List Mgmt. 2025 List Management Discussion - Part IV

[Hubnester]

2025 List Management Discussion - Part 4

Now that our season is over, and news is starting to break - it's time for a fresh thread.

This thread is to discuss all things list management - trades, draft, free agency, delistings and more.
As we are now officially in our off-season, we'll be wanting to keep this thread more strictly on-topic than the previous iterations.
Be respectful. You are allowed to disagree with someone - but play the ball, not the man. Repeat offenders will have their posting rights revoked.

Thanks to Lore once again for this incredibly useful spreadsheet.

2025 KEY DATES
Free Agency Period: Friday, October 3rd - Friday, October 10th
Trade Period: Monday, October 6th - Wednesday, October 15th
AFL Draft: Wednesday, November 19th - Thursday, November 20th

See Also:
2025 Year in Review Rumours & Confirmed Movements 2025 Draft Discussion
​

 

[saxond74]

Next draft actually looks stronger at this point.

100%
Would trade this years FRDP before next years in a heart beat!!
Not that I know a lot but I trust Cal Twomey when it comes to the draft & if he says next year is stronger & this years drops away after about the first 10-12 then I believe him.
If we could get something back with it that would be great!!

 

[Joffaboy]

Fin Macrae anyone? Delisted by the Pies.

Would be 24 next year.

Seems to dominate the VFL as an inside mid but never really got a crack at senior level.

Yes, I'm really only bringing him up because he's Jack's little brother but if we are open to moving Steele on the Fin might be a handy option to have in reserve?

Seems to play more games than Dow at least so he'd put some pressure on the other young guys to maintain their form.

Are we still in the habit of taking other clubs trash. Got delisted for a reason.

 

[DT_35]

There's been a lot of money talk recently, but when it comes to staying or going in the end friends, family, environment, the coach, ladder position and other factors seem to still be pretty important.

Considering that, if Jevan Pou is expected to come a fair bit later than our pick 7, maybe we should try to turn Marshall and Pick 7 into Flanders and Jevan somehow. Some on here would say we should get something extra on top, others would say we might have to cough up something extra on top, but might be something worth trying for. Twomey seems to think he might have something pretty special and is under the radar due to injury.

Fincher on top would be a decent trio in.

Would need a bit more on top for that.

 

[Anythings_sipposible]

Flanders is contracted, and highly sought after, so we'll have to pay a premium to bring him in.

I'd say on face value, he's worth around pick 10-20, as he was a high draft pick and has played some high quality football at the AFL level, but he has hasn't done this consistently across his career, so you're still paying for potential a bit.

With that in mind, let's say he's worth pick 15. In a normal draft year, and if he was not contracted, you'd expect a second coming with him if you were giving up pick 7. But he is contracted, and this year that pick 7 drifts out to a pick in the teens in a draft with not a whole bunch of obviously elite talent. So 7 straight up seems about right.

Or to make it more concrete, who would we prefer? Flanders, or one of Grlj, Greeves, Marsh, Farrows or Mini Pou? If I'm picking, I'm picking Flanders

 

[bird_man]

If he was in Melbourne he'd be much higher profile and demand more. If it was us selling we'd want that. His season was elite last year. It would be like us losing 25 year old Sinclair.

Yeah I disagree. One really good season for a 24 year old mid isn't enough to warrant that kind of price, no matter where you come from.

And I don't buy into the whole "if he was from Melbourne" argument. Look at the prices clubs had to pay for Treloar, Sheil, Taranto etc.

 

[Joffaboy]

He seems like another Jack Bytel where he has an inside game and not much more. If you aren't adaptable you need to be elite in your role. He might still have a bit more but not sure we need him.

Think we are right for inside mids for the next few years.
The footy boffins are surmising that more than two is overkill the way the game is played. We have two senior inside mids and Pou on the up.

 

[bird_man]

Flanders is contracted, and highly sought after, so we'll have to pay a premium to bring him in.

I'd say on face value, he's worth around pick 10-20, as he was a high draft pick and has played some high quality football at the AFL level, but he has hasn't done this consistently across his career, so you're still paying for potential a bit.

With that in mind, let's say he's worth pick 15. In a normal draft year, and if he was not contracted, you'd expect a second coming with him if you were giving up pick 7. But he is contracted, and this year that pick 7 drifts out to a pick in the teens in a draft with not a whole bunch of obviously elite talent. So 7 straight up seems about right.

Or to make it more concrete, who would we prefer? Flanders, or one of Grlj, Greeves, Marsh, Farrows or Mini Pou? If I'm picking, I'm picking Flanders

Gold Coast also have picks coming out of their arseh*le.

I think asking for 31 or a future pick is more than fair.

Also worth looking at giving them 7 and 18 (Geelong) for 13 or something similar.

 

[beside the seaside]

Flanders is contracted, and highly sought after, so we'll have to pay a premium to bring him in.

I'd say on face value, he's worth around pick 10-20, as he was a high draft pick and has played some high quality football at the AFL level, but he has hasn't done this consistently across his career, so you're still paying for potential a bit.

With that in mind, let's say he's worth pick 15. In a normal draft year, and if he was not contracted, you'd expect a second coming with him if you were giving up pick 7. But he is contracted, and this year that pick 7 drifts out to a pick in the teens in a draft with not a whole bunch of obviously elite talent. So 7 straight up seems about right.

Or to make it more concrete, who would we prefer? Flanders, or one of Grlj, Greeves, Marsh, Farrows or Mini Pou? If I'm picking, I'm picking Flanders

I'm not sure we'll have to pay a premium. He just signed a big contract and he's not even in their starting midfield. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out, I'd assume we are very keen to hang onto pick 7.

 

[luca77]

Would need a bit more on top for that.

Yeah, that's fine. It's more about the personnel goal.

Any idea of how would you make that work?

 

[SaintsofSteel]

Cornes was right on radio today about Flanders. He's a good player who is suddenly being talked about like's he's a superstar because he's up for trade.

Pick 7 for him is insane. He couldn't get into GC's midfield this year when they needed depth beyond Rowell+Anderson. Hopefully the talk about pick 7 is not accurate.

I think pick #7 will be involved but we should be getting something decent in return.

At the end of the day GCS need points so if we can trade the pick to get them points and retain something it will be a win for both.

If they do go ahead with JUH he won't cost them much more than salary.

 

[DT_35]

Yeah, that's fine. It's more about the personnel goal.

Any idea of how would you make that work?

I like where you’re going with it but just needs a little extra.

Something like:
Marshall for Geel 1st & 3rd
Pick 7 + 43 for Flanders & 31
Geel 3rd for Aleer
31 for Flyin Ryan

Net result:
Marshall, 7, 43
For
Flanders, Aleer, Ryan, Geel 1st

 

[ScrappyDo]

The risk with using the F1 is it puts you on the back foot if you get a gun to nominate us next year. Having said that I don't love using pick 7 on him, depending on what we would get back.

That's always the dilemma. I think in when it comes to player acquisition those gun players in general are targeted several years in advance so whilst we all take a binary view it's because we only get to see about 2% of what really goes on in list management. What l mean to say, is that the realities around this conversation are already mapped out, including draft pool qualities and future ambitions.
I suspect we already have 2 elite offensive mids in Nas and Pou. Windy a defensive utility, Hugo probably a 50/50 mix, Box looking good TBD and a few others that can support. Flanders as a mobile, goal kicking accumulator adds another type whilst the days of the slow bull are coming to an end. I don't think we need to be too future focused, with what we already have we just need to pump games into them. A future 1st would pay for Flanders and Ryan, and maybe Aleer too.

 

[beside the seaside]

Not sure. Happy to let the club decide on Marshall. I'd probably let him go if we get a good offer but if we genuinely think we need him keep him.

The interesting thing with Marshall is that we haven't been linked to any other rucks. So we're going to be losing Boyd and Heath, if we lose Marshall we absolutely MUST bring in a ruck, but we're not linked to anyone it seems. Makes me wonder if we actually have no intention of trading him.

 

[luca77]

I like where you’re going with it but just needs a little extra.

Something like:
Marshall for Geel 1st & 3rd
Pick 7 + 43 for Flanders & 31
Geel 3rd for Aleer
31 for Flyin Ryan

Net result:
Marshall, 7, 43
For
Flanders, Aleer, Ryan, Geel 1st

Yeah, that looks pretty good. Twomey has Jevan around 17 but that might get us pretty close.

 

[Joffaboy]

We demand that we get overs for Marshall or Wilkie because they are contracted but don't want to pay for a contracted player?

I know Flanders was not in the starting 23 and Marshall and Wilkie are vital.to our team, but we can't call other club supporters deluded if we do the same thing.
I dont want to use pick 7, as I like shiny new toys on draft night, but it seems the strategy is for established players not draftees this year, so I reckon our first is used maybe pick 16 coming back? Don't know maybe 31 which can be used on Ryan or Aleer.
I think GC would like the SC relief so if we have been discussing with GC a trade in good faith, they probably trade with us. Only Essendon has a better frdp but would they use pick 5?

 

[luca77]

The interesting thing with Marshall is that we haven't been linked to any other rucks. So we're going to be losing Boyd and Heath, if we lose Marshall we absolutely MUST bring in a ruck, but we're not linked to anyone it seems. Makes me wonder if we actually have no intention of trading him.

The TR guys mentioned Heath getting delisted and Dees getting him for nothing that way.

I don't think we've announced him getting delisted. If we do, does that need to happen before the trade period, or is that something we can do after the Marshall situation is decided? I had a feeling there was some kind of deadline for these things, but might be wrong.

 

[gubby88]

The interesting thing with Marshall is that we haven't been linked to any other rucks. So we're going to be losing Boyd and Heath, if we lose Marshall we absolutely MUST bring in a ruck, but we're not linked to anyone it seems. Makes me wonder if we actually have no intention of trading him.

which also makes me think we arent losing Marshall

 

[Veer Right]

Fin Macrae anyone? Delisted by the Pies.

Would be 24 next year.

Seems to dominate the VFL as an inside mid but never really got a crack at senior level.

Yes, I'm really only bringing him up because he's Jack's little brother but if we are open to moving Steele on the Fin might be a handy option to have in reserve?

Seems to play more games than Dow at least so he'd put some pressure on the other young guys to maintain their form.

Comes across as a Mark Mcgough type. To good for VFL and not quite up to it at senior level.

 

[thekizzler]

The interesting thing with Marshall is that we haven't been linked to any other rucks. So we're going to be losing Boyd and Heath, if we lose Marshall we absolutely MUST bring in a ruck, but we're not linked to anyone it seems. Makes me wonder if we actually have no intention of trading him.

If we lost Marshall as well, I'm sure we would do the same thing as last season.

Have a swing at a state league ruckman as back-up who can essentially be fourth-choice.

Then roll with TDK, Dodson, Keeler, state league ruck. Silvagni could possibly ruck in a disaster as well.

We definitely won't have elite ruck depth, but not many clubs do and you don't really need to have it either.

 

[beside the seaside]

If we lost Marshall as well, I'm sure we would do the same thing as last season.

Have a swing at a state league ruckman as back-up who can essentially be fourth-choice.

Then roll with TDK, Dodson, Keeler, state league ruck. Silvagni could possibly ruck in a disaster as well.

We definitely won't have elite ruck depth, but not many clubs do.

If we start getting linked to a ruck then it will seem more likely that we're losing Marshall. The state league ruck was a failure this year. Kind of funny that Melbourne will have Gawn, Heath and that other massive dude that used to play for us.

Edit - Tom Campbell

 

[Anythings_sipposible]

Gold Coast also have picks coming out of their arseh*le.

I think asking for 31 or a future pick is more than fair.

Also worth looking at giving them 7 and 18 (Geelong) for 13 or something similar.

I'm not sure we'll have to pay a premium. He just signed a big contract and he's not even in their starting midfield. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out, I'd assume we are very keen to hang onto pick 7.

Cant see why Gold Coast wouldn't demand a premium, they don't want to help out a competitor out of the goodness of their heart. I can see 7 and 18 for Flanders and 13 working, but that does involve trading Marshall which may not be in the clubs plans.

This is not to say that I don't think the club should try and get best value, I just think that realistically, 7 for Flanders is a win win, and should be seen as such

 

[Remboy]

Or to make it more concrete, who would we prefer? Flanders, or one of Grlj, Greeves, Marsh, Farrows or Mini Pou? If I'm picking, I'm picking Flanders

Our approach once NAS re-signed was all out on making finals next year. If the club believes Flanders will help achieve that more than a draftee then we'll do what is necessary to get him.
Personally, if we give pick 7 for him I'd hope we get something back.

 

[beside the seaside]

Cant see why Gold Coast wouldn't demand a premium, they don't want to help out a competitor out of the goodness of their heart. I can see 7 and 18 for Flanders and 13 working, but that does involve trading Marshall which may not be in the clubs plans.

This is not to say that I don't think the club should try and get best value, I just think that realistically, 7 for Flanders is a win win, and should be seen as such

My feeling is that the club has had something worked out with Gold Coast for a while, probably not the exact deal but the bones of it. So maybe it is 7 with something else coming back our way. In my opinion the club is cooking right now so I'm happy to back them in.

 

[dudeintheswamp]

Just as an aside, if Carlton are losing JsoS, TDK and Curnow with no one of note coming in, they're starting to smell like bottom... four

 

[St Neil]

Gold Coast also have picks coming out of their arseh*le.

I think asking for 31 or a future pick is more than fair.

Also worth looking at giving them 7 and 18 (Geelong) for 13 or something similar.

After the FA compensation (Allen and Draper) pick 7 will become 9 and pick 18 (Geelong’s first pick for Marshall) will become 20.

Gold Coast’s pick 12 will become 14.

Swapping picks 9 & 20 in exchange for 14 is the equivalent of pick 13/14 (based on the new DVI points).

That seems a fair price to me but would Gold Coast do it?

The risk they face is their two nepo selections need to be matched in the first two or three picks, which could leave them critically short of DVI points.