List Mgmt. 2021 List Management

[Arr0w]

Could be anything, but not a KPD

 

[katmanblue]

Maybe if we squint.

 

[therubbernub]

Its absolutely flying. Never had a better preseason, has come back in magnificent shape.

grasping at straws there..

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Quick survey...

Who should we pick up in the pre-season SSP?

McDonald -->
Crocker -->
Maher -->
Moore -->
Save for m/s draft --> ☹

(please react to the post accordingly)

What a way to get your reactions tally up. Ingenious.

I went McDonald for KPD backup purposes and also because I want our VFL side to be balanced so those dropping back down have opportunities to shine.

I can't believe we are still holding on to Moore to this point. Averages 2 games per year over 5 years. Surely, we could have found a better depth player?

No doubt he is well liked by some but he had 3 hitouts playing in the ruck for 2 games with us last year and people talk about him being another midfielder in there to cancel that stat out.

Kreuzer was another midfielder in there, actually got plenty of ball, hit the scoreboard and got his share of taps.

Moore won't be a defender for us so why do we need him? Who gets this many chances to forge an AFL career?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Incidentally, the LTI criteria was 6 weeks last year, and changed to 6 rounds for the Festival of Footy stints.

AFL tweaks long-term injury list eligibilty to give clubs greater flexibility

Players will miss a minimum of six rounds, not six weeks once placed on long-term injury list

www.afl.com.au

Where are people getting the season ending criteria?

We could easily add a few players if we saw fit.

 

[Ash24]

Incidentally, the LTI criteria was 6 weeks last year, and changed to 6 rounds for the Festival of Footy stints.

AFL tweaks long-term injury list eligibilty to give clubs greater flexibility

Players will miss a minimum of six rounds, not six weeks once placed on long-term injury list

www.afl.com.au

Where are people getting the season ending criteria?

We could easily add a few players if we saw fit.

So potentially 4 list spots? (Charlie, Newman, Kemp, + the current remaining spot)

 

[Old navy]

I know Coniglio would have been a great addition, but doubt we would have been able to get him and still and Martin Williams and Saad.
Cogs would have been great as that other inside bull to help support Cripps, but IMO Martin with he’s tackling elite ball use and ability to kick goals and also play as a forward and Williams with he’s elite speed, kicking skills and versatility are more so what our midfield was desperately crying out for.
Hopefully one of Dow Setters Stocker or Kemp later on down the road can step up and provide that contested ball support for Cripps this year.

 

[Blue__Balls]

I'm not saying I totally disagree with your post, because there is some merit in what you say. What I think you are doing though is overlooking the fact that 2020 will be a totally unique year. The Kyle Dunkley example is not really relevant because he didn't miss a year along with his whole crop; his form was exposed form and the recruiters knew more about him and his peers. This will be a really unique situation, one that will probably never happen again (let's bloody hope).

I will reiterate though that I feel there will be a handful of kids who may have got drafted if they were given their top-age year, perhaps more. We have seen it time and time again that 17 years old is when some blokes can really come on from out of nowhere and stop being outperformed by the 'man childs' or existing guns in their age group. Perhaps using the elite examples of Oliver and Bont was a bit of a mistake, I do agree someone of that quality at our likely pick could be remote but not wildly out of the question.

Will Powell is perhaps a more 'realistic' example. He was basically off the map and ended up being a late first rounder and is tracking along nicely in his career. There is almost 0% chance he gets drafted without his top-age year. Tom Doedee is another good one, same story. Mitch Georgiades (unproven) Jayden Hunt (school footy, didn't make TAC cup) Nakia Cockatoo (injuries leave him unproven) all fit the bill, as do probably countless ruckman. Brodie Grundy was largely unthought of as a good prospect, our very own Patrick Cripps probably goes quite late-rookie if not for his last year where he grew significantly which is well documented. Who knows what happens to the latter two guns if they miss their top-age year?

I get what you're saying, but I don't think it's as big of a stretch as you may think it is that there will be really good players found in the MSD.

Not at all, I'm not overlooking that 2020 was a totally unique year, I'm actively questioning the outcomes that people seem to be ascribing to it.

You've listed 7 names there, for players who rose late from borderline unknown to draftable and ultimately capable AFL players. Since 2012. And we're to believe that there would be 7 or more in 2020 alone? We're not talking players who were considered third round quality at the beginning of the year and then rose to first round level, those players have already been drafted in the third round of the 2020 draft. We're talking undraftables - players who had so little exposed form, or were so under-developed, that they were overlooked across 80 selections.

And then we're to operate on the assumption/belief/hope that 6-10 such players exist, and between now and June 2nd, are going to elevate their game to the degree that we'd see them as a long-term best 22 player who is likely to overtake enough of our developing youth (Williamson, Cuningham, Silvagni, Fogarty, O'Brien, Stocker, Kemp, Philp, Carroll, Durdin, Ramsay, Honey) to establish themselves in the best 22?

Yes, 2020 was a unique year, and yes, some players undoubtedly missed out on important development. But most of the quality would have risen anyway, and there is no guarantee that 2-3 months of overage footy is going to propel the outliers as far as people hope.

It's a nice theory, and it makes sense at surface level, but the more I consider it the more I think it's being oversold. The bottom side or two might get a nice little consolation, and there may be a feel-good story come out of it for a couple of kids, but we won't be in a position to benefit and our list profile doesn't require it anyway.

 

[Blue__Balls]

So potentially 4 list spots? (Charlie, Newman, Kemp, + the current remaining spot)

Nope, because LTI's don't equal list spots.

Cat B players can't be selected for senior games unless there is a player on the LTI list.

SSP and mid-season draft selections can only be used for unfilled rookie list spots or to replace players moved onto the inactive list, which is separate to the LTI list and is used for players who retire in-season or suffer injuries that rule them out for the season. Once on the inactive list, a player can't be reactiveated til the next season.

If an inactive, injured player is fit to play before the season ends, a club can apply to return that player to the primary list in place of another long-term injured player, but if no such player exists then the original player cannot play.

So we could move Curnow to the inactive list, but then the only way he plays is if someone else cops an LTI in time for his return.

There's a decent summary of it here: https://www.nmfc.com.au/news/250226/mid-season-draft-rules

 

[The Bighouse]

Incidentally, the LTI criteria was 6 weeks last year, and changed to 6 rounds for the Festival of Footy stints.

AFL tweaks long-term injury list eligibilty to give clubs greater flexibility

Players will miss a minimum of six rounds, not six weeks once placed on long-term injury list

www.afl.com.au

Where are people getting the season ending criteria?

We could easily add a few players if we saw fit.

LTI’s only = Cat B promotions, like Owies last season. He’ll be hanging out for the same this year.
Inactive list = season ending, or retirement for a replacement via supplementary selection (usually train on) or mid-season draft. Or if you have list spare, as we do currently for either means of selecting another player.

 

[TheKITC]

Not at all, I'm not overlooking that 2020 was a totally unique year, I'm actively questioning the outcomes that people seem to be ascribing to it.

You've listed 7 names there, for players who rose late from borderline unknown to draftable and ultimately capable AFL players. Since 2012. And we're to believe that there would be 7 or more in 2020 alone? We're not talking players who were considered third round quality at the beginning of the year and then rose to first round level, those players have already been drafted in the third round of the 2020 draft. We're talking undraftables - players who had so little exposed form, or were so under-developed, that they were overlooked across 80 selections.

And then we're to operate on the assumption/belief/hope that 6-10 such players exist, and between now and June 2nd, are going to elevate their game to the degree that we'd see them as a long-term best 22 player who is likely to overtake enough of our developing youth (Williamson, Cuningham, Silvagni, Fogarty, O'Brien, Stocker, Kemp, Philp, Carroll, Durdin, Ramsay, Honey) to establish themselves in the best 22?

Yes, 2020 was a unique year, and yes, some players undoubtedly missed out on important development. But most of the quality would have risen anyway, and there is no guarantee that 2-3 months of overage footy is going to propel the outliers as far as people hope.

It's a nice theory, and it makes sense at surface level, but the more I consider it the more I think it's being oversold. The bottom side or two might get a nice little consolation, and there may be a feel-good story come out of it for a couple of kids, but we won't be in a position to benefit and our list profile doesn't require it anyway.

Those are the names that I pulled off the top of my head that have been spoken about publicly and could be 'verified' to a degree. It would be unquantifiable the amount of players who could have been taken in the drafts for years for those of us who are not extremely invested in draft watching, that were not on the radar before their top age year. They could range anywhere from first round selections to rookies.

It's also not that they have to 'magically' elevate their games from now, they have not been afforded a full year (including pre-season) to elevate themselves. I think you are under-selling how much growth and improvement even just physically happens between the age of 16/17 to 18/19 for some and how that translates to draftability. I don't think it's unreasonable at all to suggest there will at least be a handful of them and I disagree totally that I'm overselling that point. I may even pose the question to Knightmare and some other avid draft watchers on a guess regarding the amount of players each year that get drafted that were not thought of or considered draftable prior to their top-age year and see what that bears out.

Your comment regarding how much stock we put in any player selected in the MSD is very easily applied to any draftee, at almost any position, so I do no consider that a valid criticism of taking a player in the MSD. The draft is essentially a lottery all the time in terms of finding someone that will be a long term player and displace the youth we have coming through and incumbent best 22 players. That is definitely not a reason we shouldn't put stock in selecting a player here, otherwise we would rarely go to the draft (except with blue chip picks) and just sign players with AFL form through other means.

I guess we will see, my 2c is that I hope we have a selection...

Good, healthy debate btw

 

[Blue__Balls]

Those are the names that I pulled off the top of my head that have been spoken about publicly and could be 'verified' to a degree. It would be unquantifiable the amount of players who could have been taken in the drafts for years for those of us who are not extremely invested in draft watching, that were not on the radar before their top age year. They could range anywhere from first round selections to rookies.

It's also not that they have to 'magically' elevate their games from now, they have not been afforded a full year (including pre-season) to elevate themselves. I think you are under-selling how much growth and improvement even just physically happens between the age of 16/17 to 18/19 for some and how that translates to draftability. I don't think it's unreasonable at all to suggest there will at least be a handful of them and I disagree totally that I'm overselling that point. I may even pose the question to Knightmare and some other avid draft watchers on a guess regarding the amount of players each year that get drafted that were not thought of or considered draftable prior to their top-age year and see what that bears out.

Your comment regarding how much stock we put in any player selected in the MSD is very easily applied to any draftee, at almost any position, so I do no consider that a valid criticism of taking a player in the MSD. The draft is essentially a lottery all the time in terms of finding someone that will be a long term player and displace the youth we have coming through and incumbent best 22 players. That is definitely not a reason we shouldn't put stock in selecting a player here, otherwise we would rarely go to the draft (except with blue chip picks) and just sign players with AFL form through other means.

I guess we will see, my 2c is that I hope we have a selection...

Good, healthy debate btw

Would be interested in seeing that feedback from some of the more thorough track watchers. Maybe there's more of it than I expect?

I still feel that it's overly optimistic to think that there's going to be enough of these players that stand out within the first 10 weeks of their seasons for any of note to be available to us. Maybe there are 10 undrafted players who, had they have had a full season last year, would have pushed up the board. But that's still no guarantee that they'll do so in the next couple of months, given they're coming off a non-existent season. They may start slow, or get injured.

What I expect to be available is a handful of kids who would struggle to crack our senior side in the next 4-5 years anyway, plus some mature age role players. We don't need more of the former, and I'd rather we take the latter now to give said player more time to gel with the group, and to offer positional depth for the first half of the season when we need to make sure we build momentum.

List sizes have been reduced, and I'd rather see us make practical use of all that we have available to us rather than holding one spot back for an unlikely Hail Mary.

 

[The Bighouse]

Was there any interest in K.Baldwin by any of our draft watchers last time around?

Essendon fills list spot with young forward

“I’m so appreciative to the Bombers for making this dream come true.”

www.sen.com.au

 

[TheKITC]

Would be interested in seeing that feedback from some of the more thorough track watchers. Maybe there's more of it than I expect?

I still feel that it's overly optimistic to think that there's going to be enough of these players that stand out within the first 10 weeks of their seasons for any of note to be available to us. Maybe there are 10 undrafted players who, had they have had a full season last year, would have pushed up the board. But that's still no guarantee that they'll do so in the next couple of months, given they're coming off a non-existent season. They may start slow, or get injured.

What I expect to be available is a handful of kids who would struggle to crack our senior side in the next 4-5 years anyway, plus some mature age role players. We don't need more of the former, and I'd rather we take the latter now to give said player more time to gel with the group, and to offer positional depth for the first half of the season when we need to make sure we build momentum.

List sizes have been reduced, and I'd rather see us make practical use of all that we have available to us rather than holding one spot back for an unlikely Hail Mary.

From Knightmare....

I can't say how it would be for most clubs. But I'd say for me at least, inside the top-20 it would be 1-3 each year who only really come into contention purely from their draft year.

For the whole draft, there would be something like 1/3 drafted I wouldn't have predicted going into a year if I was to do say a full phantom draft during the preseason, to give you a feel for rough numbers of players who really develop and earn it in their draft year. Maybe for a club if they're been following them since way back when, even assuming perfect talent ID, they'd still miss on at least 1/4 I would have thought a year out, just due to some guys developing, others not developing. You'll also get some who you can predict will be top-20 picks going into a season who go undrafted, so it works both ways.

There will be some MSD opportunities. NAB League. VFL. We'll see during the season how a lot of guys have developed, to see just how many opportunities there are. The slight reservation is funding for NAB League has dropped. Coaching has been far reduced. Preseason moved back. So I'd have somewhat tempered expectations from the respect that there hasn't been any footy for guys to develop and little in the way of preparation to help development either, but there will be some natural improvers due to age their bodies are coming along and others who have put in the work. So it will make for some interesting watching.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

I know these boys have trained with us so probably owe one of them a crack at it, but IMao we are light on in ruck stocks, and should Pitto get injured we may be in trouble, I would be looking to bolster this before taking on Oscar or Moore.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

Would be interested in seeing that feedback from some of the more thorough track watchers. Maybe there's more of it than I expect?

I still feel that it's overly optimistic to think that there's going to be enough of these players that stand out within the first 10 weeks of their seasons for any of note to be available to us. Maybe there are 10 undrafted players who, had they have had a full season last year, would have pushed up the board. But that's still no guarantee that they'll do so in the next couple of months, given they're coming off a non-existent season. They may start slow, or get injured.

What I expect to be available is a handful of kids who would struggle to crack our senior side in the next 4-5 years anyway, plus some mature age role players. We don't need more of the former, and I'd rather we take the latter now to give said player more time to gel with the group, and to offer positional depth for the first half of the season when we need to make sure we build momentum.

List sizes have been reduced, and I'd rather see us make practical use of all that we have available to us rather than holding one spot back for an unlikely Hail Mary.

It will be the kids who grow, that out on 10cm and all of a sudden become a completely different proposition going from a 180cm mid to a towering 190cm bull...

 

[Accidental genius]

Based on saints practice game Id be happy if we offered oscar a list spot. He competes and kicking is good and can pinch hit in the ruck.

 

[SurreyBlue]

With what our list requires, Oscar’s versatility to be able to play both ends of the ground and pinch hit in the ruck would be a good depth selection. He’s age is also an advantage, as he is now moving into the mid20’s key timeframe.
Wouldn’t mind Maher but like Crocker we have too many in front of him in those positions. Moore has been test and found out.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

Based on saints practice game Id be happy if we offered oscar a list spot. He competes and kicking is good and can pinch hit in the ruck.

kicking is good, are we talking about the same Oscar McDonald that was banned from kicking out of defence when playing at the demons because of his turnover rate.

 

[RPCB]

With what our list requires, Oscar’s versatility to be able to play both ends of the ground and pinch hit in the ruck would be a good depth selection. He’s age is also an advantage, as he is now moving into the mid20’s key timeframe.
Wouldn’t mind Maher but like Crocker we have too many in front of him in those positions. Moore has been test and found out.

Maybe Moore will find himself on an AFL list but it isn’t at Carlton. The list has moved passed giving games to the Moore’s of the world in the H&A season.

 

[Accidental genius]

kicking is good, are we talking about the same Oscar McDonald that was banned from kicking out of defence when playing at the demons because of his turnover rate.

He kicked two goals and layed a near perfect lofted pass to Jsos who then went onto kick a goal.
General field kicking was ok but I think he did kick a few a stray as did doc and as did others.

He is not going to be our saviour. He is a good depth player based on our current options.

 

[murphster]

I think the main problem I have with this line of thought is that it is based very strongly on hope and FOMO, and this dream of a Clayton Oliver type kid having gone undrafted last year and then somehow lasting to our first pick in the mid season draft. It seems to me that it is the longest of long shots.

It would have to be a player who was so far down the list as to have been overlooked at 80ish picks last year, who in the space of half a season develops into a first-round quality selection. And we probably need more than half a dozen kids to do it for one of them to be available at our pick. And these kids weren't just hidden away last year, they missed an entire year of footy. The most committed, professional and hard working kids, who stuck to their own personal programs during lockdown, will have already risen to the higher end of last years draft crop. I think it's more likely the ones who didn't get picked up are the ones who simply aren't good enough, or didn't work hard enough, and ergo aren't likely to see a meteoric rise in the next 3 months.

2019 it was Kyle Dunkley - if I remember right there were folks talking him up as though he was basically an early Christmas present. "Take him now cause he'd be a first rounder next year as an over-ager" type stuff. How's that panned out? Delisted a season and a half later and picked up as a reserves player by Essendon.

This idea of picking up the next Oliver or Bont in the mid season draft is a pipe dream. It'll happen at some point as the exception that proves the rule, but if we have an opportunity to improve our list for the now then that is the percentage play, not sitting on our hands and hoping that a miracle occurs.

Plus the fact we will more than likely get a long term injury that will miss the rest of the year between now and the mid season draft which would free up a spot if there was someone worth the pick.

If the last few weeks have shown us anything it is we need kp depth now not later, which some of us knew before the trade or draft periods anyway, we have an inordinant abundance of mids which will need to be thinned out to allow for some KP depth as well as KP development stocks as we are running at bare bones levels in both areas.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

Plus the fact we will more than likely get a long term injury that will miss the rest of the year between now and the mid season draft which would free up a spot if there was someone worth the pick.

If the last few weeks have shown us anything it is we need kp depth now not later, which some of us knew before the trade or draft periods anyway, we have an inordinant abundance of mids which will need to be thinned out to allow for some KP depth as well as KP development stocks as we are running at bare bones levels in both areas.

If Eddie is not playing 1s by the mid season draft it would make sense to retire him and use that pick.

 

[Jeremias]

If Eddie is not playing 1s by the mid season draft it would make sense to retire him and use that pick.

No it wouldn't. It would be a terrible way to treat a club great.

 

[Ash24]

kicking is good, are we talking about the same Oscar McDonald that was banned from kicking out of defence when playing at the demons because of his turnover rate.

I don't see why we would make a KPD take the kick outs when our smalls can use the new goal square rule to their advantage.

Plus, OMac went at 70% disposal efficiency on Thursday. I reckon that's pretty good for a bloke many were writing off.