What is the point of keeping long, long-term injured players?

[Silent Alarm]

Has this ever come through as a smart decision?

From a player's perspective it's like, well, spend a few years being on $150,000 a year. But from the club what is the upside? Is someone really going to get the fitness back? Are they ever going to be a good player again? Some champions with Brownlows, 200 games behind them go out for a season and never come back again.

This bloke from the Swans, Harley Bennell, the dude who got drafted about pick 5 for Collingwood and now he's at St Kilda for 0 games. Then old Anthony Morabito.

Does this generally just work to make a coach look safe or to placate the fans? Is it to justify a silly draft or trading choice?

Does it actually seriously ever work?

 

[Baird]

Either sympathy or hope that the player will come good.

 

[Muddiemoose]

Dan Menzel

 

[Silent Alarm]

Dan Menzel

How good was he though, really? It's not like he's come back and won the Brownlow.

 

[Engimal v3]

Was wondering this today. I mean, good on Alex Johnson, but they've put quite an investment into a fella who's not playing footy. It'd have to be over a million dollars to sit on the sidelines, and he was no superstar when he was playing football. I'm sure there's people smarter than me at list management making these decisions though.

 

[GreyCrow]

Its a fair question to ask.

I think its the last trace of empathy a club can point to after pushing others out the door

 

[theyellowsash]

David Asbury

Look up his injury history until just a couple years ago, and look how good he is now.

 

[theyellowsash]

David Asbury

Look up his injury history until just a couple years ago, and look how good he is now.

Also Dylan grimes

That was meant to be an edit not a quote but whatever

 

[Muddiemoose]

How good was he though, really? It's not like he's come back and won the Brownlow.

I dunno it’s pretry subjective I guess
I rate him kicked 40 odd goals last year pretty decent for a medium forward

 

[Aussie_boy]

Josh Cowan was one of the weirder ones. A rather ordinary player kept for 8 years.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Because the upside of the perennially injured player makes them worthwhile as a prospect as opposed to a kid unlikely to make it with the last available kid anyway?

If the choice was between a proven but injury prone Sean Rusling and any of our last free picks in any of the subsequent drafts (not including players taken late on special listing rules) we were looking at blokes like Toby Thoolen, Jack Carter and Luke Casey-Leigh. You’d go the injury prone talent every day of the week when making a decision like that.

 

[Silent Alarm]

Sean Rusling is proven? I had to google him. Played 17 games?

Even Mark Coughlan, who was a best and fairest winner in his first or second year, and generally agreed as one of the great unfulfilled talents, was cut by about age 25.

Is it just because they're good blokes around the club or what?

It's almost never ever come as a success story.

 

[GreyCrow]

Cam Ellis-Yolmen had the possibility of being delisted at the end of 2017. Did his knee early 2017 and the compassionate thinking was to give him 1 more year to show his ability. Delisted then rookied he did a lot of work and actually looked ok. But again he is on the edge of the squad as others come through

Pick 64 so no great expectations, good depth for us but I hope he finds another home and plays more senior football

 

[chargers 09]

Has this ever come through as a smart decision?

From a player's perspective it's like, well, spend a few years being on $150,000 a year. But from the club what is the upside? Is someone really going to get the fitness back? Are they ever going to be a good player again? Some champions with Brownlows, 200 games behind them go out for a season and never come back again.

This bloke from the Swans, Harley Bennell, the dude who got drafted about pick 5 for Collingwood and now he's at St Kilda for 0 games. Then old Anthony Morabito.

Does this generally just work to make a coach look safe or to placate the fans? Is it to justify a silly draft or trading choice?

Does it actually seriously ever work?

If the club knows that if they can get them
on the field they are guaranteed best 22 which all of the above examples they would be.

They probably think that it's worthwhile the small chance we can get these guys back on the field consistently then using endless amounts of very late draft/PSD picks on guys who aren't AFL standard.

Clubs probably think they are more likely to get a return on investment on trying to get these guys fit to play again (because they know they have the talent/proven output) rather than trying to develop a not up to it 18 year old with pick 89.

Certainly wouldn't be anything altruistic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Skarrz]

Paul Ahern case and point. Pray he stays safe

 

[Post padding]

Was wondering this today. I mean, good on Alex Johnson, but they've put quite an investment into a fella who's not playing footy. It'd have to be over a million dollars to sit on the sidelines, and he was no superstar when he was playing football. I'm sure there's people smarter than me at list management making these decisions though.

I think your forgetting how good Alex was as a 19 yr old.

But I do get your point about how long is enough.

If it’s the only bit of compassion that’s left in the AFL I’m ok with it

And the last few yrs Alex has been a rookie so he would have been no where on the cash to make a million dollars.

There’s also work place rehab that comes into it to I suppose

 

[D-N-R]

Are players on long term injury lists counted in the cap? Or is there a discount / reduction in player payments? Could simply be a bit cheaper or as cheap as developing an unknown prospect.

 

[Topkent]

Has this ever come through as a smart decision?

From a player's perspective it's like, well, spend a few years being on $150,000 a year. But from the club what is the upside? Is someone really going to get the fitness back? Are they ever going to be a good player again? Some champions with Brownlows, 200 games behind them go out for a season and never come back again.

This bloke from the Swans, Harley Bennell, the dude who got drafted about pick 5 for Collingwood and now he's at St Kilda for 0 games. Then old Anthony Morabito.

Does this generally just work to make a coach look safe or to placate the fans? Is it to justify a silly draft or trading choice?

Does it actually seriously ever work?

So at what point do you delist them? Petracca did his knee his first pre season should we have delisted him?

The 2nd injury almost always comes around rehabbing the first so the club owes it to the player. If you cut blokes with injuries players will hide them or rehab them at a much slower place to make sure they are ready.

Besides there has probably been only a couple at each club in recent years. If port start a being known for dumping blokes after injuries you reckon Robbie Gray doesn't leave after his knee?

 

[PerthBoy86]

As great and important Nic Nat is, I think there was too much focus on him, structurally a gameplan around him, which led to the laments when he gets injured, all doom and gloom about how we're gonna slide...I suppose we've developed Lycett, Vardy etc, but whether he returns or not we need an elite ruckman.

 

[its free real estate]

Sunk cost fallacy.

 

[PhatBoy]

How good was he though, really? It's not like he's come back and won the Brownlow.

He's come back and had a 40 goal season as a medium forward and averaged a couple of goals a game. As second forwards go, those players don't grow on trees.

 

[HTT]

Players aren’t really more than a year away from being right after any injury. Sydney wouldn’t have been able to say ‘look this bloke won’t be right until 2018 - let’s delist him.’ Thats like WC saying ‘Nic Nat won’t be back until 2024, no point having him’. There is an incredibly remote chance he will keep getting injured and won’t back until 2024, but we won’t know that until he either is, or isn’t.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Clubs need to run with their best interests and be cold at times, but that's not the whole story. The playing group sees how players are treated in bad personal times, and this impacts on culture.

We extended Matt Buntine and Adam Kennedy last year after they did ACL's and it would be silly to think that wasn't partly about their morale.
Kenners story is interesting he said he had been told he was wanted early last year before his injury, with his contract expiring at the end of the year. When he was injured the contract was put in front of him and sorted quickly.

I believe all clubs would do the same, injury is hard on players and the club doesn't benefit by being nasty.

 

[Fatrollo]

Don't underestimate the worth of having those "good bloke" types around the club. Hawthorn, for example, has kept Brendan Whitecross probably two years longer than his real onfield value is worth. Sure, he's been handy depth and has been decent enough since he came back this year, but he's 28 and had a torrid run with injuries for 5 years now.

However, he is notably an absolutely ripping person and a delight to have around the club. A good leader who works hard and is a good example for the younger players and just general team cohesion. There's more value keeping these guys around in the hope they can be depth and help with the off-field culture then cut them and draft a kid in the 80s.

I personally know Alex, having played with him in the junior days, and he really is a lovely guy. You'll hear that every time the Swans players and staff talk about him, it's always that he's a top quality person and great to have around the club.

But in all honesty, I doubt the club ever truly thought he'd get to AFL level again. And there's every chance he may still be delisted come the end of the season (again using a Hawthorn example, the club spent years trying to get Beau Muston's body right. When it finally, he only played 13 games before getting delisted).

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Don't underestimate the worth of having those "good bloke" types around the club. Hawthorn, for example, has kept Brendan Whitecross probably two years longer than his real onfield value is worth. Sure, he's been handy depth and has been decent enough since he came back this year, but he's 28 and had a torrid run with injuries for 5 years now.

However, he is notably an absolutely ripping person and a delight to have around the club. A good leader who works hard and is a good example for the younger players and just general team cohesion. There's more value keeping these guys around in the hope they can be depth and help with the off-field culture then cut them and draft a kid in the 80s.

I personally know Alex, having played with him in the junior days, and he really is a lovely guy. You'll hear that every time the Swans players and staff talk about him, it's always that he's a top quality person and great to have around the club.

But in all honesty, I doubt the club ever truly thought he'd get to AFL level again. And there's every chance he may still be delisted come the end of the season (again using a Hawthorn example, the club spent years trying to get Beau Muston's body right. When it finally, he only played 13 games before getting delisted).

I watched his story tonight on "on the mark" and it's an interesting one. He did say he was given an ultimatum after he became a negative and lost confidence after his second knee reconstruction.
Jon Patton obviously went thriyghsimikar after his second with Leon promoting him publicly to get back on the field at one point.