List Mgmt. 2020 List Management II

[smashbox gill]

Whats the knock on Phillips? I havent seen him play.

I think that’s half the reason. He was like a forgotten draftee, never heard much about him or anything.
Not many reports mentioned him maybe meaning he didn’t show anythibg

 

[Brutalitops]

That's the lot of a rookie, you would want to show a lot to get a second contract.

In general I agree, but 2020 really hampered any opportunity for him. Obviously there was something which attracted us in the first place. A small forward with some pedigree.

Dont see the harm in continuing him as a rookie and getting a better look at him in 2021.

 

[FRUMPY]

Yeah, from the 2019 draft. Didnt play seniors and obviously didnt have much of an opportunity for the magoos.

Just seems a strange delisting.

Life of a rookie I guess. I was more referring to the other 3 delisted. You'd be spewing if you were rookied in 2019 and got to only play hit and giggle matches (and not get the perks of being on an AFL list - nightclubs and YS)

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk

 

[Aphrodite]

Right now our list is at 35/3/1 and we know that the list sizes are 38/4/2

We should take someone like Henry Walsh (or another ruck) + a key defender in the draft with picks 38 + 48 to make it 37 senior players. A key forward like McCarthy can be rookied (a total then of 5), and that leaves us with 1 senior and 1 rookie spot. Do we use them in the pre-season SSP?

I know you edited your post, but in regards to Gibbons, he was promoted to the Senior List 22nd September so he is included in the 36.

Resource - Carlton Football Club Team List and Contract Status

Note: This thread is for official announcements only. Please direct all discussion to the relevant player threads - click on the player name below to be redirected! Number Name Contract Expiry Source 2024 List Notes 1 2 Lachlan Cowan 2028 Here Senior 3 Jesse Motlop 2027...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Metalcrusher]

Doesn't offer much help from the rehab group though

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk

True ... but ... we are willing keep going with marchy and charlie ... tall timber take time to mature ..

 

[FRUMPY]

In general I agree, but 2020 really hampered any opportunity for him. Obviously there was something which attracted us in the first place. A small forward with some pedigree.

Dont see the harm in continuing him as a rookie and getting a better look at him in 2021.

They may keep tabs on him at a lower level, you'd hope they would

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk

 

[Stamos]

In general I agree, but 2020 really hampered any opportunity for him. Obviously there was something which attracted us in the first place. A small forward with some pedigree.

Dont see the harm in continuing him as a rookie and getting a better look at him in 2021.

The reduction in list numbers makes it tough.
I'd hazard a guess that we might have a DFA already lined up, or want to keep a list spot open for sup periods, or both.

 

[murphster]

It's 35 Seniors (including Gibbo). Kennedy has clearly been (or at least will be before the 1st List Lodgement next week) removed from the Senior List with our commitment to pick him in the rookie draft. If we count Kennedy as a rookie, we currently have:

35/3/1

With 3 senior spots (#38, #48, #78 or DFA) and 1 rookie spot available.
Also 1 spare Cat B spot if we find one.

We can add another 2 rookies as it doesn’t have to be 2 Cat B rookies it’s just 44 players with a max of 38 senior and the remaining 6 spots as rookies whether cat a or cat b.

I suspect we will use 2 picks in the draft 38 & 48
add a DFA at some stage, probably KP defensive cover, which fills our senior list,
Then take 2 rookies in the rookie draft which will complete our list. 38/5/1

 

[Stamos]

We can add another 2 rookies as it doesn’t have to be 2 Cat B rookies it’s just 44 players with a max of 38 senior and the remaining 6 spots as rookies whether cat a or cat b.

I suspect we will use 2 picks in the draft and add a DFA at some stage, probably KP defensive cover, which fills our senior list, then take 2 rookies in the rookie draft.

I'm pretty sure that's wrong.
The cuts have been from a max of 47 (including 3 Cat B), 2 to the senior list and 1 to Cat B to a total max of 44 (including 2 Cat B).

 

[Ash24]

I'd be starting the season with 38/3/1 which would leave us 1 rookie spot for a mid season type draft for a flyer who hadn't played footy this year.

So in the main draft:
38 - KPD
48 - Small Forward
78 - Ruck

(Or a version of those 3)

Rookie Draft
R1: Kennedy
R2: Pass

Leaves 1 spare list spot

I think we have enough young draftee mid-small forwards (Fisher, Fogarty, Philp, Honey, Owies), and should focus on getting one instead during next year's trade period. Someone established in the AFL system and can kick a good 25+ a year. I also think that with Moore being delisted, Casboult turning 31, and Charlie injured, we should find another key forward either in one of the drafts or DFA.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

I'd be starting the season with 38/3/1 which would leave us 1 rookie spot for a mid season type draft for a flyer who hadn't played footy this year.

So in the main draft:
38 - KPD
48 - Small Forward
78 - Ruck

(Or a version of those 3)

Rookie Draft
R1: Kennedy
R2: Pass

Leaves 1 spare list spot

I’d even go as far as leaving two spots open. Invite a few Vic kids to train with us and use one in February, then get another bolter in through the mid season draft. Will be plenty of good Victorian’s missing out.

We could then bundle up 38+48 for a higher selection and still use 78 on a project ruck. 78 will come in a fair bit anyway.

 

[Brutalitops]

The reduction in list numbers makes it tough.
I'd hazard a guess that we might have a DFA already lined up, or want to keep a list spot open for sup periods, or both.

Looking at it that way it does make sense strategically. The midyear draft will be brimming with Vic lads who were passed on in 2020 and really trying to stake a claim. Would be prudent to hold a rookie spot for then.

 

[Wickzki]

Am genuinely gobsmacked by Macreadie.

We definitely could have gotten Fogarty cheaper with Geelong asking for him.

Why turn it down only to delist him and then in the same release identify Kennedy as the only re-rookie?

Hoping for an answer other than dumb list management.

 

[AB_Blue]

So upgrading Gibbo counts as a draft pick doesn’t it ?

2 live picks and some rookies and maybe a DFA?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Carl]

Am genuinely gobsmacked by Macreadie.

We definitely could have gotten Fogarty cheaper with Geelong asking for him.

Why turn it down only to delist him and then in the same release identify Kennedy as the only re-rookie?

Hoping for an answer other than dumb list management.

Let's see if Geelong pick him up.

 

[smashbox gill]

Maybe we are just waiting to see how the draft plays out. If there’s a year to pick up a gem late in the draft it’s this one. Maybe agresta, Brodie and Austin have a couple under the radar kids up their sleeve

 

[murphster]

I'm pretty sure that's wrong.
The cuts have been from a max of 47 (including 3 Cat B), 2 to the senior list and 1 to Cat B to a total max of 44 (including 2 Cat B).

The AFL statement says between 36-38 senior players 4-6 category A rookies and 2 cat B rookies adding up to a maximum of 44, so your mix of rookies can be as you like with up to 2 cat b rookies. So we would be 38/5/1

Now I’m not sure, maybe your right? On first reading it read like how I said but now I’m second guessing, I don’t know some such mix anyway.

 

[Stamos]

The AFL statement says between 36-38 senior players 4-6 category A rookies and up to 2 cat B rookies adding up to a maximum of 44, so your mix of rookies can be as you like with up to 2 cat b rookies. So we would be 38/5/1.

You're reading it wrong. You can have 6 Cat A rookies if you have only 36 Senior List players.

Senior List + Cat A = maximum 42.
(+ max 2 Cat B = max 44).

 

[Stamos]

So upgrading Gibbo counts as a draft pick doesn’t it ?

2 live picks and some rookies and maybe a DFA?

It's immaterial this year as you only have to take 1 player in the draft.
They haven't clarified, but it would be unlikely that a rookie upgrade would be allowed to count as your only pick.

 

[Canyouhearthedrums]

Kennedy is genuinely perplexing

 

[FitzroyBlueBagger]

Surprised Macreadie wasn’t at least retained and put onto the rookie list, anyway our next faze of developing true KPD and KPF stocks through our reserves for list depth is paper thin at best...

Harry and Charlie(injured) our only true KPF’s Silvagni and McGovern are 3rd tall types Weitering and Jones(30) our true KPD’s along with Casboult(31) playing all 3 lines...

Marchbank(injuries) and Plowman 3rd tall types...
DeKoning and Pittonett our only 2 genuine rucks...

We would be the only club to field a reserves team without a recognized KP spine, interesting..

 

[Stamos]

Kennedy is genuinely perplexing

In what way?

 

[HARKER]

Bam Bam is the whipping boy.
I could name 2 or 3 that shouldn’t be playing before him....but I’ll keep my mouth shut....I don’t need the aggravation

This is a football forum and discussion is its lifeblood.
No point saying you'd like to say something but then not say it, because some may not like it.

The fact is that we had all these players out of contract and for that reason alone, they're the first to be clipped.
Polson and Moore were easy, Kennedy has another chance to start again, but the misfortune is for Macreadie.

I'd suggest we have a KPD DFA in mind.

EDIT: As things stand we have 11 players off the books. That's now 8 years in a row we've clocked over double figures.

 

[windows1]

14 certainties to play Round 1?
10 Highly likely for Round 1?

I find it hard to comprehend how the next bunch are a good chance to play Round 1 if we already have 24 highly likely?

I like the premise, I'll have a crack

They’re not a ‘collective’ they are individuals...so my maths is about hem as individuals. Barring injury TO THEM, those comments are true because of the likelihood of injury to the ‘collective’.

Perhaps see it this way: what is the P value of each player being injured? Say 5-8/44?. It’s low right that it would happen to THEM. What’s the P value of there being 5-8 injuries in the group (and therefore creating openings)? Quite high.

So I think it makes sense to run the numbers above 22. Just how I do it. Seems reliable. And valid. And stuff.

 

[TENACIOUS]

Have list sizes been announced yet?

If we could fit them in I would be interested in
(Probably been discussed)

• Oscar McDonald - Only 24 has showed he belonged at the level, push out because of Lever & May
• Cam McCarthy - Only if club believe they could get his head right, Super talented

Good luck in the future to those that are delisted or retired...
Sure Golden Square would have a spot for any of you