Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

[jazzadogs]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

I think our club has fallen into the trap of uneccessarily promoting players from the rookie list to the senior list, e.g. Hooper, Mulligan (Panos was not criticised much at the time, but could be another example).

My understanding is that you can keep a rookie on the rookie list for two years, and after that you decide what to do. Therefore, at this stage of the year I would think that Campbell and Austin stay on the rookie list for 2013 as insurance. If they continue to do their job next year, then look at promoting them full time.

[Bornadog]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

I think our club has fallen into the trap of uneccessarily promoting players from the rookie list to the senior list, e.g. Hooper, Mulligan (Panos was not criticised much at the time, but could be another example).

My understanding is that you can keep a rookie on the rookie list for two years, and after that you decide what to do. Therefore, at this stage of the year I would think that Campbell and Austin stay on the rookie list for 2013 as insurance. If they continue to do their job next year, then look at promoting them full time.

Hooper, Mulligan and Moles were promoted when they really shouldn't have been. Boyd, Dahlhaus, Morris go allright. I think Austin has done a great job and is getting a regular game and if he continues to improve deserves an upgrade.

[Greystache]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

The only multi year rookie contracts I am aware of are for rookies who have to move interstate. Even then I believe the safety net is just there for the player. May have changed.

Austin would obviously only nominate for the draft if a side guaranteed to pick him but I believe that is a distinct possibility considering his form. 18 clubs, over 720 senior list spots available... I think Austin warrants one.

Of course if we can get away with keeping him on the rookie list we should but that goes without saying.

That's my understanding of rookie contracts too, but we can roll them over for a second year without needing to do anything, so unless he actively chose to pursue other options we're in no danger of someone poaching him. Guarantee's are a dangerous thing though, I'd heard Wade Skipper walked out on a second year rookie option from Hawthorn because another club had guaranteed to draft him (not a totally reliable source mind you), and he found himself playing at Port Melbourne last year after being overlooked in the draft.

Unless you're certain about another club's intentions, a bird in the hand....

[jazzadogs]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

Hooper, Mulligan and Moles were promoted when they really shouldn't have been. Boyd, Dahlhaus, Morris go allright. I think Austin has done a great job and is getting a regular game and if he continues to improve deserves an upgrade.

I think it depends on a list management kind of perspective, rather than just looking at it as "he's in good form, promote him". Without actually looking at numbers, I wouldn't think that tall defenders is an area of concern on the list (unless we get bad luck with injuries, in which case we could promote from the rookie list). It also depends on who we are looking at in the draft...if we have a tall smokie lined up for the rookie draft then it might change plans.

Lake, Williams, Markovic as talls, Talia, Mulligan developing talls.
Morris, Hargrave mid-sized. I'm not sure if Roberts is being groomed in defence or attack. Rough, Cordy, Panos could all play back if we were desperate.

I understand the point, and won't be all that upset if he does continue his form and get promoted, but I think it's an interesting debate from a list management perspective. Lots of variables at this stage of the year.

Is there an accepted ratio of talls:smalls on a list?

[GVGjr]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

Right now I would have Gilbee, Hooper, Moles, Mulligan, Panos and Skinner(to be rookied) in the gun.

This would give us the 5 draft spots that we need plus a spot for a FA.

Don't see the point of upgrading Campbell or Austin after only one season on the rookie list as they aren't going anywhere.

StKilda might be looking to get a ruckman so could snatch Campbell from us if we won't upgrade him and the Hawks are always looking for tall defenders so they might have their eye on Austin.

If we don't upgrade them we are likely to lose them.

I believe will will offer Campbell a 2 or 3 year (senior) deal before the end of the season.

[Desipura]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

StKilda might be looking to get a ruckman so could snatch Campbell from us if we won't upgrade him and the Hawks are always looking for tall defenders so they might have their eye on Austin.

If we don't upgrade them we are likely to lose them.

I believe will will offer Campbell a 2 or 3 year (senior) deal before the end of the season.

I think you may be right.

[Missing Dog]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

StKilda might be looking to get a ruckman so could snatch Campbell from us if we won't upgrade him and the Hawks are always looking for tall defenders so they might have their eye on Austin.

If we don't upgrade them we are likely to lose them.

I believe will will offer Campbell a 2 or 3 year (senior) deal before the end of the season.

I understand why we would upgrade Campbell for the reasons mentioned.

I don't really see the need to promote Austin though. He's been solid, thats all really. If he keeps improving perhaps, but I think we have enough depth (we still have 3 young tall defenders playing for Willy).

[azabob]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

I understand why we would upgrade Campbell for the reasons mentioned.

I don't really see the need to promote Austin though. He's been solid, thats all really. If he keeps improving perhaps, but I think we have enough depth (we still have 3 young tall defenders playing for Willy).

Who are the 3? Talia.

[Greystache]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

Who are the 3? Talia.

Roberts and Mulligan

[AndrewP6]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

I think it depends on a list management kind of perspective, rather than just looking at it as "he's in good form, promote him". Without actually looking at numbers, I wouldn't think that tall defenders is an area of concern on the list (unless we get bad luck with injuries, in which case we could promote from the rookie list). It also depends on who we are looking at in the draft...if we have a tall smokie lined up for the rookie draft then it might change plans.

Lake, Williams, Markovic as talls, Talia, Mulligan developing talls.
Morris, Hargrave mid-sized. I'm not sure if Roberts is being groomed in defence or attack. Rough, Cordy, Panos could all play back if we were desperate.

I understand the point, and won't be all that upset if he does continue his form and get promoted, but I think it's an interesting debate from a list management perspective. Lots of variables at this stage of the year.

Is there an accepted ratio of talls:smalls on a list?

I'm not sure Mulligan is developing as we'd have hoped.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

Roberts and Mulligan

Surely Austin for Mulligan as a straight swop on the senior list is a no-brainer? If we want to give him regular games next year (and I see no reason why we wouldn't) we have to upgrade him don't we? He's been solid enough to be in the best 25-30 players on our list which means upgrade for me as he'd be likely to earn himself the 12-15+ games mark.

I also met his mum in our local fish 'n chip shop tonight wearing full bulldogs regalia so maybe I'm feeling overly generous. She was so proud and she's so happy he's not injured this year. It was a heartwarming chat (albeit quick) but it gave me the warm and fuzzies about the guy

[Bumper Bulldogs]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

Surely Austin for Mulligan as a straight swop on the senior list is a no-brainer? If we want to give him regular games next year (and I see no reason why we wouldn't) we have to upgrade him don't we? He's been solid enough to be in the best 25-30 players on our list which means upgrade for me as he'd be likely to earn himself the 12-15+ games mark.

I agree and if Shaggy goes at years end, another back up would be a good thing and on performance he has done enough to be reward IMO,

On the other hand as a club would we throw Higgins out as trade bait. I cant see him having a role in our side for many more years, Always thought his best footy was played a a HFF, but he wanted to play midfield,

I'm sure other clubs would pick him up and with our younger guys coming throw do we really need a guy choc block full of potential but a tease in the fact we only see glimpses.

[azabob]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

Roberts and Mulligan

Surely he couldn't include Mulligan as a realistic option?

[stefoid]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

We arent trading Higgo - He is the type of player we want to trade for : underperforming (scope for improvement) with good footskills and the right age.

He''ll improve.

[Missing Dog]

Re: Retirements, Trades, Delistings and the Rookie list

Surely he couldn't include Mulligan as a realistic option?

Lol I think I did to my embarrassment . I may have been thinking of Panos as a back option, but thats probably just an excuse. Mulligan surely won't be on our list at years end.

We have Lake, Williams, Markovic, Morris, Roberts and Talia which is enough still IMO. Drop Markovic (who I don't rate) back to the rookie list if we must promote Austin.