- Thread starter
- #5,076
No need to trade. I hear Grigg and Hampson are going to kill it next year.
Should have grabbed Robbo. He would have been more useful. Bad move Richmond.
List Mgmt. 2014: The List
- Thread starter HARKER
- Start date
- Tagged users None
No need to trade. I hear Grigg and Hampson are going to kill it next year.
Should have grabbed Robbo. He would have been more useful. Bad move Richmond.
- Moderator
- #5,078
Hope they kill each other, Both pretty useless
You just cant trust the bummer players, Probably a good thing it didnt happen reallyWinderlich did an about turn!
He's 3o years old and with the show cause notices probably would of been banned then retire
Doubt It - Was tongue in cheek
Was mentioned carlton really wanted the #70, They are worried that Tutt wouldn't be available after 70
In any case, Richmond would be about the only club still going between 70 and 88.
I think we could pick him up late in the ND if we wanted, not many teams would want to pay 200k for a late ND pick
are they exclusive? can you nominate for the ND and the PSD separately?
Jeremias
Moderator
- Sep 26, 2004
- 46,176
- 62,547
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Moderator
- #5,084
As I understand it any out of contract player who wishes to continue their career elsewhere must stipulate whether they intend to enter the National Draft or the Preseason Draft.
It looks as though we have committed to Tutt and he has committed to us, so you'd think he'll be nominating for the PSD.
Rogers stated in his interview after trade week that we're looking to take him in that draft.
I wonder if, we knew about Tutt before well it was publicised, because Rogers stated at the start of trade week that we planned to take a player in the preseason draft, which I assume we all thought was Saad.
Jeremias
Moderator
- Sep 26, 2004
- 46,176
- 62,547
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Moderator
- #5,086
I'd say that's very unlikely given most clubs are generally receptive to trading and enter trade week with a relatively open mind, perhaps save for a few who are notoriously difficult to deal with.
It goes without saying that each club is out there looking to do what they deem best for them but at the end of the day this is a professional environment and clubs wouldn't be looking to deliberately do something 'wrong' by another.
We knew prior to the exchange period that Tutt wanted to come to Carlton and I have no doubt that the club would have tried to find an equitable trade with the Bulldogs that was mutually beneficial for the three parties involved.
There's a lot of things happening during the exchange period and whilst generally players get to the club they want to go to, sometimes things don't work out as planned. We all have different thoughts regarding the value of players and clubs are usually able to find middle ground but that is not always the case.
Clearly what we were prepared to offer for Tutt and what the Bulldogs were willing to accept were not the same and I dare say they were a fair way apart. That doesn't mean we weren't looking to trade but we can't veer from our strategies and what we believe to be the best for the club heading forward.
The trade period has now passed but clearly Tutt is still keen to come to Carlton and we seem very happy to facilitate that. No doubt our preferred option would have been to arrange a trade but that's not the only avenue available to us so unless Tutt does a backflip and decides to stay with the Dogs (unlikely but they do want to keep him still) then expect to hear his name called out by Carlton when our pick in the PSD comes around.
do you think our taking of Tutt in the PSD is detrimental to another player we had earmarked out for that PSD selection?
Jeremias
Moderator
- Sep 26, 2004
- 46,176
- 62,547
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Moderator
- #5,089
I highly doubt it has made any difference whatsoever to our plans.
Clubs who haven't filled their senior list via the other channels available have always had the PSD as another option but we haven't gone down that path recently and I very much doubt we would have explored that option had Tutt joined via trade.
Now that the trade period has passed we still have a player keen to join from another club so the PSD option opens up again and becomes the most logical way of bringing him across.
Tutt would have been on our radar for quite some time and we would have 'budgeted' for his arrival with the preferred option being facilitating a trade and the PSD the fall-back option.
With the way we tend to structure the list (38/6 split) my guess is that we offered pick 79 for Tutt which the Dogs weren't happy with.
We seem comfortable with the 38/6 split so I dare say we'll go down that path again. With Tutt joining via the PSD we have 36 senior listed players - the remaining two places to be filled with picks 19 and 28. Robinson going which seems highly likely will open pick 61.
That sees us take 3 in the ND, 1 in the PSD and maintain the desired list structure. If we decide to cut deeper (Lucas, McLean, Ellard) we have picks 65, 79 and 101 at our disposal. Pick 65 may get us something so one of those three may go but I don't see the value in going deeper than that hence the suggestion that a few of them may be very lucky and hang onto their spot on the senior list by a thread.
If we do go that deep we'll almost certainly look to topping up from our rookie list with one or both of Sheehan and/or BJ, or as rumoured draft a player (possibly Matthew Dick) as a DFA.
SE_Blue
Cancelled
We have 7 but it's highly unlikely we'd use all 7.
I interpret it as going into draft day with 7 vacant list spots (33 senior players).
Prove me wrong in a couple of weeks, when we've delisted 2 extra players to give us 3 rookie draft selections instead of 1.
Otherwise, rounds 6 and 7 are effectively bogus.
- 4 will be used at the draft
- 1 will be held over to the preseason draft
- selections 24 and 42 in the PSD will be passed to enable us 2 extra rookie spots (38/6 split)
Prove me wrong in a couple of weeks, when we've delisted 2 extra players to give us 3 rookie draft selections instead of 1.
Otherwise, rounds 6 and 7 are effectively bogus.
- Thread starter
- #5,094
Until we have a definitive understanding of what the CFC have in mind for the 4 uncontracted players, we're largely guessing.
Even though we understand McLean and Robinson to be likely shown the door and for Ellard and Lucas to remain, we can't be sure until official advice.
PSD rarely runs deeper than for a handful of players, so I doubt there would be any live selections post pick no. 10.
Last year we had only one pick-up here with the first selection.
We'll keep the one pick dry for Tutt and that will be it.
Whichever way though it seems we'll have a minimum of 3 selections in the rookie draft and at a stretch, up to 5.
Even though we understand McLean and Robinson to be likely shown the door and for Ellard and Lucas to remain, we can't be sure until official advice.
PSD rarely runs deeper than for a handful of players, so I doubt there would be any live selections post pick no. 10.
Last year we had only one pick-up here with the first selection.
We'll keep the one pick dry for Tutt and that will be it.
Whichever way though it seems we'll have a minimum of 3 selections in the rookie draft and at a stretch, up to 5.
In any case, Richmond would be about the only club still going between 70 and 88.
I think we will pass on 79 for the PSD, to get Tutt.
Wow Robbie Tarrant is the luckiest footballer ever. Astonishing that he's still on a list.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #5,098
A fair bit of debate about McLean and references to his BOG performance in R23 as evidence he can play the game.
He does know how to play the game, no risk there.
The issue with Brock is that his lack of pace makes him a liability at times. He also seems to drop off work rate wise at inopportune times. Think it was one of the Geelong heartbreakers where McLean was not minding anybody at a Cats forward stoppage and the Cats scored the winning goal. He puts himself in a position to receive and distribute and I think he is one of the smartest in the side to know where to go to intercept or receive the ball, but it shouldn't be his game. A player with smarts but no pace should be mostly inside but Brock is not a clearance machine and he is not particularly strong in the clinches.
Maybe not fair to compare him to a Brownlow medallist but Matt Priddis lacks a bit of toe so he becomes an inside beast.
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/...d1=1696&tid2=4&pid2=1382&type=A&fid1=S&fid2=S
Efficiency pretty much the same, but Priddis goes 52% contested to 40% for Brock. Because he is inside Priddis contributes with tackles and clearances. You'd think Brock was getting outside a lot more because his marking stats are higher but Priddis averages more I50s and R50s indicating his workrate is all over the ground. Then Priddis is a benefit to his side because he goes first for the ball and gets the free kicks.
Age, pace, experience, size .... this is where McLean should be ... if he worked hard enough.
He does know how to play the game, no risk there.
The issue with Brock is that his lack of pace makes him a liability at times. He also seems to drop off work rate wise at inopportune times. Think it was one of the Geelong heartbreakers where McLean was not minding anybody at a Cats forward stoppage and the Cats scored the winning goal. He puts himself in a position to receive and distribute and I think he is one of the smartest in the side to know where to go to intercept or receive the ball, but it shouldn't be his game. A player with smarts but no pace should be mostly inside but Brock is not a clearance machine and he is not particularly strong in the clinches.
Maybe not fair to compare him to a Brownlow medallist but Matt Priddis lacks a bit of toe so he becomes an inside beast.
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/...d1=1696&tid2=4&pid2=1382&type=A&fid1=S&fid2=S
Efficiency pretty much the same, but Priddis goes 52% contested to 40% for Brock. Because he is inside Priddis contributes with tackles and clearances. You'd think Brock was getting outside a lot more because his marking stats are higher but Priddis averages more I50s and R50s indicating his workrate is all over the ground. Then Priddis is a benefit to his side because he goes first for the ball and gets the free kicks.
Age, pace, experience, size .... this is where McLean should be ... if he worked hard enough.
If McLean had the speed of a few of our other mids, he would be an absolute gun. I dare say that's why he was drafted where he was and was a bit quicker before his foot injuries if I recall correctly.
Honestly, I can't see how he keeps a spot in a team in 2015. The game has gone past his abilities now, even though his natural talent allows him to hang on and covers up some of the speed issues. At the end of the day though, him being here is a list spot that could be taken up by a younger prospect.
thylacine60
Premium Platinum
- Banned
- #5,100
He doesn't do it quickly but it would be unfair not to mention his gut-running. His tank is incredible. Won us the "McLean can't get the distance" match against the Tiges.
