Opinion What do you think our Draft Strategy will be? (Poll)

Draft Strategy? (SL = "Senior List", RLA = "Rookie List cat A", ignoring Cox as Cat B)

  • 38 SL (+ P5, Moore, Varcoe, Greenwood, Frost) and 6 RLA (Gault + 5 newbies) - 0 delist

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    77
Mar 11, 2008
5,046
5,483
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
I doubt Ramsay will be delisted. He was the second youngest player in the AFL in 2013 and suffered an injury. He only his debut late in '14 but showed some signs. He was a second round pick who has not had a proper run at it so I think he is safe. Oxley might be moved to the rookie list I suppose if we wish to draft a player at pick 48 because I am almost certain Frost will be elevated.
 

mike123

Cancelled
30k Posts 10k Posts Pokemon is Life
Sep 13, 2013
31,411
28,203
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Juventus
I wouldn't care if Ramsay is delisted or not. He looks like another Williams, Sinclair type.
 
It's not a question - Frost signed a new 2-year contract late in the 2014 season so he has to be promoted.

Someone is definitely going to get delisted before the draft as we'll obviously be using pick 48 (it's far too early a pick to use on a rookie upgrade).
You are probably correct, although Frosty can remain on the rookie list for 1 more year (upgrade next year with LTI).
 

partypie

Norm Smith Medallist
Nov 26, 2013
7,228
8,775
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls, Green Bay Packers
You are probably correct, although Frosty can remain on the rookie list for 1 more year (upgrade next year with LTI).

Yep I've come to realise that's an option and it might be the one we actually take - given that he signed in September when we knew Shazza would probably be out for most of (if not all) of 2015.
 
I threw this together the other day to try to get my head around it myself:

86597_d255661f2ee53f1abc8a3464bff87a0e.png

It all depends on what they do with Frost - there is room to still have him on the rookie list this year (he'd be promoted for the full season to cover for Scharenberg) and if they went that way we'd have 36 players on the senior list going into the draft and room for picks 5, 9, 30 and 48.

It is also possible that we promote Frost and delist one of Oxley or Ramsay and re-draft them as a rookie, which would again leave us with space for the four picks in the ND.
haha happy Birthday swampy.
 

JollyBallsUp

Club Legend
Jan 6, 2011
1,824
1,124
Victoria
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Liverpool, Barcelona, Bayern Munich
We currently have 37 "permanent" senior listed players including all of Greenwood, Varcoe, Crisp and Moore.

We then have 2 upgraded rookies in Gault and Frost who can be returned to the rookie list if we wish I would assume.

Gault will be you'd think. That would then leave us with 2 live selections on draft day in 5 and 30.

With Frost we have the choice up upgrading him on draft day to become a "permanent" senior listed player or downgrade him to the rookie list.

If we downgrade him we can then add him back to the senior list prior to the season with Scharenberg added to the LTI injury list.

Take this route and we'll be able to use pick 48 as a live selection on draft day.

Of course we may have more delistings to come of one or two players.

We will be using 5 and 30 on draft day that must is sure, quality players can be found at 30 and I'll be surprised if we don't retain the ability to use pick 48 as a "live" selection as well. Some Hine specials should still be available around that mark.

We have 2 long term injuries on our list meaning if we aim to use 30 and 48 in the draft. We will have 40 players on the senior list and 4 rookies.

Frost whilst he warrants being on the senior list he can be elevated for either Macaffer or Scharenberg given they will most likely be on the long term injury list. Mid season we will be able to elevate a rookie automatically (Frost), therefore I expect we will be using both 30 and 48 in this years National draft, hence why we gave Brisbane pick 67.
 

Matt_352

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 28, 2014
16,627
18,806
AFL Club
Collingwood
Scharenburg on LTI list and Frost put on senior list allows
us to use picks 5, 30 & 48. Pick 48 is far to early to promote a rookie.

My wishlist:

Pick 5 - Jayden Laverde
Pick 9 - Darcy Moore
Pick 30 - Nakia Cockatoo
Pick 48 - Toby McLean
 

DNine

Club Legend
Oct 28, 2008
1,993
995
West of Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Such a funny question, because as we stand now, we either don't promote Frost, or we promote him and delist another player yet, to give us the room. I noticed after I originally posted this, that it has been covered in discussion already, but this is still relevant.

OUT: Beams, Lumumba, Ball, Maxwell, Clarke, Lynch
IN: Greenwood, Varcoe, Crisp, Moore, Frost???

6 out, 5 in, means one more pick at pick 5 and we are done.

UNLESS we delist one of Ramsey, Oxley, Armstrong, Dwyer.
 
Last edited:

DNine

Club Legend
Oct 28, 2008
1,993
995
West of Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
We have 2 long term injuries on our list meaning if we aim to use 30 and 48 in the draft. We will have 40 players on the senior list and 4 rookies.

Frost whilst he warrants being on the senior list he can be elevated for either Macaffer or Scharenberg given they will most likely be on the long term injury list. Mid season we will be able to elevate a rookie automatically (Frost), therefore I expect we will be using both 30 and 48 in this years National draft, hence why we gave Brisbane pick 67.

No, because Frost needs to be PERMANENTLY promoted. We can't promote him temporarily forever. He has proven his worth, you promote him. Oxley however may be demoted to rookie again, but not sure whether they can do that by the rules. I am not sure.

I am getting to believe that the system has a loophole. Because there is a delisting period after the trade period, you can trade picks away like pick 67, with not ever having to justify you getting it in the first place. If we were to get pick 67, we would need to delist another 3 players. One for 30, one for 48 and another for 67. We won't be doing that, so it is a loophole.
 

well left

Premiership Player
May 3, 2008
3,160
2,823
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Such a funny question, because as we stand now, we either don't promote Frost, or we promote him and delist another player yet, to give us the room. I noticed after I originally posted this, that it has been covered in discussion already, but this is still relevant.

OUT: Beams, Lumumba, Ball, Maxwell, Clarke, Lynch
IN: Greenwood, Varcoe, Crisp, Moore, Frost???

6 out, 5 in, means one more pick at pick 5 and we are done.

UNLESS we delist one of Ramsey, Oxley, Armstrong, Dwyer.

Hudson was on the senior list as a nominated rookie wasn't he???
 

DNine

Club Legend
Oct 28, 2008
1,993
995
West of Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
48 too early to promote a rookie IMO so delist or demote a player so we can use 5, 30, 48 & promote frost

Demote Oxley, Delist Ramsey is the only real option. I think Armstrong came with a 2 year deal, so will be with us until the end of 2015. Dwyer is signed until the end of 2015. Anything else would be a shock.

Probably a good thing that Martin left, because it would be worse with him in the side still.
 

swoop42

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 29, 2014
6,477
15,752
The 18
AFL Club
Collingwood
Such a funny question, because as we stand now, we either don't promote Frost, or we promote him and delist another player yet, to give us the room. I noticed after I originally posted this, that it has been covered in discussion already, but this is still relevant.

OUT: Beams, Lumumba, Ball, Maxwell, Clarke, Lynch
IN: Greenwood, Varcoe, Crisp, Moore, Frost???

6 out, 5 in, means one more pick at pick 5 and we are done.

UNLESS we delist one of Ramsey, Oxley, Armstrong, Dwyer.

We currently have 37 "fixed" senior list players (including Moore, Greenwood etc) and 2 upgraded rookies in Gault and Frost.

If we want to officially upgrade both Gault and Frost at the national draft then yes without delisting a player/s we'd only be able to use the number 5 selection.

However we have the option of returning Gault to the rookie list and this would free up another position on the list so we could use selection 30.

This seems likely to me at present.

To be able to use pick 48 we then have to decide between returning Frost to the rookie list short term (he'll be upgraded for the Scharenberg LTI) or delisting a player from our list prior to the draft.

No way will we go to the draft with only one live selection at 5. It will be 5 and 30 at a minimum and I'll be surprised if we don't allow ourselves the option of taking someone at 48 also.
 

DNine

Club Legend
Oct 28, 2008
1,993
995
West of Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
We could very well be out of the draft by pick 5 ... So Jack Frost is an option for pick 30.

We currently have 33 on the senior list.

We need minimum 5 to fill out our senior list to fill it out to 38 (maximum 7 to fill in out to 40)

The 5 would be Pick 5, Moore, Varcoe, Greenwood and Frost. In that scenario we'd pick up 5 new category A rookies and retain Gault to make 6 total category A rookies + Mason Cox as a category B rookie.

This was our strategy two years ago.

----

Hine goes into the draft with maximum flexibility.

He could not use picks 30 or 48, and have 6 on our cat A rookie list (as in 2012)

He could use picks 30 or 48, and have 4 on our cat A rookie list (as in 2013)

He could use picks 30 and/or 48 (or even later!), and have up to 6 on our cat A rookie list if the club makes additional delistings (Who would be candidates? Armstrong? ???)

So what are you saying here? How many rookies are we required to pick? 4?. How many senior listed players can we have up to. Can we have 40 senior players? Is that what you are saying?

I don't like the club playing with less senior listed players than they are entitled to. Just play with maximum Seniors, and less rookies if that is the case. Not sure if this is right though.
 
Hudson was on the senior list as a nominated rookie wasn't he???
Correct. Our senior list of 40 is reduced by 7 players (not 6 as suggested above).
We will use picks 5, 30 & 48.
Frost to remain on rookie list & upgraded prior round 1 via LTI.
No point demoting Oxley & risk losing him to Other clubs.
If we were to promote Frost, we would have to use pick 48, which the club may prefer to use in the draft.
Frost would understand that it's a list management decision that benifets the club overall.
We are better off using pick 48 in the draft verses an additional rookie pick (3rd round pick in the 40's).
 

DNine

Club Legend
Oct 28, 2008
1,993
995
West of Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
We currently have 37 "fixed" senior list players (including Moore, Greenwood etc) and 2 upgraded rookies in Gault and Frost.

If we want to officially upgrade both Gault and Frost at the national draft then yes without delisting a player/s we'd only be able to use the number 5 selection.

However we have the option of returning Gault to the rookie list and this would free up another position on the list so we could use selection 30.

This seems likely to me at present.

To be able to use pick 48 we then have to decide between returning Frost to the rookie list short term (he'll be upgraded for the Scharenberg LTI) or delisting a player from our list prior to the draft.

No way will we go to the draft with only one live selection at 5. It will be 5 and 30 at a minimum and I'll be surprised if we don't allow ourselves the option of taking someone at 48 also.

The way I remember it, is that Hine was going to pass on picks 66 and 77 last year, but was surprised when Langdon and Marsh were still available. This suggested that we senior listed two more players that we were going to last year. I always counted Gault to go back to the rookie list.

6 out, 4 in + Frost = 5 in, plus pick 5, is 6 in, 6 out.
 
Jan 12, 2011
25,397
35,576
AFL Club
Collingwood
We currently have 37 "fixed" senior list players (including Moore, Greenwood etc) and 2 upgraded rookies in Gault and Frost.

If we want to officially upgrade both Gault and Frost at the national draft then yes without delisting a player/s we'd only be able to use the number 5 selection.

However we have the option of returning Gault to the rookie list and this would free up another position on the list so we could use selection 30.

This seems likely to me at present.

To be able to use pick 48 we then have to decide between returning Frost to the rookie list short term (he'll be upgraded for the Scharenberg LTI) or delisting a player from our list prior to the draft.

No way will we go to the draft with only one live selection at 5. It will be 5 and 30 at a minimum and I'll be surprised if we don't allow ourselves the option of taking someone at 48 also.
Yep, I think that is correct

So our options are limited to:
* We either rookie a current senior listed player or
* We delist a current senior list player
if we intend to use 48
 
Back