Strategy Trade and List management Thread Part 4 (opposition supporters - READ posting rules before posting)

[Zgope1]

It’s hard to build a perfect list. We’ve been the closest to it bar lucky Melb this year. Wonder how they’d have gone if they missed Gawn, Oliver and Viney for minimum 6 weeks.

Martin, Sweet and English will be a good ruck group next year. Sweet will improve, Martin is unlikely to be less available.

Yes it would’ve been nice if we had a better ruck division sooner but our club has actually done plenty to improve the maturity and competitiveness of the list for a few years now. A few delusional ingrates in here need reminding of that.

And doggies ftw martin is better than ceglar and if the club thought he was cooked and the risk reward benefit of ceglar was a better idea than having sweet cover the back side of that they’d have gotten that decidedly okay ruckman you want. Let’s remember Martin clobbered the crap out of Port and our midfield was unstoppable with our plan A ruck division except for against the best ruck division in the league with an unblemished injury run

unlike melbourne our plan A wasn’t available to us all year

 

[Lex22]

Who would be the best 2-3 state league rucks not on an AFL list, that aren’t kids and would potentially be in the draft?

Are Bevo/Power simply just banking on one of them as depth with a late pick? Seems to make the most sense given the lack of available options in the trade period.

 

[Dogs Rule]

Trotter also confirmed Max Lynch’s desire to move from Collingwood to Hawthorn is fuelled purely by opportunity.

Apparently Hawks haven't 'guaranteed' him Number 1 ruck, but he wants to give it a shot.

Hello??? Are we awake?

 

[doggies ftw]

It’s hard to build a perfect list. We’ve been the closest to it bar lucky Melb this year. Wonder how they’d have gone if they missed Gawn, Oliver and Viney for minimum 6 weeks.

Martin, Sweet and English will be a good ruck group next year. Sweet will improve, Martin is unlikely to be less available.

Yes it would’ve been nice if we had a better ruck division sooner but our club has actually done plenty to improve the maturity and competitiveness of the list for a few years now. A few delusional ingrates in here need reminding of that.

And doggies ftw martin is better than ceglar and if the club thought he was cooked and the risk reward benefit of ceglar was a better idea than having sweet cover the back side of that they’d have gotten that decidedly okay ruckman you want. Let’s remember Martin clobbered the crap out of Port and our midfield was unstoppable with our plan A ruck division except for against the best ruck division in the league with an unblemished injury run

unlike melbourne our plan A wasn’t available to us all year

Maybe so but mate how can you say Martin is more likely to be available this year? The blokes 35 and has had every injury under the sun in the past 2 years, most of them picked up in training = cooked.

even if he is better than Ceglar when fit wouldn’t you prefer both on the list?

 

[yebiga]

I suspect power is feverishly trying but if all else fails I expect we will pick up Causbolt.

He too is a free pick up but unlike Cox, or Ceglar he is still one of the best contested marking threats in the league. Is as strong as an Ox with a good tank. Offers more than the other filler picks.

 

[DognBones]

Assume he’ll get drafted before we have a second pick?

I reckon one of our picks in the 40's might be sufficient. Just need to adjust our current picks/points values and we could get him.

 

[Mofra]

This option interests me, huge unit, US basketball background so obviously athletic, great stats in the SANFL especially hit out and clearance numbers.

Reading up on it he supposedly had a dodgy PCL so of course GC passed considering they were looking for an in season instant replacement but as an off season pick up it’s probably not as big a problem, if he went in for surgery now he’s still back for early next year.

He was previously on the Swans list for 6 months - eligible as a DFA?
He's 27 and if he can step in for a few games next year if necessary that gives us a lot more comfort.

 

[Mofra]

I think this and the fact that we just don't have the draft capital to satisfy another clubs demands for a ruck who will immediately improve our list sums up the debate in a nutshell.

I also think that Ceglar was dangled by the hawks with us specifically in mind in the hope that we bite big. We have thus far chosen not too.

I think we did bite, but he prefers Geelong.
We have future picks to address our ruck stocks and given we're right in our window now and getting blessed with FS & NGA picks, if there was ever time for a club to trade while they are "in their window" for us I would say it is this year.
I think TOB as a FA selection was a good one to shore up a role we lacked in for the latter half of the season (intercept marking in defence), and I think a small pressure forward would be handy too although they are often available in the ND & rookie draft.

 

[Mofra]

Assume he’ll get drafted before we have a second pick?

He got a draft combine invite so is on the radar of multiple clubs

 

[Mofra]

Who would be the best 2-3 state league rucks not on an AFL list, that aren’t kids and would potentially be in the draft?

Are Bevo/Power simply just banking on one of them as depth with a late pick? Seems to make the most sense given the lack of available options in the trade period.

Given that a bunch of them were picked up at the mid-season draft, the leftovers are Matthew Lobbe (ew) and Michael Knoll who failed a medical with the Suns 6 months ago. There are kids on AFL lists now who are the best of the second tier bunch.
The mid season draft has left us with slim pickings.

 

[Zgope1]

Maybe so but mate how can you say Martin is more likely to be available this year? The blokes 35 and has had every injury under the sun in the past 2 years, most of them picked up in training = cooked.

even if he is better than Ceglar when fit wouldn’t you prefer both on the list?

I mean he can’t be much less available than he was this year

even if he’s just as available the club has signalled by recommitting to sweet despite having competition that they think he will be a more useful asset to the club than an old Ceglar. That’s pretty reasonable. Getting Ceglar for further coverage almost writes off Sweet. Having Martin, Ceglar, Sweet and English is probably impossible as Sweet doesn’t commit to that. I’d take Sweet over that option.

getting Ceglar to replace Martin is a significant and unnecessary switchfor marginal benefits in availability and probably slight a drop in quality.

so what everyone is panicking over here is a very unlikely scenario. Martin AND Sweet being injured AT THE SAME TIME and even then we have a dude that has played plenty of ruck when we’ve had lengthy successful periods, will be a year older. AND you never know, Darcy might get a small amount of burn too.

basically our worstish case scenario is the best of such in the league.

the dogs of 2022 have the highest margin for error in the league. If a good team has zero error again like Melbourne did then it’ll still not be a cake walk to win it all.

if the luck goes our way though, no one will get near us

 

[DognBones]

He got a draft combine invite so is on the radar of multiple clubs

And I hope one of them is us.

 

[Bald]

a. Sam Darcy is a KPP, who will occasionally chop out in the ruck. He certainly won't play much (if at all next year)
b. This has been done to death. There have been plenty of names mentioned who are far more durable then Stef, although that's a low bar to set.

So what you're asking for is a number one ruckman. A guy that has shown he can play a full season or most of one and be relied upon to be the number one guy, right? I'm sure you will be able to name a ruckman that is:

1. Available
2. Has shown they can play a full season as the number one ruckman

Because as far as I can tell and please correct me if I'm wrong. Ceglar, Ladhams, Lynch, Fort, Xerri, Lobb (not sure if I've missed any of the rucks we're apparently missing out on) have failed to show those two things.

Now I understand the concept of a ruck wanting to leave a club because they've not been able to solidify themselves as the number one ruckman because there's somebody in front of them - but how is that any different to having Jordan Sweet on our list? Hypothetically speaking, if we traded in Ceglar, we wouldn't have re-signed Martin and when Ceglar only plays his average AFL quota of 12-13 games for the season then tell me how that's really any different ot having Martin in the middle anyway?

 

[Virgin Dog]

Given that a bunch of them were picked up at the mid-season draft, the leftovers are Matthew Lobbe (ew) and Michael Knoll who failed a medical with the Suns 6 months ago. There are kids on AFL lists now who are the best of the second tier bunch.
The mid season draft has left us with slim pickings.

With Knoll, I'd be curious if him failing the medical is due to serious issues with his knee, or issues that the Suns don't believe they can fix. I recall prior to the Keath trade, Adelaide had concerns over how his foot injury would be managed. We did the medical, took him anyway, and he played Round 1 for us. If Knoll's body isn't cooked, I think he'd be a good rookie pick

 

[Mofra]

So what you're asking for is a number one ruckman. A guy that has shown he can play a full season or most of one and be relied upon to be the number one guy, right? I'm sure you will be able to name a ruckman that is:

1. Available
2. Has shown they can play a full season as the number one ruckman

Because as far as I can tell and please correct me if I'm wrong. Ceglar, Ladhams, Lynch, Fort, Xerri, Lobb (not sure if I've missed any of the rucks we're apparently missing out on) have failed to show those two things.

Now I understand the concept of a ruck wanting to leave a club because they've not been able to solidify themselves as the number one ruckman because there's somebody in front of them - but how is that any different to having Jordan Sweet on our list? Hypothetically speaking, if we traded in Ceglar, we wouldn't have re-signed Martin and when Ceglar only plays his average AFL quota of 12-13 games for the season then tell me how that's really any different ot having Martin in the middle anyway?

Strachan and Lynch are those two guys for me.
Ceglar with the Hawks paying most of his salary is a free hit compared to what we have. He's younger and has played more games over the past two seasons than Stef so in the short term would help, although personally I'd rather go younger.

Read back a few pages, these reasons have been discussed ad nauseum.

 

[Mofra]

With Knoll, I'd be curious if him failing the medical is due to serious issues with his knee, or issues that the Suns don't believe they can fix. I recall prior to the Keath trade, Adelaide had concerns over how his foot injury would be managed. We did the medical, took him anyway, and he played Round 1 for us. If Knoll's body isn't cooked, I think he'd be a good rookie pick

PCL by all accounts. They're normally 12-14 week injuries? He might be ready to go, but then again we might not rate him.
In any case we may not get anyone if the word that we're happy with our ruck set up is true.

 

[Mofra]

so what everyone is panicking over here is a very unlikely scenario. Martin AND Sweet being injured AT THE SAME TIME and even then we have a dude that has played plenty of ruck when we’ve had lengthy successful periods, will be a year older. AND you never know, Darcy might get a small amount of burn too.

Not just injured, but Sweet is still firmly in the developing camp and may not have the form to warrant selection, just like this year.
Unlike some of the other potentials mentioned here, Sweet was really struggling in the back half of the season at the lower level.
I'm glad we signed him and he may show a rapid rate of improvement that he hasn't shown before but that's the kind of risk you may take with a team that is building rather than a team in their window.

 

[Virgin Dog]

PCL by all accounts. They're normally 12-14 week injuries? He might be ready to go, but then again we might not rate him.
In any case we may not get anyone if the word that we're happy with our ruck set up is true.

Can't be that bad considering he played SANFL finals, unless he just entirely lacks lateral mobility.

I am seriously hoping we don't enter next year with this ruck setup. After being told the ruck division would look significantly different, and Power saying we'd be active, to end things here is a pretty massive let down.

 

[doggies ftw]

I mean he can’t be much less available than he was this year

even if he’s just as available the club has signalled by recommitting to sweet despite having competition that they think he will be a more useful asset to the club than an old Ceglar. That’s pretty reasonable. Getting Ceglar for further coverage almost writes off Sweet. Having Martin, Ceglar, Sweet and English is probably impossible as Sweet doesn’t commit to that. I’d take Sweet over that option.

getting Ceglar to replace Martin is a significant and unnecessary switchfor marginal benefits in availability and probably slight a drop in quality.

so what everyone is panicking over here is a very unlikely scenario. Martin AND Sweet being injured AT THE SAME TIME and even then we have a dude that has played plenty of ruck when we’ve had lengthy successful periods, will be a year older. AND you never know, Darcy might get a small amount of burn too.

basically our worstish case scenario is the best of such in the league.

the dogs of 2022 have the highest margin for error in the league. If a good team has zero error again like Melbourne did then it’ll still not be a cake walk to win it all.

if the luck goes our way though, no one will get near us

Look if Sweet plays every game he’s available (and Martins not) then great I’m fine with that. I’ve seen nothing from our coach in 6 years to suggest that’s likely though to be honest. I can guarantee we’ll go into games next year with English first ruck and Schache back up.

I completely agree with how good our list is and that should we have some luck we should be better than anyone but look these things aren’t easy to win I’d like to give ourselves the best shot possible and not make it unnecessarily hard on us, especially our mids.

i don’t think we’re doing that by neglecting our biggest weakness but anyway we’ll see. Like I’ve said a number of times I’m okay going into games with Sweet & English

 

[Mofra]

I am seriously hoping we don't enter next year with this ruck setup. After being told the ruck division would look significantly different, and Power saying we'd be active, to end things here is a pretty massive let down.

Yeah that's the rub for me. The club has all but acknowledged ruck is a problem and now the story is that it's not an issue?
People are absolutely right to at least question what is going on.

 

[Zgope1]

Not just injured, but Sweet is still firmly in the developing camp and may not have the form to warrant selection, just like this year.
Unlike some of the other potentials mentioned here, Sweet was really struggling in the back half of the season at the lower level.
I'm glad we signed him and he may show a rapid rate of improvement that he hasn't shown before but that's the kind of risk you may take with a team that is building rather than a team in their window.

I think if the club agreed with you that he wouldn’t justify playing time they’d have gone for Ceglar and cut him lose.

Martin is a solid cover for if that doesn’t happen that is a better player than Ceg

 

[Zgope1]

Look if Sweet plays every game he’s available (and Martins not) then great I’m fine with that. I’ve seen nothing from our coach in 6 years to suggest that’s likely though to be honest. I can guarantee we’ll go into games next year with English first ruck and Schache back up.

I completely agree with how good our list is and that should we have some luck we should be better than anyone but look these things aren’t easy to win I’d like to give ourselves the best shot possible and not make it unnecessarily hard on us, especially our mids.

i don’t think we’re doing that by neglecting our biggest weakness but anyway we’ll see. Like I’ve said a number of times I’m okay going into games with Sweet & English

I think we wouldn’t have convinced Sweet to stay if he wasn’t gonna get playing time.

and your worst case scenario has objectively lead to good footy this year and in recent years.

the recruitment of Martin was an indication that Bevo has been particular about the capabilities of his rucks. Sweet’s re signing suggests Sweet is close to meeting Bevo‘s particularity

 

[RedWhite&Blue]

Can someone intimate what Ladhams off-field issues are? Like a drink, punt, something more? Hangs with dubious characters??? What are these “issues” that are being referred to or is it bigfooty speculation. Same would be said of Hunter and Libba by other boards but don’t see it impacting their performances.

Ladhams issue is work ethic - he needs to be ridden constantly and that is not the Bulldogs style.

 

[Mofra]

I think if the club agreed with you that he wouldn’t justify playing time they’d have gone for Ceglar and cut him lose.

Martin is a solid cover for if that doesn’t happen that is a better player than Ceg

I think ruck is more of a pipeline though - ideally, a rock solid no 1 option, an understudy, a ruck/forward and a depth option (who can plug into both positions if needed).
Stef's durability means I don't think we can rely on him as the number 1 option as much as I'd love him to get back to his best again. That leaves us with two question marks. I really do think English is a good no 2 ruck and was in excellent form in this role prior to his concussion. There aren't many good forward/rucks in the comp and in that role I think English really can be better than average next year (and his field kicking for a guy his size is outstanding).

As mentioned earlier I think Sweet is early in his development and is more 'promising' than 'ready'.
I'd love to be proven wrong but I do think the concerns expressed by people here are real, especially given comments by Bevo and Power in the past 2-3 months (ruck division looking 'substantially different' in 2022.

 

[doggies ftw]

On l

and your worst case scenario has objectively lead to good footy this year and in recent years.

Has it though? Just can’t agree on that. We’ve underperformed significantly when we’ve played to the structure of 1 ruck 1 forward and 1 forward/ruck backup. We just so happen to have lost our best forward/ruck back up for the year too