Nobody...except for 16 other clubs. We'd be lucky to fetch pick 100 for Miller. If anyone really, really wanted him (which I doubt) they'd just wait until we inevitably delist him.

Also possible sweetener in a multiplayer trade. Now unlikely to go elsewhere but finish out career at Demons. He may wish to try a "Robbo' but will have seen results there.

There will be a handful offering their sayonaras at seasons end...one way or another.

Spencer can't kick, you can't play AFL if you can't Kick. Today's footy is all about keeping the footy, if Spencer players the opposition will leave him free so we kick to him and he turns it over. Rucks we have Jamar, Martin, Gawn and Fitzpatrick plus get another one in the rookie draft.

Spencer can't kick, you can't play AFL if you can't Kick. Today's footy is all about keeping the footy, if Spencer players the opposition will leave him free so we kick to him and he turns it over. Rucks we have Jamar, Martin, Gawn and Fitzpatrick plus get another one in the rookie draft.

He is not that bad even though his action is not great. Its a challenge with many established rucks that they are never as good ball handlers as smaller players. Spencer has time to improve on that. At the moment has has all the core basic of ruckwork and competes physically so I would persevere with him.

On your assessment we have Jamar and no one else and we are going to rookie another ruckman. I think we might have to entertain the notion of 2-3 year AFL experienced ruck, If you think the gap between Jamar and Spencer is wide then its double that to the next lot until they prove their capability and get some game time in them. Gawn has not played yet and Fitz played his first VFL game on the weekend.

Hmmmm, seems I was too quick to praise everyone's reading comprehension in another thread.

Try again kids. Perhaps trace a finger along the screen as you read how I justified the analogy of Brad Miller as being released for a 1st round pick.

Ah. I get it now.

The point I'm really driving at here, which I've made in another thread before, is that it's too simplistic to just say, "We should have 3 draft picks so we'll have to delist 5 players, one way or another". For each delisting decision it must be considered what we're giving up and what we're getting in return, in this case, another draft pick.

But given that there is a rule that each club must make 3 selections at the ND (at least I'm 99% sure that's a rule), then it follows that we have to make enough room for 3 picks. So it's not 'we shuld have 3 picks', it's 'we must have three picks', and then given that McKenzie and possibly Spencer are going to be promoted, it follows that we must clear 4/5 spots from our senior list. So whether or not Miller gives us the spot we will eventually fill with a 1st rounder is somewhat irrelevant: 4-5 players have to go. Those would be the worst 4-5 on the list. Miller is one of them.

McKenzie named nominated rookie. What does that mean and does it impact this discussion?

See http://www.melbournefc.com.au/club%20news/tabid/7416/default.aspx

Spencer can't kick, you can't play AFL if you can't Kick. Today's footy is all about keeping the footy, if Spencer players the opposition will leave him free so we kick to him and he turns it over. Rucks we have Jamar, Martin, Gawn and Fitzpatrick plus get another one in the rookie draft.

I can disprove your argument regarding Spencer in two words....

Mark Blake

not that we might need to...but we can re rookie ( or such ) at ND.

There will be a somewhat natural attrition come EOS. Going to be a bit of an intereting trade week me thinks ( Oh I know I say that every year...but its gone that way recently )

The Meese and the Newt shan't be occupying lockers next year baring some meteoric rise in fortunes ( on their part ) I cant see the club dispensing with Spencer (sorry..lol) just yet. Stil a work in progress ,albeit slow !!

I reckon Stefan Martin will be shown the door before Spencer give he's already been in the system 3 years.

He is not that bad even though his action is not great. Its a challenge with many established rucks that they are never as good ball handlers as smaller players. Spencer has time to improve on that. At the moment has has all the core basic of ruckwork and competes physically so I would persevere with him.

On your assessment we have Jamar and no one else and we are going to rookie another ruckman. I think we might have to entertain the notion of 2-3 year AFL experienced ruck, If you think the gap between Jamar and Spencer is wide then its double that to the next lot until they prove their capability and get some game time in them. Gawn has not played yet and Fitz played his first VFL game on the weekend.

I agree with this. I will add that Fitzpatrick may well play as a utility tall not a ruckman. That is where he played on Saturday for Casey I believe. We need to have a backup for Jamar or we are very exposed. At 26 the age argument that rucks dont mature until later applies equally to PJ as it does to Jamar who last year was discussed as being trade / delist material - see another thread. An incumbent an heir and some development spares such as Gawn are needed.

Edited June 21, 201015 yr by poseidon burke

Ah. I get it now.

But given that there is a rule that each club must make 3 selections at the ND (at least I'm 99% sure that's a rule), then it follows that we have to make enough room for 3 picks. So it's not 'we shuld have 3 picks', it's 'we must have three picks', and then given that McKenzie and possibly Spencer are going to be promoted, it follows that we must clear 4/5 spots from our senior list. So whether or not Miller gives us the spot we will eventually fill with a 1st rounder is somewhat irrelevant: 4-5 players have to go. Those would be the worst 4-5 on the list. Miller is one of them.

That rule has been changed with the new franchises compromising the draft and upgrading rookies counts the same as taking a ND pick.

I notice a lot of people are upgrading Spencer to the main list. Why on earth would we do that when he is still years away from being anywhere near good enough. I am happy for him to stay on the rookie list and continue his development but he shouldnt be promoted and take the spot of a potential draft pick.

As for PJ, I stuck by him after a bad year last year, but he was pitiful when given his chance again this year and has to go.

I notice a lot of people are upgrading Spencer to the main list. Why on earth would we do that when he is still years away from being anywhere near good enough. I am happy for him to stay on the rookie list and continue his development but he shouldnt be promoted and take the spot of a potential draft pick.

.......................

and it might well work that way should Meesen and Newton depart that one spot on the rookie list be taken by Spencer ( again ) with I suspect the club casting its net further afield than in past to acquire other rookies...i.e international, other codes..vfl/*fl etc... mature age recruits ...ad infinutm

I notice a lot of people are upgrading Spencer to the main list. Why on earth would we do that when he is still years away from being anywhere near good enough. I am happy for him to stay on the rookie list and continue his development but he shouldnt be promoted and take the spot of a potential draft pick.

As for PJ, I stuck by him after a bad year last year, but he was pitiful when given his chance again this year and has to go.

Clubs can only retain one player on their rookie list for a maximum 3 year term. Spencer's rookie list time is up. He's either being promoted or cut. The prevailing leaning at this stage is we can continue to develop him and he's worth a list spot.

If you're of the belief that PJ's time is up, then that double the argument for promoting Jake.

Clubs can only retain one player on their rookie list for a maximum 3 year term. Spencer's rookie list time is up. He's either being promoted or cut. The prevailing leaning at this stage is we can continue to develop him and he's worth a list spot.

If you're of the belief that PJ's time is up, then that double the argument for promoting Jake.

Wasn't aware his time on the rookie list is up. That makes it an interesting decision that could go wither way IMO. Out of interest, how did we keep Hughes on the rookie list for so long??? was that because he had that year or two in the wilderness?

Wasn't aware his time on the rookie list is up. That makes it an interesting decision that could go wither way IMO. Out of interest, how did we keep Hughes on the rookie list for so long??? was that because he had that year or two in the wilderness?

Yes, it was because he had a year not on any AFL list that he was eligible to be re-rookied.

i personally think bruce will retire, anyone else agree?

He is on the last year of a big money contract. He will not be offered similar money next year. He may well decide to retire or play on for another year on much less. I think the club will let him decide.

He is on the last year of a big money contract. He will not be offered similar money next year. He may well decide to retire or play on for another year on much less. I think the club will let him decide.

That may well be the situation in the end. He may well be offered a "cheapie" year but would think there is definitely a changing of the guard occurring. I could see Junior staying on strangely ( esp on current form ) but Bruce might see the writing on the wall.

McKenzie named nominated rookie. What does that mean and does it impact this discussion?

See http://www.melbournefc.com.au/club%20news/tabid/7416/default.aspx

It doesn't have a huge impact on this discussion in the context of future list management.

Every club can nominate a rookie mid-season who is eligible to play senior football for the rest of the season although strictly speaking this is not a promotion to the senior list - they are still a rookie.

Up to this point, McKenzie had been playing senior games this year because he was a promoted rookie to replace a senior player who went on the LTI list. Subsequently he gets demoted when that injured senior player comes back but by luck of timing he can be "nominated" as a rookie to play senior footy due to the mid-yr rule.

In a nutshell:

R1-11: Promoted Rookie - takes place in senior side of injured senior player for duration of injury time before being demoted.

R12-22: Nominated Rookie - stays a rookie but can play senior football on top of the regular 38 seniors and 2 veterans giving us a potential pool of 41 players.

End of season: Elevated to senior list.

_________________________

One thing to mention is that if any veteran listed players (JMac/Bruce) end up finishing up then that means (as others have said) next year 1 or 2 rookie listed players being nominated for senior football all season in order to preserve the available player pool of 40 players. In this event, if we wish to relegate any current senior listed players ala Newton and Meesen last season (to the rookie list) they at least will still have a chance to play senior footy (if they get nominated) but we will still have to go through the draft process again to do this.

Edited June 21, 201015 yr by 1858

Also please remember that neither Junior nor Bruce open up access to an extra draft pick. They are on Veteran's List and nobody on our list is eligible to replace them next year to open up the senior list spot.

The only benefit of either of them retiring is that we would be able to elevate a rookie at the start of the season to fill their spot, ala Fremantle with Barlow.

Are you sure? I thought Green was eligable for vetern status at years end?

Happy to be proven wrong though.

That may well be the situation in the end. He may well be offered a "cheapie" year but would think there is definitely a changing of the guard occurring. I could see Junior staying on strangely ( esp on current form ) but Bruce might see the writing on the wall.

It would be interesting if there were a Poll,, of which you'd like to have stay on of those two.

Myself, I want junior to play for one more Yr. Bruce may or may not get one more IMO, but I reckon it would be for not more than about 9 games at the most.

We picked up Joel Mac & I'd rather persist with him than Bruce. Although I'll say I think Bruce has, in recent weeks, a little improved over past years, but still Not good enough to take the spot of a young Demon.

Bring on Tappy & Strauss, Blease, Bail, & the senior, Junior.

Are you sure? I thought Green was eligable for vetern status at years end?

Happy to be proven wrong though.

Well there you go, you're absolutely right. I guess I'd lost track of time. Greeny does turn 30 next year.

In light of this, I would say the heat turns up decidedly on the retirement of one of Junior or Bruce.