The List (2024 player movements / list updates / contract discussions)

[inxs88]

Nick Haynes had 32 possessions and 12 marks for GWS Reserves last week and despite being 32 years old, would be a handy 35-50 game recruit that could shore up our defence and keep us in the window. FREE AGENT too.

[Pies2016]

I’m sure this won’t improve anyones mood on here but I’m watching the U18 championships marquee game between Vic metro and Vic country. Easily the best quality U18 game I’ve seen in the championships over a number of years. Not CURRENTLY having a first round pick in the upcoming draft is a real kick in the guts. We’re looking at the perfect storm of no draft picks in a quality year of talent.
I just wonder if the club is seriously considering trading out a best 18 player in order to buy back into this draft. I’m not looking to turn this into a witch hunt of players but the challenge ahead for the club to both improve in the short term and build for the long term may well be Wright and co greatest challenge yet. Any ( as of yet to be confirmed ) changes to draft rules may either be the making or the breaking of our upcoming trade and period. Buckle up !

[The Black and White Lion]

Yep Pies 2016 so right. Looks a good game. So much talent on display. Tough and skillful mids and talls with agility.

Like the look of Vic Country's mid/fwd small Joe Berry, mid Jasper Alger, KF Jack Whitlock, Vic Metro's KF Thomas Sims and HF Harry Armstrong.

Hopefully one of these fall through to our current Pick 26 given the draft power rankings and early mock drafts have only Jack Whitlock from that list in the top 20

[Mr Miyagi]

Fact is you're never going to have a good season when you’ve used 40 players on your list by July. Majority through injury though, nothing to do with the quality of our list. We were two players short of winning the past couple of weeks, honestly think we would have beaten Essendon with Cox and Elliot, Geelong with Howe and Checkers.

[RudeBoy]

My concern is that despite debuting several new players this year, only Richards looks like he has a future with us. Of the others, in Dean, Sullivan, Bytel and Allan, neither has shown much at all, although Sullivan is useful to provide some midfield depth, but is unlikely to ever be in our best 23. Harrison is showing some good signs, but let's face it, he's been on our list for 2-3 yrs now.

I had great expectations for Allan, but he has failed to impress so far, but maybe give him one more year before judging his worth. I must say, I'm not a fan of McInnes, but certainly, in the absence of Checkers and Cox, we need him for now.

Last year we added Frampton, Mitchell, Hill and Markov, who all went on to become Premiership players for us. This year we've added Schultz (a tad disappointing so far), Richards (quite impressive), Bytel and Sullivan. Of these, the latter 2 are really only VFL standard imo.

[Jen2310]

M^

FWIW Allan is contracted until 2026 after we extended his contract early last year.
they view him as a long term prospect given his build. Some will just take extra time.

We didn't add Richards 'this year" he's been on the list for 2 years.

[The Black and White Lion]

I would accept a trade for Allen this year. His build looks like a permanent problem to me. Skinny through the hips and his running gait has his knees pointed to the middle. He’s got a high centre of gravity and is too easily pushed off centre in the contest. That is why he rarely wins a contested ball.

With his frame he needs to be out in space and free to run. I don’t understand which part of Fly’s game he fits into. I will be very happy to be proven wrong and he goes on to emerge as a good player but IMO he’s going to be another draft flop.

Our list needs major surgery going forward. Stuff sentiment it’s past the time for being soft and time the tough decisions were taken so the list can evolve. Young players need game time to play learn and come of age. Most players aren’t Naicos and hit it consistently from game 1.

The frank words that need to be had with every player 30 and over are that there is a ceiling and if the vets keep playing, that level prevents the next generation from coming through taking opportunities for younger players in the AFL and reserve players at VFL level.

The last thing on my mind re the list is that maybe Fly Wright and Hine aren’t on the same page this year. We needed an experienced strong body ruck at the MSD but instead we took a long term prospect. Fly’s rhetoric in the media has always been about the now this year, I think he was having some regrets after the Cats game with those new words about looking for the future.

[Pies2016]

^^^
I imagine the theory behind picking Smit instead of a mature age ruckman, was that he would have been selected in the 2024 N D, quite possibly by us anyway. The club would be conscious of such a poor draft hand ( currently ) and the thinking would be let’s add him now and then we can invest elsewhere at the N D. We could have selected Teakle ( example only and a player who was still available when we picked Smit ) and by round 20, have Cox back and Teakle not getting a game for the rest of the season, subject to injuries. They obviously think Smit has plenty of upside or they wouldn’t have picked him in the first place and to be fair, he’s shown some promising ruck attributes for someone so young. The other point to consider is that we may already have a ruckman lined up during the upcoming trade period, so sometimes you got to sacrifice the short term needs for the big picture gain.

[The Black and White Lion]

^^^
Yeah all fair points. But to trade out of a strong we need draft capital, not just cash from retiring players.

If you mean Lobb or equivalent, I don’t want to be giving overs for a player under contract. We continually do that and have always been behind in trading since the DeGoey Crisp deal.

[lazzadesilva]

^^^^i

I think it’s a forum given that we are all only speculating about what should happen without ever knowing the actual workings of the club. I have always been very skeptical of the posters here who claim to be “in the know” but then tell us nothing

[MatthewBoydFanClub]

[quote="lazzadesilva"]^^^^i

I think it’s a forum given that we are all only speculating about what should happen without ever knowing the actual workings of the club. I have always been very skeptical of the posters here who claim to be “in the know” but then tell us nothing

[Pies2016]

^^^
Yeah all fair points. But to trade out of a strong we need draft capital, not just cash from retiring players.

If you mean Lobb or equivalent, I don’t want to be giving overs for a player under contract. We continually do that and have always been behind in trading since the DeGoey Crisp deal.

If you had to pick one position that historically hasn’t required trading overs to improve on, it’s probably ruck. There’s generally a ruck merry go round at the end of the season because the second ruckman isn’t getting a go at his parent club. It’s understandable these guys want to go elsewhere for opportunity and the trade generally isn’t worth much because they aren’t playing senior footy. This year, Meek and Sweet are both examples of ruckmen who were moved on for not much and are playing good footy for their new clubs. Darcy Cameron cost us almost nothing also, so I would hope the plan isn’t to invest too heavily on a position that historically doesn’t require it.
Lobb would now cost a bit in trade value because 1) he’s contracted and 2 ) he’s now playing good footy in their backline. We had more chance of a “ bargain “ when he was playing VFL footy, wanted out and the Dogs couldn’t justify a high trade return for a VFL player. If Cox goes around again, that would leave Smit, Steene and maybe Begg, all with another year of development in VFL. If Cox retires at end of this year, I would think another plug and play ruck would be a priority, albeit for a nominal trade investment.

[MatthewBoydFanClub]

^

That's all we need. Another 30 year old ruckman who can play in the backline. When are we going to learn we need to draft young players through the national draft and not sacrifice high draft picks for players we don't need? Be thankful got lucky with TJ and Smit, but only because they were in Hawthorn's development program and were available for us to pick. We could now have a 10 year ruck combination with Smit and Steene because at this early stage they appear to compliment each other. Why go through the free agency path? We got a young Bobby Hill for a second round draft from GWS. That is good trading. We handed Freemantle a first round draft for a hard nosed 26yo small forward from Freemantle. Where did that get us? If we trade for Lobb, our club has completely lost the plot.

[Pies2016]

^^^
Where did anyone say we SHOULD trade for Lobb ?
Far from it. The point is more that younger ruckman ( but still ready to go ) are usually around. Just look at the roles Meek and Sweet ( he’s pushed Soldo out ) have played for their new clubs for minimal trades.

[lazzadesilva]

^

You make some good points but if you look at it logically, I would say that all clubs lament making wrong decisions and choices in drafts. It’s always been an imperfect science in which blind luck plays as much of a role than recruiters. Years ago fans blamed the club for recruiting Danny Roach but he hurt his knee in his first or second game and unfortunately couldn’t get it right. If not for that, he would have been an absolute gun for us. Out of many others I can also think of Graham Reichnan, Mark Orval and Sean Rustling. So bad choices and bad luck injuries affect decisions at all clubs.