List Mgmt. Contract, Trade and Draft Discussions - 2024 Post Season

[Keys]

Quick links

• Player contract status
• Draft prospect video highlights (thanks to noobermensch)
• AFL retirements and delistings
• Provisional 2025 Draft order

---

Trade period
In: 12, F1, F2, F3, 73, Baker, Owies, Graham*
Out: 3, 63, F4, Barrass, Darling

*Free agent

Done deals

• Jai Culley, Alex Witherden
  23

  Alex Witherden

  Age

  26

  Ht

  188cm

  Wt

  85kg

  Pos.

  Def

  Career

  Season

  Last 5

  D

  20.7

  5star

  K

  15.2

  5star

  HB

  5.5

  4star

  M

  6.2

  5star

  T

  1.8

  4star

  MG

  386.5

  5star

  D

  13.0

  3star

  K

  10.0

  4star

  HB

  3.0

  2star

  M

  7.0

  5star

  T

  0.0

  1star

  MG

  201.0

  3star

  D

  24.0

  5star

  K

  15.4

  5star

  HB

  8.6

  5star

  M

  5.8

  5star

  T

  2.2

  4star

  MG

  380.2

  5star

  and Coby Burgiel delisted
  • Burgiel to be considered as a train on player

• Tom Barrass traded to Hawthorn
  • In: F1, F2, F3 (HAW)
  • Out: Barrass, F4

• Liam Baker and Matt Owies join West Coast in Pick 3 trade
  • In: Baker, Owies, 12, 73
  • Out: 3, 63, 68

• Jack Darling traded to North Melbourne for Pick 67

• Jack Graham joins West Coast as UFA

• Jake Waterman re-signs with West Coast until at least 2029

• Zane Trew, Jamaine Jones
  31

  Jamaine Jones

  Age

  26

  Ht

  180cm

  Wt

  80kg

  Pos.

  D/F

  Career

  Season

  Last 5

  D

  9.0

  2star

  K

  4.8

  2star

  HB

  4.2

  3star

  M

  2.1

  2star

  T

  3.8

  5star

  MG

  159.6

  3star

  D

  10.5

  3star

  K

  6.5

  3star

  HB

  4.0

  3star

  M

  2.5

  3star

  T

  4.0

  5star

  MG

  196.5

  3star

  D

  9.0

  3star

  K

  4.2

  2star

  HB

  4.8

  4star

  M

  2.4

  3star

  T

  4.2

  5star

  MG

  166.0

  3star

  and Jordyn Baker delisted

• Archer Reid (2027), Loch Rawlinson (2025), and Coen Livingstone (2025) sign extensions

 

[Keys]

Genuine enquiry, who do you think is The West’s audience?

I mostly see Freo supporters complaining about the West so they must be the ones reading it

I certainly don’t

Guess their audience is you guys then

 

[Bleedblueandgold]

Don't mind Baker, but I wish that he had agreed to join Freo or remained at Richmond instead, so we still had pick 3.
The idea that he nominated WC but was supposedly fine to remain with Richmond if sufficient compensation wasn't found (according some ppl including wcphill) is a bit bizarre to me.
If we've committed to him, then he should do the same and be committed to moving to us if we couldn't find the right pick for him without pulling off a crazy trade.
It seems a bit one sided since we were willing to get him over regardless of the cost, but he would only move for the right price for his former club.
It doesn't even benefit him apart from an idea of honouring his former club and can potentially harm his new club, which he wants to be successful.
Also did he not realise Richmond would already have a million other good picks?
It feels like WC commited to getting Baker to WC and Baker commited to Richmond that he'll get them a good pick lol.

 

[darksquare]

I thought that Barrass trade was the worst of the trades.

We valued him at two first rounders and settled on picks that could be 20, 40 and 60 if the Hawks live up to their hype. To make it worse those picks are next year.

I spent over 20 years in sales and if I had brought those kinds of deals back to my employers I would've been mocked and then sacked.

With 20 years in sales, you'd be familiar with the idea that you should establish an anchor for negotiations. For us, that was two first-rounders. For Hawthorn, it was pick 14. We met somewhere in the middle, and I think an honest assessment of Barrass's value is that we received what he is worth, or somewhat more. If all our trade negotiations went this way, we could tick off trade period quite happily.

There was clearly a failure of negotiation strategy for Baker, though. Before the trade window even opened, we'd agreed that a pick in the teens was fair. From that point, you can never do better, and to be honest we were lucky to limit the damage to pick 14.

Even worse, we committed ourselves to a strategy which could extract a mid-teens pick, and that cost us pick 3. That trade failed to attach the necessary premium to the high pick; but the nature of this draft might still allow us to dodge the bullet. I think there is a fair-to-good chance that there is a name on the board at pick 12 that we had in our top 6.

Long story short: if we manage to pick up Smillie, Langford, M. Reid or Travaglia (for example), we've pretty much broken even for the trade period. If all we get is Allan or Berry, I think we're slightly below par.

 

[Big_Birdy]

"iTs a dEeP dRaFt tHoUgH!!!!"

Yeah that may be the case but I would have thought to take advantage of a deep draft you would want more picks not less.

The trade got us more picks? No way Baker gets traded without using 26 if we didn’t split 3.

We essentially got Baker and 26 for a 9 pick downgrade.

Now to be clear, I think we could have done much better than we did after the pick split.

But it did get us an extra pick in the circumstances. Or probably more accurately, ensured we still have 2 in top 30.

 

[Happy Mastenator]

But the "we traded in Baker/traded out #3 because we're thinking the long game (Warner)" is a myth. I've seen it said in the media multiple times and it doesn't make sense.

We traded Barrass for an F1. We'll need 2x Firsts for Warner. The Baker deal has nothing to do with it. We traded Barrass to put us in a position to get Warner. Warner isn't going to be thing, "Baker is at West Coast, let's go!". He's going to be thinking, "Harley and Draper are at West Coast, this could get real big".

I'm all for Warner, but we've left ourselves short with the Baker deal. We need to pick someone at the top of the draft this year, take Warner next year, then go to the draft again where if we're bottom 5, go another mid, if we're 5-10, we can choose SF, maybe gun KPD, maybe gun HBF etc.

I feel we're likely leaving ourselves short.

Don't disagree in part.

The Barrass trade was good.

The 3 down to 12 and 14 and 14 to Baker wasn't great. Really think Richmond would have taken 23 and maybe some other crap if we'd held out. Would love to have added Baker that way, then used 3 on the gun to add to Reid and Warner could have created the big three (Heeney, Gulden, Warner style).

 

[Obeanie1]

I hope we don't trade out any of the future picks into this draft, unless it's for a no brainer deal.

Take the picks into next year for Warner, or to take advantage of all the demand for points from teams.

Burning top picks on trades and points isn't smart.

Thats what later 1st round picks, 2nds and 3rds are for.

It is what every other club does.

 

[Obeanie1]

The trade got us more picks? No way Baker gets traded without using 26 if we didn’t split 3.

We essentially got Baker and 26 for a 9 pick downgrade.

Now to be clear, I think we could have done much better than we did after the pick split.

But it did get us an extra pick in the circumstances. Or probably more a frigate or, ensured we still have 2 in top 30.

26 is our original 2nd rounder.

Nothing g to do with the Baker trade other than we should have used it I stead of 3.

 

[Rowan18]

Don't mind Baker, but I wish that he had agreed to join Freo or remained at Richmond instead, so we still had pick 3.
The idea that he nominated WC but was supposedly fine to remain with Richmond if sufficient compensation wasn't found (according some ppl including wcphill) is a bit bizarre to me.
If we've committed to him, then he should do the same and be committed to moving to us if we couldn't find the right pick for him without pulling off a crazy trade.
It seems a bit one sided since we were willing to get him over regardless of the cost, but he would only move for the right price for his former club.
It doesn't even benefit him apart from an idea of honouring his former club and can potentially harm his new club, which he wants to be successful.
Also did he not realise Richmond would already have a million other good picks?

Agreed and I'm pissed off with Baker for it. This is something Geelong does well. They get the uncontrcated player to categorically state it's Geelong or draft and it always backs the other club into a corner at the end of trade week (so they cave for unders). We failed to do that with Tim Kelly and Baker.

What pisses me off is Pyke says we owe the player because we committed but the player should owe us too and fully committ.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

I know its early but what ranges are Banfield, Wally and Evans expected to land?

I think Walley will demand the highest bid of the three. Probably second round but he's the one who could go very high if it all clicks.

Banfield is a running machine but probably won't be viewed as a top end talent. Hopefully a late second.

Evans could be a late selection unless he does something wild in the champs. Probably more of a speculative athlete with a fast, long kicking game style.

 

[Big_Birdy]

26 is our original 2nd rounder.

Nothing g to do with the Baker trade other than we should have used it I stead of 3.

Not disagreeing with that.

Doesn’t change the fact that if we had, we would have less picks in the draft than we do now.

 

[FKASC]

Don't mind Baker, but I wish that he had agreed to join Freo or remained at Richmond instead, so we still had pick 3.
The idea that he nominated WC but was supposedly fine to remain with Richmond if sufficient compensation wasn't found (according some ppl including wcphill) is a bit bizarre to me.
If we've committed to him, then he should do the same and be committed to moving to us if we couldn't find the right pick for him without pulling off a crazy trade.
It seems a bit one sided since we were willing to get him over regardless of the cost, but he would only move for the right price for his former club.
It doesn't even benefit him apart from an idea of honouring his former club and can potentially harm his new club, which he wants to be successful.
Also did he not realise Richmond would already have a million other good picks?

Tbh I doubt the whole “I want them to be well compensated” public messaging makes very much difference at the end of the day.

It’s more that WC have some sort of ingrained policy to prioritise facilitation and player welfare in trades, whether or not we ‘win’ the transaction

 

[WCE_Phill]

I genuinely believe the Hawks will miss the 8, i wouldn't be trading their picks as they will be valued finished top 6

I would be looking to bring forward our F1 pick

Options include

1. Straight swap with the Crows for 4
2. Swaps F1 and 23 for 6, 11 (Richmomd don't need all those this year and gain a high pick next year
3. Swap F1 with the Saints for 8 and F2.

I prefer option 3, leaves us
1 X F1 Hawks
3 X F2 tied to us Hawks Saints
2 X F3 tied to us Hawks

Gives us lots of Capital to chase Warner and points for Bailfield Walley Evans

As well as 8, 12, 26 and Champion now

 

[xLeCrAs2x]

I’m generally a pessimist but anybody not happy with the Barrass trade needs their head read, flip the script and imagine us in 2017 giving up f1 f2 f3 for a 29 year old defender that’s one injury away from being a vegetable. We nailed the Barrass trade no matter where the hawks finish next year

 

[WA footy mad]

This draft isnt that deep clubs are scrambling to get as many picks for the next 2 years before tassie team compromises the draft. Thats the only Reason Richmons offloaded all the experience. Only 2 years to rebuild.

 

[PremiershipNo4]

I cant believe we re-signed barnett. Requries huge improvement.

Yeah he hasn’t shown much, we can only hope. He’s still young.

 

[Keys]

The success, or otherwise, of our trade period will hinge primarily on the fortunes of Hawthorn in 2025

Miss the 8 and finish say 10th, we have picks 9,27,45

If they make a prelim, those picks become 15,33,51 at best.

(We will also be hoping Carlton finish above Hawthorn)

To a lesser extent the impact of Baker will also be a determinant given we gave away a very useful pick for him

 

[ziad]

I mostly see Freo supporters complaining about the West so they must be the ones reading it

I certainly don’t

Guess their audience is you guys then

I don't read it. BF is my reliable source of information (and entertainment)

 

[ziad]

The success, or otherwise, of our trade period will hinge primarily on the fortunes of Hawthorn in 2025

Miss the 8 and finish say 10th, we have picks 9,27,45

If they make a prelim, those picks become 15,33,51 at best.

(We will also be hoping Carlton finish above Hawthorn)

To a lesser extent the impact of Baker will also be a determinant given we gave away a very useful pick for him

Our gifts should help Carlton

 

[WCErevival]

Carlton will finish bottom 4 without Owies

 

[PremiershipNo4]

The success, or otherwise, of our trade period will hinge primarily on the fortunes of Hawthorn in 2025

Miss the 8 and finish say 10th, we have picks 9,27,45

If they make a prelim, those picks become 15,33,51 at best.

(We will also be hoping Carlton finish above Hawthorn)

To a lesser extent the impact of Baker will also be a determinant given we gave away a very useful pick for him

That and the playing career of pick 3 vs pick 12.

 

[Big_Birdy]

If Carlton finish bottom 4 they have ‘made the worst trade in history unless they pick up Chris Judd.

4,12,22 for 3

 

[DanWCE]

One to watch for next year.. if the Swans manage to convince Warner to stay, we should be in the box seat to prise out Sheldrick, who is OOC next season and won't cost anywhere near as much.

 

[PremiershipNo4]

Well looks like I’m barracking for 17 teams next year, WC and whoever the Hawks are playing.

 

[Blackhawk42]

Smith will be an absolute star for 10 more years. Heaps of players do ACLs and are fine. The off field stuff is overblown because of his online persona, and it’ll get quashed down in Geelong anyway.

Geelong have basically rebuilt their midfield:
Bruhn, Smith, Bowes, Clark

With pick 18 and 17

Sorry, just happened upon this comment.

Bruhn, Clark and Bowes are all very speculative footballers.
Clark especially.
He's not tall, strong or fast. He's going to need to carve out a career on pure accumulation and tackling pressure.

 

[lmach]

Asked ChatGPT to summarise this thread:

In the thread, fans react strongly to the speculation of West Coast trading Pick 3 for Picks 12, 14, and Matt Owies. Many consider this a poor trade for West Coast, with some mocking the idea and calling out "bed wetters" who are panicking about the team's decision-making. The debate revolves around the value of Pick 3 versus multiple lower picks and whether Matt Owies adds enough value to the deal. Reactions are mixed but lean negative regarding the rumored trade.