I notice you are still a rookie on here so we can give you a bit more time to work A McKay out.
I've been around about 4 years and I'm still grappling with this. More name changes than a black widow probably doesn't help.
List Mgmt. Our List 2014 - Trade, De-list and Draft - (keep it all in here)
- Thread starter HARKER
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
I've been around about 4 years and I'm still grappling with this. More name changes than a black widow probably doesn't help.
- Banned
- #19,577
I notice you are still a rookie on here so we can give you a bit more time to work out that A McKay was ripping off Hot Cox.
Isn't down back where Everitt will play? Providing run Alongside Watson, jamo (mcinnes, white and Giles)
Waite is too injury prone
Casboult is better chf for now because he struggles right in front of goal
Henderson is a gem but he needs help and someone who has the skills and that's where thorp can be of use. Even if he takes an opponent will still be a threat and impose himself in games.
Either way we desperately need someone in this rookie draft
Waite is too injury prone
Casboult is better chf for now because he struggles right in front of goal
Henderson is a gem but he needs help and someone who has the skills and that's where thorp can be of use. Even if he takes an opponent will still be a threat and impose himself in games.
Either way we desperately need someone in this rookie draft
Yeah I know the differences between taking someone in the PSD and the Rookie draft. My question was in reference as to why we would have the first "active" pick in the PSD if we chose to use one. This would mean every team between the GWS and Carlton wouldn't be accessing the draft, which sounds crazy. Would mean every other teams senior lists are full.
I guess it's because you can now rookie list 10 year+ players and the risk (as Dram pointed out) is only a for a year in that case.
Not sure of my feelings on that, it seems a bit rich that we can rookie list Scotland knowing that he is likely to play every game if fit. On the other hand if the player agrees to this it saves another player from being delisted.
Some have mentioned Cornelious and Weller (to name just 2) as a potential pick up and, I guess it's to the clubs advantage to try them for 1 year at minimum cap cost.
- Jan 13, 2010
- 1,323
- 998
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- New England Patriots, Liverpool
It could be that we really don't want him or that we leaked it like Hawthorn with Garlett, so no one else will touch him and we won't have to use the first rookie pick on him.
Read however much into it as you want to.
I for one do not care who we pick and will support whoever is lucky enough to come to our great club.
Oh boy oh boy. Roll on tomorrow so we can finally bury this thing.
You obviously haven't heard that next years draft is chocka with talls and we're going to rebalance our list with ease.
Agree - Darcy Cameron looks the goods. Wonder how many other teams are looking at getting a rookie ruck (I know Bombers are).
A footy journo. Not sure if I trust his word though - as said before, it could've been a deliberate leak to throw ppl off. No guarantees of our selections until tomorrow at 12pm.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #19,589
That thought has entered my mind. Just like the Garlett rumours about missing a Hawks interview. I've got myself into discussions where not getting Thorp is beneficial to me and getting Thorp is beneficial to me. I'm screwed either way but you can get splinters if you sit on a fence.
Put together a Team Selection Draft based on how I think our team will look in 2014 (rookies withholding).
Automatic Locks in 22 (if fit) - first on the team sheet every week
Judd, Murphy, Gibbs, Henderson, Kreuzer, Walker, Simpson, Jamison, Thomas, Waite
Almost Locks (barring bad form/injury will line up for 22 games) - it's their spot to lose
McLean, Carrazzo, Scotland, Curnow, Garlett, Tuohy, Everitt, Yarran, Armfield
Fighting for Best 22 status - have work to do but will be given every opportunity to make it in 2014
Warnock, Robinson, Docherty, Casboult, Menzel, McInness, Watson, Lucas
Borderline Top 22-25 - Mainly depth players at this point - will be the guys pushing for games going forward
Rowe, Bell, Graham, Duigan, Cachia, White, Bootsma, Ellard
Rookies and Kids - not quite there, but should play a few games in 2014 if they work hard
Buckley, Cripps, Temay, Giles, Holman, Byrne, Sheehan
Don't think I've missed anyone - as the quality/form of players in the 3rd and 4th sections improve, the better chance we are of moving into that Top 4 bracket.
Automatic Locks in 22 (if fit) - first on the team sheet every week
Judd, Murphy, Gibbs, Henderson, Kreuzer, Walker, Simpson, Jamison, Thomas, Waite
Almost Locks (barring bad form/injury will line up for 22 games) - it's their spot to lose
McLean, Carrazzo, Scotland, Curnow, Garlett, Tuohy, Everitt, Yarran, Armfield
Fighting for Best 22 status - have work to do but will be given every opportunity to make it in 2014
Warnock, Robinson, Docherty, Casboult, Menzel, McInness, Watson, Lucas
Borderline Top 22-25 - Mainly depth players at this point - will be the guys pushing for games going forward
Rowe, Bell, Graham, Duigan, Cachia, White, Bootsma, Ellard
Rookies and Kids - not quite there, but should play a few games in 2014 if they work hard
Buckley, Cripps, Temay, Giles, Holman, Byrne, Sheehan
Don't think I've missed anyone - as the quality/form of players in the 3rd and 4th sections improve, the better chance we are of moving into that Top 4 bracket.
Of course i've heard that. It was a sarcastic statement that didn't need a response
That said, we could have a draft with 20 Tom Boyds next year and there'd still be calls to get Thorp 'coz he's cheap'.
- Banned
- #19,592
GET DIDAK AND THORP
Surely we pass?
Good assessment and I wouldn't argue too much other than to say that I think Robinson, Menzel, Watson and Lucas should be on at least the same footing as Armfield but whether that means they go up a rung or Armfield comes down is debatable.
What that does show is, as many have said, we still have significant KP problems. You only have 3 in the first 2 categories and, given our recent luck with KP fitness rates, leaves us very exposed.
This is why I would like to see us punt on Thorp for insurance in the rookie draft. As we've seen by the debate on him there are both positives and negatives surrounding this move, but I think the need outweighs the risk.
I won't be shattered or critical if we let him slip but I'd like to see that insurance measure taken.
I do think, looking at that list, that our middle tier is looking better than a year ago.
Of course i've heard that. It was a sarcastic statement that didn't need a response
Sorry, I thought the response was a justified extension of the spirit of your post
.
Sorry, I thought the response was a justified extension of the spirit of your post
No no, its all good
Looking forward to next years draft already!
No no, its all good
Seems like so long since the last one.
GET DIDAK AND THORP
Surely we pass?
Does this mean we can participate in the PSD if we wish to?
Surely this would be a better option if there is a player we have our eye on, salary cap allowing it.
GET DIDAK AND THORP
Surely we pass?
If we want to play Scotland and have Cachia available from day one then we must unless we delist someone else.
If we wanted, is there still time to do this?
We can, but we won't.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #19,600
Rookie salaries don't count under the cap unless they play seniors and even then I think it is only half their wage for games they play plus match fees. Senior listers have a higher minimum wage. So even if the salary was $100k or $200k for 2 players taken in the PSD, that is $200k left to frontload on a senior players contract. $200k could make all the difference to keeping one of our free agents next year. This is especially prudent if the player we are looking at wasn't going to get too many games anyway.
I think that's how it works or at least it used to.
- Status
