Strategy Trade and List Management Thread Part 8 (opposition supporters - READ posting rules before posting)

[_Mike_]

Opposition supporters coming to troll , you have been warned

 

[BomToydd]

I think the idea that Butters will be more likely to want to go to the Dogs had we merely beaten Fremantle in the 2022 elimination final, before losing in the semi final, but thus technically having had 'a finals win in the last four years' (though Butters can equally consider that we did win finals in 2021 either way) is such a ridiculous think to consider as a factor into Butters' decision making

You're the one making it all about a finals loss to Fremantle. Even if we had beaten Fremantle other teams like Hawthorn and Geelong look to be on a better trajectory than us. Do you reckon Smith would have left if we were winning flags and Geelong were in our position? Do you reckon we might have had a better chance at picking up Barrass if we finished above Hawthorn?

 

[Bald]

Carlton are a bigger club and Visy kinda helped. And he'd already won a premiership
Can't see Port winning a flag before or leaves. Maybe he really likes tortillas though and Mission can put him in a sombrero and make him a tortilla ambassador

Hey, now you're getting creative!

 

[BIG_BONTS]

in bevo's presser he talks about having thin midfield depth without marcus and libba. true but concerning. it seems like his view is that we're very middle of the road rather than stacked with stars as the media/public is looking at it.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

You're the one making it all about a finals loss to Fremantle. Even if we had beaten Fremantle other teams like Hawthorn and Geelong look to be on a better trajectory than us. Do you reckon Smith would have left if we were winning flags and Geelong were in our position? Do you reckon we might have had a better chance at picking up Barrass if we finished above Hawthorn?

That's an example of the lack of finals success in specifically the 4 year window you brought up. It's also being selective to a 4 year window and not a 5 year one.

To the extent that Butters is influenced by what our past success was or not (not that I think he is), framing it as "not having won a final within a 4 year window" but not equally mentioning "but we made the grand final 5 years ago" is in my eyes as relevant as each other. That is, of little relevance, but we're not less successful of a team culturally had we lost in the 21 semi final but won the 22 elimination final, even if it means that we had more success in the very specific 4 year window you've carved out for your argument.

Much like Ross Lyon's comments of that we're better than our win-loss record and then they beat Eagles by 100 points and they beat Carlton the next two weeks, Zak Butters is not going to define what he sees as a "successful culture" as specifically and only the number of finals wins in the past 4 years without extending it to 5 years, or to not put context into those (like missing finals with 14 wins in 2025...), he is not going to be so reductive as to what he sees as a winning or successful culture to the "must have won finals in last 4 years [but not 5 years]" like you're presenting it, so it's pointless to even discuss.

If we're framing a motivation for which team he will play for as him seeing successful culture this way, why can't I present the fact that he supported us as a child as 100% of the reason he will play for us next year? Because defining Butters' motivation to that reduction would be equally as stupid. It's a factor, but neither are anywhere near as much factors as obvious ones (like going to a club that pays him the most money).

 

[BomToydd]

in bevo's presser he talks about having thin midfield depth without marcus and libba. true but concerning. it seems like his view is that we're very middle of the road rather than stacked with stars as the media/public is looking at it.

Just sounds like a coach making excuses tbh. It's his team, he's been here 12 years and plays a part in selecting and keeping list cloggers around. He would play a part in players like Macrae and Smith leaving

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Just sounds like a coach making excuses tbh. It's his team, he's been here 12 years and plays a part in selecting and keeping list cloggers around. He would play a part in players like Macrae and Smith leaving

So we have weak ruck depth, weak midfield depth, and weak key defender depth.

Other clubs don't have weak depth if they have 11+ players in their injury list, and we're somehow immune to the equalisation methods of the draft and salary cap that we should be expected to have generated better depth than other clubs despite that equalisation.

Gotcha.

Coach making excuses. Sack Bevo etc. etc.

 

[BomToydd]

That's an example of the lack of finals success in specifically the 4 year window you brought up. It's also being selective to a 4 year window and not a 5 year one.

It wasn't me who was talking about a 4 year window but you're also being selective making it a 5 year one. Why not make it a bigger one? In his 11 seasons he's only won finals in 2.

To the extent that Butters is influenced by what our past success was or not (not that I think he is)
so it's pointless to even discuss.
If we're framing a motivation for which team he will play for as him seeing successful culture this way, why can't I present the fact that he supported us as a child as 100% of the reason he will play for us next year? Because defining Butters' motivation to that reduction would be equally as stupid.

Omg I can't take you seriously. It's ridiculous to suggest a professional athlete wouldn't prefer to join a team that wins more

It's a factor, but neither are anywhere near as much factors as obvious ones (like going to a club that pays him the most money).

Take off your bulldogs glasses for a minute and lets say location wasn't a factor and all teams are offering him the same deal. Do you really think he would choose us if we have a worse year than Geelong, Hawthorn or even Collingwood?

 

[BomToydd]

So we have weak ruck depth, weak midfield depth, and weak key defender depth.

Other clubs don't have weak depth if they have 11+ players in their injury list, and we're somehow immune to the equalisation methods of the draft and salary cap that we should be expected to have generated better depth than other clubs despite that equalisation.

Gotcha.

Coach making excuses. Sack Bevo etc. etc.

Are you related to Sam Power or something? You seem very sensitive about criticism of our list

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Omg I can't take you seriously. It's ridiculous to suggest a professional athlete wouldn't prefer to join a team that wins more

Sure, which is why Butters clearly has the intelligence to see the fact that we won 14 games last year and sometimes there are worse, less successful teams generally (that sometimes win fewer than 14 games) that also win finals in seasons generally. That doesn't make them a "more successful" team as Butters would understand it relative to us and 2025.

Thinking that "win finals in the past = more likely to be successful in the future" reduces Butters' ability to consider all factors as to why Dogs may not have won finals (such as luck lol) to that of a caveman.

Do you really think he would choose us if we have a worse year than Geelong, Hawthorn or even Collingwood?

If we're all offering the same amount of money?

Sure, why not.

Hawks have not played a single player under the age of 23 this year, except Nick Watson, at all. Butters might not think he's a chance to win a maximum amount of flags at Hawthorn over the length of the 8-year contract he signs wherever, as an example.

Even if he and you and I all think Hawks are more likely to win the flag next year. Just not in the 7 years beyond that.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Are you related to Sam Power or something? You seem very sensitive about criticism of our list

I'm sensitive to the expectation that the Dogs should magically be able to do better than other teams, with the same salary cap, structural disadvantages, and worse draft picks over the course of the last 12 years (because we've been successful and need to be equalised away over the course of the 12 years), while also having 11 injuries to some of our best players when compared to other clubs, such as Hawthorn, who are able to do things like spend more time paying for people to scout games for them via paying the luxury tax.

 

[ossie_21]

Can you two just take it to a DM or something??

 

[BomToydd]

Sure, which is why Butters clearly has the intelligence to see the fact that we won 14 games last year and sometimes there are worse, less successful teams generally (that sometimes win fewer than 14 games) that also win finals in seasons generally. That doesn't make them a "more successful" team as Butters would understand it relative to us and 2025.

Thinking that "win finals in the past = more likely to be successful in the future" reduces Butters' ability to consider all factors as to why Dogs may not have won finals (such as luck lol) to that of a caveman.

The bolded isn't about Butters, you're just having a crack at anyone who disagrees with you. Grow up
And what are you even saying? None of that makes any sense. Which teams that finished above us last year were we better than? Geelong? Hawthorn? Bevos record against them is horrible. You can't use injuries as an excuse. Every team has them. We only defeated one team above us last year

I'm sensitive to the expectation that the Dogs should magically be able to do better than other teams, with the same salary cap, structural disadvantages, and worse draft picks over the course of the last 12 years (because we've been successful and need to be equalised away over the course of the 12 years), while also having 11 injuries to some of our best players when compared to other clubs, such as Hawthorn, who are able to do things like spend more time paying for people to scout games for them via paying the luxury tax.

I get that things are stacked against us but making excuses and saying we're a better team than teams that finished above us is just delusional

 

[BomToydd]

Can you two just take it to a DM or something??

Nothing we're discussing is off topic and one of their last posts was having a crack at my response to another supporter's post. Only one of us is getting personal at people who disagree with them. If you don't like it don't get involved

 

[Bulldogs85]

 

[liesalllies]

What I am most worried about is over the last five years we have not been able to hold onto our key talent, Dunkley, Smith & Murra (I know off field issues) and to a lesser extent Lapinski and Sweet, then you look at the players we have “attracted” to the club, Baker, Lobb, Bramble ect. So I think we are exposed to lack of depth because we have a net talent deficit from these transactions. If I just take a business approach to this we have way too many single point of failure. If I was Butters it would be a hard sell to come into the dogs, I hope I am wrong but too many off seasons we have not been able to land a big fish besides Boyd which was pre Bevo/ Power days

 

[Fossie 32]

What I am most worried about is over the last five years we have not been able to hold onto our key talent, Dunkley, Smith & Murra (I know off field issues) and to a lesser extent Lapinski and Sweet, then you look at the players we have “attracted” to the club, Baker, Lobb, Bramble ect. So I think we are exposed to lack of depth because we have a net talent deficit from these transactions. If I just take a business approach to this we have way too many single point of failure. If I was Butters it would be a hard sell to come into the dogs, I hope I am wrong but too many off seasons we have not been able to land a big fish besides Boyd which was pre Bevo/ Power days

 

[MaxiBont]

 

[Munnez]

Port would laugh at us if that’s all we offered.

How did we fare with Dunkley and Smith?
When the player wants out you end up with unders. If he selects us a deal will get done. What it ends up looking like i don't have the faintest idea but will be significant.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

The bolded isn't about Butters, you're just having a crack at anyone who disagrees with you. Grow up
And what are you even saying? None of that makes any sense. Which teams that finished above us last year were we better than? Geelong? Hawthorn? Bevos record against them is horrible. You can't use injuries as an excuse. Every team has them. We only defeated one team above us last year


I get that things are stacked against us but making excuses and saying we're a better team than teams that finished above us is just delusional

Sure, but I was initially responding to the fact that we're not a successful team generally (despite having a winning record in all individual years) since 2022.

The context of this discussion is whether Butters will want to go to a successful team, and the appeal of being in a likely future successful team. Not that we're necessarily more likely to win the 2026 or 2027 flag than Hawthorn or Geelong.

Every single discussion about list management - which is what this thread is about - gets hijacked by people like yourself because you want to trumpet the fact that we have failed won win any finals since 2022 in an anti-Bevo bias, even though I think it's an unreasonable view to have. I belive it's unreasonable because "not winning finals in the last 4 years" is an incredibly poor way of measuring if a team has a "successful culture" (because it, among other things, ignores consistency of being a winning team across all 4 years, or it selectively includes 4 years ago but not 5 years ago, which are of similar weighing to culture, now, today). Why is it specifically relevant to call winning finals in a 4 year window as a sole determinant on having a successful culture, but relevant at all to consider making grand finals in a 5 year window as relevant? There is only four teams in the league who have a coach who has coached that team to a GF - Fagan, McRae, Scott and Beveridge. I don't see Sam Mitchell on that list...

We get it. You don't think Bevo can coach. You don't have to hijack the discussions of what might motivate Butters to come to us with your usual "well actually, we have not been that successful recently, Bevo bad" tripe on repeat. I'm sick of reading and having to disagree with it every time.

 

[BomToydd]

I'm sick of reading and having to disagree with it every time.

You don't have to. I don't like you talking down to others and insulting people's intelligence and going off on long-winded nonsensical tangents and still struggling to make your stupid points and then being all like "well actually, we are primed for a flag in 2033' but I'm not trying to shut down your arguments.

Sure, but I was initially responding to the fact that we're not a successful team generally

We're not a successful team. There's ultimately only one successful team at the end of the season.

you want to trumpet the fact that we have failed won win any finals since 2022 in an anti-Bevo bias, even though I think it's an unreasonable view to have.

This doesn't even make sense mate. You do realise facts and views are different things right?

I belive it's unreasonable because "not winning finals in the last 4 years" is an incredibly poor way of measuring if a team has a "successful culture" (because it, among other things, ignores consistency of being a winning team across all 4 years, or it selectively includes 4 years ago but not 5 years ago, which are of similar weighing to culture, now, today). Why is it specifically relevant to call winning finals in a 4 year window as a sole determinant on having a successful culture, but relevant at all to consider making grand finals in a 5 year window as relevant?

You can believe it all you want but it's just ridiculous to suggest not winning finals is a poor measure of a teams success. They don't give out premierships for teams who consistently finish outside the top 8 and have good winning records over a 4 year period or whatever and it's probably not the best way to attract players either. And taking money out of the equation it's just delusional to think the best players wouldn't prefer to move to the best teams.

There is only four teams in the league who have a coach who has coached that team to a GF - Fagan, McRae, Scott and Beveridge. I don't see Sam Mitchell on that list...

What has that got to do with list management?

We get it. You don't think Bevo can coach. You don't have to hijack the discussions of what might motivate Butters to come to us with your usual "well actually, we have not been that successful recently, Bevo bad" tripe on repeat.

The only time I mentioned the coach was in response to another supporter and even then it was in the context of list management. Your whole little meltdown began with me criticising Sam Power and the list. Regardless, you can't expect to see no discussion of the coach in the context of list management. It's his team, he's been here 12 years and plays a part in which players we target and keep around.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

well actually, we are primed for a flag in 2033

I was making the point that we are more primed for a future flag via having a younger list relative to the rest of the league now, than compared to 2022-23 when we had an old list. I think that's a very reasonable discussion on this board. If you're going to criticise me for shutting down other's arguments how is mischaracterising mine any different?

We're not a successful team. There's ultimately only one successful team at the end of the season.

So as it relates to the motivations of Zak Butters wanting to play for a successful team, he should only want to play for the team that just won the premiership by this token, and would not be motivated to play for any other team, for any other reason, including money or childhood support?

This doesn't even make sense mate. You do realise facts and views are different things right?

It is equally a fact that we did win finals 5 years ago as that we didn't four years ago.

I think the view that Zak Butters would hold a lack of finals success 4 years ago as entirely relevant as determining if we are a "successful team" or "have a winning culture" but equally so, give zero considerations to our success of 5 years ago as a view that you have of Butters, I just think it's not only silly, it's also not a view typically held by people like Butters.

You can believe it all you want but it's just ridiculous to suggest not winning finals is a poor measure of a teams success.

To the extent that it is relevant as a predictor of future success, there are better, more granular measures we can use. Is a team that wins an elimination final by 1 point, but then loses a semi-final by 100 points more primed to have a better following season, more likely to win the flag, than the team they just beat in the elimination final because we think it good to go to the reductive thinking of "won a final = better"?

Of course not, and Butters doesn't have to think that way either.

They don't give out premierships for teams who consistently finish outside the top 8

No, but a 9th placed team that wins 14 games and a good percentage is more likely to win the following year's flag than if a 9th placed team that wins 12 games with a bad percentage.

We were better than 9th on bookmaker premiership odds in the pre-season, for example, for 2026. We were not considered the 9th most likely team to win the 2026 flag at the moment in time that players would be making their decisions on which team to play for in the 25 trade period, despite only finishing 9th on the ladder.

If our esteemed bookmaking community can think in a more complex manner than "future success = last year's ladder position", I'm sure Zak Butters is capable of that thinking too.

What has that got to do with list management?

I'm not the one who initially brought up the fact that Butters may be attracted to playing for a 'winning culture'. In responding to that initial post (of Butters' motivation) I think it is also fair to highlight other elements of a winning culture - like playing for a premiership or GF winning coach who continues to coach at the same club where they provably brought that winning culture by qualifying for GFs. Butters only had four coaches to pick from, including us, if he wants to play for a coach who has taken that team to a GF. Not Fremantle or Hawthorn.

Your whole little meltdown began with me criticising Sam Power and the list.

Different post.

Regardless, it's not unreasonable to see discussion of the coach in the context of list management. It's his team, he's been here 12 years and plays a part in which players we target and keep around.

Myself, many other Bulldogs fans, and the player management and playing community in general likes Bevo as a coach, and thinks he's a good coach to play for both in being a good boss to have, and one that is likely to bring future success.

There is a minority that disagrees with that view, such as yourself and people like Kane Cornes.

I tend to agree with the majority.