2015 Draft Discussion

[lions27]

Pav really is past it, reckon freo would be heavily into Dixon as well...hopefully he wants to stay in Queensland

 

[PattyKwasagun]

I don't think it would give more opportunities. I think the rookie list is a good place for people like Hammelmann or Bourke to develop. I couldn't see much point in Hammer being on our senior list. I think overall the playing list would reduce.

Hypothetically though, what if Hammelmann came on much quicker than expected and was kicking bags in the NEAFL and ready for senior footy, but we didn't have the ability to upgrade him? It just seems a pretty ridiculous and unnecessary situation - there are a few players on our senior list not ready for senior football yet but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be on the list.

McGuinness, Watts, Clayton, even Dawson too aren't really ready for senior footy yet but are on the senior list. I don't really see why they should get a spot on the senior list when they're at a similar stage of development to Hammelmann and he doesn't.

The only reason would be because there's not the same belief that Hammelmann will be a senior player as there is for the others, and then the question maybe should be asked whether or not you should be drafting him at all or telling him to prove his worth in the state comps for a year.

 

[dlanod]

As far as I can tell there's three current advantages to the senior/rookie list divide:
- Salary cap relief
- One year contracts to new players
- A way to store real developmental prospects (Irish and international, code swappers, local players) in the three Category B spots

The first one is dealt with simply by bumping up the cap.
The second one is a bit unfair to the players and it's not the end of the world to see that gone.
The third one would require more thought. Would we have listed Cian (or Pearce) if we couldn't stash him somewhere that doesn't have an impact on our payments to other players given we know that they'd take at least a year or two to develop compared to other players? The same goes for the likes of Smith, Pyke, or the American basketballers.

I'm generally in favour of the removal of the rookie list and instead increased the main list size up to 48 or thereabouts. However I think there would still be a need for a separate list for true developmental prospects, with the same restrictions as Category B rookies currently.

 

[Skoob]

<SNIP>
I'm generally in favour of the removal of the rookie list and instead increased the main list size up to 48 or thereabouts. However I think there would still be a need for a separate list for true developmental prospects, with the same restrictions as Category B rookies currently.

We could call that separate list, a "rookie" list.

 

[dlanod]

We could call that separate list, a "rookie" list.

We could, but it would obviously serve a different purpose to the one currently in place.

 

[jackess]

As far as I can tell there's three current advantages to the senior/rookie list divide:
- Salary cap relief
- One year contracts to new players
- A way to store real developmental prospects (Irish and international, code swappers, local players) in the three Category B spots

The first one is dealt with simply by bumping up the cap.
The second one is a bit unfair to the players and it's not the end of the world to see that gone.
The third one would require more thought. Would we have listed Cian (or Pearce) if we couldn't stash him somewhere that doesn't have an impact on our payments to other players given we know that they'd take at least a year or two to develop compared to other players? The same goes for the likes of Smith, Pyke, or the American basketballers.

I'm generally in favour of the removal of the rookie list and instead increased the main list size up to 48 or thereabouts. However I think there would still be a need for a separate list for true developmental prospects, with the same restrictions as Category B rookies currently.

What's the disadvantages of the current system?

If a rookie ends up being better than expected but you're somehow fortunate not to have enough long term injuries.

 

[dlanod]

What's the disadvantages of the current system?

If a rookie ends up being better than expected but you're somehow fortunate not to have enough long term injuries.

My main issue with it is that a subset of players are forced on to one year contracts, with the decrease in stability and security that that entails, purely because of where they happen to be drafted. From the club's POV, your example is the main disadvantage.

 

[POBT]

If you have 48 people on the list, someone will want 49. If you limit the rookie list to certain types, someone will argue that the kid who missed out on being drafted by 1 spot has been hard done by and "why should a good, solid Aussie kid miss out to a bloke from Ireland who has never played the game".
Clubs will always try and play at the edges of what the rules allow them to do. When they do that, they should be mindful of the risks of that, instead of bleating that the rules are wrong.

This seems to me to be such a minor issue in the greater scheme of things and one that could have been prevented had St Kilda managed their list in a different way. They put Schneider on the rookie list purely to gain an advantage. It allowed them to select Jack Lonie with their last pick in the draft, which looks like a successful decision which will have long term benefits. The short term cost of opening up that additional list spot is that Schneider has to be treated like any other rookie. That's the risk St Kilda took and they must have done that with eyes wide open of the possible ramifications.

I think the rookie list is a great initiative and provides a significant amount of flexibility for clubs. I have no issue with what St Kilda did. Clubs can choose to use it in a multitude of ways but if you want to use it as a stockpile for experienced footballers, then there is a price to pay. That makes sense to me, just as if you want to fill it with undeveloped 18yos, there is a price to pay (the lack of depth). Or if you want to fill it with Irishmen and pole vaulters, you know you aren't getting anything out of them for a few years.

 

[Ironmonger]

My main issue with it is that a subset of players are forced on to one year contracts, with the decrease in stability and security that that entails, purely because of where they happen to be drafted. From the club's POV, your example is the main disadvantage.

That right there is the critical point for me. Although obviously I agree with POBT that Alan Richardson's whinging is unseemly, I don't agree with the expectation that rookies do the same work for less money and fewer opportunities.

As a principle I think having effectively two tiers of AFL players is something we want to avoid, and if we can find another way to achieve similar aims, then we should.

I like dlanod 's system of having a separate list, but purely for certain types of prospects: let every team have up to two extra list spots for players from areas of priority development, like foreign countries or remote communities.

If clubs feel they need access to additional players, then I'd prefer to see to a mid-season draft.

 

[jackess]

I don't have an issue with the current setup but they could get rid of the rookie list. Expand the senior list by 2 and have a mid-season draft.

 

[Hollow Knight]

That right there is the critical point for me. Although obviously I agree with POBT that Alan Richardson's whinging is unseemly, I don't agree with the expectation that rookies do the same work for less money and fewer opportunities.

As a principle I think having effectively two tiers of AFL players is something we want to avoid,.

There are tiers even within the national draft regardless. Aren't draftee pay rates based on what round they were taken in?

 

[jackess]

There are tiers even within the national draft regardless. Aren't draftee pay rates based on what round they were taken in?

1st rounders are definitely paid more but I think the rest are paid the same.

 

[Ironmonger]

There are tiers even within the national draft regardless. Aren't draftee pay rates based on what round they were taken in?

I don't know about the draftee pay rates.

But it's a question of degrees. Rookie-listed players have fewer opportunities than their counterparts drafted onto senior lists and I think that's something to be avoided, whether or not some players are paid more than others. The fact that they get paid less just seems like another way in which they're treated as second-class citizens.

EDIT: So looking at the CBA, it appears a first round pick gets paid in his first year $71,515, a second round pick $65,000, third round or later $61,610 and a rookie listed player $55,440.

I suppose that is roughly proportionate, really. It's not starvation wages. It probably sucks for someone like Zac O'Brien, though, who's not earning a lot of money for interrupting his life to live on the other side of the country with only a slim chance of getting a long term career out of it.

Link is here: http://www.aflplayers.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/CBA-2012-2016-FINAL.pdf

 

[jackess]

I don't know about the draftee pay rates.

But it's a question of degrees. Rookie-listed players have fewer opportunities than their counterparts drafted onto senior lists and I think that's something to be avoided, whether or not some players are paid more than others. The fact that they get paid less just seems like another way in which they're treated as second-class citizens.

But what would be better 40 senior list and 8 on the rookie list or 42 on the senior list and 2 on a development/international rookie list?

I can't see it changing to being 48 on the senior list.

 

[lionshine]

Would love to get Schache but I am excited about the fact that I don't think we can lose with either of Weitering, Schache or Francis. I think they will all be quality players at AFL level and they all have some sort of affiliation with the Lions which will hopefully reduce the go home factor.

If I had to rank my order of preference though:

1. Schache
2. Weitering
3. Francis

That ranking not only includes their ability and team needs but also the "feel good story" of Schache getting drafted by the club his late father played for.

 

[Ironmonger]

But what would be better 40 senior list and 8 on the rookie list or 42 on the senior list and 2 on a development/international rookie list?

I can't see it changing to being 48 on the senior list.

Honestly, I'd go the second option. I don't know if more listed players is necessarily better.

 

[jackess]

How would removing the rookie list affect our academy. I think the rookie list is perfect for drafting locals and putting in a couple of years before making a call on them.

 

[LIONS08]

Schache and Weitering running around for Vic country
Schache with a very nice set show from close to the boundry about 40m out. Also kicked a point that should have been a goal under the circumstances. Looks the goods!!!!
Mathieson also getting a lot of it. Very good around the clearances.

 

[LIONS08]

And Schache kicks his 3rd 2 mins into the second! Would lose every game for the rest of the year to get this kid! Especially if he wants to be there. He has such a good looking kick!

 

[Bucking Beads]

Its a tough one. We want wins but we also want to get the pick 1

 

[Hollow Knight]

You'd have to think that we need to come last to get both Schache and Dixon. Because if the Suns are below us and we take Dixon, then Schache starts to look pretty good for them.

GWS have shown that you can't have too many highly rated talls.

 

[jackess]

You'd have to think that we need to come last to get both Schache and Dixon. Because if the Suns are below us and we take Dixon, then Schache starts to look pretty good for them.

GWS have shown that you can't have too many highly rated talls.

If it wasn't for Pickering I'd be happy with Dixon and Weitering.

 

[Quigley]

Francis has switched on Schache and done very well. Giving away height but playing in front and relying on superior ability to read and react. Impressive actually.

 

[LIONS08]

Francis has switched on Schache and done very well. Giving away height but playing in front and relying on superior ability to read and react. Impressive actually.

Schache can't get near it since that switch! He just reads the play so well. Schache trailing him to the contests by 2 - 3m
Hopefully he gets a little better delivery for the 2nd half

 

[Hollow Knight]

Francis has switched on Schache and done very well. Giving away height but playing in front and relying on superior ability to read and react. Impressive actually.

They're clearly both desperate to impress Brisbane.