List Mgmt. Pies list changes for 2016

[DaVe86]

Dave I was wondering if you could expand on your opinion of yesterday when you said a couple of times that we had messed up this trade period?

I dont believe i said we 'messed it up'. I believe i said we made a mess of the treloar deal.

I thought it was a deal that shouldve gone through early to enable us plenty of time to organise other deals.

I was also dissapointed at how amateur we looked with the leaked video and also this groin surgery issue.

When you compare it to the straight forward trading of geelong, we looked quite comical.

To be honest, there was a bit of frustration in my post as well at the delays. A bit more patience couldve helped. I knew we would get the deals done, but i got impatient.

Ultimately, we had a wonderful trade period. I think we significantly overpaid for aish and treloar, but i wouldve settled for those deals as well. They are gun players who want to play for collingwood. We had to throw everything at them.

I think that if we couldve sorted the Treloar deal earlier, then there was a chance to get back into the first round with all our 2nd round picks.

At one stage it looked like we would have 4 2nd rounders. With 10 minutes to go we had 0. We managed to get pick 27 back.

Ultimately we are left with 1 pick in the top 60, despite having 4 list spaces to fill.


So in summary:

Awesome trade period and im happy with the result. We got our men.

But i think we did it the hard way and we probably needed another top 30 pick to really win.

But we will never know what goes on in negotiations, and i have no doubt a large part of the problem was GWS and Brisbane playing hard ball and chest beating.

Go Pies!

 

[TradeDraft]

With only 1 pick in the top 50, we nust have DFAs on our mind.

I wouldnt mind adcock as backup in defence, whilst stokes could be the dangerous small forward we need on a 1 year deal.

Warnock will likely be delisted by carlton as well in case we want some ruck depth

Hine has said that this years Draft has next to nothing in this Draft so I say he be happy to Trade Out of this Draft but Not Sure Next Year's One.

Though Aish and Treloar are young Players

 

[TradeDraft]

With only 1 pick in the top 50, we nust have DFAs on our mind.

I wouldnt mind adcock as backup in defence, whilst stokes could be the dangerous small forward we need on a 1 year deal.

Warnock will likely be delisted by carlton as well in case we want some ruck depth

Hine has said that this years Draft has next to nothing in this Draft so I say he be happy to Trade Out of this Draft but Not Sure Next Year's One.

Though Aish and Treloar are young Players

 

[TradeDraft]

With only 1 pick in the top 50, we nust have DFAs on our mind.

I wouldnt mind adcock as backup in defence, whilst stokes could be the dangerous small forward we need on a 1 year deal.

Warnock will likely be delisted by carlton as well in case we want some ruck depth

Hine has said that this years Draft has next to nothing in this Draft so I say he be happy to Trade Out of this Draft but Not Sure Next Year's One.

Though Aish and Treloar are young Players

 

[Bay Pie]

GWS played us big time. It appears Hine had no choice but to wait for them to sign the deal. The end deal was there on day 1. They just didn't want to make it easy on us.

I think we have 6 list spots to fill. I think we'll go with 38 on senior list and 6 rookies this year.

4 picks with the 4th being Frost upgrade.

Picks 27, 66 & 77. The 2 later picks will come in heap given GWS, Swans and Bears will all use multiple picks to secure the academy players, with picks before our 2 late ones.

Perhaps we even pick up a delisted FA for a year rather than give a 2 year deal to pick 77. Many have criticised the club for this in the past, but I'd rather that then some kid who's never going to make it and costing us an extra year on our list.

 

[Harry O]

We will only go with 38 on the senior list this year and 6 rookies, given how weak the draft is. Can then have 2 nominated rookies who can play seniors.
Would think we will have 2 picks in draft plus Frost. Plus a delisted free agent. Not sure who but reckon they will gamble on a Adcock or Saad or Grimley or Grant or Finlayson or someone like that instead of a late pick. Will go back to 40 on list next year when a strong draft.

 

[Babylove]

Having a look on the Collingwood website, including Frost we have 32 senior players on the list plus Howe, Treloar and Aish who haven't been added yet to the website (slack ). That leaves 3 spots to fill (not including Frost's upgrade) to get to the minimum 38 senior players (which is what I think will happen unless a Langdon or Marsh falls down to one of our late picks). Two of those will definitely be picks 27 and 66 (which will become about 54 after all the academy selections). The third could be either be a pick 77 (which will wind up being about pick 65) or a delisted free agent, but is likely to be passed in the ND for the PSD you would think.

As far as rookies go, we currently have Gault and Abbott plus Cox who is a category B. I believe the college basketballer (I can't remember his name) is also a category B. So that leaves four rookie spots, two of which will be taken up by Thomas and Keeffe unless they are taken by another club first.

 

[Aliago]

I don't see why we'll go 38. The only reason we went 39 this year was due to Frost accepting another year on the rookie list just in case 'the Marsh' situation happened again, but guaranteed he'll get the promotion before the season started if the unlikely didn't eventuate (which it didn't last year), making the full 40. We don't have that this time with Gault, TBS and two cat B's as being the only available options atm. Committing to two unavailable players next year just makes it more necessary to have as many senior options straight away.

 

[Hardas]

I don't see why we'll go 38. The only reason we went 39 this year was due to Frost accepting another year on the rookie list just in case 'the Marsh' situation happened again, but guaranteed he'll get the promotion before the season started if the unlikely didn't eventuate (which it didn't last year), making the full 40. We don't have that this time with Gault, TBS and two cat B's as being the only available options atm. Committing to two unavailable players next year just makes it more necessary to have as many senior options straight away.

Sorry, but huh?

 

[Adnan]

Sorry, but huh?

Maximum amount of players u can have in the seniors is 40, then u can have 7 rookies max

 

[PieNSauce]

Hine has said that this years Draft has next to nothing in this Draft so I say he be happy to Trade Out of this Draft but Not Sure Next Year's One.

Though Aish and Treloar are young Players

Fair enough!

Hine has said that this years Draft has next to nothing in this Draft so I say he be happy to Trade Out of this Draft but Not Sure Next Year's One.

Though Aish and Treloar are young Players

Really!

Hine has said that this years Draft has next to nothing in this Draft so I say he be happy to Trade Out of this Draft but Not Sure Next Year's One.

Though Aish and Treloar are young Players

OK then!

Got to love multi-post on this forum!

 

[Adnan]

We have 34 Players on our seniors list as it stands with the likelyhood of Frost being upgraded taking our list up to 35. If we are to meet the maximum of 40 Senior listed players, we would have to add 5 players with our best picks being 27, 66, 77, 83 and 87. I think only 27 and 66 are worth using in this relatively weak draft but we would want to use 77 as well, then hit the Delistees and Pre-Season draft and hope to find a few gems

 

[Hardas]

Maximum amount of players u can have in the seniors is 40, then u can have 7 rookies max

It's 38 and 6; 39 and 5 or 38 and 6, as far as I can understand.

 

[1892]

I don't see why we'll go 38. The only reason we went 39 this year was due to Frost accepting another year on the rookie list just in case 'the Marsh' situation happened again, but guaranteed he'll get the promotion before the season started if the unlikely didn't eventuate (which it didn't last year), making the full 40. We don't have that this time with Gault, TBS and two cat B's as being the only available options atm. Committing to two unavailable players next year just makes it more necessary to have as many senior options straight away.

There's a couple of advantages going with either 38 or 39 on the list with the other places being rookie promos. Mostly we can sign them for 1 year not 2 and also only half the promoted rookie(s) wage counts against the cap.

As you alluded to the disadvantage is it places is further down the selection queue and the player we like may not make it through.

 

[Scodog10]

I don't see why we'll go 38. The only reason we went 39 this year was due to Frost accepting another year on the rookie list just in case 'the Marsh' situation happened again, but guaranteed he'll get the promotion before the season started if the unlikely didn't eventuate (which it didn't last year), making the full 40. We don't have that this time with Gault, TBS and two cat B's as being the only available options atm. Committing to two unavailable players next year just makes it more necessary to have as many senior options straight away.

That's great and all, but it means we need to find an extra two players at the draft or cast off's on top of 3 ND picks and upgrading Frost. Yes it's a possibility, but every indication is that the club would prefer to have a nominated rookie or two rather than be locked in.

FWIW I think Keeffe will be upgraded for 2017 (not as sure on JT) so if TBS and Cox come on as hoped 38-6 gives us the most flexibility for next year, IMO.

 

[Aliago]

I don't think Cox will get promoted at the end of 2016. If we are all about flexibility I don't see why we wouldn't keep him outside of the 44. Blicavs was kept on the Cat B at the end of his first playing year and he played almost the entire season in the one's. Everyone has said this draft year is incredibly weak by the end of the first year anyway, so by the time we get to the rookies who knows what will happen. Idk, I'd just prefer to sign a DFA for a one year deal that plays two games due to injuries and feel the uproar of posters of saying 'how dare thou stunt development of 2016's Manteit' than an additional 18 year old pick 43ish rookie that isn't ever likely to play, even if it means losing 'flexibility for one spot. It is possible we do decide to repeat 2012 and just take all mature age rookies though given Keeffe and Thomas.

 

[MyManLynch]

I don't see why we'll go 38. The only reason we went 39 this year was due to Frost accepting another year on the rookie list just in case 'the Marsh' situation happened again, but guaranteed he'll get the promotion before the season started if the unlikely didn't eventuate (which it didn't last year), making the full 40. We don't have that this time with Gault, TBS and two cat B's as being the only available options atm. Committing to two unavailable players next year just makes it more necessary to have as many senior options straight away.

We have not gone into a season with a 40 senior list for the last few years.
We either start with 38 or 39 & upgrade nominated rookies.
With a weak draft & our 3rd & 4th picks in the 70-80's, I expect us to be out of the draft early.
Maybe only 2 live picks plus Frost upgrade (or 3 live picks if Hine has an eye on someone who is still available...like he did with Marsh).
Why commit to 2 year contracts for late draft picks in shallow draft?
Better off 1 year contract for DFA or 1 year contract for rookies.
Hence, our current list is 31 plus 3 trade recruits = 34
Use live picks 27 & 66, upgrade Frost with 77 = 37
Add 1 DFA or PSD player = 38
Take 2 rookies in draft.

Senior list 38
Rookie list 6
Rookie Cat B 2

 

[THATSGOLD]

Does Gault get re promoted? I hope not. He's just too slow.

 

[Babylove]

Maximum amount of players u can have in the seniors is 40, then u can have 7 rookies max

Just on that the maximum size of the list (senior + category A rookies) is 44 plus your category B rookies (which is a maximum of 2 I think). If you have 40 senior players I believe you can only have a maximum of 4 rookies. If you have the mimimum of 38 senior players then you can have 6 rookies with the option of upgrading two at the start of the year (anyone from category A or B). In 2015 we went with 39 senior players + 5 category A rookies + Cox as a category B.

I think if we are likely to wind up with Keeffe and Thomas on our rookie list plus with the shallowness of the ND we will likely look to go with 6 on the category rookie list, meaning we will only go for 38 on the senior list.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Maximum amount of players u can have in the seniors is 40, then u can have 7 rookies max

Technically correct.
But only 4 could be Cat A rookies and 3 would need to be Cat B rookies

 

[Bay Pie]

We have not gone into a season with a 40 senior list for the last few years.
We either start with 38 or 39 & upgrade nominated rookies.
With a weak draft & our 3rd & 4th picks in the 70-80's, I expect us to be out of the draft early.
Maybe only 2 live picks plus Frost upgrade (or 3 live picks if Hine has an eye on someone who is still available...like he did with Marsh).
Why commit to 2 year contracts for late draft picks in shallow draft?
Better off 1 year contract for DFA or 1 year contract for rookies.
Hence, our current list is 31 plus 3 trade recruits = 34
Use live picks 27 & 66, upgrade Frost with 77 = 37
Add 1 DFA or PSD player = 38
Take 2 rookies in draft.

Senior list 38
Rookie list 6
Rookie Cat B 2

The bolded is the kicker for me. Possibly bringing 2 players taken with really late picks in a schizen draft, hands them both 2 year deals. Picking that late, you might as well pick a couple of rookies instead, but only have to offer them a 1 year deal.

2 live picks & Frost to make 38. Pick 27 & 66 (likely to be closer to 50 after academy bids)

 

[THATSGOLD]

Not really a list need, but I hope so. We could do worse and reckon he deserves a chance somewhere.

We've lost Seedsman off half back. Thats one spot to compete for. No reason he couldn't get drafted by us. Had a great year in the VFL.

 

[THATSGOLD]

I'm probably not the right person to ask as I only really follow our VFL and senior team. Don't know anything about Young as player however I don't think he's been delisted by Port, so we'd need him to be cut down the track.

Yeh I think Port still have him.

 

[Cory]

Does Gault get re promoted? I hope not. He's just too slow.

The club needs to let him go tbh

 

[MyManLynch]

The club needs to let him go tbh

Who?