Collingwood List Management Thread

[Zahki]

It sounds like the club is thinking along the same lines as you Knight, though not necessarily for Stewart. Apparently they've been trying to woo Jaeger O'Meara, but he doesn't want to leave WA. If true then it looks like they're eager to get one of the 17 y/o's GWS have to trade, sounds like a better solution to the delisting dilemma, looking through the list we're almost certainly going to have to part with someone we probably don't want to, making a trade seems like a good way to make the best of a bad situation.

Our list is just amazingly good right now. Not all the young players will make it, but there's certainly enough quality combined with potential in there to take us a long way.

 

[Medders123]

What are the rules surrounding drafting VFL listed players? I think Eddy (forward), Sundberg (midfielder), Pendlebury (defender) could really compliment our list if given the chance.

 

[The Get Up Kid]

How is Ben Reid not in top 10 best performed? Mick said, "He is our premier defender".

Also, if Dick and Goldsack get delisted then I'll walk nude down Whitehorse Rd (the whole way).

 

[Knightmare]

Just Wondering how did you find out that Ceglar had a Great Attitude? as I agree espically when I heard him say to the boys after runnning out at half time in the VFL to keep it up and play a full game

Haven't heard officially from any inside sources, but it's just something you can generally pick up through watching a couple of his games. What leads me to thinking this is he has developed well over the past 2 years as well as his attitude on the field.

I think we'd be more likely to trade players for picks than delist, unless we're talking about players that nobody wants. Way too early to be talking about it though.

It is early. And no doubt the list of who might be delisted will change as the year progresses. Certainly will become allot more clear.

Don't think we will need to be a super active trader, but at the seasons end some potential targets will come up.

It sounds like the club is thinking along the same lines as you Knight, though not necessarily for Stewart. Apparently they've been trying to woo Jaeger O'Meara, but he doesn't want to leave WA. If true then it looks like they're eager to get one of the 17 y/o's GWS have to trade, sounds like a better solution to the delisting dilemma, looking through the list we're almost certainly going to have to part with someone we probably don't want to, making a trade seems like a good way to make the best of a bad situation.

Our list is just amazingly good right now. Not all the young players will make it, but there's certainly enough quality combined with potential in there to take us a long way.

Thanks for that. Will take note of O'Meara.

My one question with the O'Meara idea is would we be willing to trade enough to acquire him? eg. pick 25 in an average draft probably wouldn't be enough for a future top talent. GWS would be wanting a Sidebottom/Beams or [FONT=&quot]equivalent[/FONT] talent in exchange.

The Stewart idea is more on the basis of getting a future saving and being able to get an extra pick in this years draft and not need to make that extra delisting.

Certainly I'm sure we will be keeping our options open and looking at all ways to take advantage of the GWS concessions.

What are the rules surrounding drafting VFL listed players? I think Eddy (forward), Sundberg (midfielder), Pendlebury (defender) could really compliment our list if given the chance.

They basically get the choice to enter the national draft, or if particularly keen to land at say Collingwood then they can nominate for the preseason draft and hope they make it all the way to our selection.

All of them I thought I'd give mention to seeing as they are all playing at a near AFL equivilent level of play. But personally I probably wouldn't be drafting any of these because I do feel they all would have limited opportunities to make it into our best 22 given there are no real holes anywhere. But certainly for other clubs they could be very good selections.

 

[Knightmare]

How is Ben Reid not in top 10 best performed? Mick said, "He is our premier defender".

Also, if Dick and Goldsack get delisted then I'll walk nude down Whitehorse Rd (the whole way).

I agree with you, right now he is our premier defender. But probably to the H+A season has not been our best performer yet. Seems to have a couple of niggles which have held him back a little.

My list (particularly for the best 22) I based more so on how they have performed this season completely rather than reputation/ how good they were last year or how well we know they can play.

Reid I think come round 13 should move up the list and certainly by seasons end you'd think he would.

Dick and Goldsack in my view should absolutely be retained. By why they have to be mentioned is that they are both in the older half of the list age wise, and neither of which although certainly on the edge of selection are entrenched in the best 22 at this stage in the season.
Hopefully in the 2nd half of the season this changes.

 

[TheFreshBanana]

I would like us to draft Kris Pendlebury, I don't watch any of the VFL but I do read the reviews and I constantly see good comments about this guy.

Also how has Sunberg and Eddy gone in the VFL at the moment? I know they both had great games last week but apart from that, I've never heard of them.

Don't think Dick or Goldsack should be in contention for delistings. Dick does have serious injury concerns but he's still only 22 turning 23 this year. I think give him another chance next year, and if he still has serious shoulder or whatever injuries then he should be in contention for delistings.

Goldsack is turning 24 this year but not too many injury concerns about him and he is still recovering from glandular fever from what I've read. Doesn't seem to be doing badly in the VFL and I think he still has some upside in him.

Would be sad to see Shae Mac get delisted but I do see it as a possibility. If only he was a few years younger but at the age of 26, unless he has a major improvement, I don't see him being retained.

 

[Number 10]

Anyone see the Highlight video of Witts and Hartley?

If that was all in the one game, they looked huge prospects. Witts is a mammoth and Hartley looks like a very athletic, tall and well-buit utility already.

What is the go with drafting them? Is it similar to the F/S rule? Or we can just pick them up in PSD like Tommy Young?

 

[Number 10]

Also, talking about delistings, Reed, McNamara and Hunter (obviously) will/should go.

Never liked Reed as a player and he has never impressed me.

Furthermore, we could potentially see the retirement of Johnson, Tarrant and Davis given their form/injury cases.

Can't Jye Bolton also be elevated off the Rookie list in place of N Brown? Or has this place been taken?

 

[Brad Goodman]

In terms of position depth I think we need to get another medium forward and another key defender.

I would also veto trading first and second round draft picks for mature aged players for 2 years.

I've been thinking this for awhile now too. Unless something great comes along again, we need to inject some more top-tier youngsters into the team, rather than hoping to jag a gem from pick 45 or so.

With the change from Malthouse to Buckley I think we will see a shift in drafting strategy. MM's tenure ending gave him incentive to draft/trade for the now. I think the combination of Buckley obviously wanting to have a more future-oriented strategy than we've had the last couple of years as well as the maturity of the list being just about perfect now (i.e. the addition of Jolly/Ball/Krakoeur/Tarrant being a sufficient injection of mature talent onto the list) will see more of our early draft picks being retained rather than used as a lure to attract experienced players from other clubs.

 

[The Get Up Kid]

I agree with you, right now he is our premier defender. But probably to the H+A season has not been our best performer yet. Seems to have a couple of niggles which have held him back a little.

My list (particularly for the best 22) I based more so on how they have performed this season completely rather than reputation/ how good they were last year or how well we know they can play.

Reid I think come round 13 should move up the list and certainly by seasons end you'd think he would.

Dick and Goldsack in my view should absolutely be retained. By why they have to be mentioned is that they are both in the older half of the list age wise, and neither of which although certainly on the edge of selection are entrenched in the best 22 at this stage in the season.
Hopefully in the 2nd half of the season this changes.

You've done a great job. I like the thread and value the opinions. Just on the list you've put forward I do think Reid has been in our best 10, possibly around 10th. I think ahead of Jolly, perhaps.

Also, how hard is it when players like Beams and Krakeour are rested/injured/dropped/other to rate where they are at. I wish we knew more from the inside on where these kinds of players are rated, etc.

Also, how many coaches, assistants etc say "he's in our best 22" when they talk about players in the VFL, injured etc. Most teams would have 27 players in the team haha!

 

[TheFreshBanana]

Furthermore, we could potentially see the retirement of Johnson, Tarrant and Davis given their form/injury cases.

Johnson, Tarrant and Davis' form all have been good enough for a best 22 in the side. I see no concerns in injury apart from Johnson and I don't think it seems to be too serious, can't comment on Tarrant who knows if its even an injury.

 

[The 10th Letter]

Anyone see the Highlight video of Witts and Hartley?

If that was all in the one game, they looked huge prospects. Witts is a mammoth and Hartley looks like a very athletic, tall and well-buit utility already.

What is the go with drafting them? Is it similar to the F/S rule? Or we can just pick them up in PSD like Tommy Young?

We get to add them to our rookie list or senior list at our discretion, assuming that they agree with whatever course of action we decide on. If we offer them a rookie list spot, they've got the option of turning it down and trying their hand in the national draft. I believe this is how we landed Trent Stubbs, who was a Hawk's scholarship player but turned them down and headed for the draft.

Tom Young impressed to the point in his first season that we put him straight on the senior list; also owing to our extensive delistings last year as well. We were also obliged to take him via pre-listing so he could spend 2010 playing for our VFL squad.

I'm not sure on this so somebody feel free to correct me, but I believe if we add them to our rookie list they effectively remain outside the list for the first year? Enabling us to have an extended rookie list and also giving them a total of three years instead of two should they continue to develop. After the first year they're counted towards the rookie list though.

Based on what I saw of Hartley and Witts at Visy Park last weekend, I'd pull the trigger on both definitely if they're happy to go the rookie list route. We seem to be putting a fair bit of time into Witts lately so I can't see him turning us down for a rookie spot. I'm not sure if Hartley has been doing the rounds with us during training?

 

[Number 10]

tHANKS FOR THAT 10TH LETER!

Johnson, Tarrant and Davis' form all have been good enough for a best 22 in the side. I see no concerns in injury apart from Johnson and I don't think it seems to be too serious, can't comment on Tarrant who knows if its even an injury.

Davis' form may be good right now, but his form last season could come back and in that case he may feel the game has gone past him.

Tarrant has injury concerns, last year he was held back alot and it seems this year he may have already copped an injury.

Johnson's body will be feeling the pain now more than ever and you can't underestimate what 1 game, let alone 10 + years would do to your body in the short and long term.

 

[TradeDraft]

Haven't heard officially from any inside sources, but it's just something you can generally pick up through watching a couple of his games. What leads me to thinking this is he has developed well over the past 2 years as well as his attitude on the field.

Also the Interviews he has Given have been very postive and says how hard he is working

 

[Knightmare]

Also, talking about delistings, Reed, McNamara and Hunter (obviously) will/should go.

Never liked Reed as a player and he has never impressed me.

Furthermore, we could potentially see the retirement of Johnson, Tarrant and Davis given their form/injury cases.

Can't Jye Bolton also be elevated off the Rookie list in place of N Brown? Or has this place been taken?

Johnson, Tarrant or Davis could possibly retire, and if one does, that makes it allot easier because it means one less player needs to be delisted.

Right now though don't have any problems with the form of the trio and you'd want them to be around for another season unless injury.

Reed I didn't mind early, does some things well, has versatility, but very skinny, not a great tackler and can't see him getting past anyone inside our best 22, which as a 3rd season player you really need to do to get retained.

Not sure if anyone has replaced N.Brown on the senior list, don't think it really matters given no rookie is likely to play a senior game this year.

Should get promoted onto the senior list for next season I'd be fairly confident in saying given all we have seen of the kid.

With the change from Malthouse to Buckley I think we will see a shift in drafting strategy. MM's tenure ending gave him incentive to draft/trade for the now. I think the combination of Buckley obviously wanting to have a more future-oriented strategy than we've had the last couple of years as well as the maturity of the list being just about perfect now (i.e. the addition of Jolly/Ball/Krakoeur/Tarrant being a sufficient injection of mature talent onto the list) will see more of our early draft picks being retained rather than used as a lure to attract experienced players from other clubs.

I think you are pretty close with that. We have enough quality players now on the list to remain a top side and have spent enough years of top picks for "now players" so I think we will go back to that balance to ensure there are no serious future gaps on our list. Might add a mature ager at the end of the draft or something, but don't think we really have the possibility to trade into any more high level AFL players given salary cap rules and our wish to keep our list together.

No serious holes as we had previously with the needs for the star ruckman, inside extractor and so on. So given this and given our top level playing list we can probably get away with drafting some future players to ensure we can keep playing high level football for more than just a couple more years.

You've done a great job. I like the thread and value the opinions. Just on the list you've put forward I do think Reid has been in our best 10, possibly around 10th. I think ahead of Jolly, perhaps.

Also, how hard is it when players like Beams and Krakeour are rested/injured/dropped/other to rate where they are at. I wish we knew more from the inside on where these kinds of players are rated, etc.

Also, how many coaches, assistants etc say "he's in our best 22" when they talk about players in the VFL, injured etc. Most teams would have 27 players in the team haha!

Jolly hasn't lived up to expectations, though neither has Reid really to date considering what I was hoping for coming into the season. Both have had their niggles. It could certainly be argued that Reid has had the better start, certainly did in the NAB Cup, but really have both on parr based on what we have seen so far, don't have a significant preference to start the season either way. So don't read too far into the rankings. Just being as objective as possible and there is nothing really to suggest one stands way out infront of the other for mine yet.

We get to add them to our rookie list or senior list at our discretion, assuming that they agree with whatever course of action we decide on. If we offer them a rookie list spot, they've got the option of turning it down and trying their hand in the national draft. I believe this is how we landed Trent Stubbs, who was a Hawk's scholarship player but turned them down and headed for the draft.

Tom Young impressed to the point in his first season that we put him straight on the senior list; also owing to our extensive delistings last year as well. We were also obliged to take him via pre-listing so he could spend 2010 playing for our VFL squad.

I'm not sure on this so somebody feel free to correct me, but I believe if we add them to our rookie list they effectively remain outside the list for the first year? Enabling us to have an extended rookie list and also giving them a total of three years instead of two should they continue to develop. After the first year they're counted towards the rookie list though.

Based on what I saw of Hartley and Witts at Visy Park last weekend, I'd pull the trigger on both definitely if they're happy to go the rookie list route. We seem to be putting a fair bit of time into Witts lately so I can't see him turning us down for a rookie spot. I'm not sure if Hartley has been doing the rounds with us during training?

I think there might be a cap of 2 NSW/ACT boys outside of the rookie list for the first year (feel free to correct me, quite possibly wrong). Think it is close anyway. So if we took Witts, Hartley and Carracher one takes up a rookie slot.

Carracher I'd like to see more of, but Witts + Harley at this stage both look like really good rookie selections.

tHANKS FOR THAT 10TH LETER!

Davis' form may be good right now, but his form last season could come back and in that case he may feel the game has gone past him.

Tarrant has injury concerns, last year he was held back alot and it seems this year he may have already copped an injury.

Johnson's body will be feeling the pain now more than ever and you can't underestimate what 1 game, let alone 10 + years would do to your body in the short and long term.

The difference between Davis 2010 and Davis 2011 is that he has his run back. In 2010 was exceptionally slow and lost what made him a good player causing a significant loss of confidence.

Certainly possible he gets injured again which likely would result in a similar decline in production, but you never wish that on a productive and in form player.

Johnson if he can't remain inside the clubs best 22 might consider retirement. But we'll see. Could surprise us again as he did managing to hold onto his position in 2010 when other senior players were getting passed by.

 

[Swooop]

Sensational discussion thread Knight.

This is a dumb question no doubt. You said James Stewart is a great prospect and that he is a father son pick.

You mentioned Pies taking him say pick 25.

My question is if Pies have pick 25, we probably also have pick 43 and 61 and 79 and maybe97.

Why use pick 25 and not our latest pick? If he's a father son, why not just take him with the latest. I've seen other top players taken late as father sons, why would we use our first available pick on him??

Do we forfeit the right to pick him if we don't choose him by a ceratin time?

 

[Zahki]

They changed the F/S rules a while ago Swooop. Now other clubs get to 'bid' their draft picks and we have to match it. If he's projected as a first rounder thats probably what we'll have to use to get him.

In 2007 the AFL made an important amendment for the father-son rule, establishing a bidding system to determine which draft pick a club must give up to secure the potential recruit. The current system works as follows:
* 1. Individual clubs are free to nominate potential father-son recruits within the above eligibility guidelines.
* 2. A meeting is held on the Monday before the start of trade week where clubs can bid for the nominated players. Each club has the option to bid, in reverse ladder order, for the nominated players.
* 3. If a bid is made, the club that nominated the father-son player must use its next available selection if it wishes to retain its hold on that player. If a club nominating the father-son player declines to match the selection nominated, the club with the successful bid must use that selection at the Draft to select the player.
* 4. Any club that makes a successful bid on a father-son selection must to the pick the player they nominate.
* 5. If no bid is made by another club, the club that nominated the father-son eligible player will forfeit its last selection in the draft to select the player.

 

[mattys123]

My understanding of the new interpretation of the father/son rule is that we can take any eligible father son player with our second round draft pick (it may even be 3rd round), if no one else bids for him.

If another club bids for that player though, we have to match the round that they bid for that pick, and I'm guessing that's what Knightmare is eluding too, that it is likely someone else will at least bid for Stewart, making us use our first round pick to match that bid.

 

[Swooop]

My understanding of the new interpretation of the father/son rule is that we can take any eligible father son player with our second round draft pick (it may even be 3rd round), if no one else bids for him.

If another clubs bid for that player though, we have to match the round that they bid for that pick, and I'm guessing that's what Knightmare is eluding too, that it is likely someone else will at least bid for Stewart, making us use our first round pick to match that bid.

Ahh, Ok, thanks Zahki and Matty

 

[mattys123]

Wow, I like this part;

* 5. If no bid is made by another club, the club that nominated the father-son eligible player will forfeit its last selection in the draft to select the player.

So if no on bids for Stewart, we could use our last pick to get him.

How highly is he rated? (As in will anyone bid for him?)

 

[TradeDraft]

Wow, I like this part;



So if no on bids for Stewart, we could use our last pick to get him.

How highly is he rated? (As in will anyone bid for him?)

Emma Quyale rated him as a Possibe 1st Rounder for next year draft

 

[Knightmare]

I would like us to draft Kris Pendlebury, I don't watch any of the VFL but I do read the reviews and I constantly see good comments about this guy.

Also how has Sunberg and Eddy gone in the VFL at the moment? I know they both had great games last week but apart from that, I've never heard of them.

The thing with Kris is that he is the older brother of Scott. (Born in 86). Then look at Reid (89) and N.Brown (88). What Kris would be for us is a middle aged, depth player which is nice to have in the VFL, but not when you have senior players of a younger age ahead of them.

This doesn't mean Kris can't make it on another list. But he just isn't for Collingwood a practical recruit in my view.

Sunberg like Kris has been very impressive. Again on the older side and from memory born in 88. So allot more mature again at that age the type of player you would want to be an immediate best 22 player. It's really hard to see a player he could kick out of the senior side which again makes him a questionable recruit for Collingwood. But for another club might like Pendlebury represent good value as an immediate player.

Eddy is one I had no knowledge of coming into the season. Is a forward who just consistantly keeps bobbing up for a couple of goals every game. Will be interesting to see whether he can keep performing as the season progresses.

Anyone see the Highlight video of Witts and Hartley?

If that was all in the one game, they looked huge prospects. Witts is a mammoth and Hartley looks like a very athletic, tall and well-buit utility already.

What is the go with drafting them? Is it similar to the F/S rule? Or we can just pick them up in PSD like Tommy Young?

Both options as rookies, or straight to the senior list if we are super enthusiastic as we were with Tom Young.

With the list being in the state it is where we really want to minimise our senior delistings it is most wise to add both to the rookie list if we are interested in them at the end of the year. Having them as rookies as I understand it means they can be outside of the rookie list for that first year which is a huge advantage it doesn't even take up a position on our list! Just means we can add someone else in addition to them, which makes it a near no brainer to take one or both of these kids on at the end of the year if they can keep improving.

My understanding of the new interpretation of the father/son rule is that we can take any eligible father son player with our second round draft pick (it may even be 3rd round), if no one else bids for him.

If another club bids for that player though, we have to match the round that they bid for that pick, and I'm guessing that's what Knightmare is eluding too, that it is likely someone else will at least bid for Stewart, making us use our first round pick to match that bid.

Yeah the general idea is in 2012 if we F/S James Stewart the chances are very high that we are forced to use our first selection to take him if indeed we want him through the bidding system.

Examples of this are Mitch Wallis and Tom Liberatore this year where both had to go with first two selections because other clubs bid for them due to quality.

Stewart is in the same boat. So that's where the idea of the saving comes from.

 

[Knightmare]

Wow, I like this part;



So if no on bids for Stewart, we could use our last pick to get him.

How highly is he rated? (As in will anyone bid for him?)

Currently expected to go 1st round. Maybe top 10.

So there will be a bid from a number of other clubs unless some serious form slump.

So regarding your earlier post, it will have to be a 1st rounder we spend either way based on what we know at present unless circumstances change.

 

[mattys123]

So basically, we will be taking Stewart with our first round pick, it's almost assured you would think, and if he is rated that highly, then a very late first round pick is a bargain for him.

Opposition supporters will find someway to turn it into an "AFL favours pies" story no doubt.

 

[Knightmare]

With regard to this thread this article from the age should make some of what I have been discussing make more sense with relation to Stewart:

Clubs strike it rich on early calls

Date: April 15 2011

Emma Quayle THE same Greater Western Sydney draft concessions that forced Melbourne and Essendon to make early calls on Jack Viney and Joe Daniher, fearing they may lose them to another club, may now work to the clubs' advantage.
The Demons and Bombers could officially secure the highly rated father-son pair at the end of this season - saving their first-round choices at the 2012 draft - by trading picks and/or players to GWS in exchange for the right to list them as 17-year-olds.
Collingwood could pursue a similar deal to snare James Stewart, 17, the son of former player Craig, a year before he is also eligible for the 2012 draft.
As part of their concessions, the Giants can trade a total of four outside-the-draft selections - which must be used on 17-year-olds - to rival clubs at the end of this year and next.
The reason for Melbourne, Essendon and Collingwood to seek such a deal is that all three players are considered likely to demand first-round selections at the 2012 draft.
If they secure them at the end of this year, the players will ''cost'' less than they would at the end of 2012, and the clubs would then be able to use their first-round selections on other players.
Collingwood's first-round pick at this year's draft will be in the mid-20s, due to GWS monopolising the early picks like Gold Coast did last year. Next year, the same first-round pick will be in the teens.
While none of Viney, Daniher or Stewart would be permitted to play senior football until 2013 - after they have reached 18, or draft age - they would be able to spend more time at their clubs.
Also, their first-year salaries would not count in their club's salary cap. Players must be nominated to be considered as a 17-year-old trade option, which means Viney, Daniher and possibly Stewart could wait to see if their club secured a selection before putting their name forward.
GWS would be open to such deals because it would allow it to secure additional draft picks or players for teenagers that, because of the father-son rule, it would not have been able to touch.
The Demons and Viney committed to each other last season, with the Demons fearful they could lose the talented onballer to another club under this concession.
Essendon and Daniher reached an agreement late last year, while Stewart, whose father played 115 games for the Magpies before crossing to Richmond, has been in excellent form for Sandringham in the TAC Cup.
A handful of other 17-year-olds are also being looked at by clubs, with Fremantle keen on Perth onballer Jaeger O'Meara and several clubs interested in Bendigo utility Jake Stringer, who broke his leg playing for Bendigo and has been forced out of the AIS-AFL Academy's trip to Europe.
West Australians Shannon Taylor, Dayle Garlett and Chris Yarran (as distinct from the Carlton player) have also attracted interest, as has North Ballarat's Brad Crouch.