Collingwood List Management Thread

[mattys123]

Re: Collingwood's 2011 Draft/Trade Thread

Here's some pics of the kid;

http://aflphotos.gspservers.com.au/galleries/results/?q=taylor+adams

 

[TradeDraft]

Re: Collingwood's 2011 Draft/Trade Thread

Interesting Dave, got any information on the kid?

No Sorry Mate I know next to Nothing about him. Sorry

The Little Info is he Plays for Geelong Falcons

11 Taylor ADAMS 20-Sep-93 181 80 St.Joseph’s

 

[Knightmare]

Re: Collingwood's 2011 Draft/Trade Thread

No Sorry Mate I know next to Nothing about him. Sorry

The Little Info is he Plays for Geelong Falcons

11 Taylor ADAMS 20-Sep-93 181 80 St.Joseph’s

Think I read somewhere that he tore his hamstring in r1.

Was B.O.G or near in that game as I understand it.

Don't quote me on it though.



Side note:
Going to update this thread during the r13 bye. Will update the numbering, player comments, potential list changes amongst other things.

 

[TradeDraft]

Re: Collingwood's 2011 Draft/Trade Thread

Think I read somewhere that he tore his hamstring in r1.

Was B.O.G or near in that game as I understand it.

Don't quote me on it though.

That could really work in our Favour as there would be a very good Chance he will be there for our 1st Round Pick. That's if we keep it

 

[Knightmare]

Re: Collingwood's 2011 Draft/Trade Thread

That could really work in our Favour as there would be a very good Chance he will be there for our 1st Round Pick. That's if we keep it

Coming into the year was a projected 1st rounder so could certainly help if keen. But being this high up in the rankings I'd suggest just about all clubs are interested.

Personally I'm on the lookout for mostly on rucks, KPPs and medium + smaller backs because if my projected delistings are anything like I'd be going after we will have very little depth left (smaller + medium defenders).

Rather than mids (loaded up the year before last and the couple of drafts before that) and forwards (loaded up last year).

We'll all have a better idea of things when the U18 champs happen. And I'll have a better guage on what is going on with Taylor Adams.

 

[Zahki]

Re: Collingwood's 2011 Draft/Trade Thread

We need to nick some of these Gold Coast kids or they will be unstoppable in a few years time.

 

[Wooljay]

Re: Collingwood's 2011 Draft/Trade Thread

We need to nick some of these Gold Coast kids or they will be unstoppable in a few years time.

Zac Smith thanks.

 

[sr36]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

No player who has yet to play any senior footy should be demanding anything.

The fact is, we cannot really afford to accomodate them on our senior list, and our depth is such that it really is inconceivable that they would get a senior game in their first year or two at the club.

.

The problem is that if other clubs are keen to add them straight onto the main list, they may force our hand.

You are right though, we don't really have 3 to delist from the main list at the end of the year.

No obvious retirements: Maybe Johnson, Davis or Brown, but all 3 are still best 22.
Few obvious delistments: Rounds looks in trouble. Everyone else either looks like a keeper or is a first year player.
I suspect that we'll try hard to get one of GWS 17 year olds for a couple of our fringe players. I wouldn't want to lose any of the following players: Blair, Macaffer, Goldsack, Macarthy, Buckley, but two of them to GWS for a 17 year old is probably a pretty fair deal for both clubs. The Pies lose some depth, but gain a highly rated youngster. GWS gain a couple of young hard workers who are definitely senior standard for a player they have to trade.

 

[Harry O]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

quote I suspect that we'll try hard to get one of GWS 17 year olds for a couple of our fringe players. I wouldn't want to lose any of the following players: Blair, Macaffer, Goldsack, Macarthy, Buckley, but two of them to GWS for a 17 year old is probably a pretty fair deal for both clubs. The Pies lose some depth, but gain a highly rated youngster. GWS gain a couple of young hard workers who are definitely senior standard for a player they have to trade. quote


I suspect this is how they will manage the list issues at years end. Trade a few out to enable both room on the list and room in the cap. Another issue to consider is if the AFLPA get their way and abolish the rookie list and expand the senior list to 46 or 48.

 

[Knightmare]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

If first year players sign for two years, can they be traded or put on the rookie list for their second year?

If we can rookie Witts and Hartley for 12 months, it gives us time to move on some of the deeper first year players who will be into their second year of contract.

Otherwise need to make room for potentially- M. Clarke, Bolton, Witts, Hartley plus a pick.....

In the past with Toby Thoolan we have delisted after one year then rookied. I'd say with perhaps Stubbs this would be a good option given he was a late selection and hasn't really played. Could be a way to retain him if keen to still give him a chance while making a position on the senior list available.

We don't really know whether Marty wants to come back yet. But if he does. Gee. Allot of pressure on everyone on our list to perform.

Will be incredibly hard to get the balance right. Our list is sensational, and we don't have list cloggers like we have in years gone past which is what makes it so difficult because there are more players who we want to add to our senior list than we ideally want to.

No player who has yet to play any senior footy should be demanding anything.

The fact is, we cannot really afford to accomodate them on our senior list, and our depth is such that it really is inconceivable that they would get a senior game in their first year or two at the club.

Tom Young went straight onto the senior list, but that was after playing a full season of VFL footy for us, and winning our VFL B&F. Scott Reed was a promising young prospect, but he's STILL on the rookie list (though I'm guessing he'll be delisted at year's end as surplus to requirements), so Witts and Hartley will probably be offered rookie list spots.

Bolton will also likely be asked to go for a second year on the rookie list. While he's been promising, we also plucked him from the sticks, and he's had a few injury issues that have kept him from going on with his pre-season form.

So we should be able to go with the three mandatory draft picks... Picking three delistees is tough enough, presuming no shock retirements. Rookie list spots for Witts and Hartley would be from Tom Hunter and Scott Reed's spots.

This is correct. Delisting 3 players at seasons end will be a task. Making room for 4-5 would be a monumental task! Really hard to see any retirements this season. But if it happened, while you don't want to see it happen because Ben Johnson, L.Brown and Leon Davis are all quality and best 22 guys, it does help by allowing us to delist 1 less player.

The thing with Witts and Hartley. If they keep their form up, they might demand a position on the senior list. Because they could easily just enter the national draft and be taken in the 2nd round, maybe earlier they are that good. Both are projecting as AFL talent, not just depth. Witts could easily pass Ceglar and Wood if he can stay injury free, and I expect he will. And Hartley might pass N.Brown. So both regardless of how we get them to the club, they will prove to be fantastic value long term. So we need to make them a priority because missing out on a ruckman and a KPD talent who are 1st-2nd round quality when we have priority to them both, that would be a tragic mistake! If we can get them to the club as rookies, that is a bonus! And would mean we can retain more players which would be a massive win, but not guaranteed. We'll have to see, because if they demand a spot on our senior list, they both look deserving as Tom Young did last year.

An example of a player who did similar to what I'm talking about is our very own Trent Stubbs (our final draft selection). Was a Hawthorn NSW/ACT rookie. But entered the national draft and our good scounting picked up on this and took advantage of this. And we can't let a similar thing happen with these two because they are that level above and by position huge long term building blocks.

Bolton remaining on the rookie list for a 2nd year would be a good move, and now you mention it, it probably is the correct one. I think a couple of years back it might have been Macaffer who dominated at VFL level for the year, but we waited that 2nd year to make him force his way into our senior side, then upgrade him onto the senior list. The fact that we don't need to add that extra player to the senior list is a great help and goes a long way to helping minimise that list turnover even though he is as deserving as any to have a position on the senior list. Good call.

This offseason will be about minimising the list turnover as much as possible and keeping our list together. But we also have to make adding Witts + Hartley priorities if they can keep up their form and keep improving. If we can add them as rookies, that is optimal. If they want senior list positions, you really have to give it to them because chances are they are better than whoever we would use those selections on in the national draft anyway.

 

[TradeDraft]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

quote I suspect that we'll try hard to get one of GWS 17 year olds for a couple of our fringe players. I wouldn't want to lose any of the following players: Blair, Macaffer, Goldsack, Macarthy, Buckley, but two of them to GWS for a 17 year old is probably a pretty fair deal for both clubs. The Pies lose some depth, but gain a highly rated youngster. GWS gain a couple of young hard workers who are definitely senior standard for a player they have to trade. quote


I suspect this is how they will manage the list issues at years end. Trade a few out to enable both room on the list and room in the cap. Another issue to consider is if the AFLPA get their way and abolish the rookie list and expand the senior list to 46 or 48.

I heard we are Chasing O'Mera from WA Hard

 

[Knightmare]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

I heard we are Chasing O'Mera from WA Hard

I'd rather Stringer. Had a horrible injury which has put him out for the season. But equally talented and if we did end up going after one of those 4x 17 year olds, he would be my guy. Super explosive. Great kick. Basketball background. Hard worker with great attitude. Ideal height at 191cm, can go between HFF and HBF. Supreme talent. Goddard like.

But I expect it would be too costly to add any of these kids. Other clubs will likely go harder. Particularly those rebuilding.

 

[soreplums]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

In the past with Toby Thoolan we have delisted after one year then rookied. I'd say with perhaps Stubbs this would be a good option given he was a late selection and hasn't really played.

This is exactly what I was thinking. Also agree that we should keep Bolton on for a second year.

This was the reason I was a little dirty on so many retiring last year. It would have been worth keeping a list clogger or two just so we could delist them this year and buy some time for others.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

But I expect it would be too costly to add any of these kids. Other clubs will likely go harder. Particularly those rebuilding.

I'm not so sure - All of their valuable assets are young players, which they aren't going to give up to get less proven young players.

We actually have mid-age premiership players that are somewhat surplus to requirements, and could offer a couple of guys that would add valuable depth to the GWS team.

 

[Knightmare]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

In the past with Toby Thoolan we have delisted after one year then rookied. I'd say with perhaps Stubbs this would be a good option given he was a late selection and hasn't really played.

This is exactly what I was thinking. Also agree that we should keep Bolton on for a second year.

This was the reason I was a little dirty on so many retiring last year. It would have been worth keeping a list clogger or two just so we could delist them this year and buy some time for others.

We did a great job considering our list turnover to fill those positions with more quality. With low end draft picks we did fairly well considering and adding Tarrant + Krakouer have both turned out to be fantastic moves.

But with all those players leaving last year whether it be Josh to GC and Jack to Freo and Medhurst, Lockyer, O'Bree and Presti retiring, it has made it incredibly difficult to find anyone to delist this year.

In hindsight it might have been a good move to keep Jaxson Barham on for another year. Would have helped a young VFL team since he was a great pressure player and accumulator, and might have been another delisting option for this year to go along with possibly Rounds and maybe Stubbs who could easily be rookied. The other benefit of retaining Jaxson would have been that he would have increased our chances of making the VFL top 8, which is handy because it means you get to give the younger players a taste for what it is like to play finals footy, even at VFL level.

But we have to live with past decisions (which by no means have been bad) and make the best of what we have coming (which is pretty looking pretty good to me!)

 

[Jelly Bean]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

It is far too early to be suggesting that we need to make Witts and Hartley senior players. Even if they keep up their performance in the champs, I think it would be extremely unlikely that they would be any other than rookied.

Bolton will stay on the rookie list for another 12 months. He has shown no where near enough to be discussed as a potential promotion end of year.

We still need 3 delists minimum from the senior list. Some thoughts on options:
- Rounds is looking quite susceptible, unfortunately.
- Buckley's good performance may save him for another year.
- Goldsack is looking in trouble, but should get something in a trade
- First year players Farmer and Stubbs may be options as well.
- I doubt Johnson will retire end of year, and nor will Davis.
- Cameron Wood may be looked at as gone. I know we don't have great depth, but we would have Ceglar in second year, Keefe on the senior list, L Brown still running around and Shae on the rookie list, as well as possibly bringing on Witts. I am not saying any of these guys are the answer, but they may be able to provide back up between them (in the case of injury) until our genuine second ruck option emerges.

 

[Knightmare]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

- Cameron Wood may be looked at as gone. I know we don't have great depth, but we would have Ceglar in second year, Keefe on the senior list, L Brown still running around and Shae on the rookie list, as well as possibly bringing on Witts. I am not saying any of these guys are the answer, but they may be able to provide back up between them (in the case of injury) until our genuine second ruck option emerges.

We'll have to see with regard to Witts + Hartley what we can do. Certainly optimal if they accept rookie contracts. But it's too early to know what will happen there.

But the Cameron Wood bit is interesting and is a worthwhile discussion, even if it is only that. I would not object to delisting him. Certainly not our future ruckman. But I think with the way the club continue to talk him up, that he will be retained. Mick always talks so glowingly about Wood, which is very surprisingly for a 24 year old ruckman who is no better than the day he arrived. By 22 you really know what you've got in most cases.

The thing with Wood is that he is our only real depth ruckman. Keeffe is still more of a defender and Ceglar isn't nearly ready. So we have limited options as Jolly replacements, and with Jolly a 30 year old, you need an ok backup, which unfortunately Wood is the closest to being.

 

[TradeDraft]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

I'd rather Stringer. Had a horrible injury which has put him out for the season. But equally talented and if we did end up going after one of those 4x 17 year olds, he would be my guy. Super explosive. Great kick. Basketball background. Hard worker with great attitude. Ideal height at 191cm, can go between HFF and HBF. Supreme talent. Goddard like.

But I expect it would be too costly to add any of these kids. Other clubs will likely go harder. Particularly those rebuilding.

Yeah I think GWS would ask to Much for a Team at the Top but a Team Like the Saints or Dogs would suit them Perfectly.

Stringer sounds like a Beauty

 

[sr36]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

Yeah I think GWS would ask to Much for a Team at the Top but a Team Like the Saints or Dogs would suit them Perfectly.

Stringer sounds like a Beauty

Don't forget that they have 4 trades that they have to make. I don't think that any clubs will offer up a gun, let alone 4 clubs offering one up. I also think that most clubs won't do a trade for the sake of it, eg. trade draft pick 8 for someone they think of as being worth draft pick 8, because there is always a good chance that someone they rate higher than 8 will slip through. I also think that GWS will be after under 25 year old senior players. What rebuilding club would be willing to trade away under 25 year old senior players, unless they have a surplus in that position. Not likely to find 4 clubs in that scenario. Frankly, with a fair few young expendable players on our fringe, who have all shown that they belong in the AFL, we are in a great position to get one of these 17 year olds.

 

[Jelly Bean]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

Don't forget that they have 4 trades that they have to make. I don't think that any clubs will offer up a gun, let alone 4 clubs offering one up. I also think that most clubs won't do a trade for the sake of it, eg. trade draft pick 8 for someone they think of as being worth draft pick 8, because there is always a good chance that someone they rate higher than 8 will slip through. I also think that GWS will be after under 25 year old senior players. What rebuilding club would be willing to trade away under 25 year old senior players, unless they have a surplus in that position. Not likely to find 4 clubs in that scenario. Frankly, with a fair few young expendable players on our fringe, who have all shown that they belong in the AFL, we are in a great position to get one of these 17 year olds.

Let's not forget that after Buck's first year (end of next year) there are a number of possible retirements

- Davis (retire or close to it)
- Tarrant (retire or close to it)
- Ball (retire or close to it)
- L Brown (retire or close to it)
- Johnson (retire or close to it)

and people who if they haven't made it by then they will be a chance to be delisted

- Sinclair
- J Thomas
- Rounds
- McCarthy
- Wood
- Dick
- Young
- Farmer

So there is a bit of a list turnover expected over the next 18 months. We wouldn't want to over-reduce our depth this year only to have a great number of people retire the following year.

I don't think we will go after one of these 4 young guns if it costs us a couple of high end depth players.

 

[Scodog10]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

Let's not forget that after Buck's first year (end of next year) there are a number of possible retirements

- Davis (retire or close to it)
- Tarrant (retire or close to it)
- Ball (retire or close to it)
- L Brown (retire or close to it)
- Johnson (retire or close to it)

and people who if they haven't made it by then they will be a chance to be delisted

- Sinclair
- J Thomas
- Rounds
- McCarthy
- Wood
- Dick
- Young
- Farmer

So there is a bit of a list turnover expected over the next 18 months. We wouldn't want to over-reduce our depth this year only to have a great number of people retire the following year.

I don't think we will go after one of these 4 young guns if it costs us a couple of high end depth players.

I think that's a massive call on Ball! He's younger than Swanny by 3 months so will be 28 at the end of 2012 plus he's currently in the best form of his career since his AA year of 2005....

 

[Knightmare]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

Don't forget that they have 4 trades that they have to make. I don't think that any clubs will offer up a gun, let alone 4 clubs offering one up. I also think that most clubs won't do a trade for the sake of it, eg. trade draft pick 8 for someone they think of as being worth draft pick 8, because there is always a good chance that someone they rate higher than 8 will slip through. I also think that GWS will be after under 25 year old senior players. What rebuilding club would be willing to trade away under 25 year old senior players, unless they have a surplus in that position. Not likely to find 4 clubs in that scenario. Frankly, with a fair few young expendable players on our fringe, who have all shown that they belong in the AFL, we are in a great position to get one of these 17 year olds.

For O'Meara clubs will. He is performing at the level Coniglio is already, and Coniglio is the projected no.1 this year which gives you an idea of the talent that is already there and why clubs are so keen. If GWS don't trade O'Meara he would probably go 2nd in that draft to Lachie Whitfield who isn't eligable for the 4x 17 year olds, and you have to remember 2012 will be a very strong draft, stronger than this years. So you figure since GWS will probably win the wooden spoon they will take Whitfield and trade O'Meara for the best deal they can get (which will be significant) - maybe even close to a Brendan Goddard standard.

So clubs will do everything they can do to a no.1/2 overall quality pick. It's like saying for GC to trade away David Swallow or Melbourne to trade away Tom Scully. So clubs will have to give up significant talent.

Stringer is probably slightly more attainable and I hope we enquire about him since he doesn't get talked about nearly as much as O'Meara. I have him as the 3rd best talent of the 2012 group and most would probably rate him top 5 even with his season ending injury. But again. Still won't be cheap. But stylisticalyl I think a really great fit because he has that flexibility of position between forward and back and has that talent to be a very high level player.
Wellingham + 1st rounder possibly get the kid. Anything less like a Macaffer or Goldsack instead of Wellingham I would say very doubtful.

O'Meara we just won't have the currency for. But word is he is very keen to stay in WA.

Then after O'Meara + Stringer chances are maybe one other gets selected this year (who will likely won't nearly have the same currency and might require a Bernie Vince standard player). Then the final of the four x 17 year olds can come from the 2013 draft, and most expect GWS to carry over 1-2 of the possible trades.

Let's not forget that after Buck's first year (end of next year) there are a number of possible retirements

- Davis (retire or close to it)
- Tarrant (retire or close to it)
- Ball (retire or close to it)
- L Brown (retire or close to it)
- Johnson (retire or close to it)

and people who if they haven't made it by then they will be a chance to be delisted

- Sinclair
- J Thomas
- Rounds
- McCarthy
- Wood
- Dick
- Young
- Farmer

So there is a bit of a list turnover expected over the next 18 months. We wouldn't want to over-reduce our depth this year only to have a great number of people retire the following year.

I don't think we will go after one of these 4 young guns if it costs us a couple of high end depth players.

Ball won't retire. Only 27 this year. 28 next year. Still improving. In better physical condition than he has been in a long time. Durability is looking good despite what many thought when he came to the club. Has anywhere between 2-4 years left after this year for mine which comes down purely to how his body holds up.

Young I would take off that list of younger players and exchange him for Stubbs. And probably add Goldsack (although I am a fan) but considering age would be amongst that group and also Macaffer who could also be at risk if he doesn't have a great preseason.

 

[daics_35]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

Let's not forget that after Buck's first year (end of next year) there are a number of possible retirements

- Davis (retire or close to it)
- Tarrant (retire or close to it)
- Ball (retire or close to it)
- L Brown (retire or close to it)
- Johnson (retire or close to it)

and people who if they haven't made it by then they will be a chance to be delisted

- Sinclair
- J Thomas
- Rounds
- McCarthy
- Wood
- Dick
- Young
- Farmer

So there is a bit of a list turnover expected over the next 18 months. We wouldn't want to over-reduce our depth this year only to have a great number of people retire the following year.

I don't think we will go after one of these 4 young guns if it costs us a couple of high end depth players.

No way will Ball retire that young, the bloke has another 4 years left. But most of the young blokes should be introuble apart from Thomas and Dick. Infact I think all will be gone except those 2 from the young players you have mentioned.

 

[Jelly Bean]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

Okay, so I am copping a bit of stick about my naming of Ball (and possibly rightly so) but I just don't see him being a player with great longevity. I did say retire or close to it, meaning I have bought myself 2013 as well (by which point Ball will be 29). I am probably wrong, but who knows.

Anyway, my point is that we will get a bit of list turnover in the next two years, and therefore don't want to go trading away our young good depth now and have none left in a couple of years time.

And my final comment - I really seem to have hijacked the true purpose of this wonderful thread, which I really don't want to do (as it is my favourite thread) so please don't respond to this post, and instead let's preserve this thread for Future Magpies.

 

[bucksisbest]

Re: Future Magpies Watch '11

I just had a look and delisting off the main list will be brutal. Maybe Farmer and Stubbs might cop it and hope for a redraft, there's a few others, I wonder how Sinclair is rated internally?
I could go 4 maybe 5 off the rookie list, including Tom Hunter.