Strategy Trade and List management Thread Part 2 (opposition supporters - READ posting rules before posting)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

Roarke has been delisted and re-rookied so he would still have 2 years on rookie list
Most likely we upgrade him though IMO
Doubt very much he gets elevated to the senior list, most will say he's lucky to still be a rookie. IMO he's worth another year as a rookie to see if he can get an uninterrupted run at things and gain some confidence in his body (knee) and see if there's anything there.
 
With the changes to the rookie list this year with the ina
Riddle me this.

Why would we keep Gowers on the rookie list? He would be starting 22 round 1.

Arent rookies only eligible to play if there is a long term injury?
Not anymore. Since last year rookies can play anytime.
 
It looks like the Hawks are rolling the dice.
Backing their Medical team to fix damaged goods in Scully And Scrimshaw who couldnt get a game for a Bottom side. Wingard looks like their only certain improvement but that cost them a Highly rated young Key defender in Burton

With all that going on when they inevitably hit the cliff it's going to be epic! !!!
Plus i think theyre first pick in the draft is somewhere in the 50s. These moves will come back to bite them.

I said before the FA/trade period that they were staring down the barrell of a decade in the footy wilderness. I'm certain of it now.
 
Plus i think theyre first pick in the draft is somewhere in the 50s. These moves will come back to bite them.

I said before the FA/trade period that they were staring down the barrell of a decade in the footy wilderness. I'm certain of it now.


I'm already marking the days off the calendar...

I'm calling this Clarko's Final Stand.

It's like Russian Roulette. They're firing the gun with trades and p****** away draft picks and they've avoided the bullet so far, but they know it's coming.
 
Riddle me this.

Why would we keep Gowers on the rookie list? He would be starting 22 round 1.

Arent rookies only eligible to play if there is a long term injury?
Even if you could find a loophole.That would be demeaning and psychological damaging.A player like Gowers whom has fought so hard.Absolute ridiculous suggestion unless its a perennial injured player.
 
I'm already marking the days off the calendar...

I'm calling this Clarko's Final Stand.

It's like Russian Roulette. They're firing the gun with trades and p****** away draft picks and they've avoided the bullet so far, but they know it's coming.
People like to argue that Hawthorn are genius traders that can disregard the draft, but their golden run wad built around a core of high draft picks; Hodge, Roughead, Lewis, Mitchell, Franklin .Smith, Sewell, Rioli, etc.Their clever trades were icing on the cake, but you've got to have that base of high end talent..
 
Wingard was told by Hinkley to work on "attitude and come to training with a better mindset", "but didn't get told that during the year".

Um, he's 25.

Good luck Clarko.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Minor point, but Roarke was actually re-rookied. Not sure if he gets promoted or stays there next year but according to an earlier post it may not matter moving forward.

If we package up those picks the question must be whether any deficit we may go into for next year is worth the upgrade this year. Where does a points deficit apply - to your future first round pick or later? Eg wouldnt necessarily want to downgrade 2019 pick 6 to pick 9 so we can jag another pick in the 20s this year, depending on whats available obviously. Or is that not how it works?
The way I understand it is that you go into deficit in the round that the bid was placed
So if Khamis was bid on in the third rnd and we were in deficit it would come off your third rnd pick next year
 
Wingard was told by Hinkley to work on "attitude and come to training with a better mindset", "but didn't get told that during the year".

Um, he's 25.

Good luck Clarko.

I thought it was a fair enough comment from Wingard. If there was a significant issue it definitely should have been raised during the year and not mentioned for the first time at your end of year review. Would be poor management if that is how it occurred.
 
I thought it was a fair enough comment from Wingard. If there was a significant issue it definitely should have been raised during the year and not mentioned for the first time at your end of year review. Would be poor management if that is how it occurred.

At 25, should you need to be told by the coach to pull your finger out?
 
I thought it was a fair enough comment from Wingard. If there was a significant issue it definitely should have been raised during the year and not mentioned for the first time at your end of year review. Would be poor management if that is how it occurred.

As mentioned; he's 25. If you've been in a professional system for 7 years then you shouldn't have to be told to work harder and to pull your finger out.
 
As mentioned; he's 25. If you've been in a professional system for 7 years then you shouldn't have to be told to work harder and to pull your finger out.
I get what you are saying and its hard to know exactly what happened - but yeah if the coaches think his training standards haven't been good enough all year they shouldn't wait until the end of the year to mention it.
 
As mentioned; he's 25. If you've been in a professional system for 7 years then you shouldn't have to be told to work harder and to pull your finger out.

While I agree, how old is Libba ???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top