Opinion 2014 Draft ( Live discussion ) Mod notice post #6629

[zeeCFC]

We have to take 3 in the rookie? Surely that's too many in one season, the chances we'll hit three quality players is very very very low, maybe it would have been better to.go to 39/5 especially with 2 Cat B rookies just to balance the active playing list a bit more.

If we have 8 rookies and can only have two nominated it leaves our accessible pool of players rather low or our unaccessible pool of players high if you want to look at it this way.

If we take Tutt does that then mean we have no chance at a Kietel or Saad?

Tutt will be on the senior list - We keep our first rookie pick.

More numbers on the rookie list you can move players on sooner if they don't show signs of improvement while allowing for more cap space.

In 2008 we took Garlett first and Sam Jacobs with our last rookie pick. Since then Curnow, White, Casboult, Bell have arguably become best 22 players.

 

[zeeCFC]

Already 4 on the rookie list zee?

Cameron Wood, Blaine Johnson, Ciaran Sheehan & Ciaran Byrne

Byrne is a Categorie B rookie outside of the list. Fraser Russell can be on that list at the same time. Sheehan was put on the main rookie list as you can't have two Int. Rookies from the same country/sport.

 

[Aphrodite]

Byrne is a Categorie B rookie outside of the list. Fraser Russell can be on that list at the same time.

Thanks.

 

[mediumsizered]

It will also mean because we are running with only 38 on primary list we can nominate two rookies to play seniors with no need to wait for any dreaded long term injuries. Ciaran Byrne I hope is one of them. Can't recall our other rookie list players right now, apart from Cam Wood.

Have you forgotten the original Blaine already (& of course Ciaran Sheehan)?

 

[footyfan1978]

Actually I would think we nominate both our Irish Ciaran's to be eligible for senior selection. Hopefully Cam Wood is just there for emergency ruck backup.
Please play next season Kruezer!!! Please!!!!!!!!!

 

[footyfan1978]

Russell is yet to be officially rubber stamped but it is as good as done.

 

[footyfan1978]

The afl have a page that explains all the stuff on rookie lists.

It is below this:

http://www.afl.com.au/afl-hq/the-afl-explained/rookie-players


Rookie players
ROOKIE LIST

In 1997, the AFL introduced the Rookie List which is now recognised as one of the key list management tools available to clubs.

Over time, the size of the Rookie List and qualification criteria have been amended to allow clubs more flexibility in the way players can enter the AFL competition. It has created opportunities for players and encourages the development and recruitment of players from outside normal player pathways while the dropping of the maximum age qualification has encouraged clubs to also draft mature-age players.

With the entry of the Gold Coast Suns and GWS Giants into the AFL, clubs were permitted to have a minimum of four and up to eight players on their rookie list but starting from 2013 the maximum will be reduced to six. These six rookies are now classified as Category A rookies.

In addition to these six rookie-listed players, each club can include up to three additional players (now referred to as Category B rookies) on its Rookie List provided the player either:

• has not registered in an Australian Football competition for three years immediately before inclusion on the Rookie List;
• is an international player, meaning he is not an Australian citizen and has not lived in Australia for a substantial period;
• is a former NSW Scholarship player with that club;
• is a former International Scholarship player with that club;
• is a rookie Zone Selection for clubs based in NSW or Queensland.



IRISH ROOKIE PRE-SELECTION

Irish players can be signed directly to a club’s Rookie List under the International Player Rule and do not have to go through the draft. Previously, Irish players could not be listed as Category B rookies but took a spot on the main Rookie List.

Clubs can now list one Irish player as a Category B rookie but for each additional Irish player rookie listed, that player will be deemed to be a Category A rookie and the club will forfeit its last selection in the Rookie Draft for each additional player listed.



FATHER-SON – ROOKIE PRE-SELECTION

The Father-Son Rule previously applied to players selected at the National Draft. Under the rule, other AFL clubs can bid for eligible players who have been nominated under the Father-Son Rule by an eligible club. The nominating club can select the eligible player by forfeiting its next available pick in the draft if a bid has been made by another club. If there is no bid from another club, the nominating club forfeits its last pick in the National Draft.

A club can pre-select an eligible player as a Category A rookie between the Pre-Season and Rookie Drafts (with the player’s consent) provided the player had nominated for but was not selected by another club at either the National or Pre-Season Drafts. In that case, the relevant club would forfeit its last available selection in the Rookie Draft to take the player.



ACADEMY PLAYERS – ROOKIE PRE-SELECTION

Like father-son players, under the previous AFL rules, Academy players were subject to a bidding system before the National Draft if they were nominated by an eligible club but could not be pre-selected by that club before the Rookie Draft.

Clubs with Academy programs – the Brisbane Lions, Gold Coast Suns, Sydney Swans and GWS Giants – should have the chance to pre-select local talent from the pool of players in their Academy between the Pre-Season and Rookie Drafts if those players nominated for but were not selected at the most recent National or Pre-Season Drafts.

The amendment is designed to create incentives for Academy clubs to develop talent by providing opportunities for them to rookie list players for further development.

Only draft-eligible club Academy players who were nominated by their club at the designated time and played in the National Championships are eligible to be pre-selected as a Category B rookie.



MINIMUM NUMBER OF ROOKIES

Rookie lists are now recognised as a key list management tool and designating a minimum number of rookies is no longer necessary as it is purely a club decision.

 

[ShanDog]

What's the go regarding Giles and rookies? Is he already on the LTI list and have we nominated a rookie, or is it essentially reset for 2015?

 

[Azul]

We have to take 3 in the rookie? Surely that's too many in one season, the chances we'll hit three quality players is very very very low, maybe it would have been better to.go to 39/5 especially with 2 Cat B rookies just to balance the active playing list a bit more.

Partly a salary cap thing, partly being able to cut a player after 1 year instead of 2.

There's always a risk the player you want doesn't slip to the rookie draft. Personally I'd go with a list of 40-4-2 but that's the decision the club have gone with.

 

[HARKER]

Bound for Gory

The losers
Carlton: Who knows what Shane Rodgers was thinking taking Blaine Boekhurst at pick 19. The 21-year-old might have a great future, but the discussions between he and Laverde have already started. It seemed extremely likely Boekhurst would be still available at 28. Dillion Viojo-Rainbow was a solid choice at 28. A Heritier Lumumba type with his strength, speed and skill, he could eventually replace Kade Simpson. Clem Smith is a Byron Pickett type, and his poor kicking, skin folds and poor combine allowed him to slide to pick 61. However, on talent alone he could be a steal. Picking Jayden Foster over Reece McKenzie at 65 was a really interesting call. However, Foster’s ability to work as a secondary forward may be critical, as a forward line of McKenzie and Levi Casboult would have been one dimensional.

We're doomed. The team at BFG have us as the loser of the draft.

 

[Blue and Silver]

I am not sure how any of that makes us the losers.

Or for that matter how there is a "loser" in a draft, where by virtue of the system, everyone gains.

 

[footyfan1978]

The dumbest thing to think anyone can claim there are clear winners and losers at the draft. You need a good 3 to 4 years after to then get a sense whom may have got clear treasures or junk list cloggers.

7 years after a draft done would I think you can clearly call it as by then you know if players made it or out of the system.

 

[chipzac]

Bound for Gory



We're doomed. The team at BFG have us as the loser of the draft.

Seems like he answered his own question about the Foster selection. And, yes Foster is very different to Casboult with around 40 odd goals and 8 behinds this year. I'll take that, 4 goals out of every 5 shots at goal.

 

[Nori]

I am not sure how any of that makes us the losers.

Or for that matter how there is a "loser" in a draft, where by virtue of the system, everyone gains.

I totally agree. It's a completely flawed concept trying to predict winners and losers when the jury is out on all the players selected. It's also supremely arrogant of them to assume they know what would have been the best selections for each club. I mean what the hell are their credentials, other than an obvious skill to mindlessly regurgitate the opinions of the other media sheep?

If they had bothered to do a little homework and had offered a small amount of insight into each pick that would have been far more interesting and certainly more credible.

 

[coryne]

Bound for Gory



We're doomed. The team at BFG have us as the loser of the draft.

Na we had a C+, Port got a C-

 

[Blue By Blood]

We are losers for picking Foster over McKenzie!? So does that make the other 17 teams losers as well for not picking him multiple times? The people that wrote that article are legit the biggest flogs going around. If McKenzie slid that low then there is obviously some huge doubt around his ability to make it at AFL level.. In fact anyone picked that late is just a stab in the dark hoping they will make the grade.

 

[etsal1]

Bound for Gory



We're doomed. The team at BFG have us as the loser of the draft.

The person who wrote that has a collection of anti-carlton articles to his name. I wouldn't take any notice.

Plus he's an Essendon supporter.

According to him in February, we were definitely losing Gibbs, Walker and maybe even Murph.

 

[Blue Flame]

Bound for Gory



We're doomed. The team at BFG have us as the loser of the draft.

They don't even know Shane's name

 

[coryne]

The person who wrote that has a collection of anti-carlton articles to his name. I wouldn't take any notice.

Plus he's an Essendon supporter.

According to him in February, we were definitely losing Gibbs, Walker and maybe even Murph.

Explains why they criticize anyone who didn't pick Lavedre. "North. Took Durdin over Laverde. Fail." .....

 

[etsal1]

I should also add he wrote in a phantom draft a few weeks back that he thinks Cripps is a dud - so that pretty much sums it all up.

 

[PP34]

Why so easily offended? Just ignore him.

Leave Essendon supporters to get offended at every Caro article and any other article against them.

 

[Omega Blue]

I (my opinion only and I still support the recruiting department) think Boekhurst over La Verde over was the wrong decision, in saying that I believe Viojo-Rainbow, Smith and Foster were very solid decisions. So on that if Boekhurst was considered a loss that's still 75% which is a B+ if memory serves correct.

 

[BIGGUS 64]

The dumbest thing to think anyone can claim there are clear winners and losers at the draft. You need a good 3 to 4 years after to then get a sense whom may have got clear treasures or junk list cloggers.

7 years after a draft done would I think you can clearly call it as by then you know if players made it or out of the system.

Such a w&nk - for e.g. the Dees got an A+. Can't really go wrong when you have picks 2 and 3.

 

[fnm_just a man]

We must have, but the worst that could have happened is that Reece never made it.

Will hurt a lot now if he goes alright at the Tigers.

No, the worst that could have happened is that Reece never made it and Foster became a good player for another team.

 

[BluStreak]

The only real way to assess how our recruitment has gone is to compare it with other clubs over the same period.
Then add in the needs of each club at the time and determine whether they went with best available or needs first.
Then add in those that had the pick of the crop (1-10) and compare them to the successes of that year and the next.
Then add in any changes to the recruitment team over the course of the comparison period.
Not to mention add in any outside (of the recruitment team) interference.
Then factor in draft penalties and gifts.
Then add in the opinions of Supporters who are a major part of a club.
Oh and before i forget, lastly did the player barrack for the club as a kid.