2023 Trade Time Talk - Henley Beach Café Returns

[1970crow]

No, the issue is you want to turn EVERY discussion into attacks on keeping Sloane.

If I'm honest, I just find it boring.

You started this wanting to talk about whether we have enough list spots. But it seems you really just wanted to talk again about not cutting Sloane.

FFS, at this point I think you need to get over it. He's staying. I wouldn't have done it - but I can understand why people do things different to me.

You're trying to find reasons why keeping Sloane is wrong. But this isn't one of them because, with him on the list, we still have the list spots for them to do what they want.

I'm having trouble reconciling the above post with the below where you're bemoaning using a rookie spot on Borlase because it'll cost us an opportunity to take one of the remaining, "good talents".

Honestly, I'm annoyed we've guaranteed him a rookie spot.

With only 55 or so main list picks, there will be good talents who are unselected and available as rookies. But we'll have no ability to take them because we've committed to Borlase, someone who's not going to be no more than a middling backup.

.

 

[dogs105]

I miss the years where we'd get 4 new undrafted SA players as rookies each year. Petrenkos, Wrights, Jaenchs, Battersbys, Ruttens, Bocks, Mattners, Lairds. It was nice having so many shiny new toys that had a chance of making it.

 

[1990crow]

Next year I think that's more likely with some current listed players probably at their AFL crossroads in 2024.

We seem to be changing tact to moving senior list players to rookie lists.

 

[Mostyn]

We seem to be changing tact to moving senior list players to rookie lists.

Isn't that mostly because of contract status?

 

[1990crow]

Isn't that mostly because of contract status?

Maybe. But looks like a trend, and not just for us.

 

[El Doederino]

We seem to be changing tact to moving senior list players to rookie lists.

Moving senior players to the “rookie” list is ridiculous.

The AFL should have a rule that you can’t put anyone on the rookie list who has been on a list before. That’s why it’s a “rookie” list.

 

[1990crow]

Moving senior players to the “rookie” list is ridiculous.

The AFL should have a rule that you can’t put anyone on the rookie list who has been on a list before. That’s why it’s a “rookie” list.

It's also not very effective. It's basically a salary cap manipulation.

 

[FR0GGY]

Moving senior players to the “rookie” list is ridiculous.

The AFL should have a rule that you can’t put anyone on the rookie list who has been on a list before. That’s why it’s a “rookie” list.

Just piss it off completely

 

[Mostyn]

Moving senior players to the “rookie” list is ridiculous.

The AFL should have a rule that you can’t put anyone on the rookie list who has been on a list before. That’s why it’s a “rookie” list.

The AFL should get rid of the rookie list and just have 42 list spots.

 

[dogs105]

The AFL should get rid of the rookie list and just have 42 list spots.

46

And a reserves comp.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Moving senior players to the “rookie” list is ridiculous.

The AFL should have a rule that you can’t put anyone on the rookie list who has been on a list before. That’s why it’s a “rookie” list.

Then you stop those who get a 2nd chance.

Would be better off having an age limit.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

The AFL should get rid of the rookie list and just have 42 list spots.

This would be most sensible solution.

 

[El Doederino]

Then you stop those who get a 2nd chance.

Would be better off having an age limit.

So what? They’ve had a chance and can be picked up again on the main list. If they take a rookie spot, they’re taking it from someone that hasn’t had a chance.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

So what? They’ve had a chance and can be picked up again on the main list. If they take a rookie spot, they’re taking it from someone that hasn’t had a chance.

Many successful players have come through the rookie list with a 2nd chance.

Not everyone makes it the 1st time.

 

[Crow till I die]

Thinking how we could get up to pick 8 whilst still maintaining a decent draft hand

I wonder if we would swap picks 10 + Melbourne 2nd with Essendon for 9?. If that worked, then Geelong may well be open to swapping 8 + 23 for 9 + 20 - so we would end up going to the draft with 8, 14 & 23 and miss out on the extra 2nd next year. Pick 8 would probably guarantee the player we may really want (O'Sullivan or Wilson)