Rumour GFC 2016 Player Trading, Drafting, FA, Rumours, and Wish lists.

[4quarter_cat]

**** Edited Due to More Intelligent information ;-) ****

So who are they going to delist? (Here are my theories)

Almost certainly retire

• Lonergan; Not quite the player he was, its time.

Will probably retire

• Clark; not sure see how he finishes the season
• Enright; might decide to play on, probably won't (Form and Thurlow's Injury tell me the choice should be his)
• Bartel; might decide to play on, probably won't (Form tells me the choice should be his)

Possible other Delistings

• Cowan; has talent, but is 26 at the start of next season. Time to let him go.
• Smedts; has talent, but is 24 and will be 25 by this time next season, he should have established himself, and yet continues to have others go past him.

 

[vinum coupe]

Question to the intelligent people.

Is the rule that you actually have to remove 3 from your list? Or is the rule that you have to add 3 to your list with 2 having to come through the draft?

 

[catempire]

Question to the intelligent people.

Is the rule that you actually have to remove 3 from your list? Or is the rule that you have to add 3 to your list with 2 having to come through the draft?

I believe the rule is you must have three selections in the National Draft and one of those can be a rookie upgrade.

 

[vinum coupe]

I believe the rule is you must have three selections in the National Draft and one of those can be a rookie upgrade.

Ok, but what I'm getting at is that we are currently 2 short on the list.
Can we just lose one ( say Lonergan) and then hit the draft?

And I asked for intelligent people

 

[dazbroncos]

I believe the rule is you must have three selections in the National Draft and one of those can be a rookie upgrade.

That was my understanding too.

Given our list is short however, I dont think we need to cut 3 per se - just take the 3 total as CE referred to.

Go Catters

 

[dazbroncos]

Ok, but what I'm getting at is that we are currently 2 short on the list.
Can we just lose one ( say Lonergan) and then hit the draft?

And I asked for intelligent people

Im out...

but for fun, see my reply...

GO Catters

 

[catempire]

Ok, but what I'm getting at is that we are currently 2 short on the list.
Can we just lose one ( say Lonergan) and then hit the draft?

And I asked for intelligent people

Correct. We can. There's no rule that I'm aware of on how many you have to cut from the list.

But I would have thought we won't have any trouble losing 4-5 this year.

And hey, intelligence is relative.

 

[vinum coupe]

Correct. We can. There's no rule that I'm aware of on how many you have to cut from the list.

But I would have thought we won't have any trouble losing 4-5 this year.

And hey, intelligence is relative.

On the intelligence thing, whoever answered first was going to cop that

I have no doubt we could find room if we wanted it.
I'm just not sure we want it.

In fact I could see us trading out someone this year for a future pick in 2017 and then going a fair bit harder at the draft next year. Ie. 5 or 6 picks.

 

[Lana]

I believe the rule is you must have three selections in the National Draft and one of those can be a rookie upgrade.

I believe that it is the opposite, you must delist a minimum of 3 players off the primary list per year.

 

[FredLeDeux]

I believe that it is the opposite, you must delist a minimum of 3 players off the primary list per year.

I'm really not sure whether you're taking the pi$$ here or not.
But Rule 6(2)(d) says you have to take 3 picks at the ND, and says nothing about compulsory delisting.

 

[Lana]

I'm really not sure whether you're taking the pi$$ here or not.
But Rule 6(2)(d) says you have to take 3 picks at the ND, and says nothing about compulsory delisting.

Can I have a link to the document

 

[CatsDoItBetter]

On the intelligence thing, whoever answered first was going to cop that

I have no doubt we could find room if we wanted it.
I'm just not sure we want it.

In fact I could see us trading out someone this year for a future pick in 2017 and then going a fair bit harder at the draft next year. Ie. 5 or 6 picks.

That sounds like a good strategy and the 2017 draft is meant to be a good one. Would allow a couple of veterans to go again. They'd probably be done after another one.
Geelong needs to look at how Hawthorn are using their veterans.

 

[Turbocat]

On the intelligence thing, whoever answered first was going to cop that

I have no doubt we could find room if we wanted it.
I'm just not sure we want it.

In fact I could see us trading out someone this year for a future pick in 2017 and then going a fair bit harder at the draft next year. Ie. 5 or 6 picks.

Future picks this year will be harder to get imo.. the rep of next years draft mean clubs will hold harder to those picks. Have to be more than a fringe player to get meaningful future picks. Wells has at times shown contrarian traits.. it wouldn't surprise me if we trade our R2 and R3 from next year for more picks this year or even an R1 if he sees that others are willing to pay well for them. Would GWS trade our R1 back for picks next year.. its plausible.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Can I have a link to the document

Everything is in here (see the "Rules" one for this issue)
http://www.afl.com.au/policies

 

[sauron256]

**** Edited Due to More Intelligent information ;-) ****

So who are they going to delist? (Here are my theories)

Almost certainly retire

• Lonergan; Not quite the player he was, its time.

Will probably retire

• Clark; not sure see how he finishes the season
• Enright; might decide to play on, probably won't (Form and Thurlow's Injury tell me the choice should be his)
• Bartel; might decide to play on, probably won't (Form tells me the choice should be his)

Possible other Delistings

• Cowan; has talent, but is 26 at the start of next season. Time to let him go.
• Smedts; has talent, but is 24 and will be 25 by this time next season, he should have established himself, and yet continues to have others go past him.

Smedts is contracted for 2017.

 

[catempire]

I believe that it is the opposite, you must delist a minimum of 3 players off the primary list per year.

Hey vinum coupe, this guy needs an "intelligent" jibe.

 

[vinum coupe]

I believe that it is the opposite, you must delist a minimum of 3 players off the primary list per year.

Nice try genius.




(Note that's what my 12 year old says to me) .

 

[Pumpernickel]

Anyone else think the cats would be thinking succession plan for after our Mr Hawkins moves on. He's still got stacks of footy left in him but there's a multi million dollar man playing 2s in the VFL for the Dogs that may need a little ironing out/tough love, but is very young, raw and presently out of favor but with a little guidance ciuld he take over the mantle in the forward line post TH?
I'm sure Cash has a bit to do with acquiring his services

 

[dazbroncos]

Anyone else think the cats would be thinking succession plan for after our Mr Hawkins moves on. He's still got stacks of footy left in him but there's a multi million dollar man playing 2s in the VFL for the Dogs that may need a little ironing out/tough love, but is very young, raw and presently out of favor but with a little guidance ciuld he take over the mantle in the forward line post TH?
I'm sure Cash has a bit to do with acquiring his services

The SC numbers to get him as he is contracted would be horrendous. Not to mention the trade value WB would want...

I get the big picture however of looking now for the Hawk V2.0.

Go Catters

 

[The rabbi]

Hey vinum coupe, this guy needs an "intelligent" jibe.

Is Lana a "Guy"?

 

[vinum coupe]

Is Lana a "Guy"?

Yep.

 

[catempire]

Is Lana a "Guy"?

AFAIK.

 

[Lana]

Is Lana a "Guy"?

I can be what ever you want me to be babe

 

[The rabbi]

I can be what ever you want me to be babe

Well, I suppose at my age beggers can't be choosers.

But you better have ladies bits.

 

[vinum coupe]

I can be what ever you want me to be babe

His next question will be powderfinger or AC/DC