Are we having a pick in the pre-season draft?

[macca23]

I'm starting to get more and more confused on this issue. At the time of the national draft Reidy said that as is our custom we had saved our last pick for the pre-season draft.

However every time there is any discussion in any papers on which teams are likely to be participating in the pre-season draft the Crows never get a mention.

I would be very disappointed if we were so close to our salary cap limit that we played with one less player than our maximum - although we do have 39 on the list thanks to having 2 veterans on the list.

We'll find out next Friday, as well as which rookies we are taking.

Any ideas or information on this one??

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

If one of the players training with us stands out, then we should be drafting them in the pre-season draft (I doubt we would have a salary cap problem). There is usually a long-term injury during the year, so that would be enough to keep the rookies still interested. Crows probably aren't keen on talking up anyones chances in case another team gets interested.

 

[noddy]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
If one of the players training with us stands out, then we should be drafting them in the pre-season draft (I doubt we would have a salary cap problem). There is usually a long-term injury during the year, so that would be enough to keep the rookies still interested. Crows probably aren't keen on talking up anyones chances in case another team gets interested.

Think your spot on there Kane if there is somene who stands out & demands to be drafted then i expect the Crows to use there pick if not why waste it,

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by noddy
Think your spot on there Kane if there is somene who stands out & demands to be drafted then i expect the Crows to use there pick if not why waste it,

Looks like I was completely wrong this time if we believe today's Tiser. Apparantly neither the Crows or Power are likely to participate in the draft & concentrate on the rookie draft. If we don't have a salary cap problem, I can't really understand this. I know it allows us to have one more rookie instead, but surely it is better to have another player on the full-list (unless no one stands out).

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
Looks like I was completely wrong this time if we believe today's Tiser. Apparantly neither the Crows or Power are likely to participate in the draft & concentrate on the rookie draft. If we don't have a salary cap problem, I can't really understand this. I know it allows us to have one more rookie instead, but surely it is better to have another player on the full-list (unless no one stands out).

I don't get it either, because unless it is salary cap related or no-one looks good enough, it is 1 less player available to the club and its future.

Because we have the 2 veterans, Smart and Bickley, we are entitled to have 40 players on the list plus 4 rookies. If we don't participate in the pre-season draft, then we will only have 39 on the list plus the 4 rookies. Each club is allowed a total of 6 rookies and veterans with a maximum of 2 veterans, so we won't even be able to add another player to the rookie list.

I've been getting this feeling for a while that we wouldn't be participating in the pre-season draft, but in the absence of any explanation from the club, don't understand the logic of it.

 

[macca23]

Well at least we know one thing - Adelaide has room in it's player payments to participate in the pre-season draft. See the following from the AFL site;

Adelaide, Collingwood, Geelong, Melbourne, Richmond, St Kilda and Sydney will be eligible for the pre-season draft while the Brisbane Lions, Carlton, Fremantle, Port Adelaide and the Western Bulldogs have all been ruled ineligible due to estimates on their TPP (Total Player Payments) for 2003.

The AFL pre-season draft selection order:

Round One
1. St Kilda or Richmond
2. St Kilda or Richmond
3. Sydney
4. Geelong
5. Melbourne
6. Adelaide
7. Collingwood

Round Two
8. St Kilda
9. Richmond
10. Sydney

Round Three
11. St Kilda
12. Richmond

Round Four
13. St Kilda

Round Five
14. St Kilda

I still think that we should be having a selection. Given that it's not a question of money, then I still think we should have the extra pick and play with a full list.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by macca23
I don't get it either, because unless it is salary cap related or no-one looks good enough, it is 1 less player available to the club and its future.

Because we have the 2 veterans, Smart and Bickley, we are entitled to have 40 players on the list plus 4 rookies. If we don't participate in the pre-season draft, then we will only have 39 on the list plus the 4 rookies. Each club is allowed a total of 6 rookies and veterans with a maximum of 2 veterans, so we won't even be able to add another player to the rookie list.

I've been getting this feeling for a while that we wouldn't be participating in the pre-season draft, but in the absence of any explanation from the club, don't understand the logic of it.

It just makes no sense ar all when we don't have a salary cap issue & it's not like the club can't afford another player like say the Saints, Bullies, Roos, etc. AFC should be giving an explanation as you mentioned, because there doesn't appear to be any good reason not to participate!

 

[macca23]

Looks like we are going to waste this selection. The following is a quote from today's Age

"Adelaide was eligible to take part, but has opted to stick with its list of 37 plus two veterans. "

Got me stuffed!!

 

[Jerome]

I don't understand it. I'd love to hear Reidy explain this one.

Jerome

 

[napsyd]

I have a theory.

Could we be leaving a place on our list so that we can promote a rookie during the season without having to have a long term injury?

Is this allowed within the rules, or can a rookie only be promoted in the event of a long term injury?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by napsyd
I have a theory.

Could we be leaving a place on our list so that we can promote a rookie during the season without having to have a long term injury?

Is this allowed within the rules, or can a rookie only be promoted in the event of a long term injury?

This is the only reason, as we can promote a rookie as long as there is a spare spot (eg. say Bicks wanted to retire mid-season, we could bring up another rookie). However, with our squad I can't see us needing our rookies unless we have injuries (in which case we would be able to bring them on to the main list).

 

[napsyd]

The one I can see us wanting to promote (assuming he ends up on our list) would be Aiden Parker to bolster the defensive position if we found it to be too weak.

I guess if that were the case we'd just put him on our list straight away though.

This "not going with a full list thing" is hard to understand!

 

[PrideOf]

No, we didn't have a pick. We passed.

Wait and see who we list on the rookie list now.

 

[crowsfan]

This is what happened in Round 1 of the Rookie Draft:

1. Carlton – John McCormack (Murray Kangaroos)
2. St Kilda – Allan Murray (Port Adelaide)
3. Richmond – Kelvin Moore (Yarra Valley Anglican School)
4. Fremantle – Ricky Mott (Sydney)
5. Western Bulldogs – Pass
6. Sydney – Heath James (Sydney)
7. Hawthorn – Brad Sewell (North Ballarat)
8. Geelong – Jeff Smith (East Perth)

 

[napsyd]

We took Skipworth again apparantly.

 

[napsyd]

29. Adelaide – Jason Porplyzia (West Adelaide)

Whose that then??

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Shouldn't we be drafting ruckman & KPP as a priority ... yet for our 1st pick we go for a midfielder!

 

[PrideOf]

... and a midfielder who's had a crack at it but didn't make it.

 

[PrideOf]

Where'd you get that info from napsyd?

 

[napsyd]

AFL site has some of it up.

We've taken Aiden Parker with our third pick and someone from Norwood with our fourth I believe, waiting for confirmation.

 

[PrideOf]

Carlton's taken Angwin at 17.

The head case joins the basket case.

Good to see Matthew Shir getting another go - with Richmond.

 

[napsyd]

58. Adelaide – Michael Bratton (Norwood)

 

[PrideOf]

From the Norwood club site, Bratton's stats are:

Michael Bratton 18yo, 178cm, 70kg, 2 league games in 2002

Definitely NOT a KPP

But he did make the State U18 side.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by Jerome
I don't understand it. I'd love to hear Reidy explain this one.

Jerome

Has anyone heard from AFC why we didn't participate in the draft?

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
Has anyone heard from AFC why we didn't participate in the draft?

Not a word. I think that they should at least tell their supporters why they passed.