A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

**Go_Dogs** · 28-04-2024, 09:08 AM

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Sorry BT, but no way you trade Bont.

If he gets jack of it and wants to leave (doubt he will, but we need to focus on getting his buy-in to whatever we end up peddling at years end) then maybe. No way he’d go to GC though. If he left it would be to a team competing at the pointy end and a chance to play in a flag. Cats or Swans would be the sides to get it done.

I also kind of think Bevo is right. In this competition you don’t rebuild because you end up like North.

There are no guarantees that draft picks turn into good players and even if they do, doesn’t mean they stay fit and healthy (or stay at all).

If we get a chance to have another early first round pick we need a future elite midfielder with some pace and we need to continue trying to turn players over faster and drafting for the right attributes in the areas we need.

I get it - we’re reaching a point where the ceiling of current senior players is what it is, but we’re also making changes to the composition of our 22 in response and our list refresh with valuing dynamic players and those with high level athletic traits in underway (too late perhaps, but we’ve started and our depth in keys was the cost but gee, good problem to have).

**angelopetraglia** · 28-04-2024, 09:10 AM

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Did you catch the interview with Bolton the radio over the weekend? It was an interesting listen.

He spoke about what he had learned from his time at Calrton. The number #1 thing was that they cut too hard, too fast and it was a massive mistake. He said it was professional suicicde. He said that you need senior players to provide leadership and we are too quick to retire players over the age of 30. He cited Collingwood and Geelong as examples that kept the older experienced players around.

Thinking that the path to success is chasing first round draft picks via trading out experienced talent is dangerous territory. How many first round picks has North got on their list? How many first round picks do Gold Coast have?

Also, under no circumstance do you trade Bont. Ever. He is more than just a player to this club.

**bulldogtragic** · 28-04-2024, 09:14 AM

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Originally posted by Go_Dogs

Sorry BT, but no way you trade Bont.

If he gets jack of it and wants to leave (doubt he will, but we need to focus on getting his buy-in to whatever we end up peddling at years end) then maybe. No way he’d go to GC though. If he left it would be to a team competing at the pointy end and a chance to play in a flag. Cats or Swans would be the sides to get it done.

I also kind of think Bevo is right. In this competition you don’t rebuild because you end up like North.

There are no guarantees that draft picks turn into good players and even if they do, doesn’t mean they stay fit and healthy (or stay at all).

If we get a chance to have another early first round pick we need a future elite midfielder with some pace and we need to continue trying to turn players over faster and drafting for the right attributes in the areas we need.

I get it - we’re reaching a point where the ceiling of current senior players is what it is, but we’re also making changes to the composition of our 22 in response and our list refresh with valuing dynamic players and those with high level athletic traits in underway (too late perhaps, but we’ve started and our depth in keys was the cost but gee, good problem to have).

It’s just conversation. I think there’s an argument Bont makes the list better just in driving standards. The exploration of the flip side is if he gets frustrated (and he’s certainly looking more frustrated with other players on field this year) is if he wanted to explore a trade would we simply say ‘no’ or if a club could offer a Judd like trade (GCS can right now hence I used them) would Bont be worth more in standards or draft capital?

The list is shot. I advocated a shorter and sharper rebuild last year, and the club thought tinkering the list would have us top 4 and they’re wrong again and now we have no draft capital.

We are in a bind. How do we dig ourselves out of it? If we sign English and Smith picks Collingwood, well that’s not helping much.

**bulldogtragic** · 28-04-2024, 09:18 AM

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Originally posted by angelopetraglia

Did you catch the interview with Bolton the radio over the weekend? It was an interesting listen.

He spoke about what he had learned from his time at Calrton. The number #1 thing was that they cut too hard, too fast and it was a massive mistake. He said it was professional suicicde. He said that you need senior players to provide leadership and we are too quick to retire players over the age of 30. He cited Collingwood and Geelong as examples that kept the older experienced players around.

Thinking that the path to success is chasing first round draft picks via trading out experienced talent is dangerous territory. How many first round picks has North got on their list? How many first round picks do Gold Coast have?

Also, under no circumstance do you trade Bont. Ever. He is more than just a player to this club.

I’m only talking about one older player. And not shopping him. But being open to the idea of a trade if that’s something he wants to explore and if it’s mutually beneficial. It’s unsavoury as I’ve said. But I guess something has to give. This group can’t and won’t win a flag and we have bugger all draft capital this year to turn it around. Bont looks a lot more frustrated with team mates this year on field.

**angelopetraglia** · 28-04-2024, 09:27 AM

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

This is the Geelong team who played yesterday and their origin. They had three thirst round picks that they selected playing. The highest was pick #16. They have been the most sustainable successful team of the modern era. They definiltey have not relied on early draft picks. Six rookies on their list too. They must be doing something different in regards to development too. Two high profiles trades in Danger and Cameron who are highly influential and critical to their success.

Miers (Pick #57)
C Guthrie (Pick #23)
Cameron (Traded for the house)
Holmes (Pick #20)
Z Guthrie (Rookie)
Bruhn (Traded, first round pick)
Tuoy (Traded)
Duncan (Pick #28)
Bowes (Traded, salary dump from GC)
Stengle (Delisted free agent)
Dangerfield (Traded picks and a player)
Henry (Pick #16)
Blicavs (Pick #54)
Stanley (Traded)
J Henry (Rookie)
Dempsey (Rookie)
Kolodjashnij (Pick #41)
Hawkins (Father son)
Atkins (Rookie)
Parfitt (Pick #26)
O'Connor (Rookie)
Close (Rookie)
De Koning (Pick #19)

**GVGjr** · 28-04-2024, 09:28 AM

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

First up, I'm not giving up on this years chances after the Fremantle game. They were stung into lifting their performance and we didn't quite grasp our chances.

Now regarding a rebuild: It all depends on how deep the rebuild would need to be and we don't quite know that yet
The focus would be on moving some of the older players out and backing some of our younger guys.
I discussed this the other day with Smads but if there was a mid season trade period now there would be the likes of Melbourne coming hard to take Lobb off our hands. We could probably land a 2nd rounder for him from a team in contention this year.
If Smith and English were to depart then we can rebuild our draft hand.
If we put up a for sales sign on Macrae who could open some salary cap room. Daniel might attract some interest as well.
Keath and Duryea will most likely retire

The list structure is there, a few emerging key defenders in JOD, Busslinger and Croft supported by Richards and Dale.
Key forwards in Naughton, Darcy and Marra supported by Weightman and West and some emerging midfielders like Garcia, Sanders and Gallagher to support Bont, Libba and Treloar.
We also have some decent role players like Gardner, Poulter, Baker, Bramble and Coffield that wouldn't cost us much in cap space but can offer some depth.

I think there is some flexibility to maneuver the list in whatever direction is needed.

**The bulldog tragician** · 28-04-2024, 09:35 AM

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Don’t know about rage BT but more like deep depression. Where my anger comes from is that after 2016 we didn’t contend again strongly. The public comments from Grant et al suggesting we’d got there too early were weird and haven’t worn well with hindsight.

I’ve weathered a lot of things in my supporting time. BUT if Bont ever plays for another club, whether with our “blessing” because we get a supposedly advantageous trade or because he’s sick of our underachievement, I think my connection to our club and the game would be forever broken.

**angelopetraglia** · 28-04-2024, 09:35 AM

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Originally posted by bulldogtragic

I’m only talking about one older player. And not shopping him. But being open to the idea of a trade if that’s something he wants to explore and if it’s mutually beneficial. It’s unsavoury as I’ve said. But I guess something has to give. This group can’t and won’t win a flag and we have bugger all draft capital this year to turn it around. Bont looks a lot more frustrated with team mates this year on field.

Collingwood finished 17th in 2021 and I thought they were gone after just losing the GF in 2018 and a prelim in 2019 and then finishing 8th in 2020. I said, this list can't win a flag.

I said the same thing when Geelong missed the finals last year. Finally it is the end of an era. I said the same thing about the Bulldogs at the end of 2014, I thought we were a decade away. I said the same thing about GWS when Cameron left. They finished 16th and look cooked.

Things are rarely as bad—or as good—as you think they are.

**angelopetraglia** · 28-04-2024, 09:36 AM

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Originally posted by The bulldog tragician

Don’t know about rage BT but more like deep depression. Where my anger comes from is that after 2016 we didn’t contend again strongly. The public comments from Grant et al suggesting we’d got there too early were weird and haven’t worn well with hindsight.

I’ve weathered a lot of things in my supporting time. BUT if Bont ever plays for another club, whether with our “blessing” because we get a supposedly advantageous trade or because he’s sick of our underachievement, I think my connection to our club and the game would be forever broken.

My teenage kids would be heartbroken. Possibily even lost to the game. THEY LOVE BONT.

**bulldogtragic** · 28-04-2024, 09:44 AM

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Originally posted by angelopetraglia

Collingwood finished 17th in 2021 and I thought they were gone after just losing the GF in 2018 and a prelim in 2019 and then finishing 8th in 2020. I said, this list can't win a flag.

I said the same thing when Geelong missed the finals last year. Finally it is the end of an era. I said the same thing about the Bulldogs at the end of 2014, I thought we were a decade away. I said the same thing about GWS when Cameron left. They finished 16th and look cooked.

Things are rarely as bad—or as good—as you think they are.

Geelong are different again. Woods & Giants got new coaches and played a new style. This group, playing they way have have, is absolutely cooked. We need new players like the teams you mentioned got in new players. The biggest fear is we follow the fatally flawed Woods model of paying a handful of players too much and use substandard players to fail around them.

I don’t think the question is about rebuilding, but how.

**azabob** · 28-04-2024, 09:55 AM

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Originally posted by angelopetraglia

My teenage kids would be heartbroken. Possibily even lost to the game. THEY LOVE BONT.

I’d be lost to the game if Bontempelli leaves. Well bloody close.

**Go_Dogs** · 28-04-2024, 09:57 AM

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Originally posted by bulldogtragic

It’s just conversation. I think there’s an argument Bont makes the list better just in driving standards. The exploration of the flip side is if he gets frustrated (and he’s certainly looking more frustrated with other players on field this year) is if he wanted to explore a trade would we simply say ‘no’ or if a club could offer a Judd like trade (GCS can right now hence I used them) would Bont be worth more in standards or draft capital?

The list is shot. I advocated a shorter and sharper rebuild last year, and the club thought tinkering the list would have us top 4 and they’re wrong again and now we have no draft capital.

We are in a bind. How do we dig ourselves out of it? If we sign English and Smith picks Collingwood, well that’s not helping much.

I’m not sure “the list is shot” but it’s certainly in a transition phase. We have a huge amount of draft capital tied up in KPP who are either developing (Marra, Darcy, Buss, Croft) or senior players who aren’t quite delivering as much as we’d hope for but travelling largely OK (Naughton, English) - that’s a lot of our first round picks since 2016 flag.

We’ve got some senior players who are underperforming or who look out of place in the modern game as more dynamic athletic traits are now required rather than an ability to grind all day (Macrae, Daniel - it also relegated Wally to a forward) as if you don’t have a super elite inside game and defensive intent (Libba) it’s becoming harder for these types to play at the elite level week in week out.

We’ve still got a solid to good senior core around these players and can’t understate how much we’re missing Baz around the ball this year (I know he’s had a few years treading water).

Our drafting the last couple of years appears to be focussed on the right attributes but it takes time to transition a list and there’s no magic wand. We need to try and get players like Gags / Sanders etc upto 50 games quickly. And hopefully we get Clarke and Freijah and AOD into the senior side at some point this year and on their way too.

A couple of things we should be doing though:

1. Giving guys with the right attributes AFL time in the right roles when their form warrants it.
2. Turning over the list quicker when we identify players are not quite there - we hold on too long.

What we should not be doing:
1. Fire sale to build draft capital
2. Repeating the same plan with the same players expecting a different result
3. Jumping off players on the upswing after a bad game

**Bornadog** · 28-04-2024, 10:10 AM

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

We have delisted and traded a lot of players over the past few years (despite WOOFERS calling for more). This has resulted in a profile this year where we have 7 to 10 players each week in the 0 to 50 games and only 1 or 2 playing in the 50 to 100 bracket.

If you look at Geelong it is very different.

Geelong game:

Total Players By Games
	Western Bulldogs	Games	Geelong
9	Less than 50	3
1	50 to 99	6
5	100 to 149	6
4	150 to 200	3
4	200 or more	5

They have a fairly good spread of players, although, probably not enough in the 0 to 50.

Last night, even Freo had a better spread of experience, although they lacked players in the 150 to 200.

Total Players By Games
	Fremantle	Games	Western Bulldogs
8	Less than 50	7
7	50 to 99	2
4	100 to 149	5
2	150 to 200	6
2	200 or more	3

Are we playing too many kids? Do we have players that can actually come in with 50 to 100 games behind them?

I think we are relying too much on too few and we don't have the cattle to back them up.

Is this a mini rebuild of sorts, trying to gift young players games, or we just don't have the talent to bring in others.

Of course, this can all be traced back to drafting back in 2020, 2021 because we gave up alot to get Marra and Darcy. The players from those years would now be in the 50 to 100 bracket.

**bulldogtragic** · 28-04-2024, 10:12 AM

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Originally posted by Go_Dogs

I?m not sure ?the list is shot? but it?s certainly in a transition phase. We have a huge amount of draft capital tied up in KPP who are either developing (Marra, Darcy, Buss, Croft) or senior players who aren?t quite delivering as much as we?d hope for but travelling largely OK (Naughton, English) - that?s a lot of our first round picks since 2016 flag.

We?ve got some senior players who are underperforming or who look out of place in the modern game as more dynamic athletic traits are now required rather than an ability to grind all day (Macrae, Daniel - it also relegated Wally to a forward) as if you don?t have a super elite inside game and defensive intent (Libba) it?s becoming harder for these types to play at the elite level week in week out.

We?ve still got a solid to good senior core around these players and can?t understate how much we?re missing Baz around the ball this year (I know he?s had a few years treading water).

Our drafting the last couple of years appears to be focussed on the right attributes but it takes time to transition a list and there?s no magic wand. We need to try and get players like Gags / Sanders etc upto 50 games quickly. And hopefully we get Clarke and Freijah and AOD into the senior side at some point this year and on their way too.

A couple of things we should be doing though:

1. Giving guys with the right attributes AFL time in the right roles when their form warrants it.
2. Turning over the list quicker when we identify players are not quite there - we hold on too long.

What we should not be doing:
1. Fire sale to build draft capital
2. Repeating the same plan with the same players expecting a different result
3. Jumping off players on the upswing after a bad game

Agree with what we should be doing. Thing is we don?t. Even this weekend Garcia was meant to be sub.

With regard to the fire sale. I can only think of Daniel & Macrae that fit my definition of that. What do we do with them?
We keep losing close games. Our million dollar players or wanna be million dollar players don?t dominate last quarters and drag us over the line.
I think everyone gets a mulligan unless it?s a shocking game.

When saying the list is shot. In its current form it won?t win a flag is what I mean. It?s not North like basket case, but it?s not a flag contender or top 4 team like the club keeps saying/thinking/acting like. So in that sense, we need to get players to make us better or just keep being fodder for top 8 teams and anyone who wants to win a close game.

More tinkering of the list is a recipe to times and repeat the last couple of years.

A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment