List build - where are we going in the next 10,000 posts?

I think we are carrying on 1 more ruck than we should on our list.

List balance was a major issue under the previous team and I think Rosa/Scott have made an error here.

List spots are precious and should be treated with high respect. We shouldn’t waste spots on players who are there in case others get injuried.

We have Bryan and Draper being the main rucks. Vigo is still developing. 2MP is there also if the main two get injured.

If the club knew they were going to pick up Gerreyn we should have made the tough call on Goldstein.

What is really comes down to is who is third in line. Do we want it to be Goldy or a young untried ruck.

2 Likes

We have a spare list spot now and can’t find a player worthy of a spot for that! So I don’t think having Goldy on the list is a big issue

7 Likes

Swap Davey for Langford along side adding Merrett and Ridley and that’s a promising look at a half decent side.

Going by draft guru list age is 24.00 years ranked 15th in 2025

Would say our list is not much older then Richmond,North,West Coast,Hawks to say we are not improving the list and just keep playig old guys is just wrong imo

2 Likes

Take out Goldy and the average age drops to 18.5.

7 Likes

Too many rucks is an issue because you can’t develop them in the VFL if they have spend big periods forward.

er yes you can, modern rucks have to be able to rest forward/back anyway

let them work on their goal kicking while they build out their tank and frame

not so much for us as Goldy doesn’t play every VFL game.
I’m half expecting Goldy to retire mid season.

1 Like

Hope so as it will open up a list vacancy for the mid season draft.

1 Like

I think we’ll have 1 MSD pick available anyway if we don’t recruit anyone during the SSP period.

1 Like

he’s playing every week and you will like it

2 Likes

I agree that Goldstein is totally superfluous (and I was against getting him to begin with), and think Bryan/Draper/Vigo/Wright is fine.

However, Gerryn isn’t relevant to the ruck conversation. He’s very unlikely to be an AFL ruck. His odds are probably better to be an AFL midfielder! However, he most likely will be a KP player.

2 Likes

According to Jimmy Bartel we’ve had internal discussions about targeting 2030 with our list build.

1 Like

Which would imply that we are gonna try and get as much young talent in via the draft and other avenues before the Tassie team disrupts everything.

Can’t see scott surviving until then tbh unless there is a finals victory before then, so it would look like his task is to build it for someone else

2 Likes

These are my thoughts too. 2 years of draft focus, then pivot to big time free agent acquisitions for ‘27-‘28 for a window that opens around ‘29-‘30.

I don’t mind it, but it’s a long time to wait.

Or have enough talent to be able to sell some to the new team for a king’s ransom

2 Likes

IF they are targetting 2030 (I would have thought they’dbe targetting sooner personally), and do so successfully, of course there would be finals victories beforehand.

1 Like

I meant finals success in by the end of his current contract. Which is 2026. I think that is unrealistic, so I would give him an extension now personally if they think he is the right man for the rebuilding process. I’d hope he invests this year in playing talented AFL ready youth over the journeyman and giving games to the Roberts and El Hawli’s so we don’t get a repeat of the Mass Exodus.

IMO 2030 would be the target for developing the finals culture that has you reliably competing deep into September.

Everyone accepts that with a bit of luck that timeline can be brought forward very quickly if things click, like the Hawks did last year, or with Collingwood being gifted some future brownlows via FS

But the slow methodical list build with a target of 2030, would imo, be the conservative build assuming we don’t have any luck. If that makes sense.

I wouldn’t get too fixated on the year.
It’s basically a 5 year plan. Which every team would have. Heck even good companies and businesses would be doing this.
There’s also be particular milestones along the way. Even Vozzo in the interview with Watson said we’re still aiming for finals (cannot recall if he mentioned winning one).

They’ll track their progress against it, but at some point, there is a chance that they reach a position where that 5 year plan is no longer achievable so they adjust their plan from there or completely scrap it and pivot.

A high majority of long term plans fail. That’s the reality of being in a competitive competition where a very small percentage of teams achieve ultimate success.
Sometimes, the plan can be highly aspirational and totally unrealistic (like Brendan Gale’s one with Richmond ten years ago). The aim for these would be to set a high bar and even if it isn’t isn’t reached, we are pretty damn good and give themselves a chance. Geelong’s and Sydney’s plans would be similar over the last 20 years, but with varying results.

I can’t think of any team that wouldn’t be aiming for something major in 5 years time. That’s how it takes to draft players, develop a full group and get them to start performing. The major X factor is whether you have the people in place to get there. We definitely didn’t have it 5 years ago. We may not have it now, but we’re in a better position than 5 years ago. Highly likely there’ll still need to be more change along the way. It’s not as simple as ‘just get this person in’ and then sit back on a beach with a drink and watch the premierships come in.

3 Likes

This could easily be a misinterpretation by Bartel of a pretty standard 5 year plan which every org has been doing since the dawn of modern business.

2 Likes