View Full Version : Do we need to delist any more?
Warwick
25 Oct 2007, 14:53
Our list as it stands at the moment:
1. M. Clark
5. S. Harding
6. L. Power
7. J. Adcock
8. T. Notting
9. A. McGrath
10. M. Moody
11. J. Sherman
12. J. Hawksley
13. C. Schmidt
15. M. Tyler
16. J. Brown
17. J. Brennan
19. J. Charman
20. S. Black
21. D. Merrett
23. M. Leuenberger
24. J. Patfull
25. W. Mills
26. J. Macdonald
27. P. Garner
28. T. Selwood
29. J. Roe
30. R. Copeland
32. C. Stiller
33. R. Hooper
34. A. Proud
35. M. Rischitelli
36. D. Bradshaw
39. J. Drummond
41. S. Sheldon
43. B. McDonald
44. N. Lappin (Vet outside the 38)
New: Travis Johnstone
Rookies:
A. Corrie
C. Begley
D. Dzufer
S. Clouston
J. Tippet
H. Kiel
W. Hamill
Out: Wood, Hadley, C. Scott, Voss, Johnson, Allan, Fixter
In: Johnstone, Corrie (probable), Begley (probable)
Draft picks: 8, 25, 41, 52, 57
So....
We currently have 33 on the list. If we promote Corrie and Begley - 35. I'd imagine we would take 5 picks in the ND so that leaves 2 more to be delisted by my maths. Garner would be an obvious choice with the option of trying to pick him up in the rookie draft. Does that leave one more to be shown the door?
lionbear
25 Oct 2007, 14:57
What are the minimum amounts of selections you have to use in the National Draft?
I think it is looking more like we will not participate in the PSD as well.
Warwick
25 Oct 2007, 14:58
What are the minimum amounts of selections you have to use in the National Draft?
I think it is looking more like we will not participate in the PSD as well.
3 in the ND.
Lethal has come out and said we won't be picking up anyone in the PSD.
lionbear
25 Oct 2007, 14:59
Lethal has come out and said we won't be picking up anyone in the PSD.
Thats good, I don't think we need to do any recycling this year:D
It was always going to be unlikely that we'd pick someone up in the PSD given that there weren't many obvious delistings on the list.
It wouldn't totally surprise me if we end up only taking 4 in the draft, with Garner the only one to move off the senior list. Even the much derided Moody would be worth 1 more year, given that he has played a few decent games, mainly in 2006 (yes, the Jmac experience has me nervous about predicting the ends of careers!).
Dylan12
25 Oct 2007, 15:53
Would I be right in saying that the maximum number of players we can have this year is 39 - from my understanding - must have a squad of 38 - and are allowed 2 veterans - by my reckoning Lappin is the only one who qualifies - so with that - squad of 33 now - add Corrie & Begley (if not they have to be delisted) - that makes 35 - take Garner off and rookie - back to 34 and then can have 5 selections at National Draft - also if Hammil is not placed on the senior list, i think we have to delist him as he already has had 3 years as a rookie, the maximum - please correct me if wrong:thumbsu:
TheBrownDog
25 Oct 2007, 16:00
Its going to be great when Blacky and Luke are eligible for Veterans list status.
BigCat2
25 Oct 2007, 16:44
Something to keep in mind which complicates our list size is the use of veterans outside 38. Last season we had 2 (Voss and Lappin) at the expense of rookie spots so that allowed us to have 40 senior players.
With Voss gone, and nobody else eligible (I believe player has to be 30 years old as one of the criteria), Lappin will be our only veteran, and likely to remain outside 38. That gives us a maximum of 39 senior players.
So however many additions we have, we'll need to have 1 more delisting.
Players out: Voss, Scott, Johnson Wood, Hadley, Fixter, Allan = 7
Players in: Johnstone, (likely) Begley, (likely) Corrie = 3
So the way things stand at the moment we can have 3 picks in the National Draft, provided we don't enter PSD (which Leigh has confirmed).
It'd be interesting to see how many picks the club would like to take in the ND, and the fates of guys like Garner, Moody, Hamill.
Sherminator.
25 Oct 2007, 17:36
Garner would be a probable delistment if necessary. I'd say Moody is the other logical choice.
I'd like to see the Lions take Collard in ND.
_charlie_
25 Oct 2007, 17:45
Hello everyone, I have been wondering the same thing.
I don't think it is absolutely necessary that we delist anyone else in regards to numbers. Having said this, there are two players that I personally would not be heartbroken to let go:
Ash McGrath
Matthew Moody
However I feel both players could have attracted outside interest and since they were not traded then I feel it is unlikely they will be leaving the Lions this year.
Begley and Corrie I thought would be certainties to be promoted, as most of you have said.
I would also like to see Pat Garner rookie listed. Fingers crossed for the local boy.
TheBrownDog
25 Oct 2007, 18:02
Hello everyone, I have been wondering the same thing.
I don't think it is absolutely necessary that we delist anyone else in regards to numbers. Having said this, there are two players that I personally would not be heartbroken to let go:
Ash McGrath
Matthew Moody
.
Would be gutted to lose Ash. Criminally underrated.
TheBrownDog
25 Oct 2007, 18:04
I'd like to see the Lions take Collard in ND.
Avoid at all costs.
Freo are stupid when it comes to list management, but not this stupid.
Has been let go for a reason. Attitude is allegedly terrible.
_charlie_
25 Oct 2007, 19:03
TheBrownDog:
Would be gutted to lose Ash. Criminally underrated.Yes, perhaps he is underrated. But TBD, where do you see Ash playing, considering the likes of Corrie and Hooper are around? I am a fan of Hooper playing in the centre yet that outs someone like Stiller, Sherman etc etc etc. I just would not be choosing Ash over any of these blokes.
The-Spanner
25 Oct 2007, 19:35
I wouldn't be putting Hooper in the middle at this stage of his career. Ash, on the other hand, would be a good option to play off the bench and onto a wing.
Dylan12
26 Oct 2007, 01:39
Since when did Corrie become a better player than Ash - he is no chance to be delisted - i would still put him ahead of Hooper as he has the runs on the board and like charlie said will be played further up the ground - i for one am not sure what Ash has done wrong - thought he struggled with an injury for a while but besides his offensive prowress he is gold with his pressure (tackling, chasing etc) i think those that doubt him underate him significantly - a real solid performer whom i rate:thumbsu:
TheBrownDog
26 Oct 2007, 01:41
Since when did Corrie become a better player than Ash - he is no chance to be delisted - i would still put him ahead of Hooper as he has the runs on the board and like charlie said will be played further up the ground - i for one am not sure what Ash has done wrong - thought he struggled with an injury for a while but besides his offensive prowress he is gold with his pressure (tackling, chasing etc) i think those that doubt him underate him significantly - a real solid performer whom i rate:thumbsu:
Yup, Ash supporters unite. :thumbsu:
Still remember the blinder he played in the 2003 PF, including that freakish long goal.
Grimreepah
26 Oct 2007, 02:09
I have been critical of Ash in the past but he has been quite good this year. I can't see the Lions even considering getting rid of him.
Yes, perhaps he is underrated. But TBD, where do you see Ash playing, considering the likes of Corrie and Hooper are around? I am a fan of Hooper playing in the centre yet that outs someone like Stiller, Sherman etc etc etc. I just would not be choosing Ash over any of these blokes.
I would see Ash playing across the half back flank coming off the bench.
If we have to delist anyone else for me it has to be Moody. I just can't see him ever being the player we wanted him to be.
The Flying Belgian
26 Oct 2007, 09:55
Agree with McGrath. Between he and Hooper we have two small forward capable of going into the midfield, even though I prefer Ash up the field a bit.
I would see Ash playing across the half back flank coming off the bench.
If we have to delist anyone else for me it has to be Moody. I just can't see him ever being the player we wanted him to be.
Agreed, If we don't use the Hadley pick I'm going to be ticked off! At the moment we have
Pick 08 -
Pick 25 -
Pick 41 -
Pick 52 -
Pick 57 -
Surely there has to be 5 kids worth a roll of the dice? If we only pick 3 then I'd be most disappointed.
brenjay
26 Oct 2007, 15:27
Although hooper has speed, his shot for goal lets him down. Ash however has a very nice kick and has proved he can kick goals.
Will much rather Ash play up the ground
BigCat2
31 Oct 2007, 18:25
According to afl.com.au, Allan, Fixter and Garner have been officially delisted.
So if the only further list changes we make are the promotions of Begley and Corrie, then we'll have 4 selections in the National Draft.
According to afl.com.au, Allan, Fixter and Garner have been officially delisted.
So if the only further list changes we make are the promotions of Begley and Corrie, then we'll have 4 selections in the National Draft.
So looks like we'll use our Hadley pick (52) but not our pick 57? Which would effectively mean that we've traded hadley for an upgrade of 5 spots in the fourth(?) round. hmmm.
Fairley
31 Oct 2007, 18:49
On afl.com.au it says begley is still on our rookie list? what the? he is better than half our playes on the senior list.
T Factor
31 Oct 2007, 18:51
From the AFL site....
BRISBANE LIONS
1. Adcock, Jed
2. Black, Simon
3. Bradshaw, Daniel
4. Brennan, Jared
5. Brown, Jonathan
6. Charman, Jamie
7. Clark, Mitchell
8. Copeland, Robert
9. Corrie, Anthony
10. Drummond, Josh
11. Harding, Scott
12. Hawksley, James
13. Hooper, Rhan
14. Johnstone, Travis
15. Lappin, Nigel (veteran – outside list)
16. Leuenberger, Matthew
17. Macdonald, Joel
18. McDonald, Beau
19. McGrath, Ashley
20. Merrett, Daniel
21. Mills, Wayde
22. Moody, Matthew
23. Notting, Tim
24. Patfull, Joel
25. Power, Luke
26. Proud, Albert
27. Rischitelli, Michael
28. Roe, Jason
29. Schmidt, Chris
30. Selwood, Troy
31. Sheldon, Sam
32. Sherman, Justin
33. Stiller, Cheynee
34. Tyler, Matt
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
Rookie List
1. Begley, Colm
2. Clouston, Scott
3. Dzufer, Daniel
4. Kiel, Haydyn
5. Tippett, Joel
6.
7.
8.
Scholarship List
-
ADDITIONS:
Father/son selection: –
Exchange period – received: Travis Johnstone (Melbourne)
Rookie elevation: Anthony Corrie
Scholarship elevation:
NAB AFL Draft:
NAB AFL Pre-Season Draft:
NAB AFL Rookie Draft:
DELETIONS:
Retired: Chris Johnson, Chris Scott, Michael Voss (veteran – outside list)
Exchange period – traded: Richard Hadley (Carlton), Cameron Wood (Collingwood)
Delisted: Marcus Allan, Ben Fixter, Pat Garner, Will Hamill (rookie)
BigCat2
31 Oct 2007, 18:52
On afl.com.au it says begley is still on our rookie list? what the? he is better than half our playes on the senior list.
Don't be so hasty, this is only the first list lodgement. There's another lodgement to come on 16 Nov.
Cousin Jed
31 Oct 2007, 18:56
On afl.com.au it says begley is still on our rookie list? what the? he is better than half our playes on the senior list.
No Rush.
He's not going anywhere.
Bobby Beecroft
31 Oct 2007, 19:15
So looks like we'll use our Hadley pick (52) but not our pick 57? Which would effectively mean that we've traded hadley for an upgrade of 5 spots in the fourth(?) round. hmmm.
Preferred he went into the PSD?
I Struggle to see the choice we had.
As for Ash I just wish they would play him in the back half.
Would make a great attacking defender in the CJ mould.
Delisted: Marcus Allan, Ben Fixter, Pat Garner, Will Hamill (rookie)
That's new. Hadn't heard Hamill had been delisted, not that it was hugely unexpected.
Sherminator.
31 Oct 2007, 19:44
7 players out of the team and 1 in means 6 spots. I presume the Lions will use their first four picks and then take 3 priority rookie picks. :thumbsu:
Good to see Hamill has made space on the team list.
Fairley
31 Oct 2007, 21:18
what exactly are the rules with us and our rookies? i know something is special, anyone like to explain what?
TheBrownDog
31 Oct 2007, 21:50
what exactly are the rules with us and our rookies? i know something is special, anyone like to explain what?
Along with the Swans, we are allowed extra rookie spots.
In addition, we get three priority picks in the Rookie draft before the other teams, but we must use them on QLD based players.
Preferred he went into the PSD?
I Struggle to see the choice we had.
I preferred we dealt him someplace else. I refuse to believe that no-one would give us more for Hadley than that. A pick in the 30s at least.
And if it came down to it, YES let him go in the PSD. We got virtually nothing for him, let him go in the PSD. Let some club use a pick on him, and possibly overpay him with a nominated salary.
notting18
31 Oct 2007, 22:55
I preferred we dealt him someplace else. I refuse to believe that no-one would give us more for Hadley than that. A pick in the 30s at least.
And if it came down to it, YES let him go in the PSD. We got virtually nothing for him, let him go in the PSD. Let some club use a pick on him, and possibly overpay him with a nominated salary.
I think the problem with that is that Hadley wanted to go to Carlton and not a team willing to give us a higher pick - so he would never have agreed to another club.
Also, there is the aspect of treating people respectfully - yes it can come back to bite us (Mal anyone?), but if possible i see it as a preferable practice. If Hadley desperately wanted to go to Carlton, wouldn't agree to go to another club for a higher pick and wasn't a walk up start in the best 22...I am ok with the club dealing to get him to Carlton.
I think the problem with that is that Hadley wanted to go to Carlton and not a team willing to give us a higher pick - so he would never have agreed to another club.
Also, there is the aspect of treating people respectfully - yes it can come back to bite us (Mal anyone?), but if possible i see it as a preferable practice. If Hadley desperately wanted to go to Carlton, wouldn't agree to go to another club for a higher pick and wasn't a walk up start in the best 22...I am ok with the club dealing to get him to Carlton.
I don't want to get into the whole Hadley debate again, but I dont think it's liked we owed him or anything, its not like he was a loyal club servant. We stuck by him, kept paying him etc. I think it's about time we grew some big kahunas and did what is best for the club. I think we've been a bit too soft in our negotiations overall. We're like that kid of school... please be my friend you can have my lunch money.
What is the world coming too when your preffered club is Carlton?
notting18
31 Oct 2007, 23:24
I don't want to get into the whole Hadley debate again, but I dont think it's liked we owed him or anything, its not like he was a loyal club servant. We stuck by him, kept paying him etc. I think it's about time we grew some big kahunas and did what is best for the club. I think we've been a bit too soft in our negotiations overall. We're like that kid of school... please be my friend you can have my lunch money.
What is the world coming too when your preffered club is Carlton?
I think we have encoutered a fundamental difference of beliefs in how a business/footy club should be run. As i would argue, what we did was best for the club.
TheBrownDog
31 Oct 2007, 23:28
Don't forget Vidman that Hadley was uncontracted, and was interested in more money and playing time.
He would have got both at either Carlton or Richmond.
We didn't hold many cards at all.
Also interesting to see that Corrie has been promoted, while Begley is still on the rookie list. I thought Colm originally signed a 2 year contract when he joined us, and given that he played regularly for us last year, there's no reason why he shouldn't be on the senior list. Are we waiting for the second list lodgement? Or keeping him there to have 1 more pick in the National Draft?
TheBrownDog
1 Nov 2007, 03:15
Also interesting to see that Corrie has been promoted, while Begley is still on the rookie list. I thought Colm originally signed a 2 year contract when he joined us, and given that he played regularly for us last year, there's no reason why he shouldn't be on the senior list. Are we waiting for the second list lodgement? Or keeping him there to have 1 more pick in the National Draft?
Waiting for the draft I guess, plenty of opportunity to elevate him still.
Not sure exactly why they wouldn't have done it at the same time as Corrie.
Maybe he has to sign something as part of the elevation process, and he is still in Ireland.
Maybe that is the reason?
Quite possibly TBD.
In other news, Llane Spaanderman has been delisted by West Coast after spending a year on their rookie list.
TheBrownDog
1 Nov 2007, 03:24
Quite possibly TBD.
In other news, Llane Spaanderman has been delisted by West Coast after spending a year on their rookie list.
Oh dear, last time he was delisted by a club he went on a crime spree. (http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,21691185-2761,00.html)
Bad egg that kid.
I think we have encoutered a fundamental difference of beliefs in how a business/footy club should be run. As i would argue, what we did was best for the club.
Agreed we disagree:thumbsu:
I think in five or ten years time the winners will be determined more and more by who plays the off field two games best - the salary cap and the draft. I'm not convinced that we play either of those two games well enough, or tough enough.
You could add in there free agency should that come in, and in some form it probably will.
Don't forget Vidman that Hadley was uncontracted, and was interested in more money and playing time.
He would have got both at either Carlton or Richmond.
We didn't hold many cards at all.
Uncontracted players get traded all the time. I have no idea how the afl gets away with it, but they do. I still think we'd have been better a) trading him to someone else for a better pick or b) let him go in the draft, would send a message to all those teams for next year and put us in a better negotiating position in the years ahead.
Sometimes when you hold no cards, bluffing is an option, particularly if it costs virtually nothing (upgrade of fourth round picks). Ok, I think i've been playing online poker too much this week!
You could add in there free agency should that come in, and in some form it probably will.
It will be a sad day for the Brisbane Lions when that comes in.
Brisbane and Sydney would be totally disadvantaged.
The Flying Belgian
1 Nov 2007, 11:25
I think in five or ten years time the winners will be determined more and more by who plays the off field two games best - the salary cap and the draft. I'm not convinced that we play either of those two games well enough, or tough enough.
You could add in there free agency should that come in, and in some form it probably will.
Uncontracted players get traded all the time. I have no idea how the afl gets away with it, but they do. I still think we'd have been better a) trading him to someone else for a better pick or b) let him go in the draft, would send a message to all those teams for next year and put us in a better negotiating position in the years ahead.
Sometimes when you hold no cards, bluffing is an option, particularly if it costs virtually nothing (upgrade of fourth round picks). Ok, I think i've been playing online poker too much this week!
There's two schools of thought on trading. One is "Lets' screw them for as much as they're worth". Downside there is pretty soon, no one wants to deal with you. The second and my preferred method is that both club receive fair compensation. That's what trading should be about IMO. And I think we played the salary cap game pretty well, we kept our premiership list together for a while so we exploited what we could, Sure we paid a price, but we seem to have recruited astutely since then, nullifying a lot of the impact.
Additionally I get the feeling that we're maybe front-loading a few contracts ATM while we have the opportunity. It's impossible to make a call really on that side of things without knowing contract size etc. We don't so we can't really.
The decision to trade Hadley was a good one from on two points. Firstly, it got the player where he wanted to go (and saving him the possibility of going to Richmond) and getting a slightly higher choice in the draft, while it may seem a waste of time it's all about maximising your options given the circumstances. If we draft a smoky who turns out great with that picks it'll be considered one of the most shrewd decisions going around. Secondly, keeping Carlton in the PSD market meant that it was one more club that would potentially be in the market for Brennan and keeping him away from Essendon.
People ask why didn't we trade him to another club. Evidently he wanted to go the the Blues. Pretty hard to trade a player to any other side when they don't want to go as the player has to sign off on it as well. In that way it's a Clayton's free agency. Player effectively says trade me to this club or I'll take my chances in the PSD.
Btw, all traded players are contracted - contracts expire on the 31 of October in the relevant year.