2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

[bulldogtragic]

Last time we were successful with great depth, 2016, we lost Hamling, Stevens & Hrovat to trades. I get the sense this might happen again. We also have just one pick inside the end of the fourth round. We need to get back in.

So right now I’m thinking:

Jong (retired/delisted)
Hayes (delisted - one of Hayes or Scott is enough)
Cavarra (delisted - McNeil looks to have moved passed him already)

Wallis (I’d hold off and allow his manager to shop him around. Then come to us with years/dollars and if it’s better to let him go, bank the compo)

JJ (I’d offer him a one year extension on top of his last contracted year next year on very little money. He may seek a trade, which is fine, or his salary drops significantly over the then 2 years to just above the average AFL wage. Good depth player on that money, but not big money. I can see him getting some interest)

Dunkley stays unless we get an offer too good to refuse. But I want him.

I’d expect clubs to go hard after Lipinski, Richards, Schache & Young. These are possibly going to be the Hamling, Stevens & Hrovat of our strong list depth. If we could offload the circa $900,000 of Walis & JJ combined maybe we keep the younger guys.


So I think we need 5 spots, which I think we will have. Realigning the list back to 38 Primary, 4 Rookie (Gardner, Smith, McNeil and one new rookie). Jong & two re-opened Primary spots gives us 3 vacancies. So two more outgoing players to get to 4-5 spots. 1 used for a trade (ie McAsey), 4 for the draft - elevating Sweet & Buku, and maybe a priority access or two (possibly later on - to - rookie) from our two live ND Picks and one RD Pick.

Early call:

Out: Jong, Hayes, Cavarra, two others being maybe Wallis & JJ
In: 1st (if it’s around 18-20, then involved with McAsey or similar), circa end of 2nd (JJ), 3rd Rounder (Wallis), 4th & 5th Rounder on Sweet & Buku upgraded, 2 live ND picks (2nd & 3rd) & 1 RD pick (with Priority Access Potential)


There’s far too many variables for this to be even close, but there’s a few interesting things to consider like depth, or letting veterans go to keep younger talent. Are some players going to be at peak value and consider trading out if they’re happy and will Bevos favourites like Smith & Cordy get extended throughout the year or wait and see (I don’t see them being cut). What is the number one priority, KPD or small pressure forward?

Discuss.


(P.S. I love this thread because sometimes you’re right, and sometimes players make you look stupid with a great middle and end to the season)

[Scraggers]

Re: 2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

Thanks BT ... I absolutely love your posts about current and future drafts; I get excited about what could be particularly with the names you are touting.

BUT ... I have huge issues with moving on our F/S players. Wallis needs to stay. Not picking up McPherson was disappointing, particularly when you see him do well at Gold Coast. But having a F/S player in our ranks and talking about moving him on really goes against my beliefs. If he was shite (aka Ayce Cordy) I understand we don't offer him a contract, but we are very quick to forget that Wallis was our leading goal kicker last year with 25 ... 10 more than Naughton, 11 more than Bruce. Yes, he has started the season slow, but he has played two games (against Collingwood and West Coast) and we are talking about moving him on??

I don't get it; surely we are not that cut-throat that we move on our Vice Captain, a F/S, last year's leading goal scorer, based on two games?? I reiterate ... Wallis needs to stay

[Bornadog]

Re: 2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

Hayes is a rookie, does that make a difference?

[bulldogtragic]

Re: 2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

Thanks BT ... I absolutely love your posts about current and future drafts; I get excited about what could be particularly with the names you are touting.

BUT ... I have huge issues with moving on our F/S players. Wallis needs to stay. Not picking up McPherson was disappointing, particularly when you see him do well at Gold Coast. But having a F/S player in our ranks and talking about moving him on really goes against my beliefs. If he was shite (aka Ayce Cordy) I understand we don't offer him a contract, but we are very quick to forget that Wallis was our leading goal kicker last year with 25 ... 10 more than Naughton, 11 more than Bruce. Yes, he has started the season slow, but he has played two games (against Collingwood and West Coast) and we are talking about moving him on??

I don't get it; surely we are not that cut-throat that we move on our Vice Captain, a F/S, last year's leading goal scorer, based on two games?? I reiterate ... Wallis needs to stay

I’m not explicitly saying get rid of him. I’m saying let’s have his manager shop Mitch around. If say North offered three years and $400,000 for example and Mitch’s manager wanted something close, I’d not match it. That’s Mitch exercising his free agency rights. This is his last good years/dollars contract, so i have no issue with him leaving for more years and more money, we get a compo pick. We did something similar with Dahl where his manager said Geelong were offering more years and money. He left which was a good result for him and us (points for West). If Mitch says he’s happy with one year extensions on average salary, that’s another conversation.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: 2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

Hayes is a rookie, does that make a difference?

No. We just move the list structure to have two less rookies, and two more primary spots. As was our custom prior to the changes last year.

[mjp]

Re: 2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

I’d expect clubs to go hard after Lipinski, Richards, Schache & Young. These are possibly going to be the Hamling, Stevens & Hrovat of our strong list depth. If we could offload the circa $900,000 of Walis & JJ combined maybe we keep the younger guys.

Well...the problem is they wont go 'HARD'. Because they aren't playing. So they will offer 3/5'ths of 1/3rd of nothing and we'll probably have to take it.

Each of those players - with the exception of Lipinski who is getting opportunity - should be looking to move on. And we should probably facilitate it.

[Scraggers]

Re: 2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

I’m not explicitly saying get rid of him. I’m saying let’s have his manager shop Mitch around. If say North offered three years and $400,000 for example and Mitch’s manager wanted something close, I’d not match it. That’s Mitch exercising his free agency rights. This is his last good years/dollars contract, so i have no issue with him leaving for more years and more money, we get a compo pick. We did something similar with Dahl where his manager said Geelong were offering more years and money. He left which was a good result for him and us (points for West). If Mitch says he’s happy with one year extensions on average salary, that’s another conversation.

Thanks BT ... my comment isn't solely based around your suggestion or this thread, it has been discussed in other threads and I just don't understand the thought process behind it.

[Bornadog]

Re: 2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

No. We just move the list structure to have two less rookies, and two more primary spots. As was our custom prior to the changes last year.

You need to re-check that

Rookies are: Hayes, Cavarra, Roarke and Sweet with Buku Cat B

[comrade]

Re: 2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

Richards has played about 90% of the games he’s been available for, he’s had plenty of opportunity even when his form didn’t warrant it.

[Axe Man]

Re: 2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

You need to re-check that

Rookies are: Hayes, Cavarra, Roarke and Sweet with Buku Cat B

Um there is a mythical source of this information that will reveal Gardner and McNeil are also rookies. Don't doubt BT.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: 2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

Thanks BT ... my comment isn't solely based around your suggestion or this thread, it has been discussed in other threads and I just don't understand the thought process behind it.

That’s why woof is good. There’s opposite arguments to make in a discussion around the list. Dealing with a contract for Wally isn’t my highest priority. It’s nothing against him, but we need to open up spots and get back into the draft, and Wally is a free agent.

[Bornadog]

Re: 2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

Um there is a mythical source of this information that will reveal Gardner and McNeil are also rookies. Don't doubt BT.

6 rookies? plus Buku

What about Scott?

[Axe Man]

Re: 2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

6 rookies? plus Buku

What about Scott?

Yes 6 category A rookies and 1 category B rookie. You can have 4, 5 or 6 category A rookies and reduce your primary list accordingly if you have 5 or 6.

Scott took Lloyd's spot on the primary list as an SSP signing. Also, simply as a process of elimination he couldn't be a rookie as we already had the maximum 6 category A rookies when we signed him.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: 2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

Looking at the article recently posted here on Sam Darcy being potential top 20. Imagine if he goes around Pick 30, if Raak hypothetically passes the MSD and goes passed 20 and if Macca and another NGA kid are late pick possibles. Plus if our first rounder was a part in some sense to get McAsey (or similar). Then we are needing with more seriousness to get back into the draft to accumulate draft points.

[Topdog]

Re: 2021 Rolling List Management Discussion

Thanks BT ... my comment isn't solely based around your suggestion or this thread, it has been discussed in other threads and I just don't understand the thought process behind it.

because we only have 42 spots on the list and have to think about both now and the future, there is very little room for sentiment.