List Mgmt. Adelaide Crows 2021 List Management thread

[Mutineer]

I can dream

 

[crows dude]

So safe to say he's not a done deal then.

Which is odd given some on the North board seem convinced he's gone and it is a done deal.

We'd have him back in a heartbeat. Thats Norwood and not crows.

 

[Mego Red]

We will be lucky to get pick 30+ for M Crouch in free agency. We have seen this story before.

What are you talking about?

It's probably not band 1, but it's CERTAINLY either band 2 or 3.

We're not getting CEY level compo for Matt f***ING Crouch.

 

[Crow till I die]

What are you talking about?

It's probably not band 1, but it's CERTAINLY either band 2 or 3.

We're not getting CEY level compo for Matt f***ING Crouch.

If we did, we may as well pack up the whole show and just close the doors on the club for good as that is no way to be running a professional organisation

 

[spexau]

If we did, we may as well pack up the whole show and just close the doors on the club for good as that is no way to be running a professional organisation

We don't exactly get to decide what we get for FA compensation. If we did we would've had pick 2 and 3 last year.

 

[Danger in Texas]

A mid that in his best season averaged 23.6 disposals (2019) and 3.6 clearances in his best season (2017) is hardly a player we should be chasing at all.

Sooner he's a list clogger there than here...he's not the future.

Yeah, he’s be turning 27 going into next year, doesn’t fit our list profile. Need to be targeting 22-24 year olds (max age), IMO

I agree with you off the eye test, too... just that I’m sure North fans have watched him more than us and they seem to love him over there lol

 

[Crows I Am]

In the Tippett saga, we lost 2x1st and 2x2nds. Plus, we couldn't trade Tippett, and lost him, so effectively we lost potentially 5 top 30 players on our list, who would be 25 ATM.

Players we would have access to over that period include:

2012: (Atkins, Siggins, Callinan)
Tom Clurey
James Stewart
Tim O'Brien
Kamdyn McIntosh

2013: (Knight)
Patrick Cripps
Zac Merrett
Rory Lobb
Trent Dumont

It will be another 5 years before we recover and are back on a level playing field.

Thanks Triggy.

So we didn't miss much in 2012 then. None of those players would have had a dramatic impact on our side currently.

 

[Crow till I die]

We don't exactly get to decide what we get for FA compensation. If we did we would've had pick 2 and 3 last year.

And the burnt hand should teach best and we should be prepared to put up a contract to Matt that is big enough that to better it, a team would be offering a deal way beyond Band 4 compo (and hopefully band 3 or even 2) - we should be offering brad a deal that if he stays is good money but maybe on a 3 year term, but we should be prepared to match a longer term for similar money

 

[Johnny Rutten]

Tippett saga? Really? Its 2021 folks.

Didn't we make a GF 5 years after Tippett left/the sanctions?

Our current rebuild is due to the fall out from losing the 2017 GF, and the corresponding drastic decline and/or mismanagement of our senior players in 2018/2019 (off-field failures, of course, also a big factor).

 

[Mutineer]

Tippett saga? Really? Its 2021 folks.

Didn't we make a GF 5 years after Tippett left/the sanctions?

Our current rebuild is due to the fall out from losing the 2017 GF, and the corresponding drastic decline and/or mismanagement of our senior players in 2018/2019 (off-field failures, of course, also a big factor).

Maybe we win that Grand Final with the top end picks we missed out on too...

 

[1970crow]

sh*t, I hope not though I guess he'd help our SANFL team somewhat.

nothing more certain than us snagging a couple of hardened plodders to ensure we minimise the beltings.

 

[ams4crows]

If North are super desperate for Talia and want him in to coach too, we could end up getting better compensation for him than we do both Crouch's... Isn't that insane? A 2 year deal at say 750k will get us more than 5 year 550k surely this stupid herbs and spices in the calculation have to be off if that is the case

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Heh, not happening. Good luck with that ... St Kilda seem to be your best bet.

Doubt it as the Saints cap is full.

 

[Skippos]

Dumont's a bit vanilla. But vanilla is fine - lots of clubs have those types as their 'bench mid' going through the rotation. You can't have 'elite' everywhere in the modern salary cap.

Certainly not as bad as people are thinking in here - had his best season last year with the shorter quarters - 45th in the comp for disposals - around the Kelly, Sheed, Cripps, JPK, Libba, Miller, Andy Brayshaw, Viney, Hopper mark. Around that mark for centre clearances too (despite being more of a winger), and 30th for tackles. He's a perfectly fine battler who'd probably give us about as much as Keays does. Not too many wingers who are able to go as well on the inside as he is, and no harm in throwing him right in the guts either. I'm sure he'd make a solid half back too. Favourite part about him is that he's works back defensively really well - great team player - and after years of watching our mids switch off the moment they turned it over, it'd be a refreshing change to have more two-way runners. For probably south of 500-550k I reckon he'd be a real coach/fan favourite. And at 25 - he'll be a 'senior player' when the kids we're drafting now are ready to lead the club.

He's just not very exciting, which means he's not nearly as sexy a FA prospect. But you can't have 'all kids' - you need to balance that with some senior bodies and mentors to keep them learning and protected a bit. Provided Dumont passes the character test, why wouldn't you want him? As long as it didn't dilute the Crouch FA compo if he chose to leave - can't come at the expense of valuable draft capital. But a defensive wingman is a bloody hard role to find and thankless as all hell. He'd be fine.

To be honest I don't know why it'd be us into him and not the cross-town rivals. But here's hoping it stays that way.

 

[The Warlord]

Dumont's a bit vanilla. But vanilla is fine - lots of clubs have those types as their 'bench mid' going through the rotation. You can't have 'elite' everywhere in the modern salary cap.

Certainly not as bad as people are thinking in here - had his best season last year with the shorter quarters - 45th in the comp for disposals - around the Kelly, Sheed, Cripps, JPK, Libba, Miller, Andy Brayshaw, Viney, Hopper mark. Around that mark for centre clearances too (despite being more of a winger), and 30th for tackles. He's a perfectly fine battler who'd probably give us about as much as Keays does. Not too many wingers who are able to go as well on the inside as he is, and no harm in throwing him right in the guts either. I'm sure he'd make a solid half back too. Favourite part about him is that he's works back defensively really well - great team player - and after years of watching our mids switch off the moment they turned it over, it'd be a refreshing change to have more two-way runners. For probably south of 500-550k I reckon he'd be a real coach/fan favourite. And at 25 - he'll be a 'senior player' when the kids we're drafting now are ready to lead the club.

He's just not very exciting, which means he's not nearly as sexy a FA prospect. But you can't have 'all kids' - you need to balance that with some senior bodies and mentors to keep them learning and protected a bit. Provided Dumont passes the character test, why wouldn't you want him? As long as it didn't dilute the Crouch FA compo if he chose to leave.

To be honest I don't know why it'd be us into him and not the cross-town rivals. But here's hoping it stays that way.

Good post. Dumont isn't ever going to be Dustin Martin, but he's a good 12-18 on the list player. Experienced, very coachable, selfless, exactly the right age. I don't want us to lose him.

Him coming in last week and us having our first win isn't a direct link, but it isn't a coincidence either.

 

[Mutineer]

Good post. Dumont isn't ever going to be Dustin Martin, but he's a good 12-18 on the list player. Experienced, very coachable, selfless, exactly the right age. I don't want us to lose him.

Him coming in last week and us having our first win isn't a direct link, but it isn't a coincidence either.

Good I hope and pray you keep him because he's a list clogger in our current rebuild.

Does not have 1 elite trait in his kitbag, not 1.

 

[Scorpus]

Yeah Dumont might be capable, but who in our current team is he pushing out?

Berry? Schoenberg? Pedlar when he gets on the park? One of Hately or O'Connor? Seedsman? Milera who will return from injury? Sholl?

Big old pile of yuck for a guy we'd need to give a long list clogging contract to and would play week in week out as a result. You can guarantee a 26 year old recruit will not be around for our next flag, it's a waste of time

 

[Mutineer]

Do we really want a player like this when we're rebuilding.

Career stats.

 

[Scorpus]

Do we really want a player like this when we're rebuilding.

Career stats.

View attachment 1131041

Very similar to Nathan Van Berlo

 

[Mutineer]

Very similar to Nathan Van Berlo

Except VB had a harder edge and attacked the contest way harder.

 

[TRP1996]

Certainly not as bad as people are thinking in here - had his best season last year with the shorter quarters - 45th in the comp for disposals - around the Kelly, Sheed, Cripps, JPK, Libba, Miller, Andy Brayshaw, Viney, Hopper mark. Around that mark for centre clearances too (despite being more of a winger), and 30th for tackles. He's a perfectly fine battler who'd probably give us about as much as Keays does. Not too many wingers who are able to go as well on the inside as he is, and no harm in throwing him right in the guts either. I'm sure he'd make a solid half back too. Favourite part about him is that he's works back defensively really well - great team player - and after years of watching our mids switch off the moment they turned it over, it'd be a refreshing change to have more two-way runners. For probably south of 500-550k I reckon he'd be a real coach/fan favourite. And at 25 - he'll be a 'senior player' when the kids we're drafting now are ready to lead the club.

But do we need another winger/half-back? Sholl, Hamill, Jones, Milera (if he's ever healthy), McHenry, Gollant(?) are pretty abundant youth stocks, especially combined with senior types that'll still be around for a few more years (Sloane, Smith, Seedsman?).

Could presumably pick up another outside type in the drafts somewhere as well.

 

[Skippos]

Do we really want a player like this when we're rebuilding.

Career stats.

View attachment 1131041

Using a player's career numbers to represent their ability is a dreadful way to look at it. It factors in the time they spent developing. It's not representative of the complete product. Just like Petracca is miles better than these numbers, Dumont is miles better than those.

I actually agree with your overall argument - he's probably not worth recruiting, he is very vanilla (I don't think he's a poor man's NVB though. He's a better kick and a more natural footy player. And Dumont attacks the contest perfectly hard enough) and at best is 31-32 when we're challenging.

I just think that if we do end up recruiting him - it's not a dreadful thing. He definitely makes us better. He could teach the kids a thing or two about defensive running and offers a bigger body for a few years.

And if he's free - great. He'd cost us the same as Ben Keays cost us, and he's only a year and a bit older than Keays. And I can't see anyone calling for us to delist Keays because he's 'a bit vanilla and might not be around for our next premiership'. And salary wise, we'd probably be paying Dumont the same as Keays next year anyway. There's almost no argument for not having Dumont that can't apply to punting off Keays or MCrouch either. Dumont isn't a 5 year at 700 kind of contract. He's a 3-4 year at 4-500 kind of contract.

But do we need another winger/half-back? Sholl, Hamill, Jones, Milera (if he's ever healthy), McHenry, Gollant(?) are pretty abundant youth stocks, especially combined with senior types that'll still be around for a few more years (Sloane, Smith, Seedsman?).

Could presumably pick up another outside type in the drafts somewhere as well.

He's a bit different to most of these guys in that he's a defence first winger who's defining trait is his defensive/team running and one percenters. But he still manages to get his 20-25 a game offensively too without being too clanger prone. He's also a lot more contested than the average winger - think his CP rate is close to 40%, reckon Sholl & Gaff are around 25%.

There's no guarantee that Jones or Gollant come along, and McHenry if he does probably stays in the forward line. Dumont and Sholl on the wings with Hamill and Milera on half back is fine. And if Jones/Gollant comes good, great - that's bench cover or injury cover (given 20% of lists are injured at any given time these days).

 

[Scorpus]

View attachment 1131062

Using a player's career numbers to represent their ability is a dreadful way to look at it. It factors in the time they spent developing. It's not representative of the complete product. Just like Petracca is miles better than these numbers, Dumont is miles better than those.

I actually agree with your overall argument - he's probably not worth recruiting, he is very vanilla (I don't think he's a poor man's NVB though. He's a better kick and a more natural footy player. And Dumont attacks the contest perfectly hard enough) and at best is 31-32 when we're challenging.

I just think that if we do end up recruiting him - it's not a dreadful thing. He definitely makes us better. He could teach the kids a thing or two about defensive running and offers a bigger body for a few years.

And if he's free - great. He'd cost us the same as Ben Keays cost us, and he's only a year and a bit older than Keays. And I can't see anyone calling for us to delist Keays because he's 'a bit vanilla and might not be around for our next premiership'. And salary wise, we'd probably be paying Dumont the same as Keays next year anyway. There's almost no argument for not having Dumont that can't apply to punting off Keays or MCrouch either. Dumont isn't a 5 year at 700 kind of contract. He's a 3-4 year at 4-500 kind of contract.



He's a bit different to most of these guys in that he's a defence first winger who's defining trait is his defensive/team running and one percenters. But he still manages to get his 20-25 a game offensively too without being too clanger prone. He's also a lot more contested than the average winger - think his CP rate is close to 40%, reckon Sholl & Gaff are around 25%.

There's no guarantee that Jones or Gollant come along, and McHenry if he does probably stays in the forward line. Dumont and Sholl on the wings with Hamill and Milera on half back is fine. And if Jones/Gollant comes good, great - that's bench cover or injury cover (given 20% of lists are injured at any given time these days).

The idea is precisely not to rebuild by clogging the side with Keays/Dumont types because then you end up with a very low ceiling. There are only so many of those types you can carry in the side, and in my opinion that limit is (barely) one.

We just spent years getting rid of guys like Greenwood, Atkins, Lyons, Brad Crouch... it would be very dumb to turn around and just bring in someone that if they were already on our list we'd want to get rid of just like those names

 

[Mutineer]

View attachment 1131062

Using a player's career numbers to represent their ability is a dreadful way to look at it. It factors in the time they spent developing. It's not representative of the complete product. Just like Petracca is miles better than these numbers, Dumont is miles better than those.

I actually agree with your overall argument - he's probably not worth recruiting, he is very vanilla (I don't think he's a poor man's NVB though. He's a better kick and a more natural footy player. And Dumont attacks the contest perfectly hard enough) and at best is 31-32 when we're challenging.

I just think that if we do end up recruiting him - it's not a dreadful thing. He definitely makes us better. He could teach the kids a thing or two about defensive running and offers a bigger body for a few years.

And if he's free - great. He'd cost us the same as Ben Keays cost us, and he's only a year and a bit older than Keays. And I can't see anyone calling for us to delist Keays because he's 'a bit vanilla and might not be around for our next premiership'. And salary wise, we'd probably be paying Dumont the same as Keays next year anyway. There's almost no argument for not having Dumont that can't apply to punting off Keays or MCrouch either. Dumont isn't a 5 year at 700 kind of contract. He's a 3-4 year at 4-500 kind of contract.



He's a bit different to most of these guys in that he's a defence first winger who's defining trait is his defensive/team running and one percenters. But he still manages to get his 20-25 a game offensively too without being too clanger prone. He's also a lot more contested than the average winger - think his CP rate is close to 40%, reckon Sholl & Gaff are around 25%.

There's no guarantee that Jones or Gollant come along, and McHenry if he does probably stays in the forward line. Dumont and Sholl on the wings with Hamill and Milera on half back is fine. And if Jones/Gollant comes good, great - that's bench cover or injury cover (given 20% of lists are injured at any given time these days).

Big pass from me, Keays has grit and determination that a player like Dumont can only dream about. Keays is not vanilla by the way in any definition of the word.

 

[Skippos]

The idea is precisely not to rebuild by clogging the side with Keays/Dumont types because then you end up with a very low ceiling. There are only so many of those types you can carry in the side, and in my opinion that limit is (barely) one.

We just spent years getting rid of guys like Greenwood, Atkins, Lyons, Brad Crouch... it would be very dumb to turn around and just bring in someone that if they were already on our list we'd want to get rid of just like those names

I disagree. I love that we've finally rebuilt. And I love stacking up on youth. So I'm all for maximising that. But I don't think the correct strategy is 'trade away all players who won't be in your next premiership side, fill as many list spots with kids and pump games into them'

That's a strategy that's been done quite a bit, and rarely ended up well.

What Keays/Dumont types do is
- Give the kids someone whose spot they aspire to take. Something to work towards. That's achievable. Learning to bang the door down is a tangible skill that has kids in better stead for the future. In a way, Keays's purpose is to eventually be dropped, haha
- Give the kids some protection, bigger bodies
- Show the kids how to train. How to crack in. How to run defensively. Professionalism
- Help the kids experience winning sooner.
- Help us win the midfield battle, so our forwards have a fighting chance of being able to develop with some okay supply instead of barely see the ball

What Keays/Dumont types cost is:
- A list spot that would otherwise go to the latest ND pick we had available or a PSD/MSD type. Who usually end up being Ben Davis tier players
- Nothing to acquire
- Salary cap space in years where we struggle to fill it
- A spot in the 22 that would otherwise go to a kid who probably isn't good enough to command it yet, and would be better off learning to dominate in the 2s (and once they do, the fillers go out) instead of struggling in the 1s. And pushing a better player into the 2s to avoid the crap our current 2s found themselves in with TT getting no supply earlier in the year.

It's why I didn't like trading away Greenwood/Lyons for virtually nothing. Crouch at least net us a nice enough pick (especially for a bloke who was a net negative by virtue of his defensive running). Atkins too - a pick that offered more than he ever did. JL/Hugh could definitely play a role in the rebuild and cashing out on them netted us nothing but an extra spot to give to a kid who probably hadn't earnt it.

Of course, if Keays had cost us a 2nd or Dumont cost us Matt Crouch compensation, then I'd give it the swift and hard pass. They should never come at the expense of high quality assets. But rarely do they - if we brought in Dumont as a FA, the net tradeoff would be there'd be no space for our final pick in the draft. And when we washed him out in 2 years, probably no space for another final pick in the draft.

It's why if I was Hawthorn I'd happily cash in on Gunston, Mitchell and JOM for hopefully top 25-30 picks, but blokes like Frost, Shiels and Phillips are fine to have around - they'd net you no assets to help rebuild, but do a role in shepherding that new breed in.