2011 Draft Pick #41 - Mitch Grigg

[WALL-e]

That's it CC. Crouch is our excitment for this draft period, Brown and Kerridge can go into good solid gets with upside and Grigg, Joyce, Ellis-Yolmen, whoever we rookie and Dowdell can all go in the God knows pile. All have/will have significant 'incomplete' parts of their game.

Here's hoping we get some games out of this years crop, with anything more coming as a very good result.

 

[cmndstab]

This is our most ordinary batch of kids on paper I have seen us recruit for years... All have some serious question marks about them...

No surprise considering this draft is missing several players, was weak to begin with, the whole first round went to one club enabling them to focus on best available rather than needs, and then we entered the draft at pick 27.

You couldn't exactly expect too much this year. As others have said, if we end up with one decent AFL player we'll be happy. You wouldn't expect us to get a gun.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

This is our most ordinary batch of kids on paper I have seen us recruit for years... All have some serious question marks about them...

That's the good thing about being so shit in 2010 and 2011 though.

The new draftees only have to be mediocre players to make a major improvement

 

[Coopers]

Back in my day, this kind of back talk was not allowed.

 

[Lawrst]

Back in my day, this kind of back talk was not allowed.

Yea, well times have changed grandpa!

 

[BACCS]

Agreed, but Shannon Hurn's gloss is slowly wearing off, rather ordinary TBH.

Hurn would walk into any sides current 22. Had another superb season.

 

[Drummond]

Hurn would walk into any sides current 22. Had another superb season.

If he had a superb season, then you're a superb poster.

Both blatantly incorrect.

 

[Mego Red]

If he had a superb season, then you're a superb poster.

Both blatantly incorrect.

C'mon, I know it's only the internet, but you don't need to say such rubbish.

 

[TheVelourFog]

C'mon, I know it's only the internet, but you don't need to say such rubbish.

But is it really such rubbish?

 

[Mego Red]

But is it really such rubbish?

Yes. Hurn was an enormous part of their turnaround and would walk into any side in the AFL. To say otherwise is to just be deliberately provocative, or trolling.

 

[FR0GGY]

Underrated player, I think he's a gun in the making.

Hurn or Grigg?

 

[Prem87]

Grigg.

 

[Geoffa32]

Will he be the one to be delisted to kip Tippet on the list?

 

[King Elvis]

No chance; it'd be someone like Callinan or Tambling - somebody with factors around them that'd prevent other Clubs from grabbing them.

 

[Vader]

No chance; it'd be someone like Callinan or Tambling - somebody with factors around them that'd prevent other Clubs from grabbing them.

Won't be Callinan, given that the club has committed themselves to upgrading him to the senior list. In any case, cutting him from the rookie list wouldn't solve our problem - which is a lack of spaces available on the senior list.

The Ragvertiser is suggesting it will be Tambling, Grigg, Ellis-Yolmen, or Joyce. Can't say I disagree with that assessment.

 

[Campbell's Chunky]

Tambling only being kept because he has a $350k a year contract.

If we delist him then does that mean another club could only take him on the proviso that they continue paying him $350k?

If so would be Tambling surely...coz no one gonna touch him on that coin...

 

[The_Answer3]

If we delist Tambling we will be required to pay his contract in full unless we can reach an agreement with him. i.e we agree to pay half and Tambo presumes he will get the rest elsewhere.....unlikely.

 

[Mighty Chinook]

Won't be Callinan, given that the club has committed themselves to upgrading him to the senior list. In any case, cutting him from the rookie list wouldn't solve our problem - which is a lack of spaces available on the senior list.

The Ragvertiser is suggesting it will be Tambling, Grigg, Ellis-Yolmen, or Joyce. Can't say I disagree with that assessment.

It would have to be Tambling wouldn't it? He's 26 now and it's clear that he isn't in Sando's plans for the future, whereas these other guys are only just getting started and haven't had a chance to prove themselves. Of the 3 draftees from last year listed above, Grigg is untouchable as he's just got too much potential, and I don't think they'll get rid of Joyce this year given his history with the club. What are your thoughts on Ellis-Yolmen's job security?

 

[Damp Squarie]

Tambling would be shittin' razor blades at the moment. Crows have a magnificent chance of drafting him back [coz no one will touch him] hence he will be the chosen one

 

[macca23]

Personally, I think its bloody-mindness of the AFL in counting Tippett as part of our numbers when the only reason he is part of them is because THEY won't let us delist him.

I'm surprised that the AFLPA haven't squawked long and loud about this because a player totally unassociated with the Tippett saga is going to have to be be delisted when Adelaide had already made the decision to keep that player on its list. Seems somewhat immoral to me.

On the assumption that we have to delist somebody, IMO it's a toss-up between Tambling and Joyce.

If it's Joyce, then its because IMO he has shown the least of the 3 draftees from last year. Ellis-Yolmen has some magical qualities about him at times and is too promising to let go. Grigg I haven't seen a lot of but some good judges believe he will be an AFL footballer.

If its Tambling, then because he still has one year on his contract for an amount in the range of $300k - $350k, next year's amount would have to be paid this year, concurrent with his delisting.

That may or may not present problems. To do that we have to have room inside the salary cap for this year to fit the Payment made to Tambling to cover the last year of his contract.

IMO we are likely to have that room, due to the low level of injuries this year, as the club always adds a contingency to cover extra match payments as a result of injuries.

However, in 2013, if we delist Tambling, will we meet the minimum amount payable under the salary cap, given that we had allowed $800k for Tippett and would be saving a further $300k - $350k on top of that? I would think not.

IMO the way out of this is to re-negotiate the contracts of some of the better paid players, and front end load them to make sure that we meet the minimum salary cap requirements. That also has the side benefit of giving us cap room to have a crack at luring a very good player from one of the other teams to Adelaide at the end of 2013 - presuming that we're allowed to have draft picks in that year.

To delist Joyce is administratively easy, other than the personal aspect of him working for the club.

To delist Tambling is more complex, but has some indirect benefits in the longer term which don't apply if Joyce is the one to be delisted.

IMO both are unlikely to be at the club at the end of 2013.

Which one would you delist this year?

 

[bjn1960]

Personally, I think its bloody-mindness of the AFL in counting Tippett as part of our numbers when the only reason he is part of them is because THEY won't let us delist him.

I'm surprised that the AFLPA haven't squawked long and loud about this because a player totally unassociated with the Tippett saga is going to have to be be delisted when Adelaide had already made the decision to keep that player on its list. Seems somewhat immoral to me.

On the assumption that we have to delist somebody, IMO it's a toss-up between Tambling and Joyce.

If it's Joyce, then its because IMO he has shown the least of the 3 draftees from last year. Ellis-Yolmen has some magical qualities about him at times and is too promising to let go. Grigg I haven't seen a lot of but some good judges believe he will be an AFL footballer.

If its Tambling, then because he still has one year on his contract for an amount in the range of $300k - $350k, next year's amount would have to be paid this year, concurrent with his delisting.

That may or may not present problems. To do that we have to have room inside the salary cap for this year to fit the Payment made to Tambling to cover the last year of his contract.

IMO we are likely to have that room, due to the low level of injuries this year, as the club always adds a contingency to cover extra match payments as a result of injuries.

However, in 2013, if we delist Tambling, will we meet the minimum amount payable under the salary cap, given that we had allowed $800k for Tippett and would be saving a further $300k - $350k on top of that? I would think not.

IMO the way out of this is to re-negotiate the contracts of some of the better paid players, and front end load them to make sure that we meet the minimum salary cap requirements. That also has the side benefit of giving us cap room to have a crack at luring a very good player from one of the other teams to Adelaide at the end of 2013 - presuming that we're allowed to have draft picks in that year.

To delist Joyce is administratively easy, other than the personal aspect of him working for the club.

To delist Tambling is more complex, but has some indirect benefits in the longer term which don't apply if Joyce is the one to be delisted.

IMO both are unlikely to be at the club at the end of 2013.

Which one would you delist this year?

Whom would I delist? Definitely that Trigg rookie! On the list for 15 years and his disposal is atrocious.

 

[macca23]

Problem solved with the determination by the AFL today that Crouchs upgrade does count as one of the 3 necessary changes.

Common sense finally prevails.