List Mgmt. Adelaide Crows 2021 List Management thread

[Dangarman]

May be shuffles between lists where possible, but we're not taking many draft picks this year.

Try to trade excess picks to bring in the 2 or 3 we use?
Trade them into next year if possible?


We still need to collect 5 more autographs in addition to Dawson's. 32/5 is the collection so far (assuming Dawson will be signed)

Even if we re-sign ROC, where do the other 2 players come from if we only draft 2?

Unless Dawson goes to the PSD and/or Lynch/Talia sign contracts worth another comp pick, I think our 2021 draft capital will be spent with only a few pennies change.

 

[dogs105]

May be shuffles between lists where possible, but we're not taking many draft picks this year.

Try to trade excess picks to bring in the 2 or 3 we use?
Trade them into next year if possible?


We still need to collect 5 more autographs in addition to Dawson's. 32/5 is the collection so far (assuming Dawson will be signed)

Even if we re-sign ROC, where do the other 2 players come from if we only draft 2?

Unless Dawson goes to the PSD and/or Lynch/Talia sign contracts worth another comp pick, I think our 2021 draft capital will be spent with only a few pennies change.

If we had a rookie promotion or 2, might only take 1 or 2 in the ND. Then 2 or 3 rookies.

I think ROC signs or is delisted and re-rookied.
So either way, taking 4 picks from 2 drafts. And possibly getting more picks from Kelly, and maybe Lynch/Talia.

 

[dogs105]

May be shuffles between lists where possible, but we're not taking many draft picks this year.

Try to trade excess picks to bring in the 2 or 3 we use?
Trade them into next year if possible?


We still need to collect 5 more autographs in addition to Dawson's. 32/5 is the collection so far (assuming Dawson will be signed)

Even if we re-sign ROC, where do the other 2 players come from if we only draft 2?

Unless Dawson goes to the PSD and/or Lynch/Talia sign contracts worth another comp pick, I think our 2021 draft capital will be spent with only a few pennies change.

Spend 23 ish on Dawson,
Then have 4, 37, 59, 63
Band 4 compo for Kelly ~40

Is it possible to use 37, 40, 59, 60 to get one pick in the 20s?

Then take 2 rookies, or NGA players late with basically free picks??

 

[arrowman]

Unless Dawson goes to the PSD and/or Lynch/Talia sign contracts worth another comp pick, I think our 2021 draft capital will be spent with only a few pennies change.

Spend 23 ish on Dawson,
Then have 4, 37, 59, 63
Band 4 compo for Kelly ~40

Is it possible to use 37, 40, 59, 60 to get one pick in the 20s?

Then take 2 rookies, or NGA players late with basically free picks??

We probably promote one rookie (to avoid being forced into too many promotions next year), leaving us with a minimum of 2 picks in the actual draft. Assuming 23 goes on Dawson, and the Kelly compo is around 40, that means our draft picks would be 4 + 37 + 40. Given the state of our list, I wouldn't be fussed if we used only 4 + 37. Any more and we'd have to delist players who OK might be on the margin now, but have to replace them with pick 40+. It might be better to give one or two guys another year to see what we've got (or not). All going well, we'll probably have a few hard decisions next year anyway.

 

[dogs105]

Spend 23 ish on Dawson,
Then have 4, 37, 59, 63
Band 4 compo for Kelly ~40

Is it possible to use 37, 40, 59, 60 to get one pick in the 20s?

Then take 2 rookies, or NGA players late with basically free picks??

Those 4 picks are the equivalent of pick 14 using the bullshit points system. Any chance a team that wants points might gives us something in the twenties?

 

[hey shorty]

Those 4 picks are the equivalent of pick 14 using the bullshit points system. Any chance a team that wants points might gives us something in the twenties?

Extremely unlikely.

 

[Mutineer]

Spend 23 ish on Dawson,
Then have 4, 37, 59, 63
Band 4 compo for Kelly ~40

Is it possible to use 37, 40, 59, 60 to get one pick in the 20s?

Then take 2 rookies, or NGA players late with basically free picks??

about the only value pick 59 and 60 have is draft points for a team needing them so the only teams likely interested are teams with F/S or Academy picks if they're struggling for draft points and even then combined they're only worth 304 points. Most clubs will be out of this draft when picks 59 and 60 come up I'd think.

 

[dogs105]

about the only value pick 59 and 60 have is draft points for a team needing them so the only teams likely interested are teams with F/S or Academy picks if they're struggling for draft points and even then combined they're only worth 304 points. Most clubs will be out of this draft when picks 59 and 60 come up I'd think.

If Collingwood had their second rounder, the points on this deal could stop them going into a deficit.

But they traded that out too...

 

[Redline]

I still expect us to try to get some more picks next year so I think we will do plenty of pick swaps.

 

[Mego Red]

Any team looking for points this year will have plenty of offers.

Almost every side will look to move picks out of this year and hopefully into next, or keep players they have.

Picks after 30 in this year will have far lower value than normal. You're looking at many players who have barely played for two years. It's just a guessing game.

 

[Betts are off]

Anyone else getting the vibe that we might strategically be looking to kick the can down the road this trade period?

I have a feeling that Dawson + a top 10 pick + 2-3 high end bites next year may be the route we end up taking

 

[LoBu]

but that would just make that MSD outcome even more of a head scratcher..

we had a small forward deficiency all year.. nicks just a week before the MSD even said that if we took someone it would be a small forward… then come draft day we picked up yet another half back type.. and one that, whilst he looks a good prospect, is miles off taking a spot away from all the other half back options in the team..

are we really now gonna try him as a small forward?..

why the hell didnt we just pick that young WA lad, tyrone thorne, who is an absolute livewire with tons of xfactor and was good enough to make the WAFL team of the year..

just fu**in weird.

Looks like we drafted for talent, not needs. I didn't know that rule applied to mid season draft, but we are seeing talent slip through as its not developed in the draft year.

On Pixel 3 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[1970crow]

He's not, has always played his best football forward of centre, can't defend worth a damn - you can mitigate that by sticking him in a half forward zone, but he's always been torn up by opponents he should be beating down back.

Our half back flankers are Smith, Hamill, and Hinge, though in a pinch we also have wingmen and a mid in Seedsman, Sholl, Laird, and maybe Cook (and soon Dawson) who could do it but are better utilised elsewhere. I don't know what Parnell is yet.

His best football was far and away off half back. He's been poor as a forward apart from a single 10 minute burst where he kicked 3 goals. He's proven nothing more than a fringe player when playing ahead of the ball.

 

[1970crow]

Not sure I agree with that.

Ricky Henderson for example was rubbish behind the ball, moved to the Hawks and played his best football on the wing and half forward

The weak, defensively inept outside players tend to be exposed behind the ball - Rory Atkins and David Mackay also come to mind - and are better played midfield and forward of center

I don't think Rat ever actually played behind the ball though, he just worked back deep as a genuine wingman. Mackay is no different regardless of playing behind the ball or as a genuine wingman.

 

[1970crow]

If we had a rookie promotion or 2, might only take 1 or 2 in the ND. Then 2 or 3 rookies.

I think ROC signs or is delisted and re-rookied.
So either way, taking 4 picks from 2 drafts. And possibly getting more picks from Kelly, and maybe Lynch/Talia.

2 in the draft sounds right. By the time we've paid for Dawson, we'll have 4, a fair gap and then likely another fair gap. Given lack of footy of vic kids the last couple of years, it's probably a good draft to not take too much capital into.

 

[Bearded Clam]

2 in the draft sounds right. By the time we've paid for Dawson, we'll have 4, a fair gap and then likely another fair gap. Given lack of footy of vic kids the last couple of years, it's probably a good draft to not take too much capital into.

At this point, given the spread of talent, being 2 standouts at the top and then being pretty even over the next 15 players, I’d rather we split 4 into two picks.. tigers obviously being the club to target.

all depends on what happens in the next week or so though.. luko or rankine asking out of the suns could change things massively..

 

[1970crow]

At this point, given the spread of talent, being 2 standouts at the top and then being pretty even over the next 15 players, I’d rather we split 4 into two picks.. tigers obviously being the club to target.

all depends on what happens in the next week or so though.. luko or rankine asking out of the suns could change things massively..

Don't disagree, but the Tigers know what we know. That said, if we've got later picks we don't intend to use, then they can get chucked into the deal(s) as well.

 

[PsychoG]

Could see us moving Butts to the main list if we don't want to go too deep into the draft. Take 2, Upgrade 1 and Trade in 1?

Otherwise we'll be in a position next season where we'll need to find main list spots for Butts, Strachan and Keays all at once. That then allows us to just move the other 2 next year straight to the main list and go 38 - 6 instead of 36 - 8 in 2023.

 

[rabidcrow]

Must be, just feel like in years gone by we've made this decision a lot quicker. Its probably an indication that there are a few tricky moves that the list managers are trying to pull off that may or may not pan out

In years gone by we played finals - and there wasn’t a bye pre GF. Everything feels like it is in slow motion when the season finished for us a month ago - as has happened the last couple of years


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[rabidcrow]

Fair enough assessments on those 3. Still, it just feels like the picture is a bit murkier then usual coming into trade week. Like there are substantially more balls in the air then usual.

I suppose I shouldn't be too surprised, its been widely reported that we are going to be highly active in trade week for months now. I'm just too conditioned to expected a lot and getting almost nothing in trade week.

I think trade week will be very quiet for us - outside of clickbait suggesting we are all in for pick 1
Excluding of course Dawson that we are already aware of

Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[NTRabbit]

His best football was far and away off half back. He's been poor as a forward apart from a single 10 minute burst where he kicked 3 goals. He's proven nothing more than a fringe player when playing ahead of the ball.

He was terrible at half back. If that was his best footy, then he's a seriously disappointing player.

 

[Vader]

Main List

Out: Stengle, Lynch, Talia, Kelly
In: (Dawson)

Vacancies: 4 (3 + Dawson)

Uncontracted: 1 (O'Connor)

Rookie List

Out: Mackay, Gibbs
In: Parnell, Murray

Vacancies: 0

Uncontracted: 1 (Davis)

Category B Rookie List

Out:
In:

Vacancies: 0

Uncontracted: 0

Excellent summary. The only thing I would add is that these vacancy numbers are predicated on the club continuing with the 36/6 list structure. They could also switch to 37/5 or 38/4.

 

[George CantStandYa]

He was terrible at half back. If that was his best footy, then he's a seriously disappointing player.

His attacking play was good, it was his actual defending that sucked

 

[Scorpus]

His attacking play was good, it was his actual defending that sucked

Was his defending any worse than Brodie Smith?

 

[tinman]

We probably promote one rookie (to avoid being forced into too many promotions next year), leaving us with a minimum of 2 picks in the actual draft. Assuming 23 goes on Dawson, and the Kelly compo is around 40, that means our draft picks would be 4 + 37 + 40. Given the state of our list, I wouldn't be fussed if we used only 4 + 37. Any more and we'd have to delist players who OK might be on the margin now, but have to replace them with pick 40+. It might be better to give one or two guys another year to see what we've got (or not). All going well, we'll probably have a few hard decisions next year anyway.

I reckon they'll be banking on list sizes increasing next year