Quicky's list, draft and trade talk thread

[BEEG]

I think we need a explosive outside Mid like Cooney to top our midfield of i know Cooney is inside and outside but someone like him would be perfect

 

[King Woodie]

Excellent thread, Quicky.

Just a very basic question - what's the difference between the draft and the Rookie draft? I've never see the distinction defined, so they might even be the same thing for all I know, I've been getting the impression that rookie-listed players are less talented, but that may have no foundation in reality.

As for Barry Hall - I'd say we'd just be buying into trouble. I'd be looking elsewhere.

Snag, at a high level to give you some context. There are three drafts.

1. National Draft - Usually at end of November. All the eligable young kids go into the this one (and some of the potential recycles as well). These draftees get a spot on the main list of 38 (or 40 if two veterans), and can therefore play when selected. This is the main pathway for people on senior lists. Each club generally takes 4-7 picks (resulting in around 80 players selected).

2. Pre-season draft. Usually start of December. It is the same in concept, but generally only a handful of clubs take a pick (and these are usually out of contract players wanting to move clubs). These also take a spot on the senior list. Usually only 5-12 players picked up each year through this. These picks can't be traded.

3. Rookie draft. Held 30 minutes after the Pre-season draft. For all young players who didn't get picked up in either of the first two drafts (assuming they are top aged, not bottom aged - bottom aged need to play another year of football). These players come at less cost for the club in terms of being outside the salary cap and on lower salaries. They also generally represent more risky picks. These players go onto the Rookie List, and can only play seniors if they are moved from the Rookie List to the senior list in place of a long term injury, or more recently, a mid-season upgrade.

When most people talk about the draft, they are meaning the National Draft (that is the most exciting one from a talented new player perspective).

 

[Snag Breac]

Snag, at a high level to give you some context. There are three drafts.

1. National Draft - Usually at end of November. All the eligable young kids go into the this one (and some of the potential recycles as well). These draftees get a spot on the main list of 38 (or 40 if two veterans), and can therefore play when selected. This is the main pathway for people on senior lists. Each club generally takes 4-7 picks (resulting in around 80 players selected).

2. Pre-season draft. Usually start of December. It is the same in concept, but generally only a handful of clubs take a pick (and these are usually out of contract players wanting to move clubs). These also take a spot on the senior list. Usually only 5-12 players picked up each year through this. These picks can't be traded.

3. Rookie draft. Held 30 minutes after the Pre-season draft. For all young players who didn't get picked up in either of the first two drafts (assuming they are top aged, not bottom aged - bottom aged need to play another year of football). These players come at less cost for the club in terms of being outside the salary cap and on lower salaries. They also generally represent more risky picks. These players go onto the Rookie List, and can only play seniors if they are moved from the Rookie List to the senior list in place of a long term injury, or more recently, a mid-season upgrade.

When most people talk about the draft, they are meaning the National Draft (that is the most exciting one from a talented new player perspective).

Thanks for that your Pies majesty.
It sounds as if the rookie draft and the PSD are the stocktaking sales of the footy world. I read that Maxy was taken off the Rookie list, and I think Tarks too, in which case we've picked up a few bargains over the years.

 

[Quicky]

What do we think about Raines? He's out of Richmond.

I think we have better players on our list currently in that position. I'd prefer to see us perservere with Blight and Clarke in support of Shaw. Cox and maybe McCarthy are other good options. That said I don't mind Raines. I know he's had injuries but he is one of the few players who can actually hit a target at Richmond (if my memory serves correct) so i'm not sure why they aren't trying to keep him.

Excellent thread, Quicky.

Just a very basic question - what's the difference between the draft and the Rookie draft? I've never see the distinction defined, so they might even be the same thing for all I know, I've been getting the impression that rookie-listed players are less talented, but that may have no foundation in reality.

As for Barry Hall - I'd say we'd just be buying into trouble. I'd be looking elsewhere.

King Woodie beat me to it Snag

On Barry I see your point, but I just feel taking the risk may land us with a premiership - so for me it justifies the risk. It is very rare to unheard of that you can pick up a player of Barrys quality for the price he will go at - its a rare chance. Also - and I know this isn't a great recruiting argument - i'd absolutely hate to be playing against a Doggies side with Hall in it (shudder).

I think we need a explosive outside Mid like Cooney to top our midfield of i know Cooney is inside and outside but someone like him would be perfect

Totally agree. We have Davis, Didak, Thomas and to a lesser extent Clarke and Wellingham but we definitely should target one. This provides a strong argument for going best available if we see an outside mid we like better than a KPP. Havn't looked at the outside mids alot yet but Gary Rohan is the sort of player we should look at. Highly doubtful he'd be available at our pick though.

Thanks for that your Pies majesty.
It sounds as if the rookie draft and the PSD are the stocktaking sales of the footy world. I read that Maxy was taken off the Rookie list, and I think Tarks too, in which case we've picked up a few bargains over the years.

Tarks, Maxy, O'Brien, Wellingham, Cox, Toovey, Blair are other notables. The rookie draft has been really good to us. It highlights the importance of getting the later picks right.

 

[Quicky]

The Shae McNamara situation is an interesting one for our list. Considering we currently have Fraser, Wood, Keefe, Bryan and Leigh Brown who can ruck on our list. We will take Witts in next years draft plus the possible inclusion of McNamara as an international rookie that is 7 rucks. Something - or more to the point someone - would have to make way. It really doesn't look good for Bryan if this is the case.

I also wonder if it will affect our drafting this year?? Would we avoid ruck type players like Vardy if he were available??

 

[magpiewarrior]

Apparently Brian Lake is only on 175K at the Doggies and that is why he is thinking of moving. If we are going to target anyone he is the one. He already carves us up every time we play the Doggies and I reckon that he hasn't hit his peak yet.
BARRY HALL no way, the umpires and tribunal hate us enough as it is and the last thing we need is a lose cannon who can wreck any momentum we might have going with his stupidity. It took long enough to stop Meddy doing stupid things without going for a total head case thug.

 

[Quicky]

Apparently Brian Lake is only on 175K at the Doggies and that is why he is thinking of moving. If we are going to target anyone he is the one. He already carves us up every time we play the Doggies and I reckon that he hasn't hit his peak yet.
BARRY HALL no way, the umpires and tribunal hate us enough as it is and the last thing we need is a lose cannon who can wreck any momentum we might have going with his stupidity. It took long enough to stop Meddy doing stupid things without going for a total head case thug.

I'm pretty sure that the 175k that Brian Lake is reported to be on has since been proved wrong. I think his actual wage was quoted at between 250-300k a year (although I don't have a link) which is still well below his market value.

In regards to Lake for us no doubt he'd be a great fit but the real question is what do we have to pay to get him??

To put it in perspective the first thing to note is that the Bulldogs will move heaven and earth to keep him - it's highly unlikely he will leave. Second thing is there are so many teams are after key position defenders the bidding war would be intense - and most of those teams will have better draft picks to use to get him. Lake would likely cost a 1st round draft pick and a promising player. It is so hard to get big name deals done anymore - and considering we wont have high draft picks to use and probably wouldn't want to get rid of any of our promising players the chances of us getting Lake are very very long.

Fair enough on Barry Hall. The guy is a headcase - and there is always the 'if Roos and Kirk couldn't straighten him out no-one could' argument. But again he is quality, experienced, fills a need, could be the difference between a flag and is cheap. I just think any risk is worth it. But yeah I wouldn't be shattered if we didn't chase him either - its just a thought.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I think Bryan is on the endangered species list. I don't think we'll be drafting any rucks with Keeffe coming along, Witts next year and possibly McNamara outside the rookie list.

Big "no" from me on the Barry Hall issue, fails the "no ********s" policy and frankly isn't talented enough or reliable enough. Could be very disruptive to the team on the field, which is a major problem over and above the possible problems say a Ben Cousins could have brought this year.

Crowley I'm fairly indifferent to. I don't think we'll be picking up any players in trade week, to be honest, but I could be wrong and I didn't see Corrie coming last year at all.

 

[Crazy Tails]

Crowley I'm fairly indifferent to. I don't think we'll be picking up any players in trade week, to be honest, but I could be wrong and I didn't see Corrie coming last year at all.

I wouldn't have minded Crowley but according to the link below on the Freo site (from 2 days ago) he has just penned a new two year deal with Freo till the end of 2011. So I would say on the basis of that he would not be on the table.

http://www.fremantlefc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/7009/newsid/84010/default.aspx

 

[Quicky]

I wouldn't have minded Crowley but according to the link below on the Freo site (from 2 days ago) he has just penned a new two year deal with Freo till the end of 2011. So I would say on the basis of that he would not be on the table.

http://www.fremantlefc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/7009/newsid/84010/default.aspx

Cheers for that Tails. Alot of the Freo supporters thought he might be trade bait but I guess thats put paid to any rumour about him moving.

The tagging situation is definitely an important one for the balance of our midfield. The more I think about it the more I like the idea of developing McCarthy into that role - atleast in the meantime. He has all the attributes to be a great tagger. He is quick enough to go with most players, he is tough and hard at it, his defensive skill are ok from what I have seen, he is a good kick and can win the ball himself and hurt his opponent the other way.

As far as trying to fit all our midfield prospects into the team as it stands this would mean McCarthy would probably replace Johnson in our current team and allow a player like Sidebottome to come into midfield as well. We'd be fixing the problem from within our list which saves us from drafting or trading for a tagger which is great.

What are peoples thoughts on using McCarthy as a tagger??

 

[Old Spice]

TRS, what's the news with the AFL trying to snaffle our young Sydney lads?

 

[ChipDouglas]

My understanding at this time is they want to be able to play club scholarship holders in the GWS tac side. They would still be tied to their AFL clubs. You couldn't really have a Tac side without them, a third rate team devoid of the talent already mined would get hammered every week.
Will find out definitively on the weekend.

 

[Old Spice]

My understanding at this time is they want to be able to play club scholarship holders in the GWS tac side. They would still be tied to their AFL clubs. You couldn't really have a Tac side without them, a third rate team devoid of the talent already mined would get hammered every week.
Will find out definitively on the weekend.

Cheers for that. So the contracts we have with them have not been ripped up etc., so that they become the chattels of WS?

 

[DaVe86]

Brilliant stuff mate...when I read the topic I had a few things in mind...but you covered them all.

The few things that I was thinking about include:

- Macaffer: I actually see him as a HBF option because he is a fantastic mark for his size and great footskills. I was glad to see you mentioned him in this role. The forward line is rich of small/mid-sizers...so his chance could come here.


- Tagger - Our midfield has great up and coming in and unders in Beams and Sidebottom. It has the class with Didak, Davis and the hard runners/clearance players in O'bree, Swan and Pendlebury.

There are 2 things it needs now. 1 is an out and out tagger. I know Mick likes going head to head...but surely each week we need to be able to shut out the oppositions best midfielder. Johnson has done some work here of late...I think we need someone purely as a tagger.

The other thing the midfield needs is Dale Thomas. Dale is closer than many think. Within a few years I think he'll become one of our most dynamic midfielders.



- Forward Line: Still needs that 50+ goal a year tall forward. Maybe its Jack Anthony...but it aint Cloke. It needs the Nick Riewoldt or Jonathon Brown presence. Cloke just hasn't become that player. He is critically vital to the side, but is never going to be a 50 goal a year player. We need Cloke on a flank, Anthony at FF and a huge presence at CHF. I have question marks over Dawes, Reid is going to be a CHB and Brown I still think is our future FB.


- Draft - has to be a KPP. I know a few have put up a ruckman...and if the good KPP's are gone by our pick then that's perhaps the way to go. But I'm confident on Wood and Fraser as a combination...but certainly we need to start looking at post Josh Fraser...and considering ruckmen take 5 years...we need to recruit a guy that is ready to go when he finishes. Josh aint going to go much past 30 because his body isn't up to it.

Ultimately I think we should go defender with our first pick. You can usually pick up the defenders a bit later...so we should get a really good one with our first round pick which is likely to be pick 14-16. Probably won't be many forward left by then.




On the delistings. I'm not sure whether to cut the depth and go all out in this draft...or back in the list and take the bare minimum in this draft. Ultimately, this draft is compromised so it is no where near as strong as in previous years.

If we delist Bryan, we have no backup at all. Look at Essendon and Brisbane this year...they each lost all their frontline ruckmen. Bryan aint much, but he is good insurance until something else comes through.

Stanely and Cook are other one's. Both have had terrific years at VFL level and no opportunities at AFL. Do we delist them for a kid late in the draft who probably wouldn't have made it in other stronger drafts??? Or do we keep these guys who are still young and continually perform at VFL level...but will never make it as frontline AFL players??


The only definite to leave that I can see is Anthony Rocca.

Rusling perhaps has 1 more chance.

I think out of necessity that Stanley and Cook will have to go simply because we need to make the 3 list changes.


Again Quicky, top work.

 

[Heater39]

No more string-bean ruckman. Wood and Fraser are too similar, we need a big strong, physically imposing bastard.

A key position player, forward or back doesn't really matter.

Another mid.

Those are what I'd be looking at. We have no glaring deficiencies,so I'd be happy if we went with a bit of everything, but no more half back flankers!

Delist/ Retire- Rocca, Cook, Stanley, Corrie, Bryan and Cox if we can't get something for him in a trade.

 

[DaVe86]

I forgot about Corrie and Cox. Both delisted for mine.

 

[wadethompson]

The Shae McNamara situation is an interesting one for our list. Considering we currently have Fraser, Wood, Keefe, Bryan and Leigh Brown who can ruck on our list. We will take Witts in next years draft plus the possible inclusion of McNamara as an international rookie that is 7 rucks. Something - or more to the point someone - would have to make way. It really doesn't look good for Bryan if this is the case.

I also wonder if it will affect our drafting this year?? Would we avoid ruck type players like Vardy if he were available??

please do not tell me collingwood are actually thinking of recruiting this guy or is this just a made up thing. he is a absolute dud just becuase his tall and quick doesn't meen any thing he would have no footy brain at all he has the worst kicking style i have ever seen and his handballing technique is a joke , wtf?

 

[Quicky]

Cheers DaVe.

On the ruck situation I see your point but I still think Bryan is in real trouble to be delisted. The trend this year has been if Wood and Fraser havn't rucked together then L Brown and Dawes have been used as back ups. With the fact Bryan hasn't been able to crack the team, Keefes likely elevation to the seniors list, the likely recruitment of Shae McNamara this year and Witts next year - it all spells bad news for Bryan to me. There is the potential for problems if Wood and Fraser are both injured leaving us with Keefe as the number one ruck but it seems excessive to have 6 rucks on the list. But yeah you might be right, we could well keep him one more year as insurance to give Keefe another years development and until we recruit Witts.

You're right to say from a list management point of view that the intelligent thing to do would be the to target KPP in this draft given how long they take to develop. The concerning thing is that the KP stocks are supposed to be thin this year. Hine will have his work cut out for him. It emphasises the importance of keeping our first two picks in this years draft.

It's a big call on Cloke you make - but I can't help but agree with you. It is a serious concern for our list because it is highly unlikely we could trade for a 50 goal a year CHF, and anyone we pick up in the draft would take 3+ years to develop. It makes Anthonys and Dawes development that much more important as well as Ruslings injury status. Drafting some quality KPP definitely seems the way to go this year - maybe with some outside mids thrown in for good measure.

To Heater39 - agree with your list of likely delisted/retired players except for Cox. He would certainly be trade bait (although I doubt we'd get much) but if he doesn't leave I think he is worth persisting with. Given the compromised drafts it is worth hanging on to a player like Cox who still has enormous potential. One of our biggest list deficiencies is a quick outside midfielder with good footskills - perhaps we can convert him into this player. He has all the attributes. It may be worth the risk of keeping him on the list another year.

 

[Quicky]

please do not tell me collingwood are actually thinking of recruiting this guy or is this just a made up thing. he is a absolute dud just becuase his tall and quick doesn't meen any thing he would have no footy brain at all he has the worst kicking style i have ever seen and his handballing technique is a joke , wtf?

Well Geoff Walsh has confirmed we are looking at him and he is currently training with us. I tend to agree with VV's point in the thread on Shae - as he is an international rookie outside of the main list there is no real risk in giving him a go. He has the right size to play ruck, has awesome agility, and a good mark. His skills have improved apparently. I'm all for giving him a go.

 

[wadethompson]

Well Geoff Walsh has confirmed we are looking at him and he is currently training with us. I tend to agree with VV's point in the thread on Shae - as he is an international rookie outside of the main list there is no real risk in giving him a go. He has the right size to play ruck, has awesome agility, and a good mark. His skills have improved apparently. I'm all for giving him a go.

your kidding me? im lost for words

 

[Handsofstone]

Was thinking the same myself - a one year project - if fit and keen I reckon worth it for sure

 

[The Royal Sampler]

TRS, what's the news with the AFL trying to snaffle our young Sydney lads?

They're not, mate; the AFL is just trying to stop us from signing any more after this year. We're conceding that the scheme can't continue forever, but we want it to conclude after 2010 or 2011, given we've put a fair bit of money into the Sydney Uni project and hiring scouts etc.

 

[Dale Didak #134]

Taking a number of considerations into account - including the suposed lack of strength in the draft, our need for a tagger/further midfield depth, a being right in the frame for a premiership, should we adopt St Kilda's idea of trading for some fringe players. Admitiddly, we're not talking your Tim Schmidt fringe types, but throwing our weight around at the trade table might'nt be the worst idea. Something like a 2nd rounder for Jack Steven + David Armitage at St Kilda. Problem would be getting them to accept.

Why? I've seen limited amounts of each, however when I have seen them play, they seem to have a very hard approach to their game - something our midfield could have a little more of. Each could put pressure on our midfield, eventually replacing the likes of O'Bree, Lockyer in the future - given their youth. I'm sure Armitage could become a run-with player, maybe Steven also.

With Stanley and Cook seemingly on the way out, they would almost be direct replacement for their spots on the list.

Thoughts?

 

[MightyQuinn]

What do the 5 B's stand for??

But yeah I just think he'd be a good fit for us. I don't really care about his off-field stuff. Always respected him as a player and think he could make the difference for us. Could provide the forward structure Rocca used to for us.[/quote]


i actually missed out a b quick...so the 6 b's are big bad bustling beagle boy barry hall.

...not sure where beagle boy bit came from.....me and the old man have been saying it for years. haha

 

[Quicky]

Taking a number of considerations into account - including the suposed lack of strength in the draft, our need for a tagger/further midfield depth, a being right in the frame for a premiership, should we adopt St Kilda's idea of trading for some fringe players. Admitiddly, we're not talking your Tim Schmidt fringe types, but throwing our weight around at the trade table might'nt be the worst idea. Something like a 2nd rounder for Jack Steven + David Armitage at St Kilda. Problem would be getting them to accept.

Why? I've seen limited amounts of each, however when I have seen them play, they seem to have a very hard approach to their game - something our midfield could have a little more of. Each could put pressure on our midfield, eventually replacing the likes of O'Bree, Lockyer in the future - given their youth. I'm sure Armitage could become a run-with player, maybe Steven also.

With Stanley and Cook seemingly on the way out, they would almost be direct replacement for their spots on the list.

Thoughts?

I'd love to get Armitage, and I havn't seen enough of Steven to really comment. I very much doubt the Saints would get rid of them for a second round pick though. I have the feeling the Saints will hold on to Armitage for some GC picks. I'd be sceptical about giving up either our first or second rounders in trade - but for a player of Armitages ability, well it would definitely be interesting. We would want to be careful about not leaving our KP's to vulnerable however.