- Banned
- #151
Nope
List lodgement pre-draft complete - Tanner Smith Delisted
- Thread starter Nickos66
- Start date
- Tagged users None
democritus
Club Legend
No more murmurs about Brown or Grimley? Surely we are making room for a DFA. I know we scored Sutcliffe with a similar pick but it seems pretty brutal booting Smith onto the rookie list for a stab at an unknown 18 year old at pick 72.
- Banned
- #153
When does the DFA trade period finish?
Would've thought any potential DFA would have shown up at training today. I wasn't at training so I may be wrong but I don't think there was any non-freo players at training this morning (assume they'd do a medical at training before we sign them). Of course that still leaves the third DFA period but doubt we have anyone lined up at this point in time.
democritus
Club Legend
Also, pretty sure we have to run any additional members of the training squad past the AFL. I haven't heard anything whatsoever about our permission to train list, (although Tanner may have been added since being delisted?) so presumably it's just our existing list out there.
Technically both Smith and Hurley (is he officially signed???) arent freo players but will be over the next month but you make a point. Perhaps a medical will be done outside of training. Assume we can do that as teams put players through medicals during trade week without them ever officially training with the team prior to signing a contract.
- Jan 14, 2008
- 14,827
- 31,828
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
No unknowns on the track today
- May 26, 2014
- 834
- 994
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Really odd. I was sure we were signing one of Grimley or Brown.
I wouldn't have thought we'd get a better player than Smith at pick 70-odd. Surely this means we are going tall early.
I wouldn't have thought we'd get a better player than Smith at pick 70-odd. Surely this means we are going tall early.
A couple of things worth noting; both Tanner Smith and Sam Grimley (Hawks) have been promised places on their respective teams rookie lists and as such unlikely they will nominate for ND and instead the PSD/RD. Whereas delisted players like Mitch Brown and Kane Lucas don't have that luxury so will nominate for both drafts. Jason Tutt who wants to get to Carlton and delisted himself will just nominate for the PSD/RD. He isn't eligible for Delisted FA.
Yes each of Tanner Smith, Sam Grimley, Mitch Brown & Kane Lucas can be picked up as Delisted FA. But you lock yourself into that selection and before the ND. The 2nd DFA period ends on Wednesday.
The draft is on the 27 November. Why not see what is available at pick 72 which is likely to drop a few selections effectively with Promoted Rookie's, Father Son and Academy selections. Otherwise pass on that final selection and then explore the 3rd Delisted FA window from the 28 Nov (day after ND) to 1 Dec, or alternatively nab one of these players in the PSD which is immediately before the Rookie Draft on 3 Dec.
I quite like Mitch Brown but with his injury record I see him more as a Rookie. Yet with Tanner Smith promised a spot I cannot see room for Grimley/Brown on the Rookie list. We would be a top heavy land of the Giants Rookie list. A midfielder to go with Tanner Smith is a must.
It is worth playing out selections 13, 34 & 54 and then deciding what is available at 72, the 3rd Delisted FA or PSD. For example if we select Wright at 13 then this would really eliminate the need for Grimley. Yet if you lock yourself in with Grimley now then this can shape how you go in the draft and we don't want that. I'm not 100% sure with this assumption but Fremantle locked themselves into the PSD early with Jack Anthony a few years back and then passed over Jack Darling in the ND.
Better that we keep our options open. Also unlike some I'm not sure what all the fuss about Grimley is so why lock yourself in. The other thing which has been mentioned is that we can get some of these players over for a training trial including mature agers in state leagues that don't get picked in ND.
Last edited:
I've just had to explain why my corn flakes have left my mouth for the breakfast table.
Having thought about it some more, and assuming we will be using pick 72, I now think what may have happened is our recruiters have learnt that some of the players they thought would be taken in the 30s may actually be around in the 50s, so we can afford to pick up a bargain player in the 50s and use pick 72 on a project player we had our eye on for pick 54
Just to throw up another possible theory
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-11-19/runs-on-the-board
I'll also add maybe we're only going with 39 senior players and 5 rookies
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-11-19/runs-on-the-board
I'll also add maybe we're only going with 39 senior players and 5 rookies
Similar threads
