List Mgmt. 2016 Trade/FA Thread 2.0: Ahern (pg168); Hrovat (pg252); Williams (pg270)

[Le Grille]

Just musing here but is it at all possible that we're not too concerned defensively at the moment and will be happy to throw a Nielson or Durdin in the deep end?

We either want to go up the ladder or down the ladder. I'm sensing we'd be content with a brief dip to position our next draft "favourably".

Could be just merely that they think Tippett simply isn't up to it. No point having a player on your list if you don't think they can contribute or improve

 

[The Filth Wizard]

Could be just merely that they think Tippett simply isn't up to it. No point having a player on your list if you don't think they can contribute or improve

Yeah, I'm not really comparing to Tippett, I've never even thought of him on our list in truth. I'm more just wondering if the club is even fussed there is no apparent plan B for Tarrant if he gets injured.

Any chance Brown lasts until our first rookie pick I wonder.

 

[Frank Thring]

Do you really have to be trim to be a defensive coach?

Not ours. Im sure Tudor and Drummond are purely there to.lower the skin fold collective of the coaching staff.

 

[tiltraise]

I think we could have done with a tagger this year after BJ went down with a season ending injury.

We don't? Who's to say Jacobs is fully fit next year after being out pretty much all of 2015.

Mountford did some run with rolls in the VFL last season. I for one would like to see him get some games next year be it tagging or otherwise.

 

[Passmore]

Just musing here but is it at all possible that we're not too concerned defensively at the moment and will be happy to throw a Nielson or Durdin in the deep end?

We either want to go up the ladder or down the ladder. I'm sensing we'd be content with a brief dip to position our next draft "favourably".

No point plugging holes with polyfiller like Mitch Brown. Live or die with Nielson and/or Durdin. If we drop off then we so be it. As you say we have a favouable draft position. If they succeed, happy days. Onwards and upwards.

 

[Skiparoo]

Just musing here but is it at all possible that we're not too concerned defensively at the moment and will be happy to throw a Nielson or Durdin in the deep end?

We either want to go up the ladder or down the ladder. I'm sensing we'd be content with a brief dip to position our next draft "favourably".

Absolutely, Thompson is closer to the end of his career than anyone in the backline. We need to play these two, to see if they've got what it takes.

 

[ferball]

Mountford did some run with rolls in the VFL last season. I for one would like to see him get some games next year be it tagging or otherwise.

He'll get games. Everyone will have to get a fair shot at games, unless they lock on a winning combination really quickly and even then I imagine they will blood as many as they can. They have publicly committed to it for a start. People who might still be upset at Boomer's sacking will probably be willing to give the reset a go by next footy season, and if it unearths some real gold then they will be on board. If not or even if they don't try it then they may drift away for a while or longer. I don't think most North fans really know who Mountford is or want to specifically give him a shot but if he isn't playing his name will be mentioned by commentators early, especially if we are losing games. And the other players names.

We have more than 22 players who could be in the round 1 side. We "sacked" two match winners to give the kids a shot. Well that's the narrative even if its slightly inaccurate. The media will be right into Scott if he doesn't show signs of success or development (or both). And with a changed situation at the club it'll be easier to see BS as just someone else who can not be there any more if he doesn't measure up. But he'll play those younger guys. I can't really see a coach going thru all this upheaval without planning change and measures to find out about players over a period of time.

 

[King Corey]

How many Academy picks do you think there will be ?

It sounds like around 8-10 academy and father-sons are in the mix. Averaging each of them as chewing up one additional selection our 5th rounders become effective 70 and 80something picks. Worth a punt on both in a supposedly talent laden draft.

 

[tiltraise]

No point plugging holes with polyfiller like Mitch Brown. Live or die with Nielson and/or Durdin. If we drop off then we so be it. As you say we have a favouable draft position. If they succeed, happy days. Onwards and upwards.

It is also advantageous that we test out both Durdin and Neilson and to a lesser extent McKay at the top level prior to the 2017 draft.

By all accounts the 2017 pool is well stocked for talls and we really need to know where we stand with these guys so we can make a more informed decision at that time.

 

[ViperR1]

Excepting Spud I'm not sure how much leadership we actually just lost.

Well that depends on if you are talking about good or bad leadership.

I'm certain we've lost plenty of one of the above and I suspect a key reason for the reset.

 

[Rooboys Rool]

It sounds like around 8-10 academy and father-sons are in the mix. Averaging each of them as chewing up one additional selection our 5th rounders become effective 70 and 80something picks. Worth a punt on both in a supposedly talent laden draft.

Clubs also start to pass on picks in the 60s or use them on rookie upgrades. Most drafts there is between 60-70 new players, so our 4th pick is likely to be in that range effectively.

 

[guapo]

Clubs also start to pass on picks in the 60s or use them on rookie upgrades. Most drafts there is between 60-70 new players, so our 4th pick is likely to be in that range effectively.

If we are using picks in the 70's to regenerate our list, we ain't serious. Just swapping list cloggers for list cloggers. Please, let's hope we don't

 

[Steele7]

If we are using picks in the 70's to regenerate our list, we ain't serious. Just swapping list cloggers for list cloggers. Please, let's hope we don't

Mountford was pick 60. Thought he has been a good pick. I would be willing to take a chance on pick 87 on a player like Olango or Bayok.

 

[Firestarter]

If we are using picks in the 70's to regenerate our list, we ain't serious. Just swapping list cloggers for list cloggers. Please, let's hope we don't

I guess you're not fond of rookies who would be, by your defintion, the cloggers of cloggers.

 

[Skiparoo]

Really it is irrelevant what draft pick you were picked at. Its what you do, once you arrive at the club that counts and work your arse off to get an opportunity and make the most of it.

 

[Heaps of fun]

Pretty sure six rookie drafted players were given premiership medals at the start of this month so would have to agree with the above.

 

[The Nostradamus]

someone provide a list of best players picked with draft picks in the 80 range

even rookie picks have had more success

 

[Thewlis Dish]

someone provide a list of best players picked with draft picks in the 80 range

even rookie picks have had more success

Rookie picks are all players available at pick 80.

 

[The Nostradamus]

Rookie picks are all players available at pick 80.

ok lets compare pick 80-90 or even 75-90 vs rookie picks 1-10

id rather take an extra rookie than waste a senior list spot, or prefer to take a DFA

 

[Harvey Manfrenjensenden]

someone provide a list of best players picked with draft picks in the 80 range

even rookie picks have had more success

Paul Dimatina
Damien Hardwick
Scott Burns
Jade Rawlings
Ben Dixon
Aaron Hamil
Brad Scott
Nathan Thompson
Taylor Walker
Rory Atkins

 

[Thewlis Dish]

ok lets compare pick 80-90 or even 75-90 vs rookie picks 1-10

id rather take an extra rookie than waste a senior list spot, or prefer to take a DFA

if there's not a delisted free agent who is going to categorically improve us (there isn't) then it's just as much a waste of a list spot as drafting someone late or keeping McKenzie/Tippet is.

 

[Harvey Manfrenjensenden]

ok lets compare pick 80-90 or even 75-90 vs rookie picks 1-10

id rather take an extra rookie than waste a senior list spot, or prefer to take a DFA

Since 2008 clubs have preferred to use late picks to upgrade rookies and the trend seems to support your thinking. Unless the club thinks by using pick 87 they can get a player that wont last until our first rookie pick this year

 

[The Nostradamus]

if there's not a delisted free agent who is going to categorically improve us (there isn't) then it's just as much a waste of a list spot as drafting someone late or keeping McKenzie/Tippet is.

which is my point, id rather McKenzie or tippet or a DFA or an extra rookie over pick 87 taking a senior list spot

 

[Thewlis Dish]

which is my point, id rather McKenzie or tippet or a DFA or an extra rookie over pick 87 taking a senior list spot

Why would you rather a known quantity who isn't up to standard over an unknown quantity who potentially could be? This view always confuses me.

 

[The Nostradamus]

Why would you rather a known quantity who isn't up to standard over an unknown quantity who potentially could be? This view always confuses me.

because I rate the two mentioned especially McKenzie who is still young and improving. And I would rather a ready made DFA like Mitch Brown or Dyl Buckley etc.

and to rephrase the argument to suit my point id also rather an extra rookie pick than wasting a senior list spot with pick 87