PSD/Rookie Draft

[Heres Waite]

Didn't he struggle in the Development league this year? Whatever his issues were, it's a hell of a gamble to pick him up. Needs to go away, play footy away from the spotlight and work his way back.

I've read through the Saints board ... It seems like he has fairly big fitness issues. Looks like he is good on the sprints but can't run any kind of long distance. Because of this he is exposed by the defender who is playing on him. He gets a few cheap goals this way "behind the play", however it seems as though his defender is able to create more damage going the other way. For example, that Richmond game (his debut), his opponent (Chaplin) had the most possessions on the ground up to half time. He has the same issues in the VFL and VFL 2nds.

Apparently he has asthma, which is most likely the cause of these fitness levels. He definitely has some talent though.

 

[LordLucifer]

193 cm tall 22 year old KPF/Third tall type player. Agile and quick with fast hands and a fast mind. Good reader of the ball into the 50 and good mark.

Thats what I got from the highlights of a game from last year against the Royals.

As The Bighouse said... he might have to play as a third tall forward in a Jack Darling type role.

Do we really need another player of that ilk though ??

We did bring Jacksh over to fill that role IMO.

 

[LordLucifer]

Read/heard somewhere that Warnock is going to North as a delisted free agent.

 

[Coona Blues]

Didnt you read my calculations in full?

We might have to promote Wood and Sheehan, but looking at our picks, after the picks we have for Jack, we only have 1 more pick. So its pretty impossible to promote two people with 1 pick.

And if we only get Jack with pick 59, there is 60 and some stupidly late pick.

Wood - recruited by Carlton as a rookie in the 2013 draft. He has been on the list for 2 years and is eligible for another year on the rookie list (still thanks to the compromised drafts).
Sheehan - We had to put him in as a Cat A rookie when we signed him to a 2 year rookie contract in 2013 because of Byrne. He is out of contract this year.
Byrne - A category B rookie (Irish International). After 2 years, he might have to move to the Category A rookie list.

I think that Wood was initially put on a 1 year contract, that got extended by another 2 years, and the two Irish boys were put on 2 year rookie contracts.

We might have to move Byrne to the cat A list but I think that he can stay on the B list for another 12 months, but both Wood and Sheehan can stay on the A rookie list for another 12 months before we have to move them.

Cat B rookies are not considered part of the standard rookie list and don't count towards the 44 players allowed on a list.

Now... to the Armfield issue. That 39 players figure I gave includes both Holman and Armfield in the numbers. If we delist Warnock, that number drops down to 38 players. Once again, we have senior player slots. We could in theory promote both Wood and Sheehan to the senior list after the draft to give us our 40/4 split without having to delist anyone else... but we don't have the picks in the ND to promote both of them.

But the way things stand, we have 2 senior slots available and Armfield and Holman can both retain their slots. If we had gotten Tomlinson, then we would have to either delist one of Armfield or Holman... but we didnt so the point is now moot. However, if we wanted to go 38/6/n and take a PSD player, then one of them will get very nervous.

Why the arrogance?

I read your "calculations", and while largely correct, there are some flawed assumptions.

Without reverting to a slanging match, we need all of Wood, Sheehan and particularly Byrne
available for senior selection from round 1. With our current model, it demands at least one
is promoted. They are all best 22 or at least strongly in the mix.

There are a number of permutations which can facilitate this. All have been previously mentioned.
Your way is not the only way.

To suggest Walsh be considered for promotion above any of the 3 shows a lack of knowledge of
the list. To assert White is contracted is misleading and untrue, as published in one of your WA
papers and shared on one of our forums a month or 2 ago. You show an unhealthy WA bias.

List management 101 will encourage SOS to promote the Irish boys as soon as practicable.
As stated earlier, Wood may only have 1 year left depending on development and fitness of the
other rucks. As I stated earlier, it has been suggested Wood had an update clause in his
contract extension. I cannot confirm the truth of the "rumour".

Leaving 3 "required" players for 2 nominated rookie spots will not happen. Similarly it would
be ludicrous to leave 3 blokes to be upgraded next season when we will need spots for trade
or draft. Similarly if Walsh, Gowers or even Korcheck excel this year, we may have more
spots required. I reiterate Army would be unlucky to be axed, but we did not trade Kerridge,
Lamb and Sumner for NB's depth. While it did not eventuate, I will almost guarantee if we had
scored Tomlinson, White would have been gone. While the likes of Jones, Tutt and Dick would be
better candidates for delisting, they are contracted.

Trust you will read my assertions in full before another retort

 

[Dramoth]

Do we really need another player of that ilk though ??

We did bring Jacksh over to fill that role IMO.

Turns out that he is a defender... who plays forward occasionally

 

[LordLucifer]

Turns out that he is a defender... who plays forward occasionally

But we just bought in Plowman for that third defender role.

 

[Dramoth]

Why the arrogance?

I read your "calculations", and while largely correct, there are some flawed assumptions.

Without reverting to a slanging match, we need all of Wood, Sheehan and particularly Byrne
available for senior selection from round 1. With our current model, it demands at least one
is promoted. They are all best 22 or at least strongly in the mix.

There are a number of permutations which can facilitate this. All have been previously mentioned.
Your way is not the only way.

To suggest Walsh be considered for promotion above any of the 3 shows a lack of knowledge of
the list. To assert White is contracted is misleading and untrue, as published in one of your WA
papers and shared on one of our forums a month or 2 ago. You show an unhealthy WA bias.

List management 101 will encourage SOS to promote the Irish boys as soon as practicable.
As stated earlier, Wood may only have 1 year left depending on development and fitness of the
other rucks. As I stated earlier, it has been suggested Wood had an update clause in his
contract extension. I cannot confirm the truth of the "rumour".

Leaving 3 "required" players for 2 nominated rookie spots will not happen. Similarly it would
be ludicrous to leave 3 blokes to be upgraded next season when we will need spots for trade
or draft. Similarly if Walsh, Gowers or even Korcheck excel this year, we may have more
spots required. I reiterate Army would be unlucky to be axed, but we did not trade Kerridge,
Lamb and Sumner for NB's depth. While it did not eventuate, I will almost guarantee if we had
scored Tomlinson, White would have been gone. While the likes of Jones, Tutt and Dick would be
better candidates for delisting, they are contracted.

Trust you will read my assertions in full before another retort

I grew up in Victoria actually. I have an unhealthy Carlton bias if the truth be known.

If White is in the firing line for a delisting, why have none of the AFL articles which reference our list and who might be in line to be delisted included White. Is it possible to look at that and base your assumptions that if he isnt on the list it's because he has a contract?

As for Walsh, it was a throw away comment based on our need of big bodied mids for next season and he is a freaking tank at 19 years old.

The biggest issue we currently have is... how do we get your 3 guys available for senior selection next season? Answer that one for me please?

 

[Dramoth]

But we just bought in Plowman for that third defender role.

And we have White.

 

[Azul]

The biggest issue we currently have is... how do we get your 3 guys available for senior selection next season? Answer that one for me please?

Well I suggested we could 'do a Scotland' and delist and re-rookie a contracted player. I nominated Foster as someone who seems a little way off debuting and might only be called upon if we had an LTI to one of our talls. Viojo another who is well down the pecking order.

 

[The Bighouse]

I grew up in Victoria actually. I have an unhealthy Carlton bias if the truth be known.

If White is in the firing line for a delisting, why have none of the AFL articles which reference our list and who might be in line to be delisted included White. Is it possible to look at that and base your assumptions that if he isnt on the list it's because he has a contract?

As for Walsh, it was a throw away comment based on our need of big bodied mids for next season and he is a freaking tank at 19 years old.

The biggest issue we currently have is... how do we get your 3 guys available for senior selection next season? Answer that one for me please?

There had been no mention of White being contracted for 2016, though his signings are usually on the quiet.

Warnock, Army, White and Holman are the ones being left until we have scoured what's left in the DFA's and fully assessed our list. Rookies could fall under this bracket too with how the list takes shape.

The uncontracted players that remain as hopeful PSD picks does not hold many aces unfortunately.

 

[AlecDuncan]

It's the club's responsibility to sell itself to recruits. That we couldn't shake one quality player out via the PSD is a fail.

 

[Dramoth]

Well I suggested we could 'do a Scotland' and delist and re-rookie a contracted player. I nominated Foster as someone who seems a little way off debuting and might only be called upon if we had an LTI to one of our talls. Viojo another who is well down the pecking order.

Thats not it... he said that Wood, Sheehan and Byrne all had to be available for the first round next year.

we need all of Wood, Sheehan and particularly Byrne
available for senior selection from round 1

With the way things stack up going to the draft, we can only have 1 of those guys available for senior selection come round 1. We delist Warnock and promote Wood using pick 113. Then how are we supposed to get the other to into a position where they can be available for senior selection?

By not picking up a PSD or DFA and going into next season light on senior players again with a 38/6/2 spread?

Or if we know that we won't be extending Woods contract past next year, we could promote Sheehan this year and Byrne next year.

We have, as I have stated a number of times, currently have 34 senior listed players on our books with the 4 top 20 picks and SOSOS to come into the list for a total of 39 people. If we promote one of the 3 (Wood, Sheehan or Byrne) that gives us a split of 40/4/2. 0 nominated rookies available.

Drop Warnock off the list and promote someone and then we will be 39/5/2. 1 nominated rookie available.

Delist one of Foster or Viojo-Rainbow and re-rookie them and we have list numbers of 38/6/2 and 2 nominated rookies.

Or we could just delist Armfield with Warnock and really piss off a few people because there is currently no need to delist him.

 

[Heres Waite]

It's the club's responsibility to sell itself to recruits. That we couldn't shake one quality player out via the PSD is a fail.

That's not a reflection on our club at all! These days the PSD is practically useless really. In the last two years only two players have been taken in the PSD. Ironically they both now play for us.

The only really high profile player that has gone in the PSD recently is Tippett and he was only there because the AFL punished him.

 

[The Bighouse]

Well I suggested we could 'do a Scotland' and delist and re-rookie a contracted player. I nominated Foster as someone who seems a little way off debuting and might only be called upon if we had an LTI to one of our talls. Viojo another who is well down the pecking order.

Jones and the loophole to put his wage outside the cap. We lack forwards (unless it's a mobile forward line) so Jones should get opportunities if he can work on his many deficiencies but he'll likely be rounding out his contract in the NB's, so a rookie spot would be beneficial and up the payments to 1AW, Jamo for their 2nd last year's.

 

[AlecDuncan]

That's not a reflection on our club at all! These days the PSD is practically useless really. In the last two years only two players have been taken in the PSD. Ironically they both now play for us.

The only really high profile player that has gone in the PSD recently is Tippett and he was only there because the AFL punished him.

If not the PSD itself, then the threat of the PSD is a weapon in trade negotiations. We failed to make it work for us. Given we'll be in exactly the same position next year, I hope the club's got a strategy to do better then.

 

[MileHigh]

It's the club's responsibility to sell itself to recruits. That we couldn't shake one quality player out via the PSD is a fail.

Hard to sell a player on having to wait 3 years for any success. Not even success, just getting to a point where you may win half of your games. Outside of that, what have we got? Playing with Judd? Finished. Buckleys a good bloke; do you wanna join a club with some nice guys?

The reality is we wont attract anyone until we can show some consistent direction and thatll take a few years.

 

[Heres Waite]

If not the PSD itself, then the threat of the PSD is a weapon in trade negotiations. We failed to make it work for us. Given we'll be in exactly the same position next year, I hope the club's got a strategy to do better then.

You are not happy with our trade period? We enter the draft with picks 1 8 11 19 and will grab SOS's kid. We also got in Kerridge, Plowman, Sumner, Phillips and Lamb. Those first three are especially exciting. We did this by only losing 3 incredibly soft sooky players, who one is injury prone, and one guy who we will miss but we had to do the deal for him and his family! That's an incredible trade period!

Realistically who could have we got for a cheaper rate through the threat off the PSD?

Treloar - to expensive for where we are at as a club, both in terms of draft picks and money. He also wanted to go to Collingwood!

Carlisle - to expensive as far as money goes! Saints can have him at that price. Also with what's just happened I think we dodged a bullet there.

Aish - meh, he has the exact type of attitude that we have been getting rid of recently.

 

[AlecDuncan]

Treloar - to expensive for where we are at as a club, both in terms of draft picks and money. He also wanted to go to Collingwood!

Way to argue my point for me.

 

[Prem17]

Moved from East Perth due to the alignment with WCE could pose and West Perth's interest.
I'm pretty sure he was playing back at the end of the season, so the figures may not reflect well for a forward.

I thought the same when I saw the figures but he still has a poor conversion rate and needs to stack on weight.
Pass.

 

[Prem17]

Given that Bolton knows all of the Hawthorn players very well, it wouldn't surprise me if the Blues snaffled Brendan Whitecross in the PSD (or as a FA).

Not sure he fits the rebuild brief but stranger things have happened.

I think he would be ok if he passes the medicals. He's only 26 next year.

 

[Salt Lake Cities]

It's the club's responsibility to sell itself to recruits. That we couldn't shake one quality player out via the PSD is a fail.

Guess clubs have been failing to sell themselves for years then. I thought this myth of getting a gun player in the PSD would've been put to rest now. Just doesn't happen. Should be scrapped IMO.

 

[Salt Lake Cities]

Hard to sell a player on having to wait 3 years for any success. Not even success, just getting to a point where you may win half of your games. Outside of that, what have we got? Playing with Judd? Finished. Buckleys a good bloke; do you wanna join a club with some nice guys?

The reality is we wont attract anyone until we can show some consistent direction and thatll take a few years.

And by then, we won't have PSD pick 1. Unless the bottom club is prepared to pay ridiculous overs to a player, the PSD is useless.

 

[Azzurri Blue2]

It's the club's responsibility to sell itself to recruits. That we couldn't shake one quality player out via the PSD is a fail.

Hopefully Bolts changes that around. But currently what player can we improve. In all seriousness would any player look at us and think that club will get the best out of me, I need to be there. Or do they think that club is crap enough so I can play in their first 22 and get paid. The players that want to succeed in life won't come here. They will go to coll, rich, etc cause these clubs have better programs to offer a players footballing development and personal development.

We are 6-8 years off anything. Hopefully young stars like Cripps don't get head hunted and leave. Only a captaincy will keep a talent like him. Will be offered 750k next contract by whoever wants him.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

I would be very happy for them to pay out Jones contract and delist him so we can upgrade Byrne and Wood.

 

[BringBackSimmo]

Jarrad Grant? Kicked 83 goals from 81 games... too much of a Liam Jones' smell?