List Mgmt. Adelaide Crows 2021 List Management thread

[Thetrader15]

If Matt is prepared to accept a 3 year deal on around 600 - $650K he should stay because contrary to what some believe he's the best mid of our more mature age mids, and yes that includes "skyscraper" Laird, obviously Sloane is the hard one, he appears past his best and should be tapped on the shoulder and told he's not a starting mid anymore and only plays midfield on a limited basis going forward. Along with Schoenberg Matt is still the best of our mids at spotting up a leading forward contrary to what some believe. Might also help if he's played to his strengths which is inside the contest rather than the quasi outside mid it appeared the brains trust were trying to turn him into.

I agree he is our best mid and would keep him on that deal.

However, I think it's a deal that only encourages him to test the water as it's not overs for $/year or duration.

I'm relatively confident he will get better options, possibly even from our friends down the road, and if clubs don't want to offer him more $/y, then they go for a longer deal on around the $600k mark.

We're then left with matching, and it's probably more than we want to pay for a 5 year deal, or don't and get poor compo.

 

[Danger in Texas]

If Matt is prepared to accept a 3 year deal on around 600 - $650K he should stay because contrary to what some believe he's the best mid of our more mature age mids, and yes that includes "skyscraper" Laird, obviously Sloane is the hard one, he appears past his best and should be tapped on the shoulder and told he's not a starting mid anymore and only plays midfield on a limited basis going forward. Along with Schoenberg Matt is still the best of our mids at spotting up a leading forward contrary to what some believe. Might also help if he's played to his strengths which is inside the contest rather than the quasi outside mid it appeared the brains trust were trying to turn him into.

This is the main thing for me. 2018/19 he couldn’t get back to his AA form as he was playing a role he wasn’t suited to, but he showed he still had all his inside grunt ability towards the end of 2020

Definitely provides something different to the rest of our grunt mids

 

[BronCrow]

All this would have been worth it if we won the 17 flag. I didn’t want Gibbs at all and was vocal about it but i understand the choice. Stupid decisions were made chasing a flag and we aren’t the only club that’s done that before.
As for list changes, it’s easier to say it after a few years and seeing the bad things that’s happened

Winning the 17 flag does not change the fact that all of those decisions were bad decisions, and still not worth it long term. If we had won more than 1 flag, then it might be different. 2016 was a lost opportunity as well. I think plenty on here were against the Gibbs trade in 2016 and 2017.

 

[Big Crow]

At a guess, probably around the $800k mark.

Given Crouch isn't as good, there won't be a club willing to give him a large enough contract to get anything other than a second round compensation pick

At what club would Crouch be their best midfielder and therefore command top dollar?

Even if a club did somehow pony up a huge offer for Matt Crouch, AFL House and its compliant media friends already established last year that they’d rig it so we wouldn’t get a first round compensation pick anyway.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Even if a club did somehow pony up a huge offer for Matt Crouch, AFL House and its compliant media friends already established last year that they’d rig it so we wouldn’t get a first round compensation pick anyway.

Maybe if we finish 15-16th they won't be quite as determined

 

[bigman]

Why then if that's the case hasn't young Max Michalanney been spotted in the Crows Academies lists or pics (maybe I missed it?) as he's obviously very talented, looks a better prospect than Borlase at the same age even if his eligibility is different? Borlase was trumpeted by the club a long way out from his draft year.
Seems strange the club PR team wouldn't be across this?

No Cookies | The Advertiser

No Cookies

www.adelaidenow.com.au

View attachment 1182047
Rostrevor rising star Max Michalanney with his dad Jim, who played in four SANFL flag wins for Norwood.

Re Crouch: Seems sensible provided it's not too long in term and not for too much money. At least it sends a message to other clubs that we are not forcing him out the door and that they will have to offer better to get him in - ideally we would then eventually lead to a FA compensation pick (or trade) that we would be happy with. Hopefully a win if he stays or a win if he leaves.

Contrary to broad opinion on this site, I also think that we should offer Tom Lynch a one year deal on reasonable money. He adds an extra dimension to the forward line that can bring other young forwards into play. He's an important part of the on-field learning exercise.

Daniel Talia is a harder one. Firstly and most importantly, we need to know he's physically capable of playing on. Secondly he is a loyal stalwart of the club and deserves the highest respect. However while he would likely still be our best lock down defender, I don't think that his presence is as critical in the rebuild. It would be nice if another contending club saw him as the "missing piece" and rewarded him well for a couple more years. In the worst case, I don't think that he should be delisted and would offer 1 year on moderate pay.

As for David Mackay his time must be up if we are serious about moving forward. He has been a list clogger for many years and is currently taking the place of young player(s) that we should be pumping games into. We have pushed far better and younger players out the door in the recent past.

an incredibly intelligent post rags

 

[Jeffcrowe]

It’s a relatively recent thing around here to realise that maybe Hamish isn’t very good.

I wonder if it’s just started to dawn on the board too? Given his importance to the process, how can you trust so much to someone who is at best… just ok at his job?

Who gets to make the decisions is just one more decision that has to be gotten right.

There’s a reason rebuild-town isn’t a quick stop over for most teams who go through it

I’d say his job is definitely on the line

unless you’re Stephen Wells it probably isn’t healthy to be in these jobs for too long ( like more than 8 years ) anyway

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Assume everyone is fit.

Brown Talia Lever
Kelly Keath Doedee
Seedsman Crouch Smith
O'Brien Crouch Sloane
Lynch Walker Keays
McGovern Thilthorpe Cameron
Laird Greenwood Lyons Milera

Wouldn’t have got Thilthorpe because wouldn’t have finished bottom

 

[Golumless]

2 - angry
3- grumpy
4+ - we've finally learnt our lesson

Any deal for 2 or 3 years will be high coin and easily trumped by a Brad style long term, low $/year deal, which will net us a poor compo pick.

4+ years would be on lower coin, and can only be trumped by a long term high $ contract (unlikely) or a shorter, high $/y deal netting us a good compo pick.

If it was me, I'd be offering a 5 year, $600k deal, front ended. If it's one year too long, that's ok, he'll be on a low wage.

If he wants more $/year, go and get it on a shorter, Daniher style deal and we can have a band 1 compo pick thanks.

I have no issue with that, personally. Between 4 years of Matt Crouch or a pick in the early 20s, I'd rather the pick in the early 20s. The thing that stops me from wanting us to retain Crouch long term is how 1-dimensional he is as a footballer. To me, that screams of Matt being a ticking timebomb in a rebuild, that sure, you might be able to retain him cheaper for longer, but that's not worth anything if it becomes dead cap space/we've had to dull his effectiveness by playing him in a dual role.

I am more comfortable with us offering $900 k x 2 instead of $600 k x 4 for Matt. That makes sure we have Matt for the period where having Matt would be a genuinely good thing, as it means we're not rushing Pedlar, Berry, 2021 draft picks, Jones (don't sleep on this one, he might not be too far away from another go in our guts) etc into our midfield before they're ready. Chayce is a good warning for what impatience and too much expectation from the club can do to a developing footballer. It also means we can begin to transition Keays and Laird out of it and make use of their flexibility earlier.

 

[Thetrader15]

I have no issue with that, personally. Between 4 years of Matt Crouch or a pick in the early 20s, I'd rather the pick in the early 20s. The thing that stops me from wanting us to retain Crouch long term is how 1-dimensional he is as a footballer. To me, that screams of Matt being a ticking timebomb in a rebuild, that sure, you might be able to retain him cheaper for longer, but that's not worth anything if it becomes dead cap space/we've had to dull his effectiveness by playing him in a dual role.

I am more comfortable with us offering $900 k x 2 instead of $600 k x 4 for Matt. That makes sure we have Matt for the period where having Matt would be a genuinely good thing, as it means we're not rushing Pedlar, Berry, 2021 draft picks, Jones (don't sleep on this one, he might not be too far away from another go in our guts) etc into our midfield before they're ready. Chayce is a good warning for what impatience and too much expectation from the club can do to a developing footballer. It also means we can begin to transition Keays and Laird out of it and make use of their flexibility earlier.

If Matt is offered 2x900k, he'd staying, but what do we do then?

I don't want to lose Matt for a pick in the early 20s, so we have to be smart with how we structure the deal to take that option off the table.

 

[Vader]

If Matt is offered 2x900k, he'd staying, but what do we do then?

I don't want to lose Matt for a pick in the early 20s, so we have to be smart with how we structure the deal to take that option off the table.

Depends on whether his priority is short term gain, or long term job security (with less initial pay). He may well value the length of the contract more highly than the short term dollars.

 

[Gtowncrow]

I have no issue with that, personally. Between 4 years of Matt Crouch or a pick in the early 20s, I'd rather the pick in the early 20s. The thing that stops me from wanting us to retain Crouch long term is how 1-dimensional he is as a footballer. To me, that screams of Matt being a ticking timebomb in a rebuild, that sure, you might be able to retain him cheaper for longer, but that's not worth anything if it becomes dead cap space/we've had to dull his effectiveness by playing him in a dual role.

I am more comfortable with us offering $900 k x 2 instead of $600 k x 4 for Matt. That makes sure we have Matt for the period where having Matt would be a genuinely good thing, as it means we're not rushing Pedlar, Berry, 2021 draft picks, Jones (don't sleep on this one, he might not be too far away from another go in our guts) etc into our midfield before they're ready. Chayce is a good warning for what impatience and too much expectation from the club can do to a developing footballer. It also means we can begin to transition Keays and Laird out of it and make use of their flexibility earlier.

This is a great post. I like your thinking behind this.

 

[Crow till I die]

I have no issue with that, personally. Between 4 years of Matt Crouch or a pick in the early 20s, I'd rather the pick in the early 20s. The thing that stops me from wanting us to retain Crouch long term is how 1-dimensional he is as a footballer. To me, that screams of Matt being a ticking timebomb in a rebuild, that sure, you might be able to retain him cheaper for longer, but that's not worth anything if it becomes dead cap space/we've had to dull his effectiveness by playing him in a dual role.

I am more comfortable with us offering $900 k x 2 instead of $600 k x 4 for Matt. That makes sure we have Matt for the period where having Matt would be a genuinely good thing, as it means we're not rushing Pedlar, Berry, 2021 draft picks, Jones (don't sleep on this one, he might not be too far away from another go in our guts) etc into our midfield before they're ready. Chayce is a good warning for what impatience and too much expectation from the club can do to a developing footballer. It also means we can begin to transition Keays and Laird out of it and make use of their flexibility earlier.

Maybe a 4 year deal with the first 2 years front loaded at say $750K per year, then the back 2 years at $450K per year instead of say a flat 4 years at $600K. What this might also do is if Matt gets to the back 2 years and is itching for a move away to get more coin, we have trade power with him under contract then., Alternatively, if he were to tail off over the coming years (not sure this will happen as he is consistent), we would only be held with a light back end contract and if he ended up playing SANFL a fair bit, then it won't hurt that much

 

[GameofSloanes]

I find it interesting that, according to the AFL player ratings, Rory Sloane

9

Rory Sloane

Age

34

Ht

183cm

Wt

87kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

23.7

5star

K

11.7

4star

HB

11.9

5star

M

3.5

4star

T

6.6

5star

CL

5.7

5star

D

15.3

4star

K

7.3

3star

HB

8.0

4star

M

1.3

1star

T

3.3

4star

CL

4.2

5star

D

22.2

5star

K

8.6

4star

HB

13.6

5star

M

3.2

4star

T

6.0

5star

CL

4.6

5star

was the 5th highest averaging midfielder in the comp as of 1 month ago, yet according to most on here, he's cooked. Certainly to my eye he started well, but since his eye injury (and also the finger), has really dropped off in effectiveness if not stats

 

[Gtowncrow]

If Matt is offered 2x900k, he'd staying, but what do we do then?

I don't want to lose Matt for a pick in the early 20s, so we have to be smart with how we structure the deal to take that option off the table.

This is the deal that will suit Matt and the club. If he stays, we get his services but not for so long that he begins 'clogging' the list. The high price forces other clubs to also go higher than they might have if we made a low ball offer...and... increase the years they would need to get him to want to leave.
I think this gives us a scenario where any compo pick is maximised.

 

[70lethal]

Get rid of MCrouch and we have copied almost all of Carltons mistakes.
They lost there goals kickers first. We virtually did the same except for Tex.
They created a massive void between 24 and 30 year olds.
Neglected their midfield
Recruited some cheap average spuds while trading out quality
Kept to many spuds and kept the old guys way to long
Tried to turn their no.1 pick KPD into a forward.

Shove Laird back and Crouch is the only genuine mid between 25-30 y.o. That's not healthy moving forward.

 

[Thetrader15]

This is the deal that will suit Matt and the club. If he stays, we get his services but not for so long that he begins 'clogging' the list. The high price forces other clubs to also go higher than they might have if we made a low ball offer...and... increase the years they would need to get him to want to leave.
I think this gives us a scenario where any compo pick is maximised.

Let's say we offer 2 years at $900k. Matt thinks, "Hmm, that old groin of mine, I want a bit of security".

His manager then shops him around and he scores a 5 x $650k deal, with games trigger in his last year (anyone else remember this bedtime story?).

Matt takes the 5 year deal, we get pick 23 compo.

If we offer the 4 or 5 year deal on 650k, we structure it as 950, 950, 400, 400. So we would be paying him similar to your offer above, and if it all goes well, we get "Good Matt" on 300 or 400k for his last 2 years. If he goes bad, we're paying him less than average wage anyway. Maybe at that point he does a Gibbs and wants a trade out - good, he's contracted folks, pony up with your 1st rd picks thanks.

If he wants more $ per year, great, we can have a band 1 compo pick thanks similar to Daniher.

 

[Thetrader15]

I find it interesting that, according to the AFL player ratings, Rory Sloane was the 5th highest averaging midfielder in the comp as of 1 month ago, yet according to most on here, he's cooked. Certainly to my eye he started well, but since his eye injury (and also the finger), has really dropped off in effectiveness if not stats

Don't read too much into it. They have Dustin Martin the 4th most effective player this year ahead of:
16 - Darcy Parish
18 - Ollie Wines
19 - Touk Miller

 

[craig crowing]

One other negative about keeping Matt apart from the mid same of dilemma , is how are we going to reduce our list with many possible delists with contracts and some going beyond next year even and what could be a reluctant to release some senior payers .
With a good few top SA boys in draft along with apparently our intention to trade in at least 1 player it would seem we would need to delist around 4-5 and that's why we might trade Matt although believe rated by club as a player and club member as was on leadership group as young player.
I like Bicks rate Matt as a player and showed after tardy start to 2020 was more creative as a mid than Sloane and Laird are currently so will be a big call by club how to handle.

 

[Mutineer]

Don't read too much into it. They have Dustin Martin the 4th most effective player this year ahead of:
16 - Darcy Parish
18 - Ollie Wines
19 - Touk Miller

We're not offering Matty $900K for 1 year, 2 years, 3 years or four years, and neither is any other list manager in full control of his faculties.
He's a $600 - $700k Max player depending on the term of the contract.

 

[ringo200]

If we have decided that Matt is not the way forward or is at least a player who is losable at a certain price - is this year the right year? His value is probably the lowest it has been since he was drafted.

The guy can play and will remind people of this, has a lot of good years left ahead of him.

I understand that when players are at their peak value no club is going to want to trade them away but it seems like we time these things particularly badly - Bernie Vince

Bernie Vince

Age

38

Ht

186cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

21.8

5star

K

13.5

5star

HB

8.4

5star

M

4.1

4star

T

2.8

4star

MG

357.1

5star

No current season stats available

D

8.4

3star

K

4.4

2star

HB

4.0

3star

M

3.4

4star

T

1.2

3star

, Brad Crouch

5

Brad Crouch

Age

30

Ht

186cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

26.1

5star

K

12.1

4star

HB

14.0

5star

M

2.7

3star

T

5.5

5star

CL

5.0

5star

D

20.3

5star

K

11.1

4star

HB

9.1

5star

M

1.5

2star

T

3.9

5star

CL

4.6

5star

D

21.6

5star

K

10.0

4star

HB

11.6

5star

M

3.4

4star

T

4.2

5star

CL

2.6

5star

, Matt, Talia, Lynch potentially this year. We potentially missed out on good deals for Patrick Dangerfield, Kurt Tippett

Kurt Tippett

Age

36

Ht

202cm

Wt

106kg

Pos.

F/R

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.8

3star

K

6.7

3star

HB

4.1

3star

M

3.9

4star

T

2.2

4star

G

1.8

5star

No current season stats available

D

6.6

2star

K

3.4

2star

HB

3.2

3star

M

2.4

3star

T

1.2

3star

G

1.0

4star

, Josh Jenkins

11

Josh Jenkins

Age

35

Ht

200cm

Wt

108kg

Pos.

F/R

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.9

3star

K

9.1

4star

HB

3.8

3star

M

5.1

5star

T

2.4

4star

G

2.1

5star

No current season stats available

D

11.0

3star

K

7.6

3star

HB

3.4

3star

M

4.6

5star

T

1.2

3star

G

1.6

5star

before ending up with stuff all combined for all three if some of the rumours at the time had any merit.

 

[Golumless]

If Matt is offered 2x900k, he'd staying, but what do we do then?

I don't want to lose Matt for a pick in the early 20s, so we have to be smart with how we structure the deal to take that option off the table.

You play him, and let him take UFA afterwards. The club has every bit of value eeked out of Matt that there could get out of him, and by that point, it's truly time for Pedlar/Berry/Schoenberg/others to take over and be the main guys (if they are not already, seeing Schoenberg could be our number 1 midfielder by the end of next season with how he's tracking). By that point Berry and Scho are + 50 games. Pedlar/2021 draftees could feasibly be 40+.

As said, my main interest is seeing us not ending up stuck with Matt long term. The amount we receive, or pay is secondary to that consideration.

 

[BunjiMac]

I think the problem with Adelaide for a while is the midfield as a group. Matt Crouch

5

Matt Crouch

Age

29

Ht

183cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

28.4

5star

K

12.0

4star

HB

16.4

5star

M

3.3

3star

T

3.9

5star

CL

4.8

5star

D

24.9

5star

K

9.7

4star

HB

15.1

5star

M

2.4

3star

T

2.4

3star

CL

4.4

5star

D

21.2

5star

K

10.4

4star

HB

10.8

5star

M

4.4

4star

T

3.4

5star

CL

2.0

4star

would be fantastic surrounded be classy speedy ball users and some big powerful bodies.

Unfortunately all our prime midfielders are pretty vanilla and similar.

Sloane, Laird, Keays and add Crouch and you have probably the least variety in a prime midfield set in the AFL.

If the AFC keep crouch they need to commit to bringing in that variety and breaking up that monotony.

I don't think they are willing to do that.

I think the AFC feel that the current prime midfielders have been a revelation, perhaps apart from Sloane. I think they believe that Laird and Keays have been amazing and any move to relegate any of the 3 would be disrespectful.

So, the easier thing to do, and to not hurt anyones feelings, would be to test the waters with Crouch, especially given no-one has seen him for a year

That way we get to keep people happy, not offend the captain and reward those who try really hard.

The AFC way.

 

[Jirkago75]

Winning the 17 flag does not change the fact that all of those decisions were bad decisions, and still not worth it long term. If we had won more than 1 flag, then it might be different. 2016 was a lost opportunity as well. I think plenty on here were against the Gibbs trade in 2016 and 2017.

Agree to disagree on this, if we won the flag and fell down the bottom, everyone would accept it and be happy but when you lose , there is always people scrutinising every mistake. You are right with the decisions made on top of losing Lever Cameron and McGovern

 

[Redline]

That depends on the years.

2 - happy
3 - ambivalent
4+ - angry.

I can't see how we couldn't offer three. I think that's fair if we want him.

Different circumstances but guys like Murphy and Murray got two years. Surely alot comes down to demand. If Crouch was available at a reasonable price I think just about every club would take him on their list. I don't think any club would take the other two.