List Mgmt. Adelaide 2018 End-of-Season List Management Decisions

[Vader]

We kept Otten around as depth, that worked a treat on Grand Final day.

Stupid argument. We didn't lose the Grand Final because of Otten.

They don't have to be all 18 year olds, they can be a mid 20's mature age recruit as long as they have the potential to eventually be in the best 22.

That works fine if you're at the bottom of the ladder, in the middle of a major rebuild. It's completely and utterly stupid for a team which is contesting the premiership. Premiership contenders require a number of "depth" players, who are AFL experienced, ready to step into the side at short notice, and capable of performing reliably at the required level.

 

[crows dude]

You can count them if you like
1 - Greenwood
2- Corouch
3- Knight
4- Jenkins
5- Crouch
6- Gibbs
7 - Gallucci
8- Kelly
9 - Sloane
10 - Poholke
11- Seedsman
12 - Talia
13 - Tex
14- Mackay
15 - Hartigan
16 - Brown
17 - Betts
18 - Atkins
19 - Otten
20 - Jacobs
21 - Cheney - Yet to sign
22 - Douglas
23 - Lynch
24 - Laird
25 - Milera
26 - Fogarty
27 - Smith
28 - Himmelberg
29 - McPherson
30 - Doedee
31 - Davis
32 - Keath
33 - Obrien
34 - Mcadam
35 - Stengle

Rookies
Cey
Murphy
Wilson
Hunter - Yet to sign

After thinking about it and if we dont move up the draft at all I think we will use all picks. 8, 13, 16 and 21 gives you 4 good to very good players. So takes our list to 39 with 5 Rookies.

 

[Vader]

Will we go with a 38/6 structure, or a 39/5 structure?

I've been assuming that we'd stick with 38/6, the same structure we used this year. Cat A rookies no longer need to be upgraded before being selected, so having the extra players on the rookie list makes sense from a TPP perspective.

We recently lost McGovern, who was traded with 2 years still to run on his contract. We didn't trade in any highly paid players, and we haven't re-signed any high value players since before he announced his departure. That means that the bulk of the money he was due to be paid in 2019 & 2020 hasn't been reallocated elsewhere. It's quite possible that his departure has created a temporary "war chest", which could allow us to go with a 39/5 list structure (I think 40/4 is unlikely).

Why is this important? A 39/5 list structure would mean that we could re-sign Cheney and make 4 "live" selections (inside the top-21) in the National Draft, whereas a 38/6 list structure means Cheney has to go if we are to use all 4 draft picks (or we could re-sign Cheney and make 3 selections).

Thoughts?

 

[jackster83]

Will we go with a 38/6 structure, or a 39/5 structure?

I've been assuming that we'd stick with 38/6, the same structure we used this year. Cat A rookies no longer need to be upgraded before being selected, so having the extra players on the rookie list makes sense from a TPP perspective.

We recently lost McGovern, who was traded with 2 years still to run on his contract. We didn't trade in any highly paid players, and we haven't re-signed any high value players since before he announced his departure. That means that the bulk of the money he was due to be paid in 2019 & 2020 hasn't been reallocated elsewhere. It's quite possible that his departure has created a temporary "war chest", which could allow us to go with a 39/5 list structure (I think 40/4 is unlikely).

Why is this important? A 39/5 list structure would mean that we could re-sign Cheney and make 4 "live" selections (inside the top-21) in the National Draft, whereas a 38/6 list structure means Cheney has to go if we are to use all 4 draft picks (or we could re-sign Cheney and make 3 selections).

Thoughts?

We may decide to delist and re-rookie Cheney.

I think we will go with 4 selections in the draft. Holding onto 73 instead of using it in the Stengle trade also suggests we may have our eye on someone down the order.

 

[Vader]

We may decide to delist and re-rookie Cheney.

I think we will go with 4 selections in the draft. Holding onto 73 instead of using it in the Stengle trade also suggests we may have our eye on someone down the order.

The decision to hold onto 72 (73?) appears weirder and weirder by the day. Surely they must have some plan for it, given that they coughed up a 2019 pick to get Stengle.

 

[Tex200]

Will we go with a 38/6 structure, or a 39/5 structure?

I've been assuming that we'd stick with 38/6, the same structure we used this year. Cat A rookies no longer need to be upgraded before being selected, so having the extra players on the rookie list makes sense from a TPP perspective.

We recently lost McGovern, who was traded with 2 years still to run on his contract. We didn't trade in any highly paid players, and we haven't re-signed any high value players since before he announced his departure. That means that the bulk of the money he was due to be paid in 2019 & 2020 hasn't been reallocated elsewhere. It's quite possible that his departure has created a temporary "war chest", which could allow us to go with a 39/5 list structure (I think 40/4 is unlikely).

Why is this important? A 39/5 list structure would mean that we could re-sign Cheney and make 4 "live" selections (inside the top-21) in the National Draft, whereas a 38/6 list structure means Cheney has to go if we are to use all 4 draft picks (or we could re-sign Cheney and make 3 selections).

Thoughts?

I hope that, whichever way we go, Cheney is retained.

Thought he had a good year last year. His decision making and ball use is far superior than many of the more favoured players on our list.

 

[Golumless]

Has murphy been upgraded?

At this point, I'd be very surprised if he was. We don't need to upgrade to play them and may opt to underpay Murphy this year.

 

[Golumless]

Stupid argument. We didn't lose the Grand Final because of Otten.

That works fine if you're at the bottom of the ladder, in the middle of a major rebuild. It's completely and utterly stupid for a team which is contesting the premiership. Premiership contenders require a number of "depth" players, who are AFL experienced, ready to step into the side at short notice, and capable of performing reliably at the required level.

A rather big part of it, though, more due to Otten was on a hiding to nothing considering the player he replaced then actually Otten fault. Replaces a Jenkins, a Hartigan or even a Lynch and you probably don't notice a real difference. McGovern quite likely changes that result rather dramatically just due to having another player who is quick and with a + defensive game helps immensely with stopping the ball from moving out of our forward 50. Something that we struggled with massively in that game, especially once Richmond started to even to get on top of us.

Especially for a team that relied on strangling teams in their defensive 50 as much as it did scoring quickly.

Of course, take our chances in the first quarter and it quite likely doesn't matter about having Otten or McGovern there as we're one little run on off delivering the KO punch. That's issue number 1 really, though equally there is a level of that which is "it's football".

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Will we go with a 38/6 structure, or a 39/5 structure?

I've been assuming that we'd stick with 38/6, the same structure we used this year. Cat A rookies no longer need to be upgraded before being selected, so having the extra players on the rookie list makes sense from a TPP perspective.

We recently lost McGovern, who was traded with 2 years still to run on his contract. We didn't trade in any highly paid players, and we haven't re-signed any high value players since before he announced his departure. That means that the bulk of the money he was due to be paid in 2019 & 2020 hasn't been reallocated elsewhere. It's quite possible that his departure has created a temporary "war chest", which could allow us to go with a 39/5 list structure (I think 40/4 is unlikely).

Why is this important? A 39/5 list structure would mean that we could re-sign Cheney and make 4 "live" selections (inside the top-21) in the National Draft, whereas a 38/6 list structure means Cheney has to go if we are to use all 4 draft picks (or we could re-sign Cheney and make 3 selections).

Thoughts?

May depend on our salary cap.

I would prefer to keep Cheney & go 39/5.

 

[Vader]

May depend on our salary cap.

I would prefer to keep Cheney & go 39/5.

That's why I'm thinking that losing McGovern may have freed up enough room in the cap to go 39/5.

 

[1970crow]

That's why I'm thinking that losing McGovern may have freed up enough room in the cap to go 39/5.

I don't think cap is the problem. Cheney will be looking at $150k at the most if retained. His not yet re-contracting is due to 2 factors;

1. No other club offered him a contract based upon a trade scenario
2. If we're going to keep him it's predicated upon us trading more draft picks out than received to get higher up in the draft

It's a shame for him, he's performed pretty well every time that he's taken the field for us. He's a great spoiler for his size, closes well, has great decision making skills and is very neat by foot even when under pressure.

I expect that he'll end up at another club if we don't end up trading up. Clubs projecting to be in the middle won't entertain him, but depth at the challenging clubs and also the kid driven cellar s**t shows will be lucky to have him.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I don't think cap is the problem. Cheney will be looking at $150k at the most if retained. His not yet re-contracting is due to 2 factors;

1. No other club offered him a contract based upon a trade scenario
2. If we're going to keep him it's predicated upon us trading more draft picks out than received to get higher up in the draft

It's a shame for him, he's performed pretty well every time that he's taken the field for us. He's a great spoiler for his size, closes well, has great decision making skills and is very neat by foot even when under pressure.

I expect that he'll end up at another club if we don't end up trading up. Clubs projecting to be in the middle won't entertain him, but depth at the challenging clubs and also the kid driven cellar s**t shows will be lucky to have him.

Would walk into sides like the Gold Coast & Carlton.

Hope he gets another year with us as deserves better than playing with a cellar dweller.

 

[marty36]

I don't think cap is the problem. Cheney will be looking at $150k at the most if retained. His not yet re-contracting is due to 2 factors;

1. No other club offered him a contract based upon a trade scenario
2. If we're going to keep him it's predicated upon us trading more draft picks out than received to get higher up in the draft

It's a shame for him, he's performed pretty well every time that he's taken the field for us. He's a great spoiler for his size, closes well, has great decision making skills and is very neat by foot even when under pressure.

I expect that he'll end up at another club if we don't end up trading up. Clubs projecting to be in the middle won't entertain him, but depth at the challenging clubs and also the kid driven cellar s**t shows will be lucky to have him.

Seriously you do realise what the average wage is and what the base wage is

 

[1970crow]

Seriously you do realise what the average wage is and what the base wage is

I do and I also know that the average wage is entirely irrelevant. He won't be getting the average wage he'll be on near the base wage. Do you know what the base wage is?

 

[Vader]

I don't think cap is the problem. Cheney will be looking at $150k at the most if retained. His not yet re-contracting is due to 2 factors;

1. No other club offered him a contract based upon a trade scenario
2. If we're going to keep him it's predicated upon us trading more draft picks out than received to get higher up in the draft

It's a shame for him, he's performed pretty well every time that he's taken the field for us. He's a great spoiler for his size, closes well, has great decision making skills and is very neat by foot even when under pressure.

I expect that he'll end up at another club if we don't end up trading up. Clubs projecting to be in the middle won't entertain him, but depth at the challenging clubs and also the kid driven cellar s**t shows will be lucky to have him.

The whole reason Adelaide (and many other clubs) went with a 38/6 structure is salary cap. Base payments for players on the rookie list are outside the salary cap, so having 2 extra players there means more money for the remaining 38 players.

I agree that Cheney would not be on big $$$, however, those are still $$$ which we have to include in our salary cap. McGovern's unexpected and unbudgeted departure probably means that we now have enough room in the cap to retain Cheney, where previously he would have been forced out the door.

I like Cheney, and I like what he brings to the team. I think he's a massive upgrade on Kelly, and it's just unfortunate that Kelly has a 2019 contract when Cheney doesn't. Every cloud has a silver lining, and I'm hoping that Cheney's retention is the silver lining to McGovern's cloud.

 

[GreyCrow]

I like Cheney, and I like what he brings to the team. I think he's a massive upgrade on Kelly, and it's just unfortunate that Kelly has a 2019 contract when Cheney doesn't. Every cloud has a silver lining, and I'm hoping that Cheney's retention is the silver lining to McGovern's cloud.

I was surprised the opportunity to trade Kelly out didnt eventuate.

I assume the questions were asked.

 

[Redline]

The club knew about McGovern though and the timeline of events suggest it triggered a number of deals. I think some of his money went towards upping the offers to either Lynch and / or Sloane.

 

[Vader]

The club knew about McGovern though and the timeline of events suggest it triggered a number of deals. I think some of his money went towards upping the offers to either Lynch and / or Sloane.

When you say "it triggered a number of deals", Adelaide only did 3 deals. The first of these was the McGovern trade, the second was a pick swap... which was directly tied to the 3rd deal for Stengle.

Adelaide brought in 2 players who would both be on close to minimum wages (McAdam & Stengle). They lost a player who was on $400k+ (conservative estimate).

Lynch & Sloane were signed much earlier in the year, before McGovern's exit plans became known.

McGovern's departure was both unexpected and unbudgeted - the result of which is that the difference between his salary & McAdam's is now spare room in our salary cap.

 

[azza77]

I hope that, whichever way we go, Cheney is retained.

Thought he had a good year last year. His decision making and ball use is far superior than many of the more favoured players on our list.

Agree, I found it odd it's gotten to this stage and Cheney is the one fighting out for a contract. He is a lot more deserving than a lot of others.

 

[GreyCrow]

Lynch & Sloane were signed much earlier in the year, before McGovern's exit plans became known.

McGovern's departure was both unexpected and unbudgeted - the result of which is that the difference between his salary & McAdam's is now spare room in our salary cap.

Lynch signed June 23
Sloane signed July 11

The McGovern tweet was before that. Much discussion had in here about Mitch wanting to leave in June. I cant see how it was unexpected. Despite the public denials the truth is he did leave

 

[1970crow]

The whole reason Adelaide (and many other clubs) went with a 38/6 structure is salary cap. Base payments for players on the rookie list are outside the salary cap, so having 2 extra players there means more money for the remaining 38 players.

I agree that Cheney would not be on big $$$, however, those are still $$$ which we have to include in our salary cap. McGovern's unexpected and unbudgeted departure probably means that we now have enough room in the cap to retain Cheney, where previously he would have been forced out the door.

I like Cheney, and I like what he brings to the team. I think he's a massive upgrade on Kelly, and it's just unfortunate that Kelly has a 2019 contract when Cheney doesn't. Every cloud has a silver lining, and I'm hoping that Cheney's retention is the silver lining to McGovern's cloud.

I think the rookie contract is about $70k, so if we rookie him I presume that he would earn $80k inside the cap and $70k outside the cap. Or if he ends up on the main list, I'm sure we can squeeze $150k into the cap. I think he'd probably prefer to play AFL for another year at $150k than begin the next phase of his working life.

 

[jenny61_99]

I was surprised the opportunity to trade Kelly out didnt eventuate.

I assume the questions were asked.

Yes but the player Collingwood were going to lose, decided to stay which meant the need for Kelly lessened.

 

[jackster83]

Agree, I found it odd it's gotten to this stage and Cheney is the one fighting out for a contract. He is a lot more deserving than a lot of others.

Being injured most of the time doesn't help his cause unfortunately.

 

[Golumless]

Lynch signed June 23
Sloane signed July 11

The McGovern tweet was before that. Much discussion had in here about Mitch wanting to leave in June. I cant see how it was unexpected. Despite the public denials the truth is he did leave

McGovern going definitely played a role in us keeping Lynch, seeing it makes much more sense for us to sacrifice Lynch and to switch to a 3 tall forward line, then keep Lynch. Sloane though, I reckon was going to stay anyway, however equally may have been waiting on recovery.

 

[Stiffy_18]

When you say "it triggered a number of deals", Adelaide only did 3 deals. The first of these was the McGovern trade, the second was a pick swap... which was directly tied to the 3rd deal for Stengle.

Adelaide brought in 2 players who would both be on close to minimum wages (McAdam & Stengle). They lost a player who was on $400k+ (conservative estimate).

Lynch & Sloane were signed much earlier in the year, before McGovern's exit plans became known.

McGovern's departure was both unexpected and unbudgeted - the result of which is that the difference between his salary & McAdam's is now spare room in our salary cap.

Not true! McGovern's departure was expected pretty early in the season. It's kind of hard not to expect it when a player himself is walking around the locker room and saying he will not he there next year. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out he is out of there come season's end. This has come from one of the players who were sick and tired of his antics this year. A well respected player, in our top 5 or 6 players.