Does anyone know if we can demote a player like Newton to the Rookie List..?

hey, I can dream...

If only...

Perhaps Nathan Jones and pick 18 for pick 8??? I dunno...

Just a question, what would that trade achieve? I mean, we'd move up 10 picks, but for what? And we'd be giving up TWO good young players.

Once you get out to pick 8, especially in this draft, I would've thought the player you take will have just as much chance of being a decent player as one taken at 18.

I know little about the U/18s but I know this - the 2009 draft will be shallow.

It will be down approx. a third on talent relative to other years and with that in mind, the Demons will not take anyone at 66 and I am sure that BP would be having second thoughts about whether it would be worth taking anyone at 50.

This could mean that 1, 2, 18, 34 and PSD1 is as deep as we go. Valenti is touch and go, and Spencer can have another year on the RL.

That is 5 deletions with Robertson, Wheatley, Whelan, Johnson, and McDonald looking likely to go. Batram might be in the mix as he is uncontracted, McNamara and Cheney might be candidates for a RL if the Footy Dept. require another opening on the list (But doing this gives every other club a chance to pick them up).

An opening on the list can also be created by upgrading a pick with the trade of a player. Because you are essentially trading two players and getting one back. But this will mean a pick 50 or 66 so it depends wether BP sees any talent that late. Who knows? He might pick up Valenti at 66 if we don't upgrade before November. I wouldn't use the PSD1 on him though, there is usually a chance of a decent player heading exclusively into the PSD.

what is happening with zomer

I know little about the U/18s but I know this - the 2009 draft will be shallow.

It will be down approx. a third on talent relative to other years and with that in mind, the Demons will not take anyone at 66 and I am sure that BP would be having second thoughts about whether it would be worth taking anyone at 50.

This could mean that 1, 2, 18, 34 and PSD1 is as deep as we go. Valenti is touch and go, and Spencer can have another year on the RL.

That is 5 deletions with Robertson, Wheatley, Whelan, Johnson, and McDonald looking likely to go. Batram might be in the mix as he is uncontracted, McNamara and Cheney might be candidates for a RL if the Footy Dept. require another opening on the list (But doing this gives every other club a chance to pick them up).

An opening on the list can also be created by upgrading a pick with the trade of a player. Because you are essentially trading two players and getting one back. But this will mean a pick 50 or 66 so it depends wether BP sees any talent that late. Who knows? He might pick up Valenti at 66 if we don't upgrade before November. I wouldn't use the PSD1 on him though, there is usually a chance of a decent player heading exclusively into the PSD.

The last 3 Drafts Picks have gone into the 70's, on a rough average, subtract 12 X 17 Yr olds. Thats still around mid 50ish.

A handfull of 17 Yr olds would probably be taken in the 1st Rnd of any given year, then another 6 or so spread out through the remainder of the draft, that possibly will be taken by GC-17.

I don't believe this draft is as weak as the perception suggests. It's maybe not a superdraft, but I don't believe it's crap either.

I can't believe soo many voted for 6 delistings. We can't delist contracted players unless it's a Carroll type of delist where the bloke is just not a good enough player and a rotten apple to boot.... Even the afl and player manager had nothing to say about it

But in a year with such a weak draft, there's no point drafting much past the first 3 rounds, and unless we feel valenti, mckenzie and/or spencer absolutely HAVE to be promoted (not sure about the rules around rookie lists) surely we can just keep them on it for another year and promote them once list cloggers such as meesen, newton and bell come out of contract next year?

Not sure how I feel about it, because I firmly believe that as a second or third tall option, miller would be a very good player on a decent team, but I think given martins progression and the chance we'll pick up a promising tall somewhere in the draft, plus newtons around for at least another year, he may be playing his last few games in the red and blue (thought he was out of contract this year?)

Why the heck is Garland in there? He's our best defender, IMO.

Oh, and I voted 6 spots.

Edited August 12, 200916 yr by AdamFarr

That is 5 deletions with Robertson, Wheatley, Whelan, Johnson, and McDonald looking likely to go.

PJ is contracted.

Why the heck is Garland in there? He's our best defender, IMO.

Yes, i thought this strange also... No way he's going anywhere!

Edited August 12, 200916 yr by Doggo

LOL @ Maric

Got a vote too !!!

Given the our likely priority pick coming soon we may have to make room for some new players, who would you get rid of, and how many?

Obviously there are a few players there that do not deserve to be even considered for delisting, but I thought I should throw them up anyway.

I have taken trading out as an option because that might allow us to free up some spots on the list, and therefore make this poll difficult to work out.

Every club has to delist 4 players each year before the draft

Just a question, what would that trade achieve? I mean, we'd move up 10 picks, but for what? And we'd be giving up TWO good young players.

Once you get out to pick 8, especially in this draft, I would've thought the player you take will have just as much chance of being a decent player as one taken at 18.

Think that was just more of an example as to what type of a trade we'd have to make in order to move up positions in the draft. I for one certainly wouldn't want to get rid of Jones and I don't think anyone else would either.

Every club has to delist 4 players each year before the draft

I think you will find that the minimum is three.

this may have been discussed/raised/clarified already, but i am under the impression that if you win less than 5 games in one single year you get a priority pick at the end of the first round of the draft. And obviously if this happens over 2 years you get an extra pick at the start of the draft.

So for the dees this would mean we should get picks 1, 2, 17 & 18 this year because both of these scenarios apply to us this year???

Should this be the case or not?? Totally sux if it does not!!!

this may have been discussed/raised/clarified already, but i am under the impression that if you win less than 5 games in one single year you get a priority pick at the end of the first round of the draft. And obviously if this happens over 2 years you get an extra pick at the start of the draft.

So for the dees this would mean we should get picks 1, 2, 17 & 18 this year because both of these scenarios apply to us this year???

Should this be the case or not?? Totally sux if it does not!!!

Wow. Ok, lets put this to bed.

If we finish on bottom with less than 5 wins we'll get picks 1, 2, 18, 35, and so on.

We only get a priority pick before the 1st round, not after it also.

Wow. Ok, lets put this to bed.

If we finish on bottom with less than 5 wins we'll get picks 1, 2, 18, 35, and so on.

We only get a priority pick before the 1st round, not after it also.

we recieved a priority pick last year at the end of the first round for winning less than five??

Doing the same this year also...

So the rule applies for doing it over 2 years that we get a pick at the start also.

For mine 2 rules apply here and should be applied?? We are being rippd off!!!

Robbo certainly.

Bell, Buckley and Bartram probably.

In a just world Newton would go.

But people are making early calls on Meesen who showed brief promise. And Jamar must stay.

Macca I hear will go on

being reported on big footy that paul weatley will be retiring tommorow no idea if true or not

There is a neeed for game oportunities for the kids as they come up. If the older ones are simply there without adding to the equation then they become cloggers.

we need to somehow get rid of PJ, trade him for whatever. I don't want MFC's money paying for his inepitude.

we need to somehow get rid of PJ, trade him for whatever. I don't want MFC's money paying for his inepitude.

A trade would probably lead to MFC paying for his ineptitude, the only difference would be he would be clogging someone else's list.

Bell and Newton would be two of the first to go, but both are contracted for 2010 so they stay. While both Robbo and Junior may pull the plug at the end of the year, only Bruce is eligible for the veteran's list next year outside of those two, so if both McDonald and Robertson retire, their two omissions only open up one senior list spot. In essence, we could have Junior on the list and have 40 players or not have him and have a list of 39.

Bell and Newton still contracted...staggering when one considers their output !

I've been staunchly behind getting rid of Miller all year. I have just been so disappointed with some of his efforts - especially his kicking at goal.

HOWEVER

I've just watched the Round 14 2008 clash against Brisbane and I am now experiencing a MID-LIFE CRISIS at age 20!! He was superb that day and it reminded me just how good he can be.

You haven't included the entire list on the poll. What if the players I want to get rid of aren't included?

Also, do you want us to include possible trade bait in the list? That could radically alter the look of things.

Also, do you want us to include possible trade bait in the list? That could radically alter the look of things.

How?

Which players might the Club willingly let go would be of interest to another Club such that they would give up draft picks for?

There is no more than 1 or 2 at most. Players labelled "trade bait" on this site would not raise more than a chuckle from the opposition.

And even the most optimistic realise that the trade bait might not even have value as secondary addition to a swap of trade picks.

folks..remember ..contracted players CAN be traded. We may no.t be keeping all of our list as it looks today.