Strategy Changes: Round 16 Fremantle vs. St Kilda

[Snuffaluphagus]

Yep

There was a guy called kossi who apparently was asking for a trade… then he signed on for a record contract

Think this should go to another thread - like 2026 list management

Not weekly in outs

I think that is completely bizarre and I don't know how many more times Jackson is going to have to be top 3 on the ground playing as a ruck for people to come around. Its a head scratcher.

With regards to ins/outs I can twist the discussion enough. If they play Jackson/Darcy, playing Fyfe as well is a mistake. If they don't play Darcy, I'll be very surprised if hes not having calls with 3-4 Vic clubs by the time he gets home.

 

[Alfonz]

Not so sure about this nowadays.
What is say, Soldo at Port getting, or Jordan Sweet? I reckon soldo is on more than you might think.

Pittonet at Carlton would be another interesting one to know his salary though I guess sometimes he plays with TDK in the same side so not really true reserve.
Reeves at the Hawks would be another one.
Yeah I don’t know. Think we’ll need to pay $350k at least per year to get anyone better than Reidy across

I think you might be overestimating how much backups and depth get paid. Crunch the numbers from the latest AFL player salary survey:

The highest paid players in the AFL as rich list revealed

More players than ever before were paid more than $1 million last year

www.afl.com.au

On average, the 400-500k bracket is for the 14-19th players.

Then 300-400k is for 19-25th. Then 200k-300k is for 25th-31st. The bottom end is on 100-200k.

Not that simple cause we'd have budget options in the 22 (e.g. Wagner) and more expensive on the outer (e.g. who knows what we are wasting on Brodie). But it probably balances out.

Overall, a competent backup ruck like Pittonet or Sweet should slot in somewhere around the middle of that 200k-300k bracket.

Salary cap increasing doesn't impact the bottom end as much. Most clubs just work around a % increase for everyone, so $200k doesn't go up that much if the salary cap goes up by say 10%.

 

[s_wd6]

Ill change it again then. For those adamant on keeping Darcy, do you keep him if he asks for a trade?

Nah different story then. I don’t like forcing players out when they are/can still be a big part of the team. Bad for the culture. Him deciding he wants out is different

 

[ignoramus]

Ill change it again then. For those adamant on keeping Darcy, do you keep him if he asks for a trade?

Different situation, though the question highlights an unarticulated assumption: that both players are happy with the arrangement/ taking a team-first approach.

If not, then it becomes a question of strategy around player and list management rather than game plan/play. When you say “if Darcy asks for a trade”, I assume you mean “even after you’ve done your best to sell the situation and the future”, then, yeah, there are costs to holding him to his contract that go beyond the salary commitment, and you start thinking about the best return. Bit like the Lobb situation.

It’s not out of the realm of possibility, but if Darcy is still playing every game, and at least 50% ruck, I’d be a little surprised if he did want to move. I’d imagine a bigger salary offer would be on the table, which means we’re no longer talking chicken feed at the trade table. That makes the decision to let him go a lot easier.

 

[McRobie]

The point people make the Darcy is better against the big brutes is sound, but these days that is literally only Xerri, Gawn, Witts and maybe Marshall? He's just as big as anyone else really and can hold his own, as well as dominate them around the ball.
Is it worth paying 700k a year to come in to protect Jackson in the 4 games a season he's not as big as the opposition ruck? I think Darcy is a good ruckman, but having 1,7million a year tied up in Rucks isn't ideal, so if a good deal came in for Darcy, the club would be derilect in their duty not to at least consider it.

Remember Serong goes out of contract again in a couple of years - his next deal probably needs to be near 1.5 million a season tbh.. you can't keep them all, and Darcy feels more expendable than Jackson or Serong that's for sure.

I think Jackson can be the best ruckman in the entire comp - once Max retires it's Jackson and TDK

Yeah good post, I love Luke Jackson as a player, does it all, people forget he’s only 23 and has his best years ahead of him.
That strength that will enable him to handle the bigger boys isn’t far away.

 

[s_wd6]

Yeah good post, I love Luke Jackson as a player, does it all, people forget he’s only 23 and has his best years ahead of him.
That strength that will enable him to handle the bigger boys isn’t far away.

Sean Darcy was only 23 with his best years ahead of him When he won a b&f too

 

[Taylor]

I'm not sure Jackson can get the same leverage over a guy 5-10cm taller than him, he measured in at 199cm at the combine and those shoulders can be the strongest at the club (they aren't) and he will still start them under a guy who would conventionally be the number one ruck elsewhere.

I don't think we want Jackson to be that bulked up either if we want him to be that agile cat in the middle.

 

[jusjoshin]

I think that is completely bizarre and I don't know how many more times Jackson is going to have to be top 3 on the ground playing as a ruck for people to come around. Its a head scratcher.

With regards to ins/outs I can twist the discussion enough. If they play Jackson/Darcy, playing Fyfe as well is a mistake. If they don't play Darcy, I'll be very surprised if hes not having calls with 3-4 Vic clubs by the time he gets home.

It isn't as if we haven't seen a fit Darcy in the best 3 on the ground. Some folk on this board have short memories. He might not be as dominant around the ground, but a fit and in form Darcy is a weapon. Our game plan revolves around stoppage dominance, I'm not sure why we'd want to give up one of the strongest tap ruckmen in the league. I wouldn't want Jackson rucking all game against the heavier units like Gawn, Xerri, Briggs and Meek. How would we feel if we traded away Darcy for a bag of magic beans and then Jacksons body starts to break down because it can't take being bashed into these brutes for a season.

I'd have a talk with Sean about how we'll have to manage his load going forward, given that his body has barely held up the last couple of seasons, we can extend, but it'll be at two thirds of your current wage, because we want to rest you one game in three.

I do agree that we shouldn't be playing Fyfe until he trusts his leg to kick 40m+.

 

[jusjoshin]

Yeah good post, I love Luke Jackson as a player, does it all, people forget he’s only 23 and has his best years ahead of him.
That strength that will enable him to handle the bigger boys isn’t far away.

No, if he puts on enough weight to handle the bigger bodied rucks, he will lose some mobility (it takes more energy moving that mass around the park), and risks structural damage (tearing muscles and tendons) if he doesn't change the way he plays. Pivoting at speed might be manageable at 90-100kg, but at 100+kg there is increased risk to your joints.

 

[mattis117]

I think that is completely bizarre and I don't know how many more times Jackson is going to have to be top 3 on the ground playing as a ruck for people to come around. Its a head scratcher.

With regards to ins/outs I can twist the discussion enough. If they play Jackson/Darcy, playing Fyfe as well is a mistake. If they don't play Darcy, I'll be very surprised if hes not having calls with 3-4 Vic clubs by the time he gets home.

I agree with that and go a step further and say they can only play one, at most 1.5 (meaning sub role), of JOM, Fyfe, Darcy, and eventually Walters as well.

For me, I start Darcy and would have either of JOM or Fyfe as the sub, which is like having the extra coach on the bench.

 

[go_the_dockers]

I agree with that and go a step further and say they can only play one, at most 1.5 (meaning sub role), of JOM, Fyfe, Darcy, and eventually Walters as well.

For me, I start Darcy and would have either of JOM or Fyfe as the sub, which is like having the extra coach on the bench.

You need to Erasmus to calculation as well.

I think you can fit two of Erasmus, Fyfe, JOM and Darcy in the side.

Maybe one more as the sub, but even that is not ideal.

I would even go further to say that Fyfe and Erasmus should be in the 22 together. Both need to play the inside mid role, and for this reason Fyfe should only be played as the sub.

Fyfe and Walters retiring, Darcy leaving the club via trade I think may actually help us in a lot of ways except experience on the field.

I do wonder how much the experience Fyfe, Walters and to a lesser extent JOM brings that impacts including them.

Maybe this year we play Erasmus and JOM in the 22, have Fyfe as sub that walks the fine line between being too slow, and being too inexperienced. Especially for finals.

Fyfe can start for games like the Eagles, and maybe one more easy one.

 

[go_the_dockers]

An interesting listen. Hopefully Serong and Brayshaw are looked after as well as Daicos.

PS - Serong and Brayshaw need to get on the move, to ensure the umpire sees the free kicks.

 

[thistimeforsure]

Holy crap , I’ve seen plenty of hive mind cognitive bias drenched bullshit on this board before but this sudden ‘ Darcy’s match winning ‘ game against the Roos takes the chocolates

Dude was passable at best even with the kindest of eyes and there’s a deadset case to be made that the Roos running off him in the middle while he plodded around at half pace went a long way towards them almost pinching the game

It isn't as if we haven't seen a fit Darcy in the best 3 on the ground. Some folk on this board have short memories. He might not be as dominant around the ground, but a fit and in form Darcy is a weapon. Our game plan revolves around stoppage dominance, I'm not sure why we'd want to give up one of the strongest tap ruckmen in the league. I wouldn't want Jackson rucking all game against the heavier units like Gawn, Xerri, Briggs and Meek. How would we feel if we traded away Darcy for a bag of magic beans and then Jacksons body starts to break down because it can't take being bashed into these brutes for a season.

I'd have a talk with Sean about how we'll have to manage his load going forward, given that his body has barely held up the last couple of seasons, we can extend, but it'll be at two thirds of your current wage, because we want to rest you one game in three.

I do agree that we shouldn't be playing Fyfe until he trusts his leg to kick 40m+.

Lol are we just going to pretend there’s never been a mobile ruckman before

 

[s_wd6]

Holy crap , I’ve seen plenty of hive mind cognitive bias drenched bullshit on this board before but this sudden ‘ Darcy’s match winning ‘ game against the Roos takes the chocolates

Dude was passable at best even with the kindest of eyes and there’s a deadset case to be made that the Roos running off him in the middle while he plodded around at half pace went a long way towards them almost pinching the game

Lol are we just going to pretend there’s never been a mobile ruckman before

All you need is eyes to see that Darcy was significantly better in the ruck that game than Jackson. Then you can look at the stats to back it up. Jackson may have been better around the ground but that only counts for so much when he’s tapping it down the throat of the opposition the only time he’s able to win the HO against Xerri. Jackson had 2 HTA the entire game and at least one of them was against Darling.

 

[bushchook]

I agree with that and go a step further and say they can only play one, at most 1.5 (meaning sub role), of JOM, Fyfe, Darcy, and eventually Walters as well.

For me, I start Darcy and would have either of JOM or Fyfe as the sub, which is like having the extra coach on the bench.

Fyfe and Walters are done, JoM has 1 more year at best.

 

[CaseySibosadoHOF]

Dude was passable at best even with the kindest of eyes and there’s a deadset case to be made that the Roos running off him in the middle while he plodded around at half pace went a long way towards them almost pinching the game

North didn't score a single point from centre clearance that whole game. Every goal that North scored that quarter was off turnover. Xerri had 1 score involvement that whole quarter (a hitout against Jackson).

When you're that far off in your perceptions, you should probably reflect on your biases.

 

[jusjoshin]

Holy crap , I’ve seen plenty of hive mind cognitive bias drenched bullshit on this board before but this sudden ‘ Darcy’s match winning ‘ game against the Roos takes the chocolates

Dude was passable at best even with the kindest of eyes and there’s a deadset case to be made that the Roos running off him in the middle while he plodded around at half pace went a long way towards them almost pinching the game

Lol are we just going to pretend there’s never been a mobile ruckman before

Not this year, he has struggled getting fit returning from injury. But cast your mind back a few seasons (21/22/23) when Darcy was fit and dominating. When he picked up multiple BOG performances and snagged a Doig. When fit and in form, he is a very good ruckman, which a lot of people here seem to forget.

There have been plenty of mobile ruckmen before, even in dominant teams (Grundy at Collingwood, Goodes at Sydney spring to mind). But we have access to the best of both worlds right now, and I don't think we should be in a rush to lose that.

 

[DragoDelph]

Have we just found flogmantle?

 

[rgauci]

Keep Darcy, never sell low. His value is pretty much at its floor. People are worried it’ll go lower, it can’t go much lower.

It is much higher probability of going up than down.

 

[go_the_dockers]

 

[go_the_dockers]

Keep Darcy, never sell low. His value is pretty much at its floor. People are worried it’ll go lower, it can’t go much lower.

It is much higher probability of going up than down.

With out a detailed medical report it is hard to tell, but the club should have this.

It can get a lot worse if he doesn't play next year. Also I don't have him in my best 22, so that is another reason to trade him if we can get a 2nd rounder for him.

Option 1. Trade him now
Lose 700k X 5 years (3.5 million )
Get a 2nd round pick

Option 2. Keep Darcy one more year.

Best Case
Darcy is fit, we play him in the 22 and him and Jackson play ok.
Darcy value increases a bit to late 1st round pick.

Medium Case
Darcy is fit, but we can't fit him, Jackson and Voss into the 22.
Darcy values increases a fraction, and we get an early 2nd round pick.

Medium Case v2
Darcy is fit for half the games
Get a 2nd round pick

Worse Case
Darcy get injured, barely plays.
He is untradeable, and we need to carry him on our list for 5 years.
3.5 million of salary cap is wasted.

 

[jusjoshin]

With out a detailed medical report it is hard to tell, but the club should have this.

It can get a lot worse if he doesn't play next year. Also I don't have him in my best 22, so that is another reason to trade him if we can get a 2nd rounder for him.

Option 1. Trade him now
Lose 700k X 5 years (3.5 million )
Get a 2nd round pick

Option 2. Keep Darcy one more year.

Best Case
Darcy is fit, we play him in the 22 and him and Jackson play ok.
Darcy value increases a bit to late 1st round pick.

The best case is Darcy stays fit, gets back to his best form and the ruck combo of Darcy and Jackson lead us to unprecedented midfield dominance - resulting in repeated top four launches into September.

 

[McRobie]

No, if he puts on enough weight to handle the bigger bodied rucks, he will lose some mobility (it takes more energy moving that mass around the park), and risks structural damage (tearing muscles and tendons) if he doesn't change the way he plays. Pivoting at speed might be manageable at 90-100kg, but at 100+kg there is increased risk to your joints.

Strength doesn’t always equal bulk.

 

[swanny1234]

I agree with that and go a step further and say they can only play one, at most 1.5 (meaning sub role), of JOM, Fyfe, Darcy, and eventually Walters as well.

For me, I start Darcy and would have either of JOM or Fyfe as the sub, which is like having the extra coach on the bench.

If it was a knockout final and those were my options, i'm going Walters and Fyfe every time, which means backing Jackson in the ruck solo.
In a standard game, maybe not..

 

[stax on the mull]

Couple of reporters mentioning that Pearce didn't train today.