Present number on the senior list

All trade and draft talk here thanks..... this means you DTM!!!!

Moderator: bbmods

User avatar
Pies4shaw
Posts: 34888
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:14 pm
Has liked: 136 times
Been liked: 182 times

Post by Pies4shaw »

Yes, we're in heated agreement - 37 including Moore and 38 if we draft Frost.

I'm glad we've sorted that out.
User avatar
swoop42
Posts: 22050
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 9:27 pm
Location: The 18
Been liked: 8 times

Post by swoop42 »

Pies4shaw wrote:Yes, we're in heated agreement - 37 including Moore and 38 if we draft Frost.

I'm glad we've sorted that out.
So am I. :lol:

I'll be surprised if we don't go to the draft with the ability to use pick 48 as a live selection.

If so either a delisting to come or Frost as a short term rookie downgrade.

Now who's on first?
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD!
User avatar
jackcass
Posts: 12529
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:17 pm
Location: Bendigo

Post by jackcass »

swoop42 wrote:Oxley was a rookie upgrade at the start of the season so doesn't that mean we can once again place him on that list?

Pretty certain rookies have to be drafted on to the list at the national draft to become a permanent senior listed player.

To be able to make use of 5 and 30 we'll need to be able to rookie list Oxley and Gault.

To use pick 48 we'll need to rookie list Frost or delist someone else.
Oxley was upgraded pick 92 in the 2013 ND.
User avatar
jackcass
Posts: 12529
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:17 pm
Location: Bendigo

Post by jackcass »

4everpies wrote:
swoop42 wrote:
Pies4shaw wrote:Swoop - I set it out, player by player in the OP. Like jackcass says, Oxley was drafted in 2013. He has been a senior-list player since then, not elevated. For avoidance of doubt, he was drafted at the National Draft in 2013 with pick 92.

There are presently 38 players on the (permanent) senior list, allowing for retirements, delistings, trades in and trades out.
I have it at 37 permanent senior list placements and 2 rookie upgrades in Frost and Gault.
Yes that's right there are 37 permanent senior list players at the moment, including the 3 trades and Darcy Moore.

We must take a minimum of 3 players in the draft, so we will use 5, 9 (Moore), and 30.

That will make 39 players and the extra spot can be used to upgrade Frost.

Gault could be upgraded (if good enough) at the start of the season with Scharenberg on the LTI list.
Don't think you have to take a minimum of 3 players, I think you have to delist a minimum of 3, how they're replaced (ND, rookie upgrade, trade) is at the discretion of the club.
User avatar
jackcass
Posts: 12529
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:17 pm
Location: Bendigo

Post by jackcass »

Domesticated_Ape wrote:I reckon Jack Frost would be the sort of guy who'd be open to staying on the rookie list and being upgraded for Schrenberg preseason. As long as he still gets a decent contract.

Are there specific rules about how much rookies can be paid or how long a contract they're allowed to sign? He certainly deserves whatever payrise he was going to get if fully promoted IMO.
It is going to get increasingly tough to get a permanent place on the senior list though. Don't have a couple of likely retirees at the end of 2015 so it'll come down to delistings or players requesting trades to open up the vacancies. So while he gets a senior berth in 2015 courtesy of Mr Scharenberg, what happens come 2016?
User avatar
jackcass
Posts: 12529
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:17 pm
Location: Bendigo

Post by jackcass »

swoop42 wrote:
Pies4shaw wrote:Yes, we're in heated agreement - 37 including Moore and 38 if we draft Frost.

I'm glad we've sorted that out.
So am I. :lol:

I'll be surprised if we don't go to the draft with the ability to use pick 48 as a live selection.

If so either a delisting to come or Frost as a short term rookie downgrade.

Now who's on first?
Hard to see anyone being delisted but Ramsay and Gault would be the most vulnerable. Gault' a rookie so that doesn't help free up pick 48. Does Ramsay have to be deleted to be dropped to the rookie list or can the club just do that?
User avatar
Presti35
Posts: 19942
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2001 6:01 pm
Location: London, England
Has liked: 449 times
Been liked: 226 times

Post by Presti35 »

I say we use the three picks on best available and keep Frosty on the rookie list.

Like others have said he'll be upgraded for Scharenbergs LTI. (He is listed as 12 months yes?).

Then we go into the rookie draft with two picks?? Or three?? Which I think we take Tyler Roos (if he's there) and Leroy Jetta or a back up ruck.
A Goal Saved Is 2 Goals Earned!
E

Post by E »

jackcass wrote:
swoop42 wrote:
Pies4shaw wrote:Yes, we're in heated agreement - 37 including Moore and 38 if we draft Frost.

I'm glad we've sorted that out.
So am I. :lol:

I'll be surprised if we don't go to the draft with the ability to use pick 48 as a live selection.

If so either a delisting to come or Frost as a short term rookie downgrade.

Now who's on first?
Hard to see anyone being delisted but Ramsay and Gault would be the most vulnerable. Gault' a rookie so that doesn't help free up pick 48. Does Ramsay have to be deleted to be dropped to the rookie list or can the club just do that?
He has to be dropped (and be technically at risk). Given that a player is generally the 40th player on a teams list at the time he gets "rookied", there seems to be an unwritten rule among the clubs that when a team tries to rookie someone, the other teams tend to keep their hands off. ONe day that will be broken, but for now, this etiquette seems to be holding form. Its a small risk anyway. Very few players who go from list to rookie list ever come back (maybe there is a story of a ruckman out there, but that'd be it i'd say. More often than not its just a case of - let's give the lad one more year befrore we confirm he aint gonna make it......
User avatar
John Wren
Posts: 24186
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:28 pm

Post by John Wren »

Presti35 wrote:I say we use the three picks on best available and keep Frosty on the rookie list.

Like others have said he'll be upgraded for Scharenbergs LTI. (He is listed as 12 months yes?).

Then we go into the rookie draft with two picks?? Or three?? Which I think we take Tyler Roos (if he's there) and Leroy Jetta or a back up ruck.
frost recently signed a new two year deal so that would suggest he will get upgraded.
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle.
User avatar
jackcass
Posts: 12529
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:17 pm
Location: Bendigo

Post by jackcass »

John Wren wrote:
Presti35 wrote:I say we use the three picks on best available and keep Frosty on the rookie list.

Like others have said he'll be upgraded for Scharenbergs LTI. (He is listed as 12 months yes?).

Then we go into the rookie draft with two picks?? Or three?? Which I think we take Tyler Roos (if he's there) and Leroy Jetta or a back up ruck.
frost recently signed a new two year deal so that would suggest he will get upgraded.
That'd be my preference. Shown enough to merit an upgrade.
User avatar
Presti35
Posts: 19942
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2001 6:01 pm
Location: London, England
Has liked: 449 times
Been liked: 226 times

Post by Presti35 »

jackcass wrote:
John Wren wrote:
Presti35 wrote:I say we use the three picks on best available and keep Frosty on the rookie list.

Like others have said he'll be upgraded for Scharenbergs LTI. (He is listed as 12 months yes?).

Then we go into the rookie draft with two picks?? Or three?? Which I think we take Tyler Roos (if he's there) and Leroy Jetta or a back up ruck.
frost recently signed a new two year deal so that would suggest he will get upgraded.
That'd be my preference. Shown enough to merit an upgrade.
No doubt. Just means we can't use pick 48. But it does mean we can use an extra rookie pick.
A Goal Saved Is 2 Goals Earned!
Domesticated_Ape
Posts: 525
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 5:27 pm

Post by Domesticated_Ape »

jackcass wrote:
Domesticated_Ape wrote:I reckon Jack Frost would be the sort of guy who'd be open to staying on the rookie list and being upgraded for Schrenberg preseason. As long as he still gets a decent contract.

Are there specific rules about how much rookies can be paid or how long a contract they're allowed to sign? He certainly deserves whatever payrise he was going to get if fully promoted IMO.
It is going to get increasingly tough to get a permanent place on the senior list though. Don't have a couple of likely retirees at the end of 2015 so it'll come down to delistings or players requesting trades to open up the vacancies. So while he gets a senior berth in 2015 courtesy of Mr Scharenberg, what happens come 2016?
Yeah it's a good point.

I suppose guys like Young, Dwyer and Armstrong might be make or break next year if the kids go past them. And Oxley and Ramsey as well, if they make it through this years cuts.

Getting 2 really good prospects at the back end of last years draft with Langdon and Marsh has put more pressure on list numbers than expected.
E

Post by E »

Domesticated_Ape wrote:
jackcass wrote:
Domesticated_Ape wrote:I reckon Jack Frost would be the sort of guy who'd be open to staying on the rookie list and being upgraded for Schrenberg preseason. As long as he still gets a decent contract.

Are there specific rules about how much rookies can be paid or how long a contract they're allowed to sign? He certainly deserves whatever payrise he was going to get if fully promoted IMO.
It is going to get increasingly tough to get a permanent place on the senior list though. Don't have a couple of likely retirees at the end of 2015 so it'll come down to delistings or players requesting trades to open up the vacancies. So while he gets a senior berth in 2015 courtesy of Mr Scharenberg, what happens come 2016?
Yeah it's a good point.

I suppose guys like Young, Dwyer and Armstrong might be make or break next year if the kids go past them. And Oxley and Ramsey as well, if they make it through this years cuts.

Getting 2 really good prospects at the back end of last years draft with Langdon and Marsh has put more pressure on list numbers than expected.
Let's see what Dwyer, Oxley, Ramsay, Karnezis, Armstong, Young, Macaffer, Blair and Swan look like this time next year.

Age, injury and/or ability could easily catch up with anyone of these guys. that is potentially 9 open spots.
User avatar
Pies4shaw
Posts: 34888
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:14 pm
Has liked: 136 times
Been liked: 182 times

Post by Pies4shaw »

So Tony Armstrong has been delisted and Collingwood intends to pick him up again in the rookie draft. According to the article on the Club web-site, that "enables Collingwood to make up to five selections at the November 27 National Draft, which includes the addition of father-son selection Darcy Moore."

http://www.collingwoodfc.com.au/news/20 ... -armstrong
User avatar
magpieazza
Posts: 2306
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 10:27 am
Location: Griffith N.S.W

Post by magpieazza »

Im confused as to why we gave away 67 with the Beams trade when I thought at the time it was because we were going to the rookie draft for a player if we needed. So now we need to go to the AFL draft and we have 80 odd instead of 60 odd.

Could've avoided that situation one would think.
Im just scratching my head that's all, I am not trying to be disruptive. I hope someone can shine a bit of light if I am wrong.

Go Pies !!!
Last edited by magpieazza on Fri Oct 31, 2014 2:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Carpe diem quam minimum credula postero.
Post Reply