List Mgmt. 2017 Draft Discussion - Draft night 24/11

[Cannon82]

Rookies have changed now given Cat A can play Rd1. And that still doesn't mean those guys are any good.

Ruck isn't bad for 2018 given the fill job Pedo did.

Can we play all of them? I thought we had to elevate one of them and then others are covering for long-term injuries?

Gawm an injury risk, Spencil gone, Pedo isn't young, even Watts is gone and we haven't picked up another mature or developing ruck. Maybe King or Weideman are considered able backups...

 

[Demon 16]

Can we play all of them? I thought we had to elevate one of them and then others are covering for long-term injuries?

Gawm an injury risk, Spencil gone, Pedo isn't young, even Watts is gone and we haven't picked up another mature or developing ruck. Maybe King or Weideman are considered able backups...

We might have taken Sam Hayes with 49 if he didn't go at 48.

I am surprised that we don't have a mature age ruck on our rookie list but we are certainly not alone in that deep ruck stocks are clearly not a thing anymore.

 

[CTHORANGE]

The ruck thing is interesting, perhaps the club feels the AFL will further alter the ruck rules in the coming years, making a genuine ruck less and less useful. So having more than 1-2 developing on the list could be a waste.

 

[Demon 16]

The ruck thing is interesting, perhaps the club feels the AFL will further alter the ruck rules in the coming years, making a genuine ruck less and less useful. So having more than 1-2 developing on the list could be a waste.

I think it's also becoming a common view that you've either got a really good ruck option, or you make do with other strategies.

Having a main ruck, a second rate back up ruck and a couple of young developing rucks who take 6 years is just too much to ask of a list these days.

 

[LeverPuller]

Can we play all of them? I thought we had to elevate one of them and then others are covering for long-term injuries?

Gawm an injury risk, Spencil gone, Pedo isn't young, even Watts is gone and we haven't picked up another mature or developing ruck. Maybe King or Weideman are considered able backups...

New CBA, rules changed. You can play any Cat A rookie. Only Cat B need to be upgraded.

 

[Cannon82]

New CBA, rules changed. You can play any Cat A rookie. Only Cat B need to be upgraded.

Ah, righto. Do we have any Category B rookies?

 

[Willo 17]

Melbourne's Final List 2018
http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2017-11-24/locked-in-melbournes-2018-list

Cat B rookie spots are for players that come from other sports, basketball, cricket, table tennis etc. So I would say no to Cat B's on our list.

 

[LeverPuller]

Ah, righto. Do we have any Category B rookies?

Not anymore, Maynard got upgraded from Cat B to Cat A.

 

[blitznu]

New CBA, rules changed. You can play any Cat A rookie. Only Cat B need to be upgraded.

so whats the point of the rookie list? just add them to main list

 

[Cannon82]

so whats the point of the rookie list? just add them to main list

One year deals instead of two, and maximum three years on the rookie list. Sounds like that's it.

 

[Willo 17]

so whats the point of the rookie list? just add them to main list

Less money, shorter contract, a stepping stone type thing I think, could be wrong, but that was my take on it.

 

[LeverPuller]

One year deals instead of two, and maximum three years on the rookie list. Sounds like that's it.

Yup. Means you can take a flyer on a development-type player to get a closer look without the long-term commitment. Also means you can get a better gauge on things like work ethic.

 

[Cannon82]

Yup. Means you can take a flyer on a development-type player to get a closer look without the long-term commitment. Also means you can get a better gauge on things like work ethic.

Yeah... which other than Filipovic, is not what we're doing with the rookie list. Should have jettisoned one of the older guys, I think.

 

[LeverPuller]

Yeah... which other than Filipovic, is not what we're doing with the rookie list. Should have jettisoned one of the older guys, I think.

The other thing is: do we need it?

Of the following, how many are over the age of 25?

B: Jetta OMac Lever
HB: Hibberd Frost Hunt
C: Lewis Oliver Brayshaw
HF: Petracca Hogan Melksham
F: Garlett TMac Hannan
R: Gawn Viney Jones
Int: Tyson Harmes ANB Stretch

We really don't have the depth of ageing bodies that other clubs do. I'd rather have some units like TSmith, Keilty and Maynard as an emergency option.

 

[blitznu]

Yup. Means you can take a flyer on a development-type player to get a closer look without the long-term commitment. Also means you can get a better gauge on things like work ethic.

couldnt they just change it so say the first 2 rounds are on a 3yr contract(heard they wanted longer contracts for draftees) then 3rd and fourth rounds 2 yr contracts and anything after that a 1 year contract. they prob want to keep rookie draft so footy stays in media for abit longer but yeah could be worked out

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

Would have thought Sam Hayes could have fallen our way? Only downside for me

 

[Cannon82]

The other thing is: do we need it?

Of the following, how many are over the age of 25?

B: Jetta OMac Lever
HB: Hibberd Frost Hunt
C: Lewis Oliver Brayshaw
HF: Petracca Hogan Melksham
F: Garlett TMac Hannan
R: Gawn Viney Jones
Int: Tyson Harmes ANB Stretch

We really don't have the depth of ageing bodies that other clubs do. I'd rather have some units like TSmith, Keilty and Maynard as an emergency option.

If we're using all of Smith, Keilty and Maynard on a regular basis, good odds the season is already over. If the rookie list is just an extension of the main list now, then we've got 40 odd players to call on. I don't see much point in holding on to blokes in the 35-40 bracket who are mid 20s, whatever the age distribution of the best 22 / list.

 

[TheCount]

couldnt they just change it so say the first 2 rounds are on a 3yr contract(heard they wanted longer contracts for draftees) then 3rd and fourth rounds 2 yr contracts and anything after that a 1 year contract. they prob want to keep rookie draft so footy stays in media for abit longer but yeah could be worked out

That's a really good idea mate, I like that a lot. Gives a lot more security to the clubs in being able to lock in the early picks, while making it easier to take a punt on platers with later picks.

As for the blokes on the Rookie List, no issue with it really, the majority of our squad is really young, so to have a couple of "break in case of emergency" experienced bodies there is as good a use of it than some speculative picks in what was already thought of as a shallow draft.

 

[jhong]

We also have another team to fill , that's if we are serious about casey.

 

[Tempy Tiger]

Meant to be a gun. Heard much higher than the 30s.

Also an excellent bowler. Nightmare to face with his steep bounce.

 

[Demon 16]

The other thing is: do we need it?

Of the following, how many are over the age of 25?

B: Jetta OMac Lever
HB: Hibberd Frost Hunt
C: Lewis Oliver Brayshaw
HF: Petracca Hogan Melksham
F: Garlett TMac Hannan
R: Gawn Viney Jones
Int: Tyson Harmes ANB Stretch

We really don't have the depth of ageing bodies that other clubs do. I'd rather have some units like TSmith, Keilty and Maynard as an emergency option.

Good point.

 

[Demon 16]

If we're using all of Smith, Keilty and Maynard on a regular basis, good odds the season is already over. If the rookie list is just an extension of the main list now, then we've got 40 odd players to call on. I don't see much point in holding on to blokes in the 35-40 bracket who are mid 20s, whatever the age distribution of the best 22 / list.

I'm hoping Maynard will actually be good enough for someone senior footy next year. The rookie list is the right spot for Filipovic.

Maybe we just didn't rate the depth this year and would rather make the rookie changes next year?

 

[Cannon82]

I'm hoping Maynard will actually be good enough for someone senior footy next year. The rookie list is the right spot for Filipovic.

Maybe we just didn't rate the depth this year and would rather make the rookie changes next year?

Maynard looked solid enough when he played, but he just seems like another Viv Michie to me, and we have more midfield depth these days. Maybe I'm wrong and his game takes a leap forward next season, but if we actually thought he was a likely type, he'd be on the main list instead of the rookie list.

Given they're one year deals on the rookie list, we can make changes every year. Why not have a look at another kid? The rookie list is there to encourage speculation.

 

[Demon 16]

Maynard looked solid enough when he played, but he just seems like another Viv Michie to me, and we have more midfield depth these days. Maybe I'm wrong and his game takes a leap forward next season, but if we actually thought he was a likely type, he'd be on the main list instead of the rookie list.

Given they're one year deals on the rookie list, we can make changes every year. Why not have a look at another kid? The rookie list is there to encourage speculation.

Fair point but I refer back to @Striker475s post whereby we have a very young list so maybe put rookie list is best used for senior depth rather than youth just now.

I can understand a club not presuming that 1 year will give them the answer with a junior. Sometimes you want 2 or 3 years look at them before cutting.

Maybe I'm dreaming but I'm also hoping for more from Maynard than Michie.

 

[Cannon82]

Fair point but I refer back to @Striker475s post whereby we have a very young list so maybe put rookie list is best used for senior depth rather than youth just now.

I can understand a club not presuming that 1 year will give them the answer with a junior. Sometimes you want 2 or 3 years look at them before cutting.

Maybe I'm dreaming but I'm also hoping for more from Maynard than Michie.

Just had a flick at the list on footywire - has been updated after the draft. Smith and Maynard are the 8th and 10th oldest on the list, which is a bit surprising. Yes, we do have a younger list, but I still think hanging on to middling depth players because of that is a poor excuse. You look at that list and a lot of those younger guys aren't pushing for a spot in the team, they are already in it. Kielty, King, Johnstone, McKenna and Flipovic are the only ones who haven't been near the side yet; it's not like our young list is fully of developing schoolboys. The depth is already there with or without these older rookies.

So if the rookie list is now an extension of the main list, then we've gone from 38 to 42 players available (or 39 or 40, if you want to look at upgrades or whatever). We can still only play 22 on a match day, so further additions should go towards digging up talent with a view to the future. If we have 10 or 15 injuries, so be it. You have a backup but you don't have five poor imitations lying around just in case.