List Management for 2020/21

[GVGjr]

Just picking up a ruck for the sake of it would be insanity. Any experienced addition in ruck stocks needs to fit in with the way we play and needs to actually add something apart from being a tall. Anyone we get needs to either be elite at getting first hands on the ball or give something else elite around the ground. Just plonking in an average ruck because he is tall is like playing a tall forward who can’t mark the ball, all it does is slow you down. Put me in the camp of getting creative and trying to establish a mobility advantage if we can’t get the right player.

We also need to consider the flexibility of any ruck option we get. English needs games so to me it means if we spend money, picks or a player to get quality in they must be able to play forward to have the ability to operate in tandem.

I agree with the principle of what you are saying and there is the added challenge of if we would play 2 ruckman in the same team.
We do however need some depth and if Bevo doesn't believe Sweet is ready we need to find someone else.

[Topdog]

There is no doubt he can more than match it versus the second/third tier type ruckmen in the competition (Essendon's Phillips for example whe he completely dominated and Hickey fits into this bucket) but I prefer not to measure him against them.

What I care about are his performances against top 8 sides. He was destroyed by Grundy, the Saints guys worked him over completely, big O gave him a bath against Brisbane etc.

Oh most definitely but thats just of his progression. We are talking about a ruckman that is about to reach his 50th game and is 23.

He has a long way to go and I'm just enjoying watching him continue to improve.

Really looking forward to watch him vs Ceglar who also got completely worked over by the Saints duo.

[bornadog]

40 would a reasonable outcome. I think must clubs would reduce their lists by 10 players

Let's assume 40, which means we need to get to 37 if we want to recruit fresh draftees - so that is 8 gone.

My Delist/Retire would be:

• Dickson, Tory
• Gowers, Billy
• Greene, Fergus
• Khamis, Buku R
• Lynch, Bradley
• Porter, Callum
• Suckling, Matthew
• Hayes, Will or Cavarra, Ben

[Axe Man]

Let's assume 40, which means we need to get to 37 if we want to recruit fresh draftees - so that is 8 gone.

My Delist/Retire would be:

• Dickson, Tory
• Gowers, Billy
• Greene, Fergus
• Khamis, Buku R
• Lynch, Bradley
• Porter, Callum
• Suckling, Matthew
• Hayes, Will or Cavarra, Ben

Not much point retaining Trengove if he's not going to play.

[mjp]

We do however need some depth and if Bevo doesn't believe Sweet is ready we need to find someone else.

The challenge is finding a player who Bevo believes in.

I can't help but think we need to find ourselves a player who has capacity to play in another position first - their is simply no value in us recruiter another Tom Campbell "type" (Preuss, Pittonet) because he will not select them. I still think our only hope is to find Tim English#2 and roll them between forward and the ruck - at one stage I thought Young was going to be that player but something has clearly happened there...

[GVGjr]

The challenge is finding a player who Bevo believes in.

I can't help but think we need to find ourselves a player who has capacity to play in another position first - their is simply no value in us recruiter another Tom Campbell "type" (Preuss, Pittonet) because he will not select them. I still think our only hope is to find Tim English#2 and roll them between forward and the ruck - at one stage I thought Young was going to be that player but something has clearly happened there...

That is the challenge and I agree that the players you listed don't suit what the MC would like.
I think Bevo would prefer just one or two ruckman on the list supported by one or two hybrid types. Trengove should have been a good fit for us, Roughead as well but I'd guess the requirement is the players must also be mobile.
Schache has the mobility but is clearly not preferred and I doubt he will be added to the Naughton and Bruce combo up forward.

A Kreuzer type might suit for a season or two. A player like Casboult's who has the ability to take a mark up forward and ruck for 5 to 7 minutes per quarter would possibly suit but with key 2 key forwards locked I can't see us doing much more than looking for fill ins.

[bornadog]

Not much point retaining Trengove if he's not going to play.

I thought of that, but for me the list is what I would do.

[DOG GOD]

Let's assume 40, which means we need to get to 37 if we want to recruit fresh draftees - so that is 8 gone.

My Delist/Retire would be:

• Dickson, Tory
• Gowers, Billy
• Greene, Fergus
• Khamis, Buku R
• Lynch, Bradley
• Porter, Callum
• Suckling, Matthew
• Hayes, Will or Cavarra, Ben

I agree with most of your list Bornadog, but I’d add Trengove and possibly Lew Young on the list. MC won’t play them, so why have them on the list? I certainly don’t want Lew Young to go, but I’ve got a feeling he will be traded.

So, Greene and Hayes to stay
Trengove and Lew Young to go (unfortunately)

[bornadog]

I agree with most of your list Bornadog, but I’d add Trengove and possibly Lew Young on the list. MC won’t play them, so why have them on the list? I certainly don’t want Lew Young to go, but I’ve got a feeling he will be traded.

So, Greene and Hayes to stay
Trengove and Lew Young to go (unfortunately)

We would be crazy to get rid of a 21 year old 197cm mobile player. Trengove will be 30 in November and is out of contract, so that is a possibility.

[DOG GOD]

We would be crazy to get rid of a 21 year old 197cm mobile player. Trengove will be 30 in November and is out of contract, so that is a possibility.

I agree 100% but there HAS to be a reason why he hasn’t been played, in a compromised year. I literally can’t get my head around it. It would be stupidity, but there’s gotta be more to it than just scratch match form.

[bornadog]

I agree 100% but there HAS to be a reason why he hasn’t been played, in a compromised year. I literally can’t get my head around it. It would be stupidity, but there’s gotta be more to it than just scratch match form.

It certainly is a mystery.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Read that Quinten Narkle is potentially open to a trade.

I haven't seen a whole heap of him, but what I've seen I've liked. I'd enquire.

[FrediKanoute]

Wood has apparently agreed a 2 year deal. Surprised personally given age and his dodgy hammies.

[Vred]

Wood has apparently agreed a 2 year deal. Surprised personally given age and his dodgy hammies.

I'm not too happy with a 2 year deal for Wood, one? Yep, two is overkill..

[mjp]

I think Bevo would prefer just one or two ruckman on the list supported by one or two hybrid types. Trengove should have been a good fit for us, Roughead as well but I'd guess the requirement is the players must also be mobile.

...and would have I guess if he could have played forward. Isn't it funny how you recruit a player who has been an OK key defender / OK ruckman at AFL level and try to play him as a ruckman forward it is not a success.

I was thinking about this the other day with specific regard to the Easton Wood as a forward experiment...I wonder if it might have been more of a success if he had been inside 50m with even one other player who had some idea what he was doing - I swear I remember a game where he and Trengove were in the goal-square together (forward gs) and, well, the outcome was not great!!!