Delistings and List Regeneration

15. Courtenay Dempsey - Trade to Carlton

http://dempsey.isafreeagent.com

Hilarity aside, you do actually realise you can trade a guy who’s out of contract? See Chapman, Crameri, Cooney, Monfries. You just don’t tend to get as much for them.

It would come down to what the player demands of the new club. If he refused to move under free-agency then it would force a trade.

typically the club currently holding the player gets screwed.

15. Courtenay Dempsey - Trade to Carlton

http://dempsey.isafreeagent.com

Hilarity aside, you do actually realise you can trade a guy who’s out of contract? See Chapman, Crameri, Cooney, Monfries. You just don’t tend to get as much for them.

It would come down to what the player demands of the new club. If he refused to move under free-agency then it would force a trade.

15. Courtenay Dempsey - Trade to Carlton

http://dempsey.isafreeagent.com

Hilarity aside, you do actually realise you can trade a guy who’s out of contract? See Chapman, Crameri, Cooney, Monfries. You just don’t tend to get as much for them.

15. Courtenay Dempsey - Trade to Carlton

http://dempsey.isafreeagent.com

it gets better each time.

  1. Courtenay Dempsey - Trade to Carlton

Oh dear.

15. Courtenay Dempsey - Trade to Carlton

http://dempsey.isafreeagent.com

  1. Michael Hibberd - Keep, but put him on a diet and play him at half back

  2. Tom Bellchambers - Keep, but for farks sake give him a hand with another ruckman.

  3. Paul Chapman - retire with dignity

  4. Jobe Watson - Keep, but give him some support on the inside.

  5. Brent Stanton - Keep, playing good footy and has a couple of years left.

  6. Joe Daniher - Keep, build the team around him and tell him to act like a Daniher.

  7. Zachary Merrett - Keep, nothing to say, kid is a champ

  8. Jason Wimderlich - retire with dignity

  9. Brendan Goddard - same as Stanton

  10. Nick O’Brien - Give him some games in the firsts or sack him

  11. David Zakaharis - Keep, and leave him in the forward line, or best bet at a dangerous small forward.

  12. Mark Baguley - Keep, another champ.

  13. Adam Cooney - retire with dignity

  14. Jason Ashby - Keep, harness his anger and let him loose

  15. Courtenay Dempsey - Trade to Carlton

  16. Tayte Pears - trade to Richmond

  17. Jake Melksham - trade to Port Melbpurne

  18. Michael Hurley - Keep, another Champ, but play him forward

  19. Shaun Edwards - Keep, let him run free

  20. Jackson Merrett - keep, he can play, needs more time

  21. Dyson Heppell - keep, another champ

  22. Jake Carlisle - Keep, but play him back

  23. David Myers - keep, could be a champ

  24. Alex Browne - Keep and play him for 10 games or send him to Ballarat.

  25. Arie

I did write that before the injury news came out....

I get that you said that, but i think we all know its been rock bottom for 2 years. He had 1 good season and just hasn’t capitalised and built on it.

I dont think any club is screaming for more rucks atm. All have at least 1 primary and a Ruck/Fwd option.

Well what we’ve been hearing is that he’s on good coin and being offered more from others. If true, people do rate him (as do I)

I did write that before the injury news came out....

I get that you said that, but i think we all know its been rock bottom for 2 years. He had 1 good season and just hasn’t capitalised and built on it.

I dont think any club is screaming for more rucks atm. All have at least 1 primary and a Ruck/Fwd option.

Btw I find the AFL naming guys who were already free "free agents" if they fit under certain circumstances an interesting bit of double-speak.

You mean, like if they’re good and play for Essendon, the AFL will help them weasel out of the last 3 years of their contracts.

Baguley, Mark - 2015 - 3 year contract
Bellchambers, Tom - 2015 - trade
Browne, Alex - 2015 - rookie list
Carlisle, Jake - 2015 - trade
Chapman, Paul - 2015 - retire
Dalgleish, Lauchlan - 2015 - 2 year contract
Daniher, Joe - 2015 - 4 year contract
Dempsey, Courtenay - 2015 - delist
Fantasia, Orazio - 2015 - 2 year contact
Fletcher, Dustin - 2015 - 1 MORE YEAR
Gwilt, James - 2015 - delist
Hams, Will - 2015 - 3 year contract
Kavanagh, Elliott - 2015 - 2 year contract
Melksham, Jake - 2015 - trade
O’Brien, Nick - 2015 - delist
Pears, Tayte - 2015 - delist
Stanton, Brent - 2015 - 2 year contract
Winderlich, Jason - 2015 - retire

2 retirements
3 trades
1 rookie list
4 delistings
8 players to be signed

Baguley, Mark - 2015 - 3 year contract Bellchambers, Tom - 2015 - trade Browne, Alex - 2015 - rookie list Carlisle, Jake - 2015 - trade Chapman, Paul - 2015 - retire Dalgleish, Lauchlan - 2015 - 2 year contract Daniher, Joe - 2015 - 4 year contract Dempsey, Courtenay - 2015 - delist Fantasia, Orazio - 2015 - 2 year contact Fletcher, Dustin - 2015 - 1 MORE YEAR Gwilt, James - 2015 - delist Hams, Will - 2015 - 3 year contract Kavanagh, Elliott - 2015 - 2 year contract Melksham, Jake - 2015 - trade O'Brien, Nick - 2015 - delist Pears, Tayte - 2015 - delist Stanton, Brent - 2015 - 2 year contract Winderlich, Jason - 2015 - retire

2 retirements
3 trades
1 rookie list
4 delistings
8 players to be signed

McKernan - upgrade
Steinberg - upgrade
McKenna - leave as international rookie. Upgrade mid 2016
Long - leave on rookie list
Aylett - rookie / delist

You’ve opened up 10 list positions in a shallow draft year. Unless Dodoro has some left field players, I can’t see us getting much use out of anything beyond the 3rd round. Say we trade in a pick for each player, realistically it’s going to leave 6 picks in the first 3 rounds. Upgrade 2 rookies and that’s a turnover of 8 senior players.

I don’t see the need to downgrade Browne as he’s as close to AFL ready as you can get. Hams has the potential to be a classier Howlett type player, but I’d be hesitant giving him a long contract due to his injury history. Don’t want another Kommer situation. Gwilt gets another year to provide KPD depth unless we secure Mitch Brown in the draft, but he would be played behind Steinberg where possible.

15. Courtenay Dempsey - Trade to Carlton

http://dempsey.isafreeagent.com

Hilarity aside, you do actually realise you can trade a guy who’s out of contract? See Chapman, Crameri, Cooney, Monfries. You just don’t tend to get as much for them.

Yeah, I know, but we’d end up with a pick in the 50s or something (51 for Monfries, 84 for Chapman), which I don’t think is the result people intend when they say “trade”.
To be pedantic: Crameri wasn’t a free agent which makes it a whole different situation, and Cooney was still under contract.

Not being a free agent doesn’t make it much different. Guys can still walk, they just go in the PSD, and the club they leave doesn’t get any compo. See Tippett, K.

You’re right, but I reckon a non free agent demanding a trade knocks trade value back about 10-15 picks. A free agent knocks it back 30+.
To be pedantic again: Adelaide were banned from receiving anything for Tippett in a trade as part of their sanctions for salary cap infringements.


I would’ve thought the other way around.

A “free agent” ie 8/10 years service leaving will garner you some compo.
An uncontracted, non- “free agent” won’t.
They’re both only going to go to a select few clubs who want them and can fit them in.
Surely you’re going to play hard ball more with the guy you’re getting something for regardless, and settle for a worse offer with the one you’d otherwise get nothing for?

Ie, you’re only going to trade a “free agent” if you’re getting a better offer than the compo pick (or for other reasons, ie messing with existing compo picks).
A guy who’ll walk to the PSD for nothing, well, any offer is better than nothing.

What would be the basis of your thinking it’d be the other way around?

My opinion is largely just based on what happens. Hunt for 75, Chapman for 84, Monfries for 51 compared to Crameri for 26, Mumford for 35. The former are junk picks, the latter are trades made under duress.

You’re right that if you know you’re getting compensation, that puts you in a stronger position. But the other side know that they can get the player for literally nothing. Monfries-esque situtations aside, why would they even sit down at the trade table?

I honestly don’t know why uncontracted players get more (even if it’s less than they’re worth) because you’re right about losing them for nothing. Theoretically going to the PSD runs the risk of being drafted by a different team, but the evidence is that teams simply will not pick players who don’t want to go there. Perhaps clubs are worried about losing players the same way? Maybe they’re just not as ruthless towards each other as I assume? Maybe if the PSD was routinely full of decent quality established AFL players people would start picking them regardless? The fact is that uncontracted players get traded for first and second round picks all the time, while pick 51 is the highest a free agent has garnered (and that was in a situation where Port gained pick 29 by doing so).


The first two were 31+. Cramers, Gus, Mumford were mid 20s. I think that had a lot more to do with it than whether or not they qualified for “free agency”.

Putting senior players on the rookie list can ■■■■ right off.

Signing guys who’ve only played a couple of games to multi year deals/extensions can go with it.

15. Courtenay Dempsey - Trade to Carlton

http://dempsey.isafreeagent.com

Hilarity aside, you do actually realise you can trade a guy who’s out of contract? See Chapman, Crameri, Cooney, Monfries. You just don’t tend to get as much for them.

Yeah, I know, but we’d end up with a pick in the 50s or something (51 for Monfries, 84 for Chapman), which I don’t think is the result people intend when they say “trade”.
To be pedantic: Crameri wasn’t a free agent which makes it a whole different situation, and Cooney was still under contract.

Not being a free agent doesn’t make it much different. Guys can still walk, they just go in the PSD, and the club they leave doesn’t get any compo. See Tippett, K.

You’re right, but I reckon a non free agent demanding a trade knocks trade value back about 10-15 picks. A free agent knocks it back 30+.
To be pedantic again: Adelaide were banned from receiving anything for Tippett in a trade as part of their sanctions for salary cap infringements.


I would’ve thought the other way around.

A “free agent” ie 8/10 years service leaving will garner you some compo.
An uncontracted, non- “free agent” won’t.
They’re both only going to go to a select few clubs who want them and can fit them in.
Surely you’re going to play hard ball more with the guy you’re getting something for regardless, and settle for a worse offer with the one you’d otherwise get nothing for?

Ie, you’re only going to trade a “free agent” if you’re getting a better offer than the compo pick (or for other reasons, ie messing with existing compo picks).
A guy who’ll walk to the PSD for nothing, well, any offer is better than nothing.

What would be the basis of your thinking it’d be the other way around?

My opinion is largely just based on what happens. Hunt for 75, Chapman for 84, Monfries for 51 compared to Crameri for 26, Mumford for 35. The former are junk picks, the latter are trades made under duress.

You’re right that if you know you’re getting compensation, that puts you in a stronger position. But the other side know that they can get the player for literally nothing. Monfries-esque situtations aside, why would they even sit down at the trade table?

I honestly don’t know why uncontracted players get more (even if it’s less than they’re worth) because you’re right about losing them for nothing. Theoretically going to the PSD runs the risk of being drafted by a different team, but the evidence is that teams simply will not pick players who don’t want to go there. Perhaps clubs are worried about losing players the same way? Maybe they’re just not as ruthless towards each other as I assume? Maybe if the PSD was routinely full of decent quality established AFL players people would start picking them regardless? The fact is that uncontracted players get traded for first and second round picks all the time, while pick 51 is the highest a free agent has garnered (and that was in a situation where Port gained pick 29 by doing so).


The first two were 31+. Cramers, Gus, Mumford were mid 20s. I think that had a lot more to do with it than whether or not they qualified for “free agency”.

I listed those three because that’s all the free agents who’ve been traded for picks.

15. Courtenay Dempsey - Trade to Carlton

http://dempsey.isafreeagent.com

Hilarity aside, you do actually realise you can trade a guy who’s out of contract? See Chapman, Crameri, Cooney, Monfries. You just don’t tend to get as much for them.

Yeah, I know, but we’d end up with a pick in the 50s or something (51 for Monfries, 84 for Chapman), which I don’t think is the result people intend when they say “trade”.
To be pedantic: Crameri wasn’t a free agent which makes it a whole different situation, and Cooney was still under contract.

Not being a free agent doesn’t make it much different. Guys can still walk, they just go in the PSD, and the club they leave doesn’t get any compo. See Tippett, K.

You’re right, but I reckon a non free agent demanding a trade knocks trade value back about 10-15 picks. A free agent knocks it back 30+.
To be pedantic again: Adelaide were banned from receiving anything for Tippett in a trade as part of their sanctions for salary cap infringements.


I would’ve thought the other way around.

A “free agent” ie 8/10 years service leaving will garner you some compo.
An uncontracted, non- “free agent” won’t.
They’re both only going to go to a select few clubs who want them and can fit them in.
Surely you’re going to play hard ball more with the guy you’re getting something for regardless, and settle for a worse offer with the one you’d otherwise get nothing for?

Ie, you’re only going to trade a “free agent” if you’re getting a better offer than the compo pick (or for other reasons, ie messing with existing compo picks).
A guy who’ll walk to the PSD for nothing, well, any offer is better than nothing.

What would be the basis of your thinking it’d be the other way around?

My opinion is largely just based on what happens. Hunt for 75, Chapman for 84, Monfries for 51 compared to Crameri for 26, Mumford for 35. The former are junk picks, the latter are trades made under duress.

You’re right that if you know you’re getting compensation, that puts you in a stronger position. But the other side know that they can get the player for literally nothing. Monfries-esque situtations aside, why would they even sit down at the trade table?

I honestly don’t know why uncontracted players get more (even if it’s less than they’re worth) because you’re right about losing them for nothing. Theoretically going to the PSD runs the risk of being drafted by a different team, but the evidence is that teams simply will not pick players who don’t want to go there. Perhaps clubs are worried about losing players the same way? Maybe they’re just not as ruthless towards each other as I assume? Maybe if the PSD was routinely full of decent quality established AFL players people would start picking them regardless? The fact is that uncontracted players get traded for first and second round picks all the time, while pick 51 is the highest a free agent has garnered (and that was in a situation where Port gained pick 29 by doing so).


The first two were 31+. Cramers, Gus, Mumford were mid 20s. I think that had a lot more to do with it than whether or not they qualified for “free agency”.

I listed those three because that’s all the free agents who’ve been traded for picks.

Swans Traded for Mumford cause knew would lose him if he went to PSD. as giants had first pick.
funny thing is giants then used first pick on Lamb (Swans), who hasnt turned out to be much… swans pick 35 was used on Toby Nankervis - ruckman from Tassie who is yet to play a game.

15. Courtenay Dempsey - Trade to Carlton

http://dempsey.isafreeagent.com

Hilarity aside, you do actually realise you can trade a guy who’s out of contract? See Chapman, Crameri, Cooney, Monfries. You just don’t tend to get as much for them.

Yeah, I know, but we’d end up with a pick in the 50s or something (51 for Monfries, 84 for Chapman), which I don’t think is the result people intend when they say “trade”.
To be pedantic: Crameri wasn’t a free agent which makes it a whole different situation, and Cooney was still under contract.

Not being a free agent doesn’t make it much different. Guys can still walk, they just go in the PSD, and the club they leave doesn’t get any compo. See Tippett, K.

You’re right, but I reckon a non free agent demanding a trade knocks trade value back about 10-15 picks. A free agent knocks it back 30+.
To be pedantic again: Adelaide were banned from receiving anything for Tippett in a trade as part of their sanctions for salary cap infringements.


I would’ve thought the other way around.

A “free agent” ie 8/10 years service leaving will garner you some compo.
An uncontracted, non- “free agent” won’t.
They’re both only going to go to a select few clubs who want them and can fit them in.
Surely you’re going to play hard ball more with the guy you’re getting something for regardless, and settle for a worse offer with the one you’d otherwise get nothing for?

Ie, you’re only going to trade a “free agent” if you’re getting a better offer than the compo pick (or for other reasons, ie messing with existing compo picks).
A guy who’ll walk to the PSD for nothing, well, any offer is better than nothing.

What would be the basis of your thinking it’d be the other way around?

My opinion is largely just based on what happens. Hunt for 75, Chapman for 84, Monfries for 51 compared to Crameri for 26, Mumford for 35. The former are junk picks, the latter are trades made under duress.

You’re right that if you know you’re getting compensation, that puts you in a stronger position. But the other side know that they can get the player for literally nothing. Monfries-esque situtations aside, why would they even sit down at the trade table?

I honestly don’t know why uncontracted players get more (even if it’s less than they’re worth) because you’re right about losing them for nothing. Theoretically going to the PSD runs the risk of being drafted by a different team, but the evidence is that teams simply will not pick players who don’t want to go there. Perhaps clubs are worried about losing players the same way? Maybe they’re just not as ruthless towards each other as I assume? Maybe if the PSD was routinely full of decent quality established AFL players people would start picking them regardless? The fact is that uncontracted players get traded for first and second round picks all the time, while pick 51 is the highest a free agent has garnered (and that was in a situation where Port gained pick 29 by doing so).


The first two were 31+. Cramers, Gus, Mumford were mid 20s. I think that had a lot more to do with it than whether or not they qualified for “free agency”.

I listed those three because that’s all the free agents who’ve been traded for picks.

Swans Traded for Mumford cause knew would lose him if he went to PSD. as giants had first pick.
funny thing is giants then used first pick on Lamb (Swans), who hasnt turned out to be much… swans pick 35 was used on Toby Nankervis - ruckman from Tassie who is yet to play a game.

Indeed. How much the PSD threat affected the trade value compared to what him being a free agent would have done is the point of this whole discussion.

Edit: actually I guess it’s about whether someone being a free agent makes them more or less tradeable than them simply being uncontracted.

I'm brutal, but I think we criminally overate our list, the club, and blitz

The start reality is that a lot of that list have either not shown or are yet to show, that they are capable of playing AFL football. If a player has been on the list 3 years or more, and has yet to show they can even make the grade, they sure as ■■■■ are not going to be anything more than middling players at best. We hang on to injury prone players far to long.

Going into next season we need 30 guys who we know are capable of playing AFL football to a moderate level or higher, and the next 8-10 list spots are for development for guys that we hope to usurp the bottom 10 of that 30

Baguley, Mark - 2015 - sign 2 year
Bellchambers, Tom - 2015 - offer up for trade if no takers, offer 1 year at only moderate salary. He is a RF anyway this year
Browne, Alex - 2015 - Delist. Shows signs, but is not durable and still doesnt use it very well.
Carlisle, Jake - 2015 - sign 2 year
Chapman, Paul - 2015 - retire, and get him in to coach our forwards
Dalgleish, Lauchlan - 2015 - Unless he has forced his way into the seniors by the last 4 rounds, delist, another non durable guy
Daniher, Joe - 2015 - 3 year deal
Dempsey, Courtenay - 2015 - Same as Bellchambers, offer up for trade or offer 1 year deal.
Fantasia, Orazio - 2015- Resign on 2 years
Fletcher, Dustin - 2015 - Retire - and straight into the coaching panel.
Gwilt, James - 2015 - Delist
Hams, Will - 2015 - Sign on 2 year deal
Kavanagh, Elliott - 2015 - Delist - not up to it.
Melksham, Jake - 2015 - Sign on 2 year deal, but make it performance based.
O’Brien, Nick - 2015 - Delist
Pears, Tayte - 2015 - Delist
Stanton, Brent - 2015 - Sign on 1 year (over 30 that should be the rule)
Winderlich, Jason - 2015 - Retire

Stienberg - Delist
Aylett - Take up second year of rookie deal

So thats 3 retirees, 6 delistings, and 2 possible trades.

agressivly trade with picks and players

Upgrade Smack take 5 picks into the draft. Bring in 2 Free agents, and another rookie.

I cant say this enough, if you have been on the list for 3 years or more, and cant get into the senior team, you are not good enough. Love em or hate them, TBC, Dempsey, Stanton, and Melksham are at least capable AFL footballers. Stanton is best 22, everyone here who doesnt think that is a ■■■■■■■■. The other 3 are good depth. Which you need.

We need to do a restructure of our list management team also

I agree with the majority of this. The only problem I have is making all the changes in one year. I can’t see us getting enough talent at the back end of the draft to make it worth delisting the last couple of players.


That all depends on what we might get back though.
If TBC gets a good FA offer and takes it, we’d get either an end-of-first-round pick, or an after-our-second-round pick. If someone wants to trade for him, that’s the sort of value as well.

Say we finish 12th, we’ll start with pick 7/25/43. So already you’re starting off with our best hand since 2008.
Bellcho gets us either 19 or 26. If anyone wants to take Dempsey, you accept pretty much anything to help him get where he wants to go.

So we have 7/25/26/43/61, and probably a pick in the 50s or 60s for Demps.

I’d be upgrading SMack, so that’s our theoretical last pick used, and I’d be drafting Mitch Brown who we will probably need to get done at 43 (but hopefully 61). The other 4 picks, we need a ruck to eventually surpass Giles/SMack, and use the rest on mids/smalls.

I agree with all of that, except the Dempsey bit, unless he wants out I think what he offers, for what he costs, is going to be better than what he would fetch on the open market (as you said a pick in the 60’s) you dont get his speed at that prick range. Plus you need to also consider list changes the year after. Dempsey has shown, more recently than others that his best is better than moderate AFL level. TBC is a ruckman and they just get more value, Demps would need to be a pick in the second round to improve our position on him in this draft pool (top end good, back end terrible) all the picks after about 30 are going to be speculative. At least with Dempsey you know what we get, but TBC could get us into those earlier picks.

As for Gwilt that @Westing_Wuckman was asking about, you are right, but as HAP has said, id be giving his spot to Mitch Brown. T
taller and offers a lot of the same skillset but can be more effective on bigger bodies. That being said, I would not be adverse to holding onto him either.

oh and HAP, we can just sign Brown as a delisted free agent. So it again becomes the last pick cost.

I'm brutal, but I think we criminally overate our list, the club, and blitz

The start reality is that a lot of that list have either not shown or are yet to show, that they are capable of playing AFL football. If a player has been on the list 3 years or more, and has yet to show they can even make the grade, they sure as ■■■■ are not going to be anything more than middling players at best. We hang on to injury prone players far to long.

Going into next season we need 30 guys who we know are capable of playing AFL football to a moderate level or higher, and the next 8-10 list spots are for development for guys that we hope to usurp the bottom 10 of that 30

Baguley, Mark - 2015 - sign 2 year
Bellchambers, Tom - 2015 - offer up for trade if no takers, offer 1 year at only moderate salary. He is a RF anyway this year
Browne, Alex - 2015 - Delist. Shows signs, but is not durable and still doesnt use it very well.
Carlisle, Jake - 2015 - sign 2 year
Chapman, Paul - 2015 - retire, and get him in to coach our forwards
Dalgleish, Lauchlan - 2015 - Unless he has forced his way into the seniors by the last 4 rounds, delist, another non durable guy
Daniher, Joe - 2015 - 3 year deal
Dempsey, Courtenay - 2015 - Same as Bellchambers, offer up for trade or offer 1 year deal.
Fantasia, Orazio - 2015- Resign on 2 years
Fletcher, Dustin - 2015 - Retire - and straight into the coaching panel.
Gwilt, James - 2015 - Delist
Hams, Will - 2015 - Sign on 2 year deal
Kavanagh, Elliott - 2015 - Delist - not up to it.
Melksham, Jake - 2015 - Sign on 2 year deal, but make it performance based.
O’Brien, Nick - 2015 - Delist
Pears, Tayte - 2015 - Delist
Stanton, Brent - 2015 - Sign on 1 year (over 30 that should be the rule)
Winderlich, Jason - 2015 - Retire

Stienberg - Delist
Aylett - Take up second year of rookie deal

So thats 3 retirees, 6 delistings, and 2 possible trades.

agressivly trade with picks and players

Upgrade Smack take 5 picks into the draft. Bring in 2 Free agents, and another rookie.

I cant say this enough, if you have been on the list for 3 years or more, and cant get into the senior team, you are not good enough. Love em or hate them, TBC, Dempsey, Stanton, and Melksham are at least capable AFL footballers. Stanton is best 22, everyone here who doesnt think that is a ■■■■■■■■. The other 3 are good depth. Which you need.

We need to do a restructure of our list management team also

I agree with the majority of this. The only problem I have is making all the changes in one year. I can’t see us getting enough talent at the back end of the draft to make it worth delisting the last couple of players.

I’d rather have 6 “not talented enough 18 or 19 year old who could develop” types than 6 “22-23 year old who hasn’t shown anything” types as the last 6 players on our list.

I’d be interested @benfti who you think we could or should pick up as free agents?

Im actually more interested in what we can get for the guys who walk/delisted. There are guys in that pool who are let go because of age and the rebuild status of their lists, or are just surplus to clubs needs, where as they could fit right into our needs. Smack is a prime example of that.