List Mgmt. Contracts/Trade/Draft Thread - 2025 Edition

[Keys]

Quick links

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

List Spots Available

• One on either main OR rookie list to be filled as a SSP selection following train on assessments.
• Current train on players -
  - Sandy Brock

SSP signing dates

Spoiler

• Monday, November 25, 2024 – Thursday, December 19, 2024
• Monday, January 13, 2025 – Friday, February 21, 2025

Players out of Contract (16) - 2025

Spoiler

• Tim Kelly (26/7/94) - Signed a 6 year contract (2020-25) in October 2019
• Dom Sheed (10/4/95) - Signed a 4 year extension (2022-25) in April 2021*
• Oscar Allen (19/3/99) - Signed a 3 year extension (2023-25) on an existing contract due to expire 2022 in May 2021
• Campbell Chesser (27/4/03) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) on an existing contract due to expire 2023 in May 2022
• Tom Cole (28/5/97) - Signed a 3 year extension (2023-25) in May 2022
• Rhett Bazzo (17/10/03) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) on an existing contract due to expire 2023 in September 2022
• Jayden Hunt (3/4/95) - Signed a 3 year contract (2023-25) in October 2022
• Callum Jamieson (31/7/00) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) in March 2023
• Jeremy McGovern (15/4/92) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) in August 2023
• Jamie Cripps (23/4/92) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) in August 2023
• Jack Petruccelle (12/4/99) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) in August 2023
• (R) Jack Hutchinson (10/11/01) - Automatic 18 month contract (2024-25) when drafted in May 2024
• (R) Tyrell Dewar (27/3/04) - Signed a 1 year extension (2025) in June 2024
• (R) Loch Rawlinson (1/6/05) - Signed a 1 year extension (2025) in September 2024
• (R-B) Coen Livingstone (25/5/05) - Signed a 1 year extension (2025) in September 2024
• (R-B) Malakai Champion (17/5/06) - Automatic 1 year contract (2025) when added as a Cat B Rookie in November 2024

 

[RanaNaved]

They will, but many of them will be better than Baker and give more than 6 years.

Which ones though?

 

[RanaNaved]

Imo the Baker/Graham was a strategic move and not a 'sugar hit'. Time will tell I guess

 

[eaglevision]

Balls on the line. Pick 1 you’d have taken and see how that one goes against him. Naming a stack is easy because one of them will probably be good, but which one?

Murphy Reid hands down with the Baker pick. Draper or Jagga at pick 3 had we not split.

 

[eaglevision]

Again. Didn’t say that. Just raised the possibility that the two trades might have been related (which nobody in the ‘trade pile on’ seemed to even consider).

I don’t have inside knowledge to say it was or wasn’t. But your ‘ridiculous’ certainty on the matter indicates inside knowledge - so please share.

It’s not insider knowledge to know that Graham was an UFA and there was nothing Richmond could do to stop him walking for whatever salary we offered him.

 

[Bleedblueandgold]

Cal Twomey said Freo had pick 11 on the table Baker

It wasn't making much difference as Richmond already rated him as a pick in the early teens. Baker didn't want to go to Freo (and rumoured to not want to be at the same club as Bolton), so it was never gonna happen. Perhaps more chance of him staying put if the Eagles didn't satisfy Richmond.
It didn't seem like he was as desperate to return to WA as Bolton in contrast.

 

[Grahame]

It’s not insider knowledge to know that Graham was an UFA and there was nothing Richmond could do to stop him walking for whatever salary we offered him.

That’s true. But again I wasn’t commenting on that. You can trot out any number of things I didn’t raise but none of them so far negate the possibility that the club might have only got Baker if they got Graham too (or vice versa). That both trades were maybe linked.

But if you know that possibility is 100% untrue … evidence please.

 

[briztoon]

The only draft watching I did was read people's opinions on here, so I can't really comment on their haul, other than I was surprised with some of the talls they took over others that were available.

What it does say to me is how badly they've backed themselves into a corner trying to rebuild in one or two drafts. They were smart to take a lot of talls, as they can take 3-5 years to develop, but they're in for a world of pain as they also need to play them someone to allow them to develop. We saw what this looks like with our injury crisis (meaning experienced players weren't playing) but that's going to be them every week.

They're doing the best they can (given their senior players wanted to leave), but I always think of that win we had against them at home in 2021 as the moment both clubs fell off a cliff. We went straight to the bottom (partly through luck at being so bad at managing injury), while they traded players in to slow the fall. I fell like we're starting to climb up a bit while they're probably locked in to win 1 or 2 more spoons.

It's almost like the quantity of picks they had affected their thinking too much. With the quantity of picks they had, they are the ones who could afford to take a risk to shoot for the stars and afford for a pick to fail.

They could take a risk on someone like Smillie with a very high ceiling, but lower probability of reaching that ceiling... or they could afford to take a risk on Hotton after his injury this year... or they could afford to take a bit of a risk on Trainor and his concussions... or they could afford to reach a bit on someone like Faull that maybe they liked a bit more than consensus.

But that should apply to one or two of their picks, not cumulatively applied to all of them. I guess they have a few years of premium picks ahead of them.

I don’t know how much Richmond’s injury list impacted their performance this year. I think I read somewhere that they were the worst hit team this season.

They were certainly going to drop with the loss of Cotchin, Reiwoldt, Dusty being a shadow of his former self.

I believe they have been pretty clear that they wanted to hit this draft, and next years hard, before Tassie impacted the drafts in a couple of years.

I don’t know if clubs view acl’s as a much of a risk. Many players these days recover from an ACL and go on to play as if they haven’t had an injury.

The main thing is the player misses his first year of development at AFL level.

So don’t know if Hotton is really a risk.


Many clubs have specific talent assessment and/or types. GWS and Sydney’s early picks were widely regarded as reaches.

Richmond obviously looking for a specific type of key forward (contested marking type, as opposed to a leading marking type).

I don’t know if Trainor’s concussions have been overplayed or not. It certainly appears more of a BigFooty topic than a draft media topic.

As for Smillie, he was widely regarded as the best player available at their second pick. If they went for a different player, there would be just as much discussion about the pick, as they deviated away from a consensus pick.


The main issue a lot of people have is the amount of picks they had.

I don’t see it as such a big issue as others have made out.

This year’s draft was widely regarded as very deep without the out and out top end talent.

The other thing it wasn’t, is heavily compromised. 2025 and 2026 currently look to be very compromised by father sons and nga academy and northern academy kids.

And Richmond were still able to push a late first in to next year’s probable top 3-5.

 

[Obeanie1]

My records show the following out of contract players (age end of 2025)

Senior list - 11
Sheed (30)
Hunt (30)
Kelly (31)
Allen (26)
Cripps (33)
Chesser (22)
McGovern (33)
Petruccelle (26)
Cole (28)
Bazzo (21)
Jamieson (24)

Rookies - 3
Rawlinson (20)
Dewar (21)
Hutchinson (23)

Cat B - 1
Livingston (20)

Player No 44 will be SSP or mid season draft likely to be a 1 year contract

Too soon to write anyone off including Sheed.
McGovern and Cripps will be older but may well get another gig if their body stays fit and they adapt to new coach
Chesser and Bazzo for various reasons have not shown they can make it yet. So 2025 will see them playing for their career and we will not worry what pick we used on them
Champion, Walley and Evans will be putting huge pressure on Rawlinson to step up or he will be gone (lucky to stay IMHO). Dewar made better progress but will need to continue to build
Jamieson is a tease as he cannot stay fit so most likely back to Claremont

Add also players under contract with questions on their futures.

Liam Ryan
Brockman

And we have few others who may look elsewhere or be approached

B Williams
J Williams
A Reid
Barnett

A surprise or two will pop up no doubt.

 

[tigger_ferret]

That’s true. But again I wasn’t commenting on that. You can trot out any number of things I didn’t raise but none of them so far negate the possibility that the club might have only got Baker if they got Graham too (or vice versa). That both trades were maybe linked.

But if you know that possibility is 100% untrue … evidence please.

Graham wasn’t traded. He signed as a UFA, so nothing Richmond could do.

The only connection that could have been made between signing Graham and trading for Baker, is one WCE created eg Baker was only going to agree to be traded to WCE if they signed Graham. I would argue this weakened WCE bargaining power and makes the Baker trade even worse, not better.

 

[amazingjoshy]

I do share you caution, the big question is can the Chad translate his form being surrounded by a very good ruck and midfield to a team with a below average ruck and midfield. If the answer is yes then I’ve mentioned where I think the trade lands as a then 24yo mid among the league’s best is a better age profile than a top end 18yo mid for us.

But as you say, what if he’s a downhill skier benefiting from having great players around him. We've been burnt before and it’s likely Pyke told him we’d do what me must to get the deal done during their leisurely round of golf. If Sydney get a few midfield injuries and Warner isn’t roving to Grundy I’ll be watching that game with intent.

His ruckman was Tom Hickey before this year

And even though he was not very influential in this year's GF, he still had 21 touches and a goal. The last GF he had 29 touches, 6 tackles and 2.2

Not sure on the downhill skier tag either tbh

 

[amazingjoshy]

I don’t know how much Richmond’s injury list impacted their performance this year. I think I read somewhere that they were the worst hit team this season.

They were certainly going to drop with the loss of Cotchin, Reiwoldt, Dusty being a shadow of his former self.

I believe they have been pretty clear that they wanted to hit this draft, and next years hard, before Tassie impacted the drafts in a couple of years.

I don’t know if clubs view acl’s as a much of a risk. Many players these days recover from an ACL and go on to play as if they haven’t had an injury.

The main thing is the player misses his first year of development at AFL level.

So don’t know if Hotton is really a risk.


Many clubs have specific talent assessment and/or types. GWS and Sydney’s early picks were widely regarded as reaches.

Richmond obviously looking for a specific type of key forward (contested marking type, as opposed to a leading marking type).

I don’t know if Trainor’s concussions have been overplayed or not. It certainly appears more of a BigFooty topic than a draft media topic.

As for Smillie, he was widely regarded as the best player available at their second pick. If they went for a different player, there would be just as much discussion about the pick, as they deviated away from a consensus pick.


The main issue a lot of people have is the amount of picks they had.

I don’t see it as such a big issue as others have made out.

This year’s draft was widely regarded as very deep without the out and out top end talent.

The other thing it wasn’t, is heavily compromised. 2025 and 2026 currently look to be very compromised by father sons and nga academy and northern academy kids.

And Richmond were still able to push a late first in to next year’s probable top 3-5.

The biggest issue is what they gave up to get that haul

Likely going to be a very lean next 2/3 years or so and will be interesting to see how well these kids develop in a team most likely getting hidings every week

 

[WCE777]

The biggest issue is what they gave up to get that haul

Likely going to be a very lean next 2/3 years or so and will be interesting to see how well these kids develop in a team most likely getting hidings every week

yes, they have given up a huge amount to get all these kids.
I think they are destined for 3-4 years minimum at the bottom.
Long road, the only upside in the short term is the return of some good players from injury.

 

[stallon]

yes, they have given up a huge amount to get all these kids.
I think they are destined for 3-4 years minimum at the bottom.
Long road, the only upside in the short term is the return of some good players from injury.

Those players coming back from injury do not replace what theyve lost to trades and retirements this year, then you have to assume theyll still have some amount of injuries anyway

 

[Lyyynnnchy]

Maybe we got Graham for SFA because Richmond knew they were getting 14 for Baker?

Too many only look at the 14 for Baker in isolation - and it was overs - but never consider adding to that the trade that got us Graham for not much.

So … there is a scenario where the club looked at both trades in combination and said we’re considering it as ‘Graham + Baker’ for ‘14 + SFA’.

However, I know some here just won’t-can’t have a bar of this as a possibility because they went all in on ‘the trade period was a calamity’ meme. That it was a complete disaster. That Clarke was a f*ing ****. And Pyke was the same.

Richmond had no choice as to what they were getting for Graham…

 

[Lyyynnnchy]

That’s true. But again I wasn’t commenting on that. You can trot out any number of things I didn’t raise but none of them so far negate the possibility that the club might have only got Baker if they got Graham too (or vice versa). That both trades were maybe linked.

But if you know that possibility is 100% untrue … evidence please.

It can’t be vice versa, Graham signed as a UFA BEFORE the Baker trade was done

 

[Grahame]

It can’t be vice versa, Graham signed as a UFA BEFORE the Baker trade was done

That’s only true if both trades were separate. And nobody here apparently knows how both trades were done. Whether there was any nudge nudge. It has all been guesswork that it was just ‘Baker for 14’. That there was absolutely nothing else going on.

Who knows what really happened? Graham might have been thinking of staying at Richmond. Or going to a club that wasn’t WCE. Or until Baker persuaded him. Who knows?

My point is I don’t know - and no one else apparently does either. So all the anger at ‘Baker for 14’ is based on assumption. Meanwhile, no one seemed to even think there might be other possibilities.

 

[Yeahnahmate]

When you add up trades + draft we smashed it. Quit whining

 

[WA footy mad]

Was really impressed with the attitude of our draft crop in there interviews, apart from losing pick 3 i am hoping we have struck gold with a few of the players we picked up

 

[Coasters7]

No.

We got Graham for SFA because he was an UFA. Richmond couldn’t do s**t about anything regardless of Baker so to lump them together and say it was a package is ridiculous.

We overpaid for Baker.

Would have been a goodwill agreement with Graham and Baker for sure. Graham only signs if Baker is guaranteed to come etc. That could be where our “commitment” to him comes from.

Given the way the draft panned out I think we can move on. We ended up with the player we likely would have taken at 14 anyway

14+30 for Baker and Shanahan leaves Baker valued at 30 if you prefer to look at it that way.

 

[RookiePick]

I would totally have spent 14 on Shanahan.

Our history of success with big-beaked basterds is elite.

 

[Astro7]

This shit again, can we leave this as the training thread, go and sook somewhere else will ya.

Is there a dedicated thread for this, there should be?
For all things related to pick 3, #14, Baker and Graham - it would be endless like the twilight zone, and keep a lot of people happy on both sides of the zone?

 

[ghostbat12]

Is there a dedicated thread for this, there should be?
For all things related to pick 3, #14, Baker and Graham - it would be endless like the twilight zone, and keep a lot of people happy on both sides of the zone?

Based on Judd trade, Kelly trade same people will still be talking about it in 2034.

Now, is Reid putting in extra 10mins after training yet? Or the minimums?

Is there training tomorrow?

 

[Bender_]

Based on Judd trade, Kelly trade same people will still be talking about it in 2034.

Now, is Reid putting in extra 10mins after training yet? Or the minimums?

Is there training tomorrow?

Good news, Reid's starting training 10 minutes early instead.

When he holds hands with his girlfriend she still puts hers on top though - can't win them all.

 

[Nuffington Post]

I just realized Dev is out of contract in 2025 …


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[ThePuma #9]

Trading pick 3 for 12 and 14 and then on trading 14 for Baker was awful. Theres no sugar coating it and I was pissed at the time but thanks to a fortunate draft we have managed to pick ourselves up off the canvas and regroup. It doesn’t excuse what happened but it helps make it more palatable. Have to be lucky sometimes I suppose.

After some reflection however I can think of several reasons why the club made the trade.

1. Graham and Baker are best mates. It’s one thing to say Graham was an UFA and one had nothing to do with the other but it did. Graham had an offer on the table from the Tigers but decided to join his mate in WA. He’s from SA so there was no go home factor involved.
We signed him early and promises would’ve been made to Graham that we’d get the Baker deal done. When Hawks ****ed us by trading out 12 our hands were tied. We needed to come up with draft capitol quickly. Tigers knew that and were not interested in pick 3 for a downgrade and second rounders weren’t going to get it done for him either. I’m certain we looked at every trade imaginable but that was the best split available. Just looking at draft night and what first rounders were valued at I doubt there was a better offer available.

2. The Harley factor. Still unsigned and the hounds howling at the gates. We need to improve quickly for a few reasons. The obvious one is to convince Harley we are heading in the right direction but it’s also to attract talent.
We took aim at Busslinger, Robertson, English, Peatling, Warner…. god knows how many others. No one wanted to come play for us. Only way to change that is showing them we are improving and on the up.
Adding Baker, Graham and Owies definitely improves the squad and if we manage to win 7-8 games next year it might be worth it in the long run, especially is Reid signs an extension.

Pick 3 might turn into a star but the difference between that player and Allen plus any potential recruits we may be able to snare thanks to the improvement we may show might not be as far apart as some think.

3. Baker and Graham know the Tigers way. I know Mini will put his twist to it but he’s bringing a game style that will be very reminiscent of the way the Tigers played. Baker and Graham are experienced in this. It helps Mini massively to have two former players be able to help guide the younger players on what we are trying to achieve. You can never have too many on field leaders, especially for a young side.

I’ve put the trade behind me now. I’m sure lessons were learned. It was Pykes and Clarkes first time out on their own and I doubt we’ll be making the same mistakes twice. Let’s hope for a bit more luck, a few more wins and that the moves that were made pay off in the long run.