List Mgmt. 2023 Trade & List Management Thread III

Remove this Banner Ad

Both aren’t your traditional pressure forward that can crumb goals type

More your medium forwards who can take a mark and are classy
Both can absolutely crumb goals. Curtis struggles with pressure due to lack of tank but his tackle numbers improved across the season. No such issue with Sheezel. He was awesome in that Swans game when he went forward. Two goals (both snaps from memory), 5 tackles and 25 possessions. Those two in tandem could be devastating around goals.
 
Just purely a hypothetical. I am not saying I'd do this as I'd definitely want to keep pick 2 (pick 3 I'd consider sliding to 6 and 11 on draft night if we want Curtin/Caddy/Sully) but if we were prepared to give up McKercher and Duursma we could trade down twice.

Trade 3 and 18 for Dees 6, 11 and F1.
Trade 2 and Dees F1 for Hawks 4 and F1 (not sure Hawks would do this)
Assume Hawks and Dees take McKercher and Duursma, order doesn't really matter.

4 - Watson/Curtin/Sanders (I'd probably go Watson because Dogs would take Sanders, leaving Curtin/Caddy/Sully)
6 - Curtin/Caddy/O'Sullivan
11 - Windsor/Wilson/Murphy (assuming O'Sullivan and Leake are gone, if not I'd consider them first)
15/17 - Roberts/Shoenmaker/Collard (not if Watto)/Hastie/Edwards/Goad/Green/Morris/A Reid etc. (depends on earlier picks)
Come on Chubbs, stop with this nonsense.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I thought I read somewhere that he needs to work on his defensive side?
Ahh that would Mark McGowns article in The Age " Some talent scouts expect him to be as successful as the likes of Eddie Betts and Stephen Milne – small forwards who kicked more than 570 goals each – but they would like to see some defensive improvement. Watson laid only three tackles across his last five Talent League games. Recruiters’ other query on him was his lack of impact against senior opposition for the AFL Academy."
Such a blanket statement about defensive improvement could be thrown on any forward being drafted but the only critque on this kid is 4 quarter game and...his size.
 
Both can absolutely crumb goals. Curtis struggles with pressure due to lack of tank but his tackle numbers improved across the season. No such issue with Sheezel. He was awesome in that Swans game when he went forward. Two goals (both snaps from memory), 5 tackles and 25 possessions. Those two in tandem could be devastating around goals.
I’m not saying they can’t but it’s not their main avenue to goal

And the tackle pressure like you pointed out with curtis
 
Just purely a hypothetical. I am not saying I'd do this as I'd definitely want to keep pick 2 (pick 3 I'd consider sliding to 6 and 11 on draft night if we want Curtin/Caddy/Sully) but if we were prepared to give up McKercher and Duursma we could trade down twice.

Trade 3 and 18 for Dees 6, 11 and F1.
Trade 2 and Dees F1 for Hawks 4 and F1 (not sure Hawks would do this)
Assume Hawks and Dees take McKercher and Duursma, order doesn't really matter.

4 - Watson/Curtin/Sanders (I'd probably go Watson because Dogs would take Sanders, leaving Curtin/Caddy/Sully)
6 - Curtin/Caddy/O'Sullivan
11 - Windsor/Wilson/Murphy (assuming O'Sullivan and Leake are gone, if not I'd consider them first)
15/17 - Roberts/Shoenmaker/Collard (not if Watto)/Hastie/Edwards/Goad/Green/Morris/A Reid etc. (depends on earlier picks)
That's a no from me
 
I’m not saying they can’t but it’s not their main avenue to goal

And the tackle pressure like you pointed out with curtis
Curtis had an eight tackle game in round 22 this year and a big uptick in tackle numbers towards the end of the year. Thus, I am bullish about his ability to apply pressure in the long term. He's certainly powerful enough. Just needs the tank to motor from contest to contest. He could be anything IMO. Goalkicking accuracy and defensive intent are the big areas for him to work on but for both of those a lot of it is in the head so easy gains can be made. Sheezel impressed me with his defensive ability in his first year. Thought it might be a bit of a weakness but he is decent IMO. Curtis very good overhead as you point out which makes him a very difficult matchup.
 
Curtis had an eight tackle game in round 22 this year and a big uptick in tackle numbers towards the end of the year. Thus, I am bullish about his ability to apply pressure in the long term. He's certainly powerful enough. Just needs the tank to motor from contest to contest. He could be anything IMO. Goalkicking accuracy and defensive intent are the big areas for him to work on but for both of those a lot of it is in the head so easy gains can be made. Sheezel impressed me with his defensive ability in his first year. Thought it might be a bit of a weakness but he is decent IMO. Curtis very good overhead as you point out which makes him a very difficult matchup.
Looks like he got a rocket at round 13.

R1 - R11 ave tackles 1.1
R13 - R24 ave tackles 3.45
 
Joined the construction industry during Covid, after 30 years of different types of jobs
( owned the deli at Chadstone for 12 years and could see those God forsaken meetings at the adjacent food court from a distance, but was never invited , but that’s a different story for a different time )
Anyway back to my point
I’ve met more North boys at CFMEU tier 1 sites in the last 3 years, than what I did in 30 years of regular employment

Since the early 90s I’ve been going to the footy on my own ( the family bailed on me) but these days I go with tradies I met on the job… every home game without fail

Will be great to start winning and celebrating with my new north mates


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
What job did you end up changing to Uber Roo ?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Both can absolutely crumb goals. Curtis struggles with pressure due to lack of tank but his tackle numbers improved across the season. No such issue with Sheezel. He was awesome in that Swans game when he went forward. Two goals (both snaps from memory), 5 tackles and 25 possessions. Those two in tandem could be devastating around goals.
This is why we don’t need Watson. Harry gunna be absolutely elite when he goes forward. We ain’t seen nothin yet.
 
From memory Stewy turned down some Assistant roles because Mrs Dew didn't want to leave Sydney, looks like she may have had some influence in this decision.

He's a completely logical replacement for Don Pyke as well.
 
She's a TV presenter so going back to Sydney would be good for her career, too.

I forgot he was married to Sarah Cumming.

jim carrey GIF
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top