List Mgmt. Adelaide Crows 2021 List Management thread

[WaynesWorld19]

Because they say they trade in "need" to continue they always get the player they ""need media spin they keep talking about, only Merrett was that elite midfielder they needed and chase and failed. The other recruit they just recruited because they wanted to go to Port Power.

Is it this, or because of a Crows knock back ?

Was Rockcliff, Motlop, McKenzie, or Fantasia ever on our radar ....because I seriously doubt it, and do you blame us ?

 

[Pick4To6]

Spot on .....Bulldogs bat so deep in the midfield ....Port relied on Wines & Boak ....they'll trade SPP, or try again this year

Not sure why Port would chase Dawson ....he simply doesn't fill a need at Port

Because it’s a good news story.

They would prefer to beat the Crows off the field in those small wins, than actually identify the correct player to help them advance towards a flag.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Wants to play midfield

Agree, and that's where I'd play him at the Crows ......but that's not Ports first priority, another outside/inside mid

Too many outside players at Port, that look a million $$ when the games on their terms ....where was the tackling pressure last night ? .....and again reinforcing why all clubs ATM are chasing speed thru the midfield.

Port lacked inside pressure and speed ....noted by the great games of Bailey Smith, Treloar, and Macrae ....Port need a libba type player, a Laird type

 

[UcantCme]

Hope we find a way of landing Dawson, Maynard, Stephens, and either take pick 4 or bundle it for a couple of mid first rounders

Maynard is staying at Collingwood

On SM-G973F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[hey shorty]

Maynard is staying at Collingwood

On SM-G973F using BigFooty.com mobile app

So they say now

 

[ABAB]

Is it this, or because of a Crows knock back ?

Was Rockcliff, Motlop, McKenzie, or Fantasia ever on our radar ....because I seriously doubt it, and do you blame us ?

We definitely wanted Motlop for the right price but the others we weren't, hence they just recruited them because they wanted to join them.

 

[Gtowncrow]

Port are a side full of flankers.

They need genuine mids and talls at both ends.

I don't understand why they would spend up for Dawson?

I didn't have my glasses on when I read the first line of your post. Once putting them on, I was relieved to see you said "flankers".

 

[Cap]

I realise this is a long bow , but is our infatuation with playing young mids on the HFF an attempt to mimic the damage that Bont does? (Or Blokes like Ablett and Martin did?)

Having a mid capable of going forward and creating goals is something we lack.

 

[Mutineer]

I realise this is a long bow , but is our infatuation with playing young mids on the HFF an attempt to mimic the damage that Bont does? (Or Blokes like Ablett and Martin did?)

Having a mid capable of going forward and creating goals is something we lack.

You're right it's a very very long bow...

 

[Golumless]

I realise this is a long bow , but is our infatuation with playing young mids on the HFF an attempt to mimic the damage that Bont does? (Or Blokes like Ablett and Martin did?)

Having a mid capable of going forward and creating goals is something we lack.

It depends on the player. For instance, I suspect we are playing McHenry as a half forward flanker because we see him as a career HFF at an AFL level. I suspect for players like Berry, Schoenberg, Pedlar, it's more to get games into them whilst we're waiting on them to be ready for midfield duties, and work a bit on flexibility.

 

[Archie87]

Port are a side full of flankers.

They need genuine mids and talls at both ends.

I don't understand why they would spend up for Dawson?

Their "need" is to go for an easy kill as they are an easier sell than us at the moment so they can beat Adelaide to increase the flow of bathwater in February.

I have no doubt at least part of the reason Port have gone after Dawson is to get one up on Adelaide. He's not even the kind of player that would help them. Particularly compared to other list needs and his cost.

They're legitimately a harder draw, Boak/Gray retiring/ageing more and a few injuries away from barely being a top 8 side. Hopefully Dawson sees that.

 

[ATsince1973]

I have no doubt at least part of the reason Port have gone after Dawson is to get one up on Adelaide.

It’s not one-up-manship in that sense. If I were Port and not interested in Dawson, I’d feign interest just to make the Crows offer him more. And if I were Dawson’s manager and he’s not interested in Port, I’d be meeting with Port … for the same reason.

Just like I don’t think we ever wanted Jamarra U-H but it was about making the Bullbogs pay more.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Skippos]

Port are a side full of flankers.

They need genuine mids and talls at both ends.

I don't understand why they would spend up for Dawson?

Because it's a mediocre draft where their pick ends up, and it's a 95% chance that whatever they'd pay for (hearing some variation of a first + change/Sam Hayes - who's probably the best ruck not getting a game in the league) Dawson doesn't end up nearly as valuable as 8 years of JD's service.

I don't think people have clicked to how good Dawson is. Third in the B&F of a 15 win side despite not being in a prime vote getting spot. Can play HBF, HFF and wing to a high level. Elite kick, great overhead, smart footballer.

On 'pure value' he's worth every bit of our pick 4, especially if Cerra is 6 + change. Obviously other factors such as overrating of picks and his contractual situation/leverage change that.

So for Port, who are in a 'win now' mindset, what's better? Using a late first - with a 50/50 hit rate, on a 'need' that won't be in a position to impact their push substantively for 2-3 years, or bring in a surefire elite player in a position they mightn't need as much.

The latter, and clearly IMO. They've got the cap space too, balls deep into Merrett and had the war chest there.

I also reckon he's more of a need for them than is being discussed in here. Their mids are a little thin but Wines/Boak/Drew is a solid three. Butters moving in their makes it the 4 man unit they need with Amon rolling through. Bergman probably best used as a half forward, so shifts there to accommodate Dawson.

Bonner's had one good game last night, but he's probably their weakest link. Burton's a solid defender but isn't more than a role player. DBJ is the worst AA selection of the last 10 years and isn't a banker for selection if he keeps it up. Houston's good - but Dawson's better. Play Dawson at HBF, Houston on the other, and all of a sudden that transition is miles, miles better. Means Bergman can replace Butters fwd and they still keep that oomph.

 

[hey shorty]

Because it's a mediocre draft where their pick ends up, and it's a 95% chance that whatever they'd pay for (hearing some variation of a first + change/Sam Hayes - who's probably the best ruck not getting a game in the league) Dawson doesn't end up nearly as valuable as 8 years of JD's service.

I don't think people have clicked to how good Dawson is. Third in the B&F of a 15 win side despite not being in a prime vote getting spot. Can play HBF, HFF and wing to a high level. Elite kick, great overhead, smart footballer.

On 'pure value' he's worth every bit of our pick 4, especially if Cerra is 6 + change. Obviously other factors such as overrating of picks and his contractual situation/leverage change that.

So for Port, who are in a 'win now' mindset, what's better? Using a late first - with a 50/50 hit rate, on a 'need' that won't be in a position to impact their push substantively for 2-3 years, or bring in a surefire elite player in a position they mightn't need as much.

The latter, and clearly IMO. They've got the cap space too, balls deep into Merrett and had the war chest there.

I also reckon he's more of a need for them than is being discussed in here. Their mids are a little thin but Wines/Boak/Drew is a solid three. Butters moving in their makes it the 4 man unit they need with Amon rolling through. Bergman probably best used as a half forward, so shifts there to accommodate Dawson.

Bonner's had one good game last night, but he's probably their weakest link. Burton's a solid defender but isn't more than a role player. DBJ is the worst AA selection of the last 10 years and isn't a banker for selection if he keeps it up. Houston's good - but Dawson's better. Play Dawson at HBF, Houston on the other, and all of a sudden that transition is miles, miles better. Means Bergman can replace Butters fwd and they still keep that oomph.

You're supposed to be telling us how we are going to get him lol

 

[Skippos]

You're supposed to be telling us how we are going to get him lol

With a lot of cash, a solid vision and some serious spin.

I've asked a couple of questions and reckon from what I'm hearing it's line ball. Which is pretty good.

I think there's a lot of people on this board who see this situation with emotion and not rationality. Sure, Port got whacked last night and have some aging stars. But every side has a weakness - the Dogs whacked them without a ruck and with very below average KPDs. Port can have a weakness and still re-load. Helps that their weakness is in the easiest part of the ground to improve.

It'll always be easier to sell a team (who can match for cash) with some good young talent who's won 31/39 in the last two years than a team who's got some good young talent but won 10/39. Even if there are (often correct, IMO) other factors that work against Port and in favour of us, it's a much easier sell.

If we can come close, I think our personnel are doing something right. If we get him, they deserve a raise. And I think there's a reasonable-ish chance we might.

 

[Mego Red]

Because it's a mediocre draft where their pick ends up, and it's a 95% chance that whatever they'd pay for (hearing some variation of a first + change/Sam Hayes - who's probably the best ruck not getting a game in the league) Dawson doesn't end up nearly as valuable as 8 years of JD's service.

I don't think people have clicked to how good Dawson is. Third in the B&F of a 15 win side despite not being in a prime vote getting spot. Can play HBF, HFF and wing to a high level. Elite kick, great overhead, smart footballer.

On 'pure value' he's worth every bit of our pick 4, especially if Cerra is 6 + change. Obviously other factors such as overrating of picks and his contractual situation/leverage change that.

So for Port, who are in a 'win now' mindset, what's better? Using a late first - with a 50/50 hit rate, on a 'need' that won't be in a position to impact their push substantively for 2-3 years, or bring in a surefire elite player in a position they mightn't need as much.

The latter, and clearly IMO. They've got the cap space too, balls deep into Merrett and had the war chest there.

I also reckon he's more of a need for them than is being discussed in here. Their mids are a little thin but Wines/Boak/Drew is a solid three. Butters moving in their makes it the 4 man unit they need with Amon rolling through. Bergman probably best used as a half forward, so shifts there to accommodate Dawson.

Bonner's had one good game last night, but he's probably their weakest link. Burton's a solid defender but isn't more than a role player. DBJ is the worst AA selection of the last 10 years and isn't a banker for selection if he keeps it up. Houston's good - but Dawson's better. Play Dawson at HBF, Houston on the other, and all of a sudden that transition is miles, miles better. Means Bergman can replace Butters fwd and they still keep that oomph.

The thing is - they have vaguely capable players in the position that Dawson plays.

They're a side FULL of flankers.

Is it worth paying an extra $400k to upgrade that position? While they're losing games due to issues in other lines?

Dawson feels like a luxury. I think Boak has maybe 15 good games left in him, and Drew is solid at best. They need to bat six or seven deep in that midfield, and they NEED capable talls.

I think clubs are going to look to raid Port over the next few years. I think West Coast will come for Giorgiades, and Butters will see big offers from big Melbourne clubs, which will feel like being in main street (I stead of being the 2nd best team in the 2nd best town). They need to retain cap space for those players, and they need to focus anything available on their actual gaps.

 

[hey shorty]

With a lot of cash, a solid vision and some serious spin.

I've asked a couple of questions and reckon from what I'm hearing it's line ball. Which is pretty good.

I think there's a lot of people on this board who see this situation with emotion and not rationality. Sure, Port got whacked last night and have some aging stars. But every side has a weakness - the Dogs whacked them without a ruck and with very below average KPDs. Port can have a weakness and still re-load. Helps that their weakness is in the easiest part of the ground to improve.

It'll always be easier to sell a team (who can match for cash) with some good young talent who's won 31/39 in the last two years than a team who's got some good young talent but won 10/39. Even if there are (often correct, IMO) other factors that work against Port and in favour of us, it's a much easier sell.

If we can come close, I think our personnel are doing something right. If we get him, they deserve a raise. And I think there's a reasonable-ish chance we might.

Always appreciate the input.

 

[Mutineer]

It's funny how once a former SA players name comes up in trade discussions or wanting home how this board all of a sudden sees them as the messiah.

With Jordan Dawson

12

Jordan Dawson

Age

28

Ht

190cm

Wt

91kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.0

4star

K

11.4

4star

HB

5.7

4star

M

4.8

5star

T

2.8

4star

CL

0.6

3star

D

15.7

4star

K

10.9

4star

HB

4.9

3star

M

2.9

3star

T

2.0

3star

CL

0.4

3star

D

11.8

3star

K

7.8

3star

HB

4.0

3star

M

5.0

5star

T

3.0

5star

CL

0.6

3star

in particular the only poster I've seen consistently mention his name on occasions over the years since he got drafted is Drugs Are Bad Mackay? and that's possibly more to do with him being a Sturt product before his big form spike this year?

 

[ABAB]

With a lot of cash, a solid vision and some serious spin.

I've asked a couple of questions and reckon from what I'm hearing it's line ball. Which is pretty good.

I think there's a lot of people on this board who see this situation with emotion and not rationality. Sure, Port got whacked last night and have some aging stars. But every side has a weakness - the Dogs whacked them without a ruck and with very below average KPDs. Port can have a weakness and still re-load. Helps that their weakness is in the easiest part of the ground to improve.

It'll always be easier to sell a team (who can match for cash) with some good young talent who's won 31/39 in the last two years than a team who's got some good young talent but won 10/39. Even if there are (often correct, IMO) other factors that work against Port and in favour of us, it's a much easier sell.

If we can come close, I think our personnel are doing something right. If we get him, they deserve a raise. And I think there's a reasonable-ish chance we might.

Isn't there data which indicated 80% of those 31 wins were against side outside the 8? So it doesn't look as good as you think it does.

 

[ABAB]

It's funny how once a former SA players name comes up in trade discussions or wanting home how this board all of a sudden sees them as the messiah.

With Jordan Dawson in particular the only poster I've seen consistently mention his name on occasions over the years since he got drafted is Drugs Are Bad Mackay? and that's possibly more to do with him being a Sturt product before his big form spike this year?

Agree, a potential elite and AA player is why we are excited but it's still only based on potential like any draftee.

 

[Skippos]

The thing is - they have vaguely capable players in the position that Dawson plays.

They're a side FULL of flankers.

Is it worth paying an extra $400k to upgrade that position? While they're losing games due to issues in other lines?

Yes. Because the alternative is doing nothing.

Who's on the market this year to move the needle for them? George Hewett? Trent Dumont? Jack Billings?

Maybe you could make a case for Billings at half forward allowing Butters to go nuts in the guts being a better spend without passing up draft capital and 150k less. But there's not a huge amount of action on the trade front forecast this year, and you've got to take risks to beat 17 other sides. Or else you end up like...us...or Carlton, who for 15-20 years made decisions to prolong long term 'competitiveness' instead of risking it to beat the rest.

A significant reason for the Dogs spike this year wasn't Treloar coming in or natural growth through the mid/fwds, but Bailey Dale. They effectively added an AA standard HBF to their side out of nowhere. Like Port would do if they acquired Dawson. They already had Daniel, Crozier, Williams, Richards & JJ as backs who impact offensively and Wood & Duryea for some defensive grunt. Not a clear need. But in Dale they upgraded Crozier beyond belief. And it made a stupidly good impact on their ball movement out of defence.

Sometimes good to great is all you need. And I don't reckon they're a team full of flankers. They're a team full of blokes who play on the flanks. Bergman's a baby and could end up anywhere. Butters and Rozee play there - but I'm sure they'd be bloody good mids. Gray is a bloody good mid and a bloody good FP. DBJ, Jonas and Burton more BPs in role than flankers. Houston's a clear flanker. Bonner is (bar last night) their worst player consistently getting a game.

If I'm Mitch Georgiades, I'm not going near West Coast. Probably the least desirable list in the AFL now. Oscar Allen and....that's it? Beyond the next couple of years. West Coast would be best placed investing resources in the other 21 spots of the ground open 3 years from now. Port need to retain cap space, sure, but we can't simultaneously pot them for having 'ageing heavy lifters' and then worry about their future cap position. If they truly have ageing heavy lifters, that's emergent cap space as they age out of the system.

 

[Skippos]

It's funny how once a former SA players name comes up in trade discussions or wanting home how this board all of a sudden sees them as the messiah.

With Jordan Dawson in particular the only poster I've seen consistently mention his name on occasions over the years since he got drafted is Drugs Are Bad Mackay? and that's possibly more to do with him being a Sturt product before his big form spike this year?

Not many times a bloke under 25 who's finished top 3 in his team's B&F comes on the market.

He's not the messiah, but he's a very good boy.

If someone like Bailey Dale comes on the market, you do what it takes to get him. Who cares if he's had 'one good season' - blind freddy could see that he's sustainably elite. The eye test matters. Dawson plays a sustainable, modern brand of football that (assuming good character and work rate) won't fall away.

And Dawson isn't even a one season wonder. He's not had 15 good games. Sydney manage their kids a bit differently. Look at Tom Mitchell when he was there. Once Dawson got his crack, he was good. At 22/23 ('19/'20) his numbers & form were that of a very good half back. Not elite, but building strongly - top 7-10 player on the list kind of areas. Now at 24 he's taken the next step and gone from good to great. As a lot of players do at that age. He's progressed at the exact rate you'd expect, with great year on year improvement - and you'd probably think he'll keep growing yet.

 

[Skippos]

Isn't there data which indicated 80% of those 31 wins were against side outside the 8? So it doesn't look as good as you think it does.

Good team beats bad teams more often than they beat good teams...shocking.

Sure, Port definitely are a little more downhill skier-y than some of the other top teams, but we're looking at this from an emotional perspective. The story behind the numbers matters less than the numbers themselves in this context - because it's a PR/spin thing. You can bet your bottom dollar Chris Davies isn't breaking down who they won against, but just 'that they win a lot' when pitching to Dawson. And probably that a player like him is what they need to turn themselves from great to 'the best' against the other contenders.

 

[Skippos]

Yes. Because the alternative is doing nothing.

Who's on the market this year to move the needle for them? George Hewett? Trent Dumont? Jack Billings?

Maybe you could make a case for Billings at half forward allowing Butters to go nuts in the guts being a better spend without passing up draft capital and 150k less. But there's not a huge amount of action on the trade front forecast this year, and you've got to take risks to beat 17 other sides. Or else you end up like...us...or Carlton, who for 15-20 years made decisions to prolong long term 'competitiveness' instead of risking it to beat the rest.

Just as an addendum, Port would be absolutely moronic not to offer the same package to Hawthorn for Tom Mitchell as they would for Dawson. If Mitchell is gettable and they choose Dawson, farcical.

If it's a choice between Dawson and nothing, they'd be mad not to go all in though.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

It's funny how once a former SA players name comes up in trade discussions or wanting home how this board all of a sudden sees them as the messiah.

With Jordan Dawson in particular the only poster I've seen consistently mention his name on occasions over the years since he got drafted is Drugs Are Bad Mackay? and that's possibly more to do with him being a Sturt product before his big form spike this year?

Yeah the Sturt connection... and my keen eye for talent*









*May also have suggested we trade for Lewis Young at one stage