30 minutes ago, monoccular said:

2 casey upgrades - please explain.

Who?   How?  Can't 'upgrade' from the VFL, need to go via the open draft as I understand.

nah, no special process, I just meant a couple of blokes from casey we could put on our list, wuold need to be via the draft I guess although i'd be hopeful of using late picks

4 hours ago, Fat Tony said:

I would like to see us try and talk Waite into a comeback. He's still got it and would be a good short-term option if Hogan leaves.

Would rather keep Pedo.

I think Casey upgrade mean support the progress by selecting a Casey VFL player in the national draft. It makes sense if there’s a quality youngster available    

Jay Lockhart, Corey Wagner, and Mitch Lewis all definitely worthy of a late draft pick.

Unfortunately no Fritsch gold but some rough and ready types to provide depth and potential.  

2 hours ago, Danelska said:

because you're a nice sympathetic bloke?

Oh you know, might be a quirking idea to keep someone we’ve put a lot of time into developing as a one on one defender as a rookie and like, hmmm avoid MORE list turnover. Just a thought though, don’t let it get in the way of the spring clean out attitude. 

You’re all just idiots if you think culling the list is a surefire way for success. 

Now I may be missing something but I do not understand what is going on with the club this trade/draft period.

With the de-listing of Dion Johnstone it means we have 8 open spaces on the list at the moment. There is talk about Hogan, VDB, Tyson and Kent moving off the other clubs. If just two of these move, then it will mean we have 10 spots to fill and picks 33, 43, 51 & 87. We have asked if we could trade next year’s first round as well.

These figures just do not add up. 10 spaces and 4 picks between 33 and 87. If, say, Kent and VDB move we may get back a second and third rounder at best.

The holes are not going to be filled by free agents knocking the door down. The ones that are out there look to be committed, and not to us.

If Hogan does not move and get us a couple of early first round selections, we are in trouble. We would not have the currency to look at trading for others such as May. We may pick up KK (sorry do not know to spell his name let alone say it) but from where we sit now, that would be it.

10 spaces to fill and a hand full of chook feed to do it with.

Looking at this I would say that we are very pro moving Hogan on to Freo.

1 hour ago, Wolfturdo said:

You’re all just idiots if you think culling the list is a surefire way for success. 

I love those leaps you make, Wolfy. Who said it was a surefire to success?

2 hours ago, CHF said:

Now I may be missing something but I do not understand what is going on with the club this trade/draft period.

With the de-listing of Dion Johnstone it means we have 8 open spaces on the list at the moment. There is talk about Hogan, VDB, Tyson and Kent moving off the other clubs. If just two of these move, then it will mean we have 10 spots to fill and picks 33, 43, 51 & 87. We have asked if we could trade next year’s first round as well.

These figures just do not add up. 10 spaces and 4 picks between 33 and 87. If, say, Kent and VDB move we may get back a second and third rounder at best.

The holes are not going to be filled by free agents knocking the door down. The ones that are out there look to be committed, and not to us.

If Hogan does not move and get us a couple of early first round selections, we are in trouble. We would not have the currency to look at trading for others such as May. We may pick up KK (sorry do not know to spell his name let alone say it) but from where we sit now, that would be it.

10 spaces to fill and a hand full of chook feed to do it with.

Looking at this I would say that we are very pro moving Hogan on to Freo.

7 main list and 1 rookie list spot open right now. 

Trade player out for at least 1 player in. Hogan for May. Vanders for KK. Tyson for Preuss. Kent for someone like Lonie, Colyer or Gregson.

It very much seems like we plan on grabbing a few extra assets in the trade period and a Hogan deal is a big part of that. I'm not sure what those assets will be, it might be more current AFL players, state league players via deal with the Suns or more picks. Or we might end up keeping Vanders and/or Tyson and using extra picks to get players we want.

Worse case scenario though the 8 list spots can be filled:

- 3 useful draft picks between picks 33 and 50
- 1 very late round speculative pick or PSD pick
- 1 or 2 delisted players
- 1 rookie pick up
- Extra rookie picks +/- promoting current rookies 

From the current delistings 5 were young guys who never played (Balic, McKenna, Flipper, King, DJ). So we can replace them with 5 more young guys. 3 were experienced guys who did play a fair bit - Bugg, Vince, Pedda - so we find 3 more experienced replacements for them.

7 hours ago, layzie said:

Oh you know, might be a quirking idea to keep someone we’ve put a lot of time into developing as a one on one defender as a rookie and like, hmmm avoid MORE list turnover. Just a thought though, don’t let it get in the way of the spring clean out attitude. 

There is no point keeping him when the FD have decided he's not good enough just to avoid further list changes

7 hours ago, Wolfturdo said:

You’re all just idiots if you think culling the list is a surefire way for success. 

A much surer way to success is to keep players who are not up it ?

8 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Worse case scenario though the 8 list spots can be filled:

- 3 useful draft picks between picks 33 and 50
- 1 very late round speculative pick or PSD pick
- 1 or 2 delisted players
- 1 rookie pick up
- Extra rookie picks +/- promoting current rookies 

 From the current delistings 5 were young guys who never played (Balic, McKenna, Flipper, King, DJ). So we can replace them with 5 more young guys. 3 were experienced guys who did play a fair bit - Bugg, Vince, Pedda - so we find 3 more experienced replacements for them.

I read the Swans delisted Dean Towers. Is he worth a look as a replacement for someone like a Pedersen? Mainly used as a utility at Sydney and will be 29 next year. 

11 hours ago, CHF said:

Now I may be missing something but I do not understand what is going on with the club this trade/draft period.

With the de-listing of Dion Johnstone it means we have 8 open spaces on the list at the moment. There is talk about Hogan, VDB, Tyson and Kent moving off the other clubs. If just two of these move, then it will mean we have 10 spots to fill and picks 33, 43, 51 & 87. We have asked if we could trade next year’s first round as well.

These figures just do not add up. 10 spaces and 4 picks between 33 and 87. If, say, Kent and VDB move we may get back a second and third rounder at best.

The holes are not going to be filled by free agents knocking the door down. The ones that are out there look to be committed, and not to us.

If Hogan does not move and get us a couple of early first round selections, we are in trouble. We would not have the currency to look at trading for others such as May. We may pick up KK (sorry do not know to spell his name let alone say it) but from where we sit now, that would be it.

10 spaces to fill and a hand full of chook feed to do it with.

Looking at this I would say that we are very pro moving Hogan on to Freo.

The issue is that we didn't make enough list changes at the end of 2016 and 2017, which has culminated in a mass cull this year. To not take any rookies last year was inexcusable, as was having just two draft picks in 2016.

I said at the start of this year that we would probably have ten list changes, and at this stage there could be another eight next year (Lewis, Kennedy-Harris, Maynard, T.Smith, Keilty, and Garlett plus any trades).

22 minutes ago, Dee Zephyr said:

I read the Swans delisted Dean Towers. Is he worth a look as a replacement for someone like a Pedersen? Mainly used as a utility at Sydney and will be 29 next year. 

No

33 minutes ago, poita said:

The issue is that we didn't make enough list changes at the end of 2016 and 2017, which has culminated in a mass cull this year. To not take any rookies last year was inexcusable, as was having just two draft picks in 2016.

I said at the start of this year that we would probably have ten list changes, and at this stage there could be another eight next year (Lewis, Kennedy-Harris, Maynard, T.Smith, Keilty, and Garlett plus any trades).

Posted this earier in the thread but looks like it's worth a repeat ...

A lot of discussion about perceived large list changes.  Here's the numbers from last year:

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.triplem.com.au/sport/afl/news/2017-afl-retirements-and-delistings/amp

Adelaide 8. Brisbane 12. Carlton 13. Collingwood 8. Essendon 8. Fremantle 12. Geelong 7. Gold Coast 12. GWS 8. Hawthorn 8. Melbourne 8. North 8. Port 11. Richmond 7. Saints 8. Sydney 8. West Coast 12. Dogs 9.

8 is the magic number, minimum is two 7s.  Our projected number of around 10 is not an outlier.  WC 12 and in the GF

Edited October 5, 20186 yr by Fifty-5

36 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

Posted this earier in the thread but looks like it's worth a repeat ...

A lot of discussion about perceived large list changes.  Here's the numbers from last year:

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.triplem.com.au/sport/afl/news/2017-afl-retirements-and-delistings/amp

Adelaide 8. Brisbane 12. Carlton 13. Collingwood 8. Essendon 8. Fremantle 12. Geelong 7. Gold Coast 12. GWS 8. Hawthorn 8. Melbourne 8. North 8. Port 11. Richmond 7. Saints 8. Sydney 8. West Coast 12. Dogs 9.

8 is the magic number, minimum is two 7s.  Our projected number of around 10 is not an outlier.  WC 12 and in the GF

@Wolfturdothinks every list manager in the AFL is an idiot.

5 hours ago, DavidNeitz9 said:

There is no point keeping him when the FD have decided he's not good enough just to avoid further list changes

Well they do know best at the end of the day. Personally thought there might have been enough for a rookie spot but that's an armchair opinion. 

Edited October 5, 20186 yr by layzie

5 hours ago, DavidNeitz9 said:

There is no point keeping him when the FD have decided he's not good enough just to avoid further list changes

That's fine but you have to admit this is a massive turnover for a team that finished in the last 4. This line makes perfect sense if we were a bottom 4 or even an outside the 8 team but a bit unprecedented for a young side on the rise. If it gets to 10 spots to fill that is quite a lot to be topping up with draft and guys off the street. 

What do you propose we do to fill these spots left by people who were considered project players? Draft new? Look for mature age guys in the VFL? 

3 minutes ago, Sadler said:

That's fine but you have to admit this is a massive turnover for a team that finished in the last 4. This line makes perfect sense if we were a bottom 4 or even an outside the 8 team but a bit unprecedented for a young side on the rise. If it gets to 10 spots to fill that is quite a lot to be topping up with draft and guys off the street. 

What do you propose we do to fill these spots left by people who were considered project players? Draft new? Look for mature age guys in the VFL? 

West Coast 12 changes end of 2017 = Premiership 2018 ???

23 hours ago, SFebes said:

His brain fade in the pre-lim wouldn't have helped but I think he was a long shot anyway, thanks and seeya.

I think he might get rookied... my opinion anyway.

Interesting that we are now a destination club, but we don't seem able to take advantage of it and get a FA, well at least not so far.

2 hours ago, Redleg said:

Interesting that we are now a destination club, but we don't seem able to take advantage of it and get a FA, well at least not so far.

Maybe we just don't want to sell the farm.

5 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Maybe we just don't want to sell the farm.

Is it selling the farm to pay what others offer if it costs you nothing to get a top player? I understand there is a cap, but other clubs seem to manage or are true destination clubs.

6 hours ago, Sadler said:

That's fine but you have to admit this is a massive turnover for a team that finished in the last 4. This line makes perfect sense if we were a bottom 4 or even an outside the 8 team but a bit unprecedented for a young side on the rise. If it gets to 10 spots to fill that is quite a lot to be topping up with draft and guys off the street. 

What do you propose we do to fill these spots left by people who were considered project players? Draft new? Look for mature age guys in the VFL? 

Based on the stats quoted in an earlier post this is not a massive turnover, it is about middle of the road. A big part of this is a cull of several players who never played and were just taking up space, from a list management perspective. AVB and Tyson are different and will be traded for picks or another player. 

What interests me is what the FD are thinking. I am certain none of this is a surprise, it is quite intentional. There is a very concrete plan for 'balancing our list' as Mahoney put it in his interview. Obviously KK and Preuss are part of it, I'm not hearing anything else except the May rumours, which I can only assume rely on a Hogan trade. Surely there is something in the works for a running midfielder of the likes of Gaff and Dalhaus who are clearly sent getting. 

11 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

West Coast 12 changes end of 2017 = Premiership 2018 ???

That’s great but it’s one example.

I love it how one example always gets used as the be all and end all to an argument. Critical mass is what I want. How many list changes did the last 10 premiership teams have? 

@Fifty-5 has shown that many teams have had multiple list changes and that 8 is actually closer to the average. West Coast is merely an example of many list changes failing to prevent success.

What are you looking for? Are you simply looking to criticise the FD?

The stats cited provide enough evidence to suggest 11 list changes are not destabilising. That's no excuse for not showing improvement next year, unless you're looking for an excuse, @Sadler?

Edited October 5, 20186 yr by A F