List Mgmt. NGA, Father son watch

[Kane McGoodwin]

Yes .. and Borlase, by Wednesday next week

Would think we would nominate Borlase but not Newchurch as we would prefer to take him as pick 1 rookie.

 

[SaltPeter]

Would think we would nominate Borlase but not Newchurch as we would prefer to take him as pick 1 rookie.

I can't remember the rules .. i think if we nominate him and he falls through the ND, Newchurch can be picked up by our last pick in the RD?

Vadar ..?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I can't remember the rules .. i think if we nominate him and he falls through the ND, Newchurch can be picked up by our last pick in the RD?

Vadar ..?

The issue though is we don't want to use a ND pick on him...

 

[SaltPeter]

The issue though is we don't want to use a ND pick on him...

I guess LM have to work out if the bid comes, and where .. and if they feel its too high just pass on him

 

[Thetrader15]

We've just said we wont take him as a father-son. Should it happen that we manage to trade up pick 9 (or get 2021 picks) and it wipes out most of our existing picks, we could still draft Luke late or as a rookie if he's still available.

Unlikely perhaps, but sure would be interesting.

That would make even less sense.

We get him cheaper as FS and can rookie him automatically if we nominate him. If we don't, he goes into the rookie draft and we wait in line.

 

[Mutineer]

What type of midfielder does he play like?

Perhaps he is not the type of midfielder we are looking for?

His inside/outside game both seemed proficient to me from the small midfield sample, other than not blessed with a lot of speed or great agility nonetheless he possesses great composure, efficient kicking skills, efficient by hand, good reader of the play and high level footy smarts. I can only think his lack of speed/agility might be what recruiters are marking him down on because he's the ideal size and build for the midfield. Some really good midfielders aren't noted for their speed so it's not the be all to be a successful AFL midfielder.

 

[Crow_68]

I guess LM have to work out if the bid comes, and where .. and if they feel its too high just pass on him

Nominating him may also discourage others from bidding.

On SM-A908B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[crows dude]

The issue though is we don't want to use a ND pick on him...

Then we don’t match

 

[Mutineer]

I can't remember the rules .. i think if we nominate him and he falls through the ND, Newchurch can be picked up by our last pick in the RD?

Vadar ..?

My understanding is also with Luke Edwards we still retain Rookie Draft priority access to him if he goes through the National Draft undrafted the same as Ben Jarman? If we exercise that right of course?

 

[SaltPeter]

My understanding is also with Luke Edwards we still retain Rookie Draft priority access to him if he goes through the National Draft undrafted the same as Ben Jarman? If we exercise that right of course?

OK - so if we don't nominate either Edwards or Newchurch in the ND we still have the ability to exercise first rights via RD? Or do we need to nominate if they fall through?

 

[Mutineer]

OK - so if we don't nominate either Edwards or Newchurch in the ND we still have the ability to exercise first rights via RD? Or do we need to nominate if they fall through?

Not sure about the NGA's but I'm pretty sure that was how we took Ben Jarman F/S with our last rookie pick in his draft year..

 

[Mr Courageous]

I thought I read somewhere that if NGA players aren’t picked in the National Draft they can then be added as a Cat B rookie which we can have 2 of to make up a list of 44. So we could have 38/4/2 as far as list goes.


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

My understanding is also with Luke Edwards we still retain Rookie Draft priority access to him if he goes through the National Draft undrafted the same as Ben Jarman? If we exercise that right of course?

we can, but sounds like we’ve passed completely.

 

[Drewie11]

No big deal, if we nominate and he gets to rookie then we have to take him. We are now free if there are good rookies we rate in front of him. With mid season drafts we could possibly still have a look but I don’t think he is getting picked up. It will be strange because looks good enough to be on an AFL list exactly like Jonty Scharenberg but he went all the way through without getting drafted including the rookies

 

[Go the Guts]

The breakdown of the relationship over the years between Tyson and the club is a shame. Guys who have done as much for us on the field shouldn't feel the way that Tyson does. Ditto Andrew McLeod

Andrew Mcleod

Age

49

Ht

181cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

19.8

5star

K

13.1

5star

HB

6.7

4star

M

3.1

3star

T

2.2

4star

No current season stats available

D

10.8

3star

K

6.8

3star

HB

4.0

3star

M

1.0

1star

T

1.6

4star

in this regard.

The McLeod / Edwards / Lleyton Hewitt / all the wives shit show that began over 15 years ago revealed a lot about a couple of legends of the club, and that they are all not very nice people, and despise each other, and now the club. The sooner they all piss off into history the better. And sadly, their kids are by default dragged through it. It is good of the club to take this action, in Luke's best interests.

 

[Big Dub]

Can't seem to find a straight answer, so appreciate if someone can confirm either way.

If we nominate an NGA player prior to the national draft and there is no bid, do we lose our last ND pick and they go on the main list, or can we take them cat A or cat B rookie?

Same with F/S, except no cat B option (there seems to be more here re on main list using our last pick)?

 

[1970crow]

They will never admit their disappointment at being overlooked .....although ADEL has not said they wouldn't Draft Luke, simply that they won't take him where the club may expect him to be selected by another club

You don't have to match though. It's not difficult to say, "Luke, we won't match a bid prior to 50 for you and even then depending on who's still available we can't guarantee to match after that." Reality is that they don't see any chance that he'll be next on our list at any of the picks we plan to use and he's probably 3rd in a line of 2 for academy/father son spots. Where other clubs might select him is irrelevant as the choice to match remains ours. What we're avoiding is the bad news story that comes with nominating him and not matching late in the draft.

 

[1970crow]

The breakdown of the relationship over the years between Tyson and the club is a shame. Guys who have done as much for us on the field shouldn't feel the way that Tyson does. Ditto Andrew McLeod

Andrew Mcleod

Age

49

Ht

181cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

19.8

5star

K

13.1

5star

HB

6.7

4star

M

3.1

3star

T

2.2

4star

No current season stats available

D

10.8

3star

K

6.8

3star

HB

4.0

3star

M

1.0

1star

T

1.6

4star

in this regard.

The only time Tyson has been complimentary about the club was when he took the opportunity to contradict McLeod earlier in the year. Not a nice word to say except if macca is bagging us, then we're great.

 

[1970crow]

That makes more sense. If Luke has genuine interest in the later rounds from other clubs, nominating him would only get everyone's false hopes up that Crows would match, which they wouldn't. Then you'd get the angry fans who'd blame the club.

Should that be a key driver of list management decisions?

 

[1970crow]

Many other clubs can’t be arsed wasting their time interviewing Edwards repeatedly, scouring over game vision, and subsequently bidding at say pick 30-60 if they know we are going to match the bid.

This is why many father/son and academy players over time have slipped far lower down the draft order than they otherwise might have.

This definitely improves Luke’s chances of getting on a senior list.

So what you're saying is that potential father sons and academy players that are projected to go in the later rounds are the last kids that they look properly into. It makes sense, you'd prioritise the pointy end and work your way down skipping the bidding kids until you've got spare time or it's known they're not being or accepting nominations.

What I find interesting is the Edwards camp role. Tyson said last year that at the time he wasn't keen on accepting a nomination as he believed it hurt Jackson's career. The reasoning did make some sense although I think talent was more his problem, but there was logic to his view. So what happened to that, did he change his mind?

 

[1970crow]

Firstly, neither of Edwards or Newchurch are considered top 30 talents in this draft pool. This is universally accepted. You can make an argument that they may not be top 40 in many recruiters’ eyes.

Secondly, Rowey is a moron who knows nothing about how any of this works, so you’re doing a disservice to yourself by listening to him. It’s not as simple as “we won’t match a bid for Newchurch”, and frankly, nobody with any knowledge of the situation thinks it is that simple. It depends if and when the bid actually comes, how many draft selections we’ve already made at that point, and how many SENIOR list spots we decide to fill for 2021.

We currently have 31 senior listed players. We know for a fact that we are taking Hately in the PSD which brings that number to 32. We are allowed to end up with anywhere between 36 and 38 on the senior list when it’s all said and done. Conventional wisdom suggests that number will almost definitely be 36 or 37, and NOT 38.

In addition to the senior list, we currently have 3 players on the Category A rookie list (Butts, Strachan, Keays). This number can end up anywhere between 4 (if we go in with the full 38 on the senior list - we won’t) and 6 (if we go in with 36 on the senior list - we’ll almost definitely go in with 36 or 37). Now, importantly, Newchurch and Borlase would automatically go onto the Cat B rookie list if no other club bids on them during the National Draft, which frees up another list spot. This is possible in the case of Newchurch. Not likely in the case of Borlase.

It is blatantly obvious that we’ll either be trading up or down in this draft, whether that’s between now and the draft, or on draft night.

Personally, I think we’ll only end up using 3 picks in the top 25. Whether that means we package up 9 and 22
to move up, or 22 and 23 to move up, or maybe it means trading out one of those picks for a 2021 pick.

This would mean we’d leave our options open later in the draft in terms of being able to potentially match bids on BOTH of Borlase and Newchurch if they come. If we get right to the end of the draft and a bid hasn’t eventuated for one of them (Newchurch), we can pull the trigger on a slider and chuck Tariek on the Cat B list.

To put it another way: If someone bids on Newchurch at Pick 25 and we’ve already made 4 selections, guess what, we aren’t matching and nor should we. If someone bids at pick 50 and we’ve only made 3 selections to this point, guess what, it’s a no brainer match.


As for the notion that Mackay took Edwards’ spot - that’s utter nonsense. We made a conscious decision prior to the delistings of Poholke, Gallucci and Crocker on how many guys we are going to draft this year. This Edwards decision simply means that we’ve decided we can get x amount of players in the draft who are better than Edwards.

Dont forget, Mackay being on the list for one more year means that he comes off the list at the end of 2021 - this frees up an extra draft pick in next year’s draft, which we otherwise wouldn’t be using if we delisted Mackay now and were subsequently taking Edwards or a different late pick on a 2 year deal this year. Give me a fringe 2021 superdraft option over a fringe 2020 magical mystery draft option any day thanks.

The thing about Mackay is that if we hadn't re-signed him we wouldn't be required to draft a 2 year replacement in this draft. We would only use the spot on a player we thought worthy of 2 years. It could be left unfilled or re-sign Mackay as soon as we've run out of 2 year contract worthy draftees. And before anybody worries about meeting the list minimum, we have 3 contracted rookies that can be moved to the main list to reach the minimum.

Some people seem to be rationalising Mackay's extension as part of draft strategy, it's nothing to do with it as the pick wouldn't have to be used at the draft. It's anti draft strategy as it provides no actual gain but reduces possible opportunity should a rated talent slide to a pick we didn't think we'd use. Mackay has been extended purely based on his good year, great character, 220+ games of experience and high level of professionalism. Nothing at all to do with draft strategy.

 

[1970crow]

I guess the interesting thing will be- is he drafted before we are finished taking players.

if not it confirms our decision that we simply didn’t rate him within our picks. If he picked and we still have a pick we do use after, some will argue we missed out on a free hit and/or misjudged the draft and/or highlight conspiracy theories about therelationship

It's as simple as us not rating him anywhere within the range that we expect to be picking from. He's slid behind Borlase and is nowhere near our first 4 picks. That's 37 players including Hately and we've still got picks 40 and 56. If we filled the list with pick 40, Edwards would need to be the next player on our talent order, which is highly unlikely even if he's rated at us at 40.

 

[1970crow]

Don’t we have to nominate Newchurch to have matching rights?

Also that excuse for keeping Mackay was used last year as well.

I didn't think we did nom acadany players. I'm sure I asked earlier in the year and was told we don't. The Mackay thing is pure make believe, it doesn't stack up. Leave the spot open during the draft and extend him afterwards and you get the exact same result. It's pure rubbish. He was extended because they want him around for 2021, nothing at all to do with the 2020 draft.

 

[1970crow]

Would think we would nominate Borlase but not Newchurch as we would prefer to take him as pick 1 rookie.

I think nomming him does that for us anyway if he slips through the draft. We lose nothing by nomming him. But we gain because if he slips he goes to the Cat B list which keeps a rookie spot open for mid season draft. The cat B bit I got from on here, so if it's wrong, non mea culpa.

 

[Mong]

Would anyone have interest in him if his last name wasn’t Edwards? I feel like a middle to late rated half back is the last thing we need. Not because of David Mackay

14

David Mackay

Age

37

Ht

181cm

Wt

78kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.0

4star

K

9.2

4star

HB

7.7

5star

M

3.2

3star

T

3.2

5star

MG

315.4

4star

D

16.5

4star

K

7.0

3star

HB

9.5

5star

M

2.5

3star

T

2.0

3star

MG

265.5

4star

D

12.0

3star

K

6.2

3star

HB

5.8

4star

M

4.6

5star

T

1.2

3star

, but because of Wayne Milera

30

Wayne Milera

Age

28

Ht

185cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.9

4star

K

10.0

4star

HB

6.8

4star

M

4.3

4star

T

2.5

4star

MG

265.3

4star

D

15.0

4star

K

8.5

3star

HB

6.5

4star

M

3.5

3star

T

1.0

2star

MG

282.0

4star

D

11.4

3star

K

5.8

3star

HB

5.6

4star

M

3.0

3star

T

1.4

4star

MG

182.0

3star

, Andy McPherson, Will Hamill

17

Will Hamill

Age

25

Ht

187cm

Wt

84kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.8

2star

K

4.4

2star

HB

4.4

3star

M

2.6

3star

T

1.4

3star

MG

135.2

2star

D

8.8

2star

K

4.4

2star

HB

4.4

3star

M

2.6

3star

T

1.4

2star

MG

135.2

2star

D

8.8

3star

K

4.4

2star

HB

4.4

4star

M

2.6

3star

T

1.4

4star

MG

135.2

3star

, Lachlan Sholl. I think our stocks of half backs with midfield potential is filled quite nicely with some of the best talent on our list.