Club Focus Essendon 2025

[Ticky009]

Data from footywire. To check the draft order see the thread here.

Footywire says: "While we make every effort to keep up to date with player contracts, it is likely that our data may at times be out of date, incomplete or inaccurate. If you find any player contracts that need updating, please let us know using our brand new contract submission form."

 

[eth-dog]

That actually says more about the bombers list

This post really sums up Richmond fans.

The bloke is nearly 31. Bombers won't even be thinking of finals for at least another 5 years.

Where did Murhpy Reid go in 2024 again? You should've taken what you could get. You don't want players at the club that don't want to be there and there is always steals to be hand in the teens and 20s.

But this one more. One okay pick, which we got anyway, two shit picks and a bloke about to get cut.

How about we offer Will Setterfield, two seconds and a mid teens pick for Will Day? Injury prone, struggles to stay on the park, that should be enough, yeah?

 

[THE_GUN]

This post really sums up Richmond fans.

But this one more. One okay pick, which we got anyway, two shit picks and a bloke about to get cut.

How about we offer Will Setterfield, two seconds and a mid teens pick for Will Day? Injury prone, struggles to stay on the park, that should be enough, yeah?

Does will day want to leave ? if no then its a silly comparison

 

[rusman]

Troll alert

 

[eth-dog]

Does will day want to leave ? if no then its a silly comparison

No, it isn't. What you two are failing to grasp is that trading our best player for a packet of twisties isn't actually a good idea.

The only part of what they offered that was any good, we got anyway.

 

[tiger_tough]

This post really sums up Richmond fans.

But this one more. One okay pick, which we got anyway, two shit picks and a bloke about to get cut.

How about we offer Will Setterfield, two seconds and a mid teens pick for Will Day? Injury prone, struggles to stay on the park, that should be enough, yeah?

Yeah, that's pretty much the same thing

Anyway, it will be interesting what the new coach decides to do. They're in a lose-lose situation. Hold onto Ridley, Merrett etc and still finish down toward the bottom but without any additional decent picks in the last uncompromised draft before tassies comes in, or go full scorched earth rebuild like we did (but a year or two too late) and get stuck down the bottom for the foreseeable future anyway.

Better off going the draft picks IMO. Each to their own though....

 

[JayJ20]

Such an enormous blunder not trading Merrett out last year. Now the new coach will come in and want to get rid of every that doesn't want to be there, and they'll get less for him in trade and have missed out on a year of development they could've got into another top 10 pick form last year.

I don't think it was a blunder because Hawthorn didn't offer anything of value to us. We didn't need more 2025 draft picks because we were already tight on list spots. Henry Hustwaite also isn't a player we need.

More importantly, this year we can get a 2027 selection which helps us match a Bewick bid.

 

[Hawks91b]

I am constantly surprised at how clubs rate their lists. Not sure how you anyone can be tight on list spots - we're talking about the bottom few players on a list or the mediocre middle that everyone thinks will turn into something even after years of trying. Geel are the best exponents of keep picking, trading and turning the average or even occasionally good player who is surplus to requirements over and staying relevant.

Fair to say Ess will be cutting a fair few that could have gone last year.

 

[eth-dog]

I am constantly surprised at how clubs rate their lists. Not sure how you anyone can be tight on list spots - we're talking about the bottom few players on a list or the mediocre middle that everyone thinks will turn into something even after years of trying. Geel are the best exponents of keep picking, trading and turning the average or even occasionally good player who is surplus to requirements over and staying relevant.

Fair to say Ess will be cutting a fair few that could have gone last year.

You wouldn't find a club more pessimistic about their list than ours.

We've ****ed up many decisions over the past 20 years (including today), however the non trade of Merrett isn't one of them.

 

[JayJ20]

I am constantly surprised at how clubs rate their lists. Not sure how you anyone can be tight on list spots - we're talking about the bottom few players on a list or the mediocre middle that everyone thinks will turn into something even after years of trying. Geel are the best exponents of keep picking, trading and turning the average or even occasionally good player who is surplus to requirements over and staying relevant.

Fair to say Ess will be cutting a fair few that could have gone last year.

We have a young list and most of the players needing to be turned over were contracted senior or experienced players. Can't exactly delist a contracted player.

Also, why do we need more than 5 selections in the 2025 draft? We selected 3 first round picks (top 10 before academies).

Over investing in a single shallow and heavily compromised draft isn't a good list strategy. Also what's the point of adding an average player like Hustwaite to take up yet another list spot.

2026 and 2027 picks make more sense and Hawthorn didn't offer it.

 

[tiger_tough]

Lol even the coach thought they should've traded Merrett

 

[Ants]

I wonder what happens to their list with yet another coaching turnover.

Do they take the attitude of anyone who wants out can piss off, or try to actively move on older players for picks or younger guys?

Which players on their list currently would attract good picks or be strong value as part of any trade?

Please, please be this.

Some of us have been calling for a rebuild for many years, so to see the club turn down good Merrett offers, screw up and have Draper as a UFA, convince Langford and Ridley to stay, and top up with guys like Setterfield, Weideman, Goldstein, Dursma, Gresham, McKay and Fiorini is beyond painful. We've not waited to start the rebuild until Tassie is just about to come in, I don't put it past this stupid club to delay it even further.

 

[Ants]

No, it wasn't, and no, we won't.

Literally the best pick they offered we got anyway. A bunch of shit picks in the 20's are irrelevant.

This is just, well rubbish. We didn't get the best pick they offered. We got the one before it. We could have had picks #9 and #10 (value before academy picks). Plus #22 and their F1.

Let alone if we'd really gone into the rebuild and not brought in Fiorini, and not convinced guys like Ridley and Langford to stay. Now, all of their values are down while we have one less draft before Tassie comes in. Not trading Merrett was a freaking disaster, but it was just one part of a consistent approach by EFC to try and aim for finals. Something we've consistently done for years at the cost of the list.

I don't think its coincidence that Vozzo resigned shortly after we refused to trade Merrett (not that I believe Scott wanted to for a moment, you can't trust anything he's saying).

Pick 13, 25 and what is right now pick 15, which will definitely turn into a pick in the late teens at a minimum and a VFL player.

What an enthralling offer for our best player.

Effectively a deal that was commensurate value with what Petracca and Curnow got, when you consider we didn't have to give anything back.

 

[Ants]

Very optimistic trades there
I dont believe Hawks will offer both their 1st rounders this year for Merrett with only 1 year left on his contract
probably a 20261st rounder plus something later but 2 x 1st rounder would be a massive achievement

Ridley , With the injury history this guy has thats a big ask

You do have to remember that their 2027 first is really a second rounder in value terms. Anyone finishing outside the bottom 5 will have the value of their picks pushed back by around 8-12 spots compared to a normal uncompromised draft.

 

[rusman]

This is just, well rubbish. We didn't get the best pick they offered. We got the one before it. We could have had picks #9 and #10 (value before academy picks). Plus #22 and their F1.

Let alone if we'd really gone into the rebuild and not brought in Fiorini, and not convinced guys like Ridley and Langford to stay. Now, all of their values are down while we have one less draft before Tassie comes in. Not trading Merrett was a freaking disaster, but it was just one part of a consistent approach by EFC to try and aim for finals. Something we've consistently done for years at the cost of the list.

I don't think its coincidence that Vozzo resigned shortly after we refused to trade Merrett (not that I believe Scott wanted to for a moment, you can't trust anything he's saying).


Effectively a deal that was commensurate value with what Petracca and Curnow got, when you consider we didn't have to give anything back

“Effectively a deal that was commensurate value with what Petracca and Curnow got, when you consider we didn't have to give anything back”


…..boy do I have a car to sell you

 

[Yoda_]

a little fun fact, with the Tasmania picks + the new magic fairy dust compo picks, that is almost 12 additional picks before the 2nd round even begins.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

We have a young list and most of the players needing to be turned over were contracted senior or experienced players. Can't exactly delist a contracted player.

Also, why do we need more than 5 selections in the 2025 draft? We selected 3 first round picks (top 10 before academies).

Over investing in a single shallow and heavily compromised draft isn't a good list strategy. Also what's the point of adding an average player like Hustwaite to take up yet another list spot.

2026 and 2027 picks make more sense and Hawthorn didn't offer it.

You absolutely can delist a contracted player.

 

[Yoda_]

You absolutely can delist a contracted player.

We already had a young enough squad, taking another ND pick was going to make us younger again. This a big reason we wanted an established best 22 player and not a fringe list clogger. HH was never going to be the needle mover.

 

[JayJ20]

You absolutely can delist a contracted player.

But you cannot cut every senior player and make your list too young. Deep cuts do not work.
Turning over a list has to be done gradually so the younger players gain experience before they take the position of their experienced counterparts. Otherwise they will lose by 100 points every week which hurts a rebuild.

 

[eth-dog]

This is just, well rubbish. We didn't get the best pick they offered. We got the one before it. We could have had picks #9 and #10 (value before academy picks). Plus #22 and their F1.

Let alone if we'd really gone into the rebuild and not brought in Fiorini, and not convinced guys like Ridley and Langford to stay. Now, all of their values are down while we have one less draft before Tassie comes in. Not trading Merrett was a freaking disaster, but it was just one part of a consistent approach by EFC to try and aim for finals. Something we've consistently done for years at the cost of the list.

I don't think its coincidence that Vozzo resigned shortly after we refused to trade Merrett (not that I believe Scott wanted to for a moment, you can't trust anything he's saying).


Effectively a deal that was commensurate value with what Petracca and Curnow got, when you consider we didn't have to give anything back.

Lol. Some rant. They swapped those picks after their first offer in desperation.

Also, it was still a shit deal. Don't care how many "first's" it was when two of them would end up in the mid 20's. We got the best pick they offered.

Nice hyperbole mate but it was the right decision.

Also don't you think it's a coincidence that Vozzo resigned after Barham got pushed out, Solomon promoted himself to assistant coach and 6 months before Scott got ousted? Writing was on the wall, he didn't want his brand damaged.

 

[Vindicater]

Stick to the plan. Hit the draft at the pointy end hard again and cut more of the dead wood.

Hopefully convince Merrett about Gold Coast and try to swing into the Humphrey to Hawks deal to help facilitate it.

 

[Ants]

“Effectively a deal that was commensurate value with what Petracca and Curnow got, when you consider we didn't have to give anything back”


…..boy do I have a car to sell you

Lol. Some rant. They swapped those picks after their first offer in desperation.

Also, it was still a shit deal. Don't care how many "first's" it was when two of them would end up in the mid 20's. We got the best pick they offered.

Nice hyperbole mate but it was the right decision.
...

Some people don't seem to understand that the deal was comparable with the Curnow and Petracca deals, and call it a shit deal. It was comparable, and it wasn't a shit deal. Let's ignore Hustwaite as its clear we didn't want him and I don't think anyone valued him. Therefore the final offer was #10, #22 and Hawthorn's F1 for Merrett. Nothing going back. Let's compare that to the other two deals (for players who were younger and contracted for longer).

Things to consider below:

• 2027 picks (FF_) are effectively one round later for teams in the finals. Who all of Sydney, Hawks, Gold Coast would be expected to be. So a FF1 is really a FF2 as it will be pushed back ~10 spots.
• We know what a bevy of later picks were worth last year, since we saw what the deals could be. We have real life examples of what a bunch of picks could be turned into.
  • We traded #21, #27, #30 for picks #9 and #43 (#43 was second round still).
  • North traded #25, #46 and (their) F2 for picks #11 and #54.
  • Hawks traded #22 and (their) F2 for pick #17
• That future picks are worth less than picks in the current draft.

Merrett vs Petracca
The Petracca deal was the player plus #24, #28, F2 for #7, #8, #37, F1, FF3

• Similar: #8 vs #10, F1 vs F1
• Pretty meaningless: FF3 (really a 4th due to Tassie)
• Leaving: #22 (Merrett deal) versus #7 and #37 with #24, #28 and F2 back. Rearranged, becomes #7 and #37 vs #22, #24, #28 and F2

Given the deals that happened last year, the above #22, #24, #28 can be viewed as around the value of #9 and #43. Which makes it #9, #43 and F2 (Melbourne) versus #7 and #37.

Result: Differences of a handful of pick positions in Petracca’s favour, but an additional second to Merrett to offset. Pretty close. Melbourne do way better than expected has probably swung things a little in the Petracca deal's benefit as that F2 is worth less than expected.

Merrett vs Curnow
The Curnow deal was the player plus #31, #42, FF2 for Hayward, #11, F1 and FF1.

• Similar: #10 vs #11, F1 vs F1
• Meaningless: the F2 and FF1 given by Carlton and Sydney pretty much offset since the F1 is effectively a second rounder due to Tassie. The F2 being linked to Carlton may actually be viewed as more valuable than Sydney's FF1.
• Leaving: #22 versus Carlton giving up #31 and #42 for Hayward. Or, switched around, is Hayward worth #22, #31 and #42? Opinions will vary. I would say no, but it’s not hugely overpaying either. I certainly don't think it is getting him cheap though! #22, #31, #42 could definitely have been traded up for pick #17 or better, and I don't think Hayward had a first rounder valuation.

Result: pretty much a line ball unless you rate Hayward as worth a lot more than #22, #31 and #42. If you rate Hayward less then Curnow deal was worse.

Summary
Both deals were of similar value. I'd probably say Petracca was a bit better (partly due to Melbourne doing far better this year than 2024 or 2025), but I think the Curnow deal was a bit worse. But, given both players were younger than Merrett, both had longer contracts, and that I think most neutrals would rate Petracca as the better player than Merrett, I believe anyone being objective would struggle to say the Merrett deal wasn't of comparable, and thus fair, value.

 

[Ants]

Also don't you think it's a coincidence that Vozzo resigned after Barham got pushed out, Solomon promoted himself to assistant coach and 6 months before Scott got ousted? Writing was on the wall, he didn't want his brand damaged.

I suspect Vozzo left because he'd just been overruled on a footballing decision by the Chair of the board. And he thought we needed to start a rebuild, and didn't want to be associated with a club aiming for finals with a mediocre list.

I think the "plan" to push for finals but keep our first rounders was as close as Vozzo had been able to convince the board to do a rebuild. But that he and Rosa thought in reality we needed more picks to bring in more quality. Which would jibe with the media comments that we needed to keep our firsts for quality, as we didn't have enough of it on the list. My suspicion is Vozzo and Rosa thought Merrett leaving was a good opportunity to turn one player who was 30 in October into three good picks to take to the draft was a good one. When it was over-ruled, he left.

Obviously, this is all speculation on my part.

 

[Ants]

We have a young list and most of the players needing to be turned over were contracted senior or experienced players. Can't exactly delist a contracted player.

Also, why do we need more than 5 selections in the 2025 draft? We selected 3 first round picks (top 10 before academies).

Over investing in a single shallow and heavily compromised draft isn't a good list strategy. Also what's the point of adding an average player like Hustwaite to take up yet another list spot.

2026 and 2027 picks make more sense and Hawthorn didn't offer it.

The 2025 draft is looking like it was pretty strong. If we're converting fringe players (McMahon) and a 30yr old (Merrett) into good picks plus a future pick, that makes the team stronger. Losing Merrett wouldn't have materially damaged our performance this year or our leadership. It would have got us one of Dovaston, Lindsay, Nairn, Barker, Schubert, and one of Sweid, Emmett, Allen. Or we could have traded the #22 into 2026 or 2027 picks.

Hustwaite I don't think we had any interest in, and even if we'd accepted the deal I think we would have turned down. But #10, #22 and their F1 was fair, as I've laid out above.

And that all assumes if we'd got on the front foot we couldn't have got a better deal. Such as adding our FF2 in and getting their FF1. Offering to cover Merrett's 2026 and 2027 salary. We asked for their FF1 flat (well, with Hustwaite dropped out), and Mitchell said yes but was overruled by the management team. A little more proactive trading and we possibly could have made the deal sweeter than their final offer. Such as #10, #22, F1, FF1 for Merrett and our FF2.

Merrett out would have also created a midfield spot for Tsatas, Robey or Sharp to get experience in. Instead of Scott dropping Tsatas after two good games to play Merrett midfield....

 

[THE_GUN]

You do have to remember that their 2027 first is really a second rounder in value terms. Anyone finishing outside the bottom 5 will have the value of their picks pushed back by around 8-12 spots compared to a normal uncompromised draft.

Yes but if the player wants to leave and you know he will again
what you would have got last trade period is always going to be more than what you could possibly get a year later
was there really any extra value in keeping him the extra year

 

[Yoda_]

Yes but if the player wants to leave and you know he will again
what you would have got last trade period is always going to be more than what you could possibly get a year later
was there really any extra value in keeping him the extra year

Its not even the Merrett wanting out thing, he has shown he wants out, I dont begrudge him, it is what can help improve the list quickly.