It is possible, but clubs normally say when guys are delisted if they plan to rookie them.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
2021 List
- Thread starter bricci
- Start date
With Mate' Colina on the list, thats 7 rookies we have, so no room unless we uptgrade some Bakes, Pickett etc onto the main list this draft period
Surely Bakes and Fish get put on the main list this draft period, they are dual premiership players and deserve a pay rise.
as I said yesterday, rookie payments are minimum, we could be paying Bakes $600k on the rookie list ( we aren't but we could)
Yes, I'm sure we aren't.
If we are going to select a couple more rookies we are going to need room on the rookie list to be able to do it.
Plus it's the right thing to do. Shouldn't be expedient with player's livelihoods and reputations ( a la the Pies).
It’s been reported that, besides Houli who should re-sign soon, the only out of contract players that we now have are Garthwaite, Eggsmolesse-Smith (Eggs-over-easy) and Miller.
Is the general consensus that we should retain all three? Garthwaite didn’t manage a senior game this season but has always shown heaps and Eggs is a smooth operator. I can’t really comment on Ben Miller. Miller was an emergency late in the season.
Is the general consensus that we should retain all three? Garthwaite didn’t manage a senior game this season but has always shown heaps and Eggs is a smooth operator. I can’t really comment on Ben Miller. Miller was an emergency late in the season.
We have 41 on the main list including 6 rookies. I understand Colina won't join the rookie list until 2022. Maximum list size is 44. English and Turner delisted but remain on the list as possible future draftee rookies. Rance still on list so 39 plus 6 rookies, (and a 10% reduction of TPP to be negotiated by each club...what a fiasco that will be).
Tall utility Nic Cox looks like a good selection but probably won't get past Collingwood's pick and a similar issue with Maurice Rioli and pick 61, as Essendon have 44 - so maybe a pick swap of 17, 36 and 61 (via GWS who have 13 and 52).
So it would be 44 less 4 and plus just 2 from the draft and elevations for Baker and Pickett, leaving space for all 4 presently uncontracted players to remain and space for just 1 more to replace Rance, or maybe that won't be necessary.
Tall utility Nic Cox looks like a good selection but probably won't get past Collingwood's pick and a similar issue with Maurice Rioli and pick 61, as Essendon have 44 - so maybe a pick swap of 17, 36 and 61 (via GWS who have 13 and 52).
So it would be 44 less 4 and plus just 2 from the draft and elevations for Baker and Pickett, leaving space for all 4 presently uncontracted players to remain and space for just 1 more to replace Rance, or maybe that won't be necessary.
There is no point trading up fro MRJ if we think he will be bid on at the earliest by the Bombers at 44. With the discount we would only need 165 points or pick 58. Our 61 is fine. It will be a marginal points deduction of 30 points which if we won the premiership, would push next years Pick 54 (as the difference comes off the same round pick) to Pick 57. I'd take that if thats our highest risk position on MRJ. No need to trade up from 61 really,
I'd like to move up from 17 if we can, but don't think 17 and 36 for 13 makes sense (as there is zero value in bringing us up to Pick 52 unless we thought MRJ was going to be bid higher than mid 40's).
I haven't seen any draft watcher include him in their top 50 as yet. I'd be surprised if he was bid on anywhere in the top 40 (hence any discount will come off our 3rd next year). With a 1st, 2 2nds and 2 3rds next year I think we would take the risk on getting him with Pick 61. I might be wrong but seems we'd be giving something up for very little gain.
For example, if he is bid on at 40 (which is probably worst case) then thats 429 points, less the flat discount of 192 points means we need 237 points, we use Pick 61 (135 points) means we have a shortfall of 102 points to come off our 3rd next year. Pick 54 is 220 points so would drop back to 118 points which is Pick 62-63. If the worst case scenario is Pick 61 this year and a downgrade of our 3rd next year bu 8-9 spots I'd think we'd be comfortable with that as that would almost be a worst case scenario.
If we think he might be bid on in the top 40 then it might change things, but I doubt we are expecting that.
Minus
Rance
Turner
English
Markov
Higgins
apart from Ellis our back to back premiership players are intact
Rance
Turner
English
Markov
Higgins
apart from Ellis our back to back premiership players are intact
With Phillips gone though they can front load some contracts to free up space later.
Doesn’t the shortfall come off our next available pick?
If so our 2021 1st round pick gets the points deducted from it and that 1st round pick drops in value. Ie pick 18 (985 points) becomes the equivalent to pick 22 ish
Pretty sure it comes off the next years pick of the same round that you bid for them.
Ie. the bid comes in the 3rd round, so deficit comes off the same round the following year.
Still reckon this is all spin coming out of the club to appease members. Ie. well this "may" give us a chance to get a FA next year, when they don't get one they'll just claim that they tried but the players decided to go elsewhere.
There were comments from Eddie last week (the day after the trade period) where he made comments like "if you want Grundy, De Goey and Moore then something has to give", very much along the lines of the salary cap issue that has been spoken about.
I’m not sure if that’s right.
Maybe this explains it better
How a little known clause could give Crows two top-five picks
They appear destined for their first wooden spoon. But this is how Adelaide could take two picks inside the top five
www.afl.com.au
I’m not sure if that’s right.
Maybe this explains it better
How a little known clause could give Crows two top-five picks
They appear destined for their first wooden spoon. But this is how Adelaide could take two picks inside the top five
They were all 1st round bids though, hence why they posted the deficit against Freos 1st rounder.
See the attached article.
An idiot's guide to the new AFL bidding system
Have you struggled through many sleepless nights trying to work out how the AFL's new bidding system works? Don't worry: your questions, concerns and 'what ifs' are all answered in here...
The main bit is way down the article so I've copied it out below.
"
Will the points be subtracted from their first pick?
If that's where the bid they are matching was placed.
Under that scenario, the club's future first pick will be repositioned in the drafted order. Owing 300 points, for instance, would see pick 4 moved to pick 7.
However, if a club runs out of points matching a bid for a player in the third round, the points owed would be subtracted from their future third round selection.
That pick would also then be repositioned in the draft order, according to the DVI."
