Strategy Trade and List management Thread Part 6 (opposition supporters - READ posting rules before posting)

[Anja_Nees]

Would be very happy to try a player who missed the draft in the last few years and has taken steps forward at state level.

The reason I’ll take that over a recently delisted player is that the delisted player’s club has seen them play every week, train several times a week and interact with their teammates over a course of years and decided to get them off the list.

Would be much happier trying to find the next Dickson/Picken/Boyd.

 

[Ash1337]

That would normally be true, but this seems to be Bevos blind spot I reckon. Any recruiting from within the AFL/VFL bubble includes the senior coach and Bevo has seemed to favour these types over the drafted in kids. How Tim O’Brian was playing ahead of Cleary? Or McComb was playing ahead of Garcia? etc etc and we could make a long list of ‘never going to make it’ types getting games against talented drafted kids like Bendendo, Cleary, Garcia who are made to wait and wait.

Would say so but then you have players like Bailey Dale who was barely in the side until 2020 who had a good year playing forward then moved back to be a AA player. Also see West. I think he does his best to protect the young players from falling to the sword by playing the likes of McComb until they're ready physically. Look at Cleary who needs to work on his Strength.

 

[DognBones]

Why on earth would we consider recruiting Bianco when we have Poulter and Baker, who are better players, already languishing in our VFL side? Look elsewhere Dogs.

 

[Northernsoul74]

Geez won't we have clubs selling away their future for the short term. If they got desperate or reckless they could destroy a club for a decade

Then they will just request priority picks … and probably be granted them.

 

[Libbaaaa]

Why on earth would we consider recruiting Bianco when we have Poulter and Baker, who are better players, already languishing in our VFL side? Look elsewhere Dogs.

Ding, ding. Also giving Poulter and Baker two year deals (probably on the minimum but still) is just baffling.

 

[iambrilliant]

Could Bianco play a role in backline as a duryea replacement ?

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Some of the logic here is inherently contradictory!

Somehow it was wrong to give Baker and Poulter an additional year.

But at the same time people are claiming that Bianco are no better of a footballer than Baker and Poulter.

Even though, by the decision to not give Baker and Poulter, we would be opening up a list spot ... to take a player like Bianco (or equivalent).

Not to say that we had to re-sign those players in the manner we did. Just if you follow the logic being discussed it doesn't really make sense!

 

[Riley2Rhylee]

Would be very happy to try a player who missed the draft in the last few years and has taken steps forward at state level.

The reason I’ll take that over a recently delisted player is that the delisted player’s club has seen them play every week, train several times a week and interact with their teammates over a course of years and decided to get them off the list.

Would be much happier trying to find the next Dickson/Picken/Boyd.

This is a good point, for example the current Collingwood team is extremely good at getting the most out of role players, you look at some of the guys they had in their premiership side ie Markov, Mcreery etc these are bog average players who they’ve found roles for and got them to thrive. If they can’t see anything in these players over a couple of years on the list what makes us think we will?

This I think is a fundermental issue with some of our choices, you’re much more likely to strike gold by identifying kids who have never been in a professional environment but have some stand out AFL level attributes like above average kicking skills, pace etc whatever but some sort of trait you can see shine at AFL level and bank on working on their deficiencies whether that’s attitude, work ethic, tank etc something which can potentially be fixed. A guy like Bianco is never going to grow or get faster. Not saying you can never take a Scott type, VFL battler who is generally good but not great at everything, you do need these types but you can’t make that your whole selection strategy, or you end up with a list imbalance like ours where we have a glut of players who are great VFL players but probably won’t make the step up.

Again you need these guys who can plug a hole to an acceptable standard but we have them, basically all our late picks now should be on higher ceiling types as a free hit.

Admittedly we’ve been better here recently targeting guys like Bedendo, Jones, Freijah, AOD who fit this mould, low floor high ceiling stand out trait types, but we tend to waste rookie and MSD picks like they’re worthless when in reality some bloody good players have been found here, and more often than not they’re guys who have never been in a professional system, not guys who have been delisted.

It’s a bit head scratching & frustrating, not the end of the world but we could do better

 

[Unorth]

Some of the logic here is inherently contradictory!

Somehow it was wrong to give Baker and Poulter an additional year.

But at the same time people are claiming that Bianco are no better of a footballer than Baker and Poulter.

Even though, by the decision to not give Baker and Poulter, we would be opening up a list spot ... to take a player like Bianco (or equivalent).

Not to say that we had to re-sign those players in the manner we did. Just if you follow the logic being discussed it doesn't really make sense!

It was wrong to give Poulter and Baker more than a one year extension.

It makes no sense to recruit Bianco given he would be competing with similar players in that role - unless we genuinely believed he was well above the players we have sitting in the vfl already.

Not sure who is arguing that we should have not signed those players on the basis that we could instead be recruiting Bianco or equivalent. Think the gist is a lot of us are over that kind of recruiting (and the handing out of 2 year extensions) and we’d rather be cycling through them more quickly?

 

[lachy]

Some of the logic here is inherently contradictory!

Somehow it was wrong to give Baker and Poulter an additional year.

But at the same time people are claiming that Bianco are no better of a footballer than Baker and Poulter.

Even though, by the decision to not give Baker and Poulter, we would be opening up a list spot ... to take a player like Bianco (or equivalent).

Not to say that we had to re-sign those players in the manner we did. Just if you follow the logic being discussed it doesn't really make sense!

Can you please provide a diagram of this TNP ?

Poulter and Baker should have been given 1 year only, no one else is going to pick them up and are very average depth. To add another average depth player who is not exceptional seems a waste of finances.

Would prefer no one unless the player has shown strong signs as either a small forward or KPP and is young.

Not picking just for the sake of it saves money

 

[TiAn_]

Some of the logic here is inherently contradictory!

Somehow it was wrong to give Baker and Poulter an additional year.

But at the same time people are claiming that Bianco are no better of a footballer than Baker and Poulter.

Even though, by the decision to not give Baker and Poulter, we would be opening up a list spot ... to take a player like Bianco (or equivalent).

Not to say that we had to re-sign those players in the manner we did. Just if you follow the logic being discussed it doesn't really make sense!

I don’t think the logic is contradictory. I don’t anyone’s saying we shouldn’t have signed up Poulter and Baker so we could get Bianco. Most just don’t want another delisted player in Bianco either way, but the fact it’s a duplication of what we already have in Poulter particularly makes it more vexing.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

The difficulty with the mid-season draft is that many of the medium- to long-term prospects ask for longer-term deals (which they are entitled to do), which limits the appeal of them for teams looking to contend.

Locking in one of these players now reduces the flexibility that we have over the off-season (which opens up new avenues for player movement, including trade and FA, that are not available now). With how things look at the end of the year being so uncertain, I think going for mature depth on a 6 month contract is a far better option.

With this said, although I do not follow the lower leagues carefully and so am happy to be wrong, I find it exceedingly hard to believe that Bianco would be the best option available to us. He has seemingly done well to improve and is a very valuable player for Footscray, but small players need a point of difference to thrive at AFL level, and I just cannot see what that is. He does not excel in one particular role, is not athletically gifted, is not a huge volume accumulator, and is not especially skilled.

Above all, he does not seem to be significantly outperforming the other, contracted players in his role at VFL level, let alone those playing those roles at AFL level. Depth is important, but what we are currently lacking in those positions is quality, not depth.

 

[W W Biscuit]

That's going to be an absolute mess.

How do you value North Melbourne's 2026 first round pick, as an example.

Pick 1. Lock it in for 2027 and 2028 too.

 

[dogwatch]

Given how low percentage late picks are, the fact those two have played any senior football at all is actually a decent return for guys presumably on base salary.

That's one way to look at it.

Another is that fringe players are a dime a dozen. They occupy ("clog") a list spot. We are better off turning those spots over frequently in the hope that we'll find a gem eventually. The secret is to keep churning through players who are mostly playing VFL. Give them short senior list contracts (1 year, 2 years at most) only for as long as they keep performing.

I'm speaking generically. No reflection on Baker or Poulter. My personal view is that Poulter might still be a prospect to make it, but Baker is ... well, just an honest fringe player.

 

[JohnnySteel]

Not saying we would entertain the trade but suns would be mad not to try and get Dale across. They have the picks to make it happen and they are in the market for a half back. Would suit their play.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[St 07]

Not saying we would entertain the trade but suns would be mad not to try and get Dale across. They have the picks to make it happen and they are in the market for a half back. Would suit their play.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Would they pay a first rounder and change?

 

[The Inbetweener]

Would they pay a first rounder and change?

They have 3 1sts and a future 1st to play with, so they would be willing to pay up for someone in contract.

 

[VitalDread]

I'm all for unrestricted pick swaps

Makes watching other teams more interesting having tied to X y z

If a team throws their entire draft for top end talent
So be it

They can purchase a pick back

 

[doggiesin08]

I'm all for unrestricted pick swaps

Makes watching other teams more interesting having tied to X y z

If a team throws their entire draft for top end talent
So be it

They can purchase a pick back

Yep, I agree but the AFL needs to draw a line in the sand on no more priority picks. You can’t go all in trading out future selections and then get priority picks 2-3 years later if it doesn’t work.

I’d also be telling clubs there is an expectation they stop being bitches and start using the pre-season draft. It’s an equalisation measure that clubs ignore to maintain friendly relationships but **** friendly relationships, it’s a competition. North should have offered Kai Lohmann a $500K signing bonus and an extra year and nabbed him for free last year.

 

[stefoid]

So from a list management perspective, unhappy to say that Lobb was a smart pickup.

 

[Testekill]

So from a list management perspective, unhappy to say that Lobb was a smart pickup.

Ultimately the other thing forcing Lobb out of the team until now is that Darcy has come on a lot quicker than anticipated.

 

[LittleG]

Not saying we would entertain the trade but suns would be mad not to try and get Dale across. They have the picks to make it happen and they are in the market for a half back. Would suit their play.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

They have a need at the position and a first round pick is less than a proven player.

They could and should be offering two first round picks and we should consider the offer….

 

[Doggy]

They have a need at the position and a first round pick is less than a proven player.

They could and should be offering two first round picks and we should consider the offer….

They'd be stupid to offer that though

 

[LittleG]

They'd be stupid to offer that though

They offered a first rounder to get rid of a salary cap mistake….

Suns are close to a complete team, 2 first round picks that will take 3 years to contribute; aren’t going to move the needle. Dale is young enough and good enough to move the needle for a few years.

 

[Doggy]

They offered a first rounder to get rid of a salary cap mistake….

Suns are close to a complete team, 2 first round picks that will take 3 years to contribute; aren’t going to move the needle. Dale is young enough and good enough to move the needle for a few years.

Yes I know that ... but that is stupid overs.