List Mgmt. List management for 2016

[Doctor Feel]

He played 13 games for North Ballarat this year

#lolnorf

 

[philthy05]

Surely we move Broadbent on. Gold Coast would happily give a top 20 pick for him, as he is what they want. Broadbent's an experienced player under the age of 27. He is the type of player we should move on as we have several half back flankers and his midfield output is minimal.

Broadbent is a first 22 player we should only move on if it means we can add a first 22 player in a position we need more



We absolutely should not move broadbent on for the sake of list turnover. That's what you do to fringe players. Broadbent is not a fringe player. I too believe he can be moved on if , and only if , it's a deal we can add a player who will improve us.

Otherwise we keep him and move on players like lobbe and Oshea

 

[Janus]

Sadly the next era will simply be GWS and 17 also-rans.

Not even. I've told you, at the end of 2018 a lot of the players on GWS' list are eligible for FA because even though they weren't admitted to the competition until 2011, they were contracted players in 2010. Add the loss of salary cap concessions and the re-rating of compensation picks by the AFL, you'll find that GWS doesn't become this all-conquering super power - just a very good side the way that Sydney is. They will always bleed players due to their location and the franchise nature of their club.

They are definitely part of the next wave along with the Bulldogs...but we can be just as good if not better than them. The AFL has the desire that all 18 teams have the ability to win a premiership every 12 years - 2 years in the bottom 4 to stock up on top five draft picks (key position players and 10 year elite midfielders that will form the nucleus of your side), 4 years in the bottom 10 to continue building up your side with top ten draft picks (more elite mids and small defenders/forwards), 2 years in the bottom half of the eight to either draft or trade for specialized positions that you might not have been able to recruit earlier...and then, 4 years at the top of the tree, when those top 10 draft picks will be in the sweet spot of 28-30 and ready to hit for a flag.

That's the reason why we need to get the trade period right this year - we have dropped back down into that bottom 10 area after being in the bottom half of the eight portion because, quite frankly, we did over-achieve in 2013/14. Not internally, but externally, based on the fact that we surprised a lot of sides with just how good we can be if we are left unchecked. This will happen to the Bulldogs and GWS next year - sides will study them and work out how to shut them down, and it will be how they respond to that which will determine whether or not they keep staying in that top four echelon or fall down like we did - an Icarus that got too close to the sun.

It's why Hartlett is on the trade table - he's meant to be one of the elite players along with Boak, Wingard and Wines that form the nucleus of our squad, but if all he sees himself as is a flanker because he can't or won't build up his tank to run through the midfield...he needs to go so we can get someone who will have the drive and hunger to be the best.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Broadbent is a first 22 player we should only move on if it means we can add a first 22 player in a position we need more



We absolutely should not move broadbent on for the sake of list turnover. That's what you do to fringe players. Broadbent is not a fringe player. I too believe he can be moved on if , and only if , it's a deal we can add a player who will improve us.

Otherwise we keep him and move on players like lobbe and Oshea

I'm still unsure how Broady turned into Toby Thurstans in the eyes of board posters here.

 

[mightypowerrrr]

Broadbent is a first 22 player we should only move on if it means we can add a first 22 player in a position we need more



We absolutely should not move broadbent on for the sake of list turnover. That's what you do to fringe players. Broadbent is not a fringe player. I too believe he can be moved on if , and only if , it's a deal we can add a player who will improve us.

Otherwise we keep him and move on players like lobbe and Oshea

Broadbent will net us a top 20 pick. He is a player who hasn't elevated his game into our top 10 players and is 26. Anyway Port are looking to move him on according to Tredrea

 

[philthy05]

I'm still unsure how Broady turned into Toby Thurstans in the eyes of board posters here.

I'm one who is somewhat critical of broadbent myself, but only because I expect better than he sometimes delivers. Still I know he is defintely a best 22 player until bonner proves otherwise. I would deal broady, but for another best 22 player we need more.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Broadbent is a first 22 player we should only move on if it means we can add a first 22 player in a position we need more

Rhys Stanley pls

 

[Shaucob_Burjan]

If Broadbent isn't moved, then he needs to get away from the half back flank. We absolutely do not need him there anymore.

 

[DaTBird187]

If Broadbent isn't moved, then he needs to get away from the half back flank. We absolutely do not need him there anymore.

But we can't move him closer to goals, because although most people think he is a great booming kick, his kicking for goal is terrible.

 

[*PAF]

Broadbent is a first 22 player we should only move on if it means we can add a first 22 player in a position we need more



We absolutely should not move broadbent on for the sake of list turnover. That's what you do to fringe players. Broadbent is not a fringe player. I too believe he can be moved on if , and only if , it's a deal we can add a player who will improve us.

Otherwise we keep him and move on players like lobbe and Oshea

I'm not in favour of trading Broadbent, however he is exactly the sort of player to trade if we are looking for picks.
Has value and we do have others who can play his role to a decent if not high level.

Trading fringe players for decent picks does not happen, and bundling lots of fringe players for a decent pick is a BF fantasy.

Decent picks only come about from trading established players that aren't too old, young players with potential, or if one is very lucky a player that another coach is really keen on and is prepared to pay overs.

 

[ctpower]

The foot skills of the bulldogs last night showed just how far we have to improve. I lost count the number of times during this season when we had players in the clear but kicks were too wide, long or high and we created a contest for the opposition when there should have been none. I hope Burgess takes a back seat this preseason and pl
ayers are relentlessly drilled into low direct passing. If the Boss can record Human Touch and recover then hope springs eternal.

I've come to the belief that you either can kick or you can't kick.
Sadly a lot of our players can't kick especially on the run.

 

[Zakk Wylde]

I've come to the belief that you either can kick or you can't kick.
Sadly a lot of our players can't kick especially on the run.

I generally agree with this. But confidence does play a massive part in execution causing variation in performance.

 

[ctpower]

I generally agree with this. But confidence does play a massive part in execution causing variation in performance.

Yeah I think you're right. I've often wondered how much better out foot skills would be with confidence back in the team.
Having said that even in 2014 our skills were not the best.
It's that ability to hit a team mate with a foot pass any where from 15 metres to 40 metres whilst on the run that is a major concern for me.

 

[finbarr]

It's fitness too. Hawthorn's skills by foot would have a bit to do with Andrew Russell having them in great condition.

 

[PJ Power]

I'm still unsure how Broady turned into Toby Thurstans in the eyes of board posters here.

I think it's his perceived trade currency and perhaps a redundancy that we have accrued for half back flankers who are good but not exceptional: Hartlett, Krak, Broadbent.

He's clearly first 22 though.

 

[ctpower]

It's fitness too. Hawthorn's skills by foot would have a bit to do with Andrew Russell having them in great condition.

I still think we're one of the fitest teams in the comp. you don't lose that level of fitness that we built unless you really drop the workload. I don't this happend.

 

[PAFCsince1870]

Not even. I've told you, at the end of 2018 a lot of the players on GWS' list are eligible for FA because even though they weren't admitted to the competition until 2011, they were contracted players in 2010. Add the loss of salary cap concessions and the re-rating of compensation picks by the AFL, you'll find that GWS doesn't become this all-conquering super power - just a very good side the way that Sydney is. They will always bleed players due to their location and the franchise nature of their club.

They are definitely part of the next wave along with the Bulldogs...but we can be just as good if not better than them. The AFL has the desire that all 18 teams have the ability to win a premiership every 12 years - 2 years in the bottom 4 to stock up on top five draft picks (key position players and 10 year elite midfielders that will form the nucleus of your side), 4 years in the bottom 10 to continue building up your side with top ten draft picks (more elite mids and small defenders/forwards), 2 years in the bottom half of the eight to either draft or trade for specialized positions that you might not have been able to recruit earlier...and then, 4 years at the top of the tree, when those top 10 draft picks will be in the sweet spot of 28-30 and ready to hit for a flag.

That's the reason why we need to get the trade period right this year - we have dropped back down into that bottom 10 area after being in the bottom half of the eight portion because, quite frankly, we did over-achieve in 2013/14. Not internally, but externally, based on the fact that we surprised a lot of sides with just how good we can be if we are left unchecked. This will happen to the Bulldogs and GWS next year - sides will study them and work out how to shut them down, and it will be how they respond to that which will determine whether or not they keep staying in that top four echelon or fall down like we did - an Icarus that got too close to the sun.

It's why Hartlett is on the trade table - he's meant to be one of the elite players along with Boak, Wingard and Wines that form the nucleus of our squad, but if all he sees himself as is a flanker because he can't or won't build up his tank to run through the midfield...he needs to go so we can get someone who will have the drive and hunger to be the best.

I love your passion mate but I think you'll find a lot of the Giants best players are already signed beyond 2018.

Not to mention if they keep trading guys like Treloar out for two first round picks they will just have a continuous cycle of first rounders coming in who won't be RFA's anywhere close to 2018.

Under the current rules they'll also be duly compensated with more first round picks for any quality players that do happen to leave under free agency.

The only hope the rest of the competition has is if the AFL make some knee jerk reaction and change the rules because as they currently stand GWS will dominate the competition for a long, long time.

And that's without even talking about the academy players they will have access to.

 

[finbarr]

I still think we're one of the fitest teams in the comp. you don't lose that level of fitness that we built unless you really drop the workload. I don't this happend.

I'm sure we are fit. But there's working smart and working hard. We fit into the latter, Hawthorn fit into both. Overworked, tired legs produce poor kicking.

 

[jac147]

Broadbent will net us a top 20 pick. He is a player who hasn't elevated his game into our top 10 players and is 26. Anyway Port are looking to move him on according to Tredrea

Needs to go as he is now surplus. Trade for a pick in the 20's

 

[Shaucob_Burjan]

It's our gameplan too. We are too defensive and spend more time chasing players than creating run.

 

[Janus]

I love your passion mate but I think you'll find a lot of the Giants best players are already signed beyond 2018.

Not to mention if they keep trading guys like Treloar out for two first round picks they will just have a continuous cycle of first rounders coming in who won't be RFA's anywhere close to 2018.

Under the current rules they'll also be duly compensated with more first round picks for any quality players that do happen to leave under free agency.

The only hope the rest of the competition has is if the AFL make some knee jerk reaction and change the rules because as they currently stand GWS will dominate the competition for a long, long time.

And that's without even talking about the academy players they will have access to.

5 players signed beyond 2018 - Congilio, Ward, Scully, Cameron and Haynes. They aren't going to get two first round draft picks for every single player on this list - and they've got to trim this back to 40 players by 2018 anyway. Marchbank is gone and was a first round pick - GWS will just get a first rounder for him. 10 other players, like Marchbank, don't have contracts for next year. 18 don't have contracts for 2018. And their salary cap shrinks every year. You think they are 'going to dominate for a long time' still?

They've got until 2018 to win a flag with the list they have as it stands now, which is what the whole point of giving them such generous concessions was. If you think these players and their managers are going to sacrifice money to be paid a relative pittance to what they could be earning so they can win flags in a state that doesn't care about them, then maybe they will be the dynasty you say. I don't think they will.

 

[woffy]

I've come to the belief that you either can kick or you can't kick.
Sadly a lot of our players can't kick especially on the run.

Barrie Robran once said that if you're not a good kick by the time you're 17, you never will be. Players new to football obviously a different scenario.
That's why we must draft players who are at least reasonable kicks.

 

[PowerLil]

This is a theory - I'll admit it could be way off the mark.
I love the way both teams could throw out hand balls when under severe pressure and get it pretty damm close to their intended team mate and it's the same with short kicks when under pressure.
Both teams last night have a light coloured strip which may be easier to pick out in the heat of combat than with our predominately black strip. Or are they drilled to know that there will always be several team mates around them ready to lend a hand?
So do we retire the back in black or is that being, in my case, over reactive.
Just putting it out there?

This has crossed my mind before re our home strip, especially when we play at night. The players are sometimes hard to pick up live at the game.

 

[OneGreatClub]

This has crossed my mind before re our home strip, especially when we play at night. The players are sometimes hard to pick up live at the game.

I have always thought this.

 

[edgie]

And their handball skills. Very good.

I would go as far to say handballing is the most underrated, overlooked skill in modern, congested football.



Sent from my Lumia 800 using Tapatalk