Tristen Walker Delisted

[MarkT]

...but whats done is done.

I would be far more accepting if what was done wasn’t a long running trend. Better late than never as they say but as I said this time last year, if you carry players that won’t make it past the point it becomes apparent they won’t make you won’t win premierships. Lists are too short and quality player are too hard to recruit.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

I would be far more accepting if what was done wasn’t a long running trend. Better late than never as they say but as I said this time last year, if you carry players that won’t make it past the point it becomes apparent they won’t make you won’t win premierships. Lists are too short and quality player are too hard to recruit.

I agree that Walker and Hall, at the very least, should have been gone last year.

However, it stands to reason that you can't really complain about delisting players that you admit weren't going to make it at AFL level.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I agree that Walker and Hall, at the very least, should have been gone last year..

Theoretically that would have given us two late picks last year.

After pick 40 last year there was Rhan Hooper, Andrew Swallow, Kasey Green, Travis Baird, Michael Rix, Joel Patful. Sam Lonergan, Hugh Minson, Clint Bartram, and Mathew Stokes.

Three or four of these made a huge impression last year.

With a bit of luck any of these could have been ours if we had bumped Hall and Walker last year. (Having said that, whats done is done).

I just hope we have a bit of luck with our late picks this year.

 

[MarkT]

Given we rookied Toovey you would think we would have drafted him if we were going to use a late pick unless we had our eyes on someone specific such as the players you listed. The other alternative is that we would have listed O’Brien and rookied someone else. Who knows if it would have made any difference. The point is if you do it continually you turn over more players and increases your chances of uncovering serviceable players or maybe better. This is the theory we used to get rid of Betheras and the like yet we stuck with Kinnear and the like. As I keep saying, the mistakes we debate are not just little mistakes that have some minor theoretical impact they are the mistakes that see us with a mediocre list and wholly dependant upon future very good drafting which every club is aiming for. We have already had our early picks. Now we either need to get more or to be very very good and lucky over a number of drafts.

This time last year I wanted to delist Hall and Walker and not list Fanning. I don’t know who that would have added to our list or whether they would have been any better but given we delisted them all anyway we may as well have tried new heads out. Then only reason we held onto them was their height and we have been in that cycle for ever.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Agree Mark, I wasnt really making any point other than it is possible to pick up decent players late in the draft, and that is probably worth the risk to avtively turn over your list and take a punt on some late picks.

 

[MarkT]

Timmy, I would actually love to be able to hold onto some of these guys. Not all but say a Cameron Cloke and even a Walker who at least can move well just to see what they would be like at 24 or so. History is littered with VFL guns that made it after long reserves apprenticeships. Tuck and Doull are two very prominent ones that come to mind.

Unfortunately the AFL push to eliminate the reserves for financial reasons forced smaller lists and we now have list a that IMO are too small. I don’t know why we need to cap list numbers when we cap total payments. I would just as sooner keep Cameron Cloke and still add 4 late picks/PSD selections/Rookie players and pay them some of Tarrant’s money. List management should be deciding on keeping an Andrew Williams or Woewodin or using his pay on 4 new recruits. It has become very cut throat though and we have to be ruthless but in order to be successfully ruthless we have to make the calls earlier and still get them right. Sometimes I think we lack the judgement and sometimes the guts.

We have to operate within the list rules and they determine you cannot carry players that won’t make it by 21 or so.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

We have to operate within the list rules and they determine you cannot carry players that won’t make it by 21 or so.

Not more than one or two, anyway. Theres still room for a couple of long term project players on every list, especially if the rookie list is used judiciously. The only problem is our projects generally prove to be more problematic than the Wembley stadium project!

 

[GRANGE_GSM]

so hes been delisted right?maybe re-rookied?this is interesting and very stiff for the kid considering they are all over in arizona and he has been given he flick during the camp....?poor kid! ah well thats footy!

 

[Coin_Toss]

so hes been delisted right?maybe re-rookied?this is interesting and very stiff for the kid considering they are all over in arizona and he has been given he flick during the camp....?poor kid! ah well thats footy!

He had known it before the trip and Malthouse would have commited to his decision (with Tristen) a few weeks prior to making it official.

I've heard Tristen's shattered, but he will move on, life's too short not to.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I've heard Tristen's shattered, but he will move on, life's too short not to.

He may not move on if he gets rookie listed.

 

[GRANGE_GSM]

so hes gone over to arizona knowing hes been given the flick??obviously to try and regain a spot?.... respect to the kid!

 

[Coin_Toss]

so hes gone over to arizona knowing hes been given the flick??obviously to try and regain a spot?.... respect to the kid!

I'm not sure if he went over, probably not, last time I checked he wasn't on the list.

Originally posted by Timmy from Thomastown
He may not move on if he gets rookie listed.

Maybe... time will tell. It depends on how we draft.