2022 List management, trading, drafting

[MattW]

Okay if Melican is staying as Kinnear is indicating then I’m not really sure why we are after Francis unless we think he can supplant one of our current tall defenders.

Unless they're thinking of trying Paddy forward...

[bloodspirit]

Okay if Melican is staying as Kinnear is indicating then I’m not really sure why we are after Francis unless we think he can supplant one of our current tall defenders.

Maybe we want to be able to move one of our talls who is currently playing down back forward after Buddy leaves (or if Buddy is injured)? Plus maybe we think Francis is an upgrade on Melican and a better prospect looking further down the track. Also, fits with the idea that we're not so enamoured of the talls in this year's draft crop and so we are looking for more mature talent? Anyway I like the idea of having a really good backline in the VFL next year!

- - - Updated - - -

Unless they're thinking of trying Paddy forward...

Jinx!

[Auntie.Gerald]

I suspect that we are not moving Paddy into the forward line.

We may not even see Francis in the top22 immediately

We have Buddy and Reid who could go down thru injury and then we have an extra tall in Francis to provide us flexibility if required.

But just like Paddy...if the skills sets are there and the contract is minimal then a 193cm tall that has great closing speed and a super strong intercept mark and some decent AFL experience is available then you enquire.

Francis also gives us a lot of flexibility on draft night and or how we handle our draft picks today.

I can see how frustrated Kinnear is because leaving it late with Francis is stuffing up what we could do with our two first round picks.

[Auntie.Gerald]

Ps I know any time over the years I have mentioned Geelongs strategy regarding recruitment my comments are met with quite fierce opposition.

But should Ollie Henry join Geelong, the Cats will have brought in three former top-20 draft picks and another with its first-round selection in this year’s draft.

I must say that is a A+ effort once again by the Cats.

In a year that they dominated they have increased the probability of 2023 success and it could be argued all other contenders have not advanced as much for 2023 besides the Tigers.

Is this a concern for us that a GF winning team and a team that clearly won the most games has found a significant amount of Cap space to advance their recruitment and we have not ?

Would it be fair to say we have not kept up in recruitment via trades heading into 2023 and that Geelong has jumped ahead again in trading in players?

[Ruck'n'Roll]

And none of his trades have made the bombers better.

Which is strange because every off season it's announced that the Don's have "won" trade week. ????

[KTigers]

He sure wasn't! That was hilarious.

Dodoro feels like the mynah bird of recruiters, determined to pick a fight even when one isn't necessary. At what point does he acknowledge he's playing with blokes' lives?

Steady on. I know mynah's can be pretty annoying but putting them in the same sentence as that doofus. That's a bit
harsh man.

[Roadrunner]

Ps I know any time over the years I have mentioned Geelongs strategy regarding recruitment my comments are met with quite fierce opposition.

But should Ollie Henry join Geelong, the Cats will have brought in three former top-20 draft picks and another with its first-round selection in this year’s draft.

I must say that is a A+ effort once again by the Cats.

In a year that they dominated they have increased the probability of 2023 success and it could be argued all other contenders have not advanced as much for 2023 besides the Tigers.

Is this a concern for us that a GF winning team and a team that clearly won the most games has found a significant amount of Cap space to advance their recruitment and we have not ?

Would it be fair to say we have not kept up in recruitment via trades heading into 2023 and that Geelong has jumped ahead again in trading in players?

They recruit well and somehow have an elastic cap- they would recruit a few more but they don’t want to make things too obvious!

As good as they were this year, we have a young team with plenty of upside. Let’s disregard the GF as we hardly fired a shot ( for whatever reasons). We are not quite there yet and it may take another 1-2 years of building but we’re much closer than that last game. I’m confident we can go toe to toe with them next year.

[Foreign Legion]

The more I think about it, the happier I am that we did not entertain trading for Dustin Martin. To a lesser degree the same thing happened with Joe Daniher.

I think Martin is only about 60/40 to play out his contract. He seems to be getting injured more which is understandable at his age and playing style.

[Dow]

Ps I know any time over the years I have mentioned Geelongs strategy regarding recruitment my comments are met with quite fierce opposition.

But should Ollie Henry join Geelong, the Cats will have brought in three former top-20 draft picks and another with its first-round selection in this year’s draft.

I must say that is a A+ effort once again by the Cats.

In a year that they dominated they have increased the probability of 2023 success and it could be argued all other contenders have not advanced as much for 2023 besides the Tigers.

Is this a concern for us that a GF winning team and a team that clearly won the most games has found a significant amount of Cap space to advance their recruitment and we have not ?

Would it be fair to say we have not kept up in recruitment via trades heading into 2023 and that Geelong has jumped ahead again in trading in players?

We aren’t Geelong, we don’t have the same pull they do. So we can’t employ the same list building strategy’s they do. It’s really that simple (ps I alway love reading your theories ????????)

[Markwebbos]

See they are now wanting Francis to chat with Scott in the hope of averting the trade. Ffs

Essendon confirms Weideman pursuit, want Scott to speak with wantaway defender

[i'm-uninformed2]

After hearing Beatson today, I will have to walk back my drafting strategy for the year. Beatson doesn't seem to rate our part of the draft too highly, especially regarding KPPs. Things look different in real life than they do on Cal Twomey's ratings sheet. Beatson even mentioned the possibility of trading one of our first rounders into next year's draft.

Assuming Francis comes in and Melican stays, we have a full complement of players across the board, and there's no great urgency to fill any particular position, especially if we are not all that keen on the selection of players available.

So for such a busy year in player movement, we remain oh so quiet. No need to follow the herd. It's another sign of confidence in our current list.

I've seen a few draft observers say that the two years of limited junior football during to COVID is likely to have its strongest effect in this year's draft, and that after the top five or six, it falls away and is more comparable to the 2016 draft, which had little elite talent. The view is next year's draft has a lot more top end talent, including KPPs - though there is always a little bit of a 'grass is greener' view of future drafts.

[gloveski]

Ps I know any time over the years I have mentioned Geelongs strategy regarding recruitment my comments are met with quite fierce opposition.

But should Ollie Henry join Geelong, the Cats will have brought in three former top-20 draft picks and another with its first-round selection in this year’s draft.

I must say that is a A+ effort once again by the Cats.

In a year that they dominated they have increased the probability of 2023 success and it could be argued all other contenders have not advanced as much for 2023 besides the Tigers.

Is this a concern for us that a GF winning team and a team that clearly won the most games has found a significant amount of Cap space to advance their recruitment and we have not ?

Would it be fair to say we have not kept up in recruitment via trades heading into 2023 and that Geelong has jumped ahead again in trading in players?

Great post , without knowing the full details of what extra funds per say are allowed outside the cap and I’m pretty sure the AFL keep this a grey area deliberately bit like the magic herbs and spices mix that compensation picks are. The AFL are making a mockery of equalisation and it’s now arguably heading back to the pre draft days . The better run clubs/richer clubs will dominate for years to come as they either have ways and means to add extra incentives outside the cap or can peddle their culture / well run club off the field etc as a way of enticing players .
It’s a mess and now for Geelong to get Bowes and pick 7 to take on his large salary and then able to smooth it out over x amount of years is laughable . Bowes has already had his contracts back ended by Gold Coast so they could keep other players . Now he is going to do the same again at another club . He is either the nicest guy in football or he is getting kick backs in other ways . For the AFL to also allow pick 7 to be apart of the deal is a joke , fair enough if his salary for the next 2 years stayed the same but for it to be able to be kicked down the road is absolute rubbish . No wonder the crowds are dropping off , young kids are not going to support clubs that are just feeder clubs for others . They have their favourite players and watch them continually leave . They simply find another sport


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KSAS]

I know this may be too simplistic, but I'm of the view all AFL contracts must be adhered to fully as it was originally signed with no re-negotiations allowed. Same as what AFL enforced with our 9 year Buddy contract, leaving no wriggle room.

The full ramifications of that contract in relation to the salary cap must be realised by both the club and player, even when player has been traded to another club whilst under contract ($$$ terms of contract still cannot be altered, when former club agrees to continue to pay portion of player's contract as part of the trade ). Current situation with Grundy & Bowes contract terms being lowered simply cannot be allowed.

I believe this will have a positive impact in the following ways:
- Clubs thinking twice about locking away players on long term deals.
- Clubs thinking twice about luring players from other clubs by throwing big $$$$
- Players not being pressured to alter their existing contracts in order to free up cap space.

The list management pain Collingwood had endured must be a consequence for ALL clubs who take on these risks. Which is why it's imperative the AFL is actively diligent in investigating & penalising clubs who are doing shifty side deals in order to get around these constraints.

[111431]

I know this may be too simplistic, but I'm of the view all AFL contracts must be adhered to fully as it was originally signed with no re-negotiations allowed. Same as what AFL enforced with our 9 year Buddy contract, leaving no wriggle room.

The full ramifications of that contract in relation to the salary cap must be realised by both the club and player, even when player has been traded to another club whilst under contract ($$$ terms of contract still cannot be altered, when former club agrees to continue to pay portion of player's contract as part of the trade ). Current situation with Grundy & Bowes contract terms being lowered simply cannot be allowed.

I believe this will have a positive impact in the following ways:
- Clubs thinking twice about locking away players on long term deals.
- Clubs thinking twice about luring players from other clubs by throwing big $$$$
- Players not being pressured to alter their existing contracts in order to free up cap space.

The list management pain Collingwood had endured must be a consequence for ALL clubs who take on these risks. Which is why it's imperative the AFL is actively diligent in investigating & penalising clubs who are doing shifty side deals in order to get around these constraints.

I agree with these thoughts otherwise the so called 'contracts' are nothing but some form of loose commitment to have a relationship as long as it is convenient for both parties. The shopping of contracted players cannot be allowed to continue otherwise the the so called AFL Socialism policy is destroyed and we are on the path to becoming the EPL

[waswan]

Contracts should stay like in the US thats why Bowes was coupled with Pick 7. To later be able to vary that contract makes a mockery of the trade

The most immediate change that needs to be made is scaled contracts based on years in the system, no way in the world Bowes should have been able to demand 800k

Like anything in life, if these 2 expansion teams can only survive on subsidies the AFL has serious issues