The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

[bulldogtragic]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

BT, I can see the need for rookie list promotions especially Lynch. I think there needs to be at least 5 subtractions

Need or want? If it's need to, then we'd have to entertain another trade potentially. Essendon will still be a basket case, so a young leader and potential very good player like Hrovat might attract interest. If a banned player picked us, Essendon paying some salary for them next year and getting a generous trade back might be win-win.

[soupman]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

BT, I can see the need for rookie list promotions especially Lynch. I think there needs to be at least 5 subtractions

Why? In my view the only reason you promote a rookie permanently is because you have to due to them either receiving better offers otherwise or reaching the time limit (like Redpath), or because they are going to be best 25 for the majority of the season (see Dahlhaus).

I'll be surprised if Lynch meets any of that criteria by the end if the season (although very pleased).

[GVGjr]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

Why? In my view the only reason you promote a rookie permanently is because you have to due to them either receiving better offers otherwise or reaching the time limit (like Redpath), or because they are going to be best 25 for the majority of the season (see Dahlhaus).

I'll be surprised if Lynch meets any of that criteria by the end if the season (although very pleased).

We are talking about at the end of the season. I think Lynch could be a real improver in the 2nd half of the season and might be in the mix for a promotion before 2017. I think there is a chance we might need to cut a bit deeper into the list.

[soupman]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

We are talking about at the end of the season. I think Lynch could be a real improver in the 2nd half of the season and might be in the mix for a promotion before 2017. I think there is a chance we might need to cut a bit deeper into the list.

I agree with everything you've said about Lynch. I think he will improve greatly throughout the year, will definitely be in the mix for selection and debut at some point. However, I have no expectation that he will be promoted at the end of the year, because doing so would be bad list management unless he is already best 25.

The fact is if he stays as a rookie next year he can still be promoted easily (lets face it we always have a long term injury), but it allows us the flexibility to make one less change to the main list, or alternatively we fill that last spot on our list with pick 50 in the ND instead of pick 50 in the RD, which are vastly different options (Caleb Daniel vs Luke Goetz). It also means that if his form doesn't command a spot early next year then we could promote a different rookie instead.

I'm all for rewarding players for effort and promise, but I think there is a view by many that the rookie list is a group of players your club has first dibs on who can come in if needed. In reality it is just an extension of our main list with slight limitations on availability and on a much lower salary. As such neither club nor player should be upset by being kept on it for a long period until they have to be upgraded, either because they demand it with their form or because the rules stipulate you cannot be on it for more than 3 years.

We have in the past promoted prematurely, Mulligan, Panos and Hooper were all promoted on the back of limited/no form at AFL level and all would not have been disadvantaged by being left on the rookie list to develop. Instead they cost us valuable main list space and an opportunity to use a ND pick on someone. The JMac/Dalrymple regime seems more switched on in this area, Redpath, Jong, Goodes, Adcock, Campbell and Roarke Smith have all been denied promotion at seasons end despite showing promise and sometimes good form at AFL level. I expect the same to happen with Lynch, even if he does play multiple encouraging games at AFL level this year.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

Assuming we play some finals, we are about 1/4 into the season.

I've now firmed my minimum 3: Prudden, Minson, Matty Boyd. Adcock too unless he's the designated mature age coverage.
Possible moving on: Roberts, Redpath
Listen and consider any decent trade offers on: Honeychurch, Hrovat, Roughead

So around 5 off the primary list. Crameri is essentially a new recruit. Romero is an active father/son. We have the pick from Sydney for Tahleeya. Obviously free agency and trading.

[azabob]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

BT do we consider delisting C.Smith?

I would seriously consider keeping Prudden. If he wasn't injured I think he would be in our senior team.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

BT do we consider delisting C.Smith?

I would seriously consider keeping Prudden. If he wasn't injured I think he would be in our senior team.

Clay stays if his knee holds up. But as a proven jinx I can't say more than that. As for Prudden, if we wanted to keep him in lieu of Advock on the rookie list then I can't see us having him 'stolen' before our rookie draft pick. It's just so hard if we we've got Libba, Roarke, Bob, Clay & Prudden on the list with some risk attached. MJP had some stats a while back about recurrence rates per ACL. Seems a big risk wouldn't you say?

[azabob]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

Clay stays if his knee holds up. But as a proven jinx I can't say more than that. As for Prudden, if we wanted to keep him in lieu of Advock on the rookie list then I can't see us having him 'stolen' before our rookie draft pick. It's just so hard if we we've got Libba, Roarke, Bob, Clay & Prudden on the list with some risk attached. MJP had some stats a while back about recurrence rates per ACL. Seems a big risk wouldn't you say?

Not really a big risk. By end of 2017 out of the ones you mention I think only Liberatore is more than a 40% chance of remaining.

[ledge]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

Not really a big risk. By end of 2017 out of the ones you mention I think only Liberatore is more than a 40% chance of remaining.

Not sure about that if Clay Smiths knee holds up he will still be there and Rourke will certainly be given another year if he doesn't get injured again. Plenty of upside in him.
Murphy will might also be their. A year off could be a godsend for him at his age. Rest the body and hunger comes back.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

Not sure about that if Clay Smiths knee holds up he will still be there and Rourke will certainly be given another year if he doesn't get injured again. Plenty of upside in him.
Murphy will might also be their. A year off could be a godsend for him at his age. Rest the body and hunger comes back.

I think Clay's best footy is excellent. It might be one of those tough calls about whether we are ever going to see it again.

[Bornadog]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

I think Clay needs to show commitment and that he can still play, otherwise I would be saying goodbye to him.

[SonofScray]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

I think Clay needs to show commitment and that he can still play, otherwise I would be saying goodbye to him.

BAD, can you comment further re: showing commitment? I heard someone at VUWO today suggest Clay wasn't showing a good attitude around the club and was in strife, just wondering if your comments reflect that?

On topic, I am thinking:

Minson, Hamilton, M Boyd, Redpath and Prudden are in the mix.

[jeemak]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

Assuming we play some finals, we are about 1/4 into the season.

I've now firmed my minimum 3: Prudden, Minson, Matty Boyd. Adcock too unless he's the designated mature age coverage.
Possible moving on: Roberts, Redpath
Listen and consider any decent trade offers on: Honeychurch, Hrovat, Roughead

So around 5 off the primary list. Crameri is essentially a new recruit. Romero is an active father/son. We have the pick from Sydney for Tahleeya. Obviously free agency and trading.

I wouldn't be surprised if we have bigger trades than Honeychurch, Hrovat and Roughead on our minds.

It's abundantly clear, even if and when we are uninjured, we're going to need more KPF and KPD depth very soon (1-2 years). Apart from Dad I don't see that in any players that haven't been tried in those areas already.

That means we're going to have to part with something more significant than the three mentioned above, unless we part with high draft picks.

Get ready for it.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

I wouldn't be surprised if we have bigger trades than Honeychurch, Hrovat and Roughead on our minds.

It's abundantly clear, even if and when we are uninjured, we're going to need more KPF and KPD depth very soon (1-2 years). Apart from Dad I don't see that in any players that haven't been tried in those areas already.

That means we're going to have to part with something more significant than the three mentioned above, unless we part with high draft picks.

Get ready for it.

Got to name names J-Man...

[Bornadog]

Re: The Moving Rolling De-Listing/Trading Thread 2016

BAD, can you comment further re: showing commitment? I heard someone at VUWO today suggest Clay wasn't showing a good attitude around the club and was in strife, just wondering if your comments reflect that?

On topic, I am thinking:

Minson, Hamilton, M Boyd, Redpath and Prudden are in the mix.

I was told something similar.