not sure what your point here is
Click to expand...
It was terrible as the budget was 100k of which 75K was for Bevo's salary. Appalling when you consider the best heads of recruiting at the leading clubs were being payed around 250-300K.

It's why we recruited players sight unseen. Howard and Sweeney come to mind. Typical amateur hour at the saints.
 
Got the fear we will offer a Hannebury style contract to Luke Parker
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Saints43 said:
You don't know what the point is?
The scouting budget was less than 100K.
That includes Bevos wages, travel.

How much do you reckon that leaves to pay scouts?

It was a tin pot operation. That's was his point.

You said "... it’s not like we didn’t have dedicated talent scouts and lost managers in 2000."

We didn't.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the recruiting budget at other clubs was ours many times over.

Pay peanuts, get monkeys

People wonder why our recruiting (& development) has been so poor for so long.

When you’ve got your arse out of your pants its impossible to get quality operators running the show. A major reason why Trout got thrown the keys.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
kernelT said:
Since 2000 we've managed to draft 15 odd players (ND) who have played or look like playing 200 AFL games…

Ball
NDS
Goddard
Fisher
Gilbert
McEvoy
Stanley
Cripps
Ross
Newnes
*Billings
*Acres
*Gresham
*Battle
*King

2021 looking good but early days.

From the rare times we've managed to pick the right players, we've more often than not moved them on or they've walked for little to no gain.

You can argue the toss on where you rank the quality of some of these players, but 200 games is a fair indicator of an excellent career and ROI. It doesn't happen very often and when it does, we usually throw it away like a drunk playing two-up.
Click to expand...
Are your bolded 200 gamers or not?

Cause the top 3 did but so did Fisher, Gilbert, Ross?
 
austinnn said:
Got the fear we will offer a Hannebury style contract to Luke Parker
Click to expand...

I’d have no issues with that.

The trade cost is the question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

akaifu
    • Like
    • Love
List Mgmt. 2026 List management - pt.1
58 59 60 61 62
Replies
2K
Views
57K
gringo2011
gringo2011
Kildonan
    • Like
List Mgmt. 2026 List Management (Part 1)
Replies
11
Views
740
PoppedCorn
PoppedCorn
Hubnester
    • Like
  • Locked
List Mgmt. 2025 List Management Discussion - Part 3
386 387 388 389 390
Replies
10K
Views
437K
Chief
Chief
Hubnester
    • Like
  • Locked
List Mgmt. 2025 List Management Discussion - Part IV
399 400 401 402 403
Replies
10K
Views
464K
Saintos The ITK
Saintos The ITK
Hubnester
  • Locked
List Mgmt. 2025 List Management Discussion - Part V
222 223 224 225 226
Replies
6K
Views
273K
Mat Mann
Mat Mann
P
    • Like
List Mgmt. TDK - Benchmarks for Success
2 3
Replies
63
Views
3K
kyrgios
kyrgios
Tommy Wigs
    • Haha
    • Like
  • Locked
List Mgmt. 2025 List Management discussion - part 2
583 584 585 586 587
Replies
15K
Views
647K
Gavinmitchell11
G

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom