We really need to sign most of the players that have 1 year left on their contract

Not really. Frawley and McDonald are the big ones. The rest are either not that great or as yet unproven. While I wouldn't like to see any of our kids leave at the end of their first contract it wouldn't be a killer blow by any means. The rest have been around for a while and not set the world on fire or are mature-aged recruits who are solid but not top-line.

We really need to sign most of the players that have 1 year left on their contract

Frawley, McDonald, Jones, and Kent is less than half. Terlich has not played under Roos so I will wait to see how year 2 goes with him.

The rest won't hurt.

Frawley, McDonald, Jones, and Kent is less than half. Terlich has not played under Roos so I will wait to see how year 2 goes with him.

The rest won't hurt.

Not entirely true, Terlich was on the Swans rookie list and Roos got rid of him I believe.

Edited October 30, 201311 yr by jnrmac

Not entirely true, Terlich was on the Swans rookie list and Roos got rid of him I believe.

Well I could say "you know what I meant" or I could come back with a smartarsed "he didn't play under Roos did he?"

I will go with the latter.

Edited October 30, 201311 yr by rpfc

He.

But I knew what you meant.

Edited October 30, 201311 yr by Machsy

He.

Cryptic?

He.

Cryptic?

DYSLEXIC !

So unless I've missed something, we go into the month of November with only two uncontracted players - Nev Jetta and Dan Nicholson which, I think is a far more stable situation that that which applied this time last year.

Twelve months ago we were under threat from the tanking enquiry and several players were going through what must have been a difficult period when they and some of their mates lived with the uncertainty of whether contracts would be renewed during a time when some major list changes were taking place. In hindsight, it was a situation not well handled by the club and which clearly caused some inner resentment among the playing group.

Don't know the situation of the remaining two uncontracted players but it will be interesting to see how the next fortnight plays out for them.

Surely the needs of Casey for an Assistant Playing Coach can't be ignored. They need a nice guy from a top club and a premiership wouldn't hurt the CV. With that in mind I urge the club to make the big sacrifice and release Byrnes to Casey and of course pay out his contract to further assist Casey and strengthen the relationship. His experience would be a major asset to Casey.

That of course would also free up a spot on our list.

WTF?

Why wouldn't we just not select Byrnes each week, for essentially the same result?

Ask him to work with the kids more when he is in the VFL.

Delisting contracted players is NOT a solution.

Surely the needs of Casey for an Assistant Playing Coach can't be ignored. They need a nice guy from a top club and a premiership wouldn't hurt the CV. With that in mind I urge the club to make the big sacrifice and release Byrnes to Casey and of course pay out his contract to further assist Casey and strengthen the relationship. His experience would be a major asset to Casey.

That of course would also free up a spot on our list.

You need to get over the fact that Byrnes is on our list, and is contracted.

If all goes well in 2014 he'll be playing for Casey anyway. But if not, then he is a part of this club, just like Pedersen is, and we can't afford to be throwing money out the window just because you don't like Byrnes.

2016

Dawes, Grimes, Watts, Michie, Vince, Tyson

2015

Clark, Trengove, Jamar (UFA), Garland (RFA), McKenzie, Howe, Jones (RFA), Evans, Gawn, Fitzpatrick, Viney, Toumpas, Pedersen, Hogan

2014

Frawley (RFA), Tapscott, McDonald, Blease, Strauss, Spencer, Bail, Dunn, Byrnes, Barry, Kent, Jones, Terlich, Cross, Clisby, Riley

2013

Sylvia (UFA), Davey (RFA), Taggert, Tynan, Nicholson, MacDonald, Sellar, Jetta, Davis, Couch ®, Magner ®, Rodan, Gillies, Stark ®

2014 Primary List Spots Created: 9

2014 Additions: Hogan, Tyson, ND9, Vince, ND40, Michie, Cross, Riley, Clisby, ND58, PSD2,

Updated.

Is Jetta and/or Nicholson > ND58 and/or PSD2?

That is a mathematical equation rolling around in a few heads down at AAMI Park.

We currently only have room for 9 and 40. That's fine, we don't have to use 58, however, the non-use of the pick means the value of the Tyson Deal is lessened and it is a sign of poor planning.

Updated.

Is Jetta and/or Nicholson > ND58 and/or PSD2?

That is a mathematical equation rolling around in a few heads down at AAMI Park.

We currently only have room for 9 and 40. That's fine, we don't have to use 58, however, the non-use of the pick means the value of the Tyson Deal is lessened and it is a sign of poor planning.

Jackson, Roos and the new infra-structure is still considerably fresh.

Giving a knock over "poor planning" at this stage doesn't appear to be apt.

Updated.

Is Jetta and/or Nicholson > ND58 and/or PSD2?

That is a mathematical equation rolling around in a few heads down at AAMI Park.

We currently only have room for 9 and 40. That's fine, we don't have to use 58, however, the non-use of the pick means the value of the Tyson Deal is lessened and it is a sign of poor planning.

We DO have to use pick 58 tho don't we? Don't we have to take a minimum of 3 draftees?

We DO have to use pick 58 tho don't we? Don't we have to take a minimum of 3 draftees?

I think the rule is that you have to use three picks. Using them to uprgrade rookies counts.

I think the rule is that you have to use three picks. Using them to uprgrade rookies counts.

That's what I'm getting at in a way. Obviously we ARE going to use that pick, and given we have more players coming in than spots available there's still at least 1 player to be delisted.

I see more potential in Jetta than Dan Nicholson, if this is what it boils down to .

Jackson, Roos and the new infra-structure is still considerably fresh.

Giving a knock over "poor planning" at this stage doesn't appear to be apt.

They are doing a fine job.

That doesn't mean that getting back Pick 58 in the Tyson deal and using it to upgrade Clisby isn't a waste.

We did the same thing last year with Martin and pick 72. If you want it back, use it.

Now you can look at it like insurance in case Riley didn't sign with us but you are still using value (however little) on a rookie upgrade.

It's just an aside right now...until a good player goes after that pick...

That's what I'm getting at in a way. Obviously we ARE going to use that pick, and given we have more players coming in than spots available there's still at least 1 player to be delisted.

rpfc's list includes Clisby as an 'addition'. Take that out and you have the third spot (which we use to pick Clisby in the draft).

We do not need to delist anyone else. ND9 = one player, ND40 = second player, ND58 = Clisby (who rpfc has already counted in the additions). That's the three picks at the ND.

Updated.

Is Jetta and/or Nicholson > ND58 and/or PSD2?

That is a mathematical equation rolling around in a few heads down at AAMI Park.

We currently only have room for 9 and 40. That's fine, we don't have to use 58, however, the non-use of the pick means the value of the Tyson Deal is lessened and it is a sign of poor planning.

Hard to say its poor planning if we didn't know Riley was delisted until today?

I read somewhere Adelaide thought they'd be able to rookie him.

Maybe we simply didn't expect him to be available & rate him better than anything likely to be available at pick 57?

I think that's perfectly plausible and it is simply smart to have the contingency of pick 57 there in the case of Riley not being available as a DFA.

I can't see how it would be seen as poor planning.

And even if we don't intend to use the pick, I'd be asking for the pick back anyway to weaken the position of our competition.

Never give a sucker an even break.

So nobody sees us using PSD2?

Hard to say its poor planning if we didn't know Riley was delisted until today?

I read somewhere Adelaide thought they'd be able to rookie him.

Maybe we simply didn't expect him to be available & rate him better than anything likely to be available at pick 57?

I think that's perfectly plausible and it is simply smart to have the contingency of pick 57 there in the case of Riley not being available as a DFA.

I can't see how it would be seen as poor planning.

And even if we don't intend to use the pick, I'd be asking for the pick back anyway to weaken the position of our competition.

Never give a sucker an even break.

We got something in a deal that we are not using. That's poor planning.

It's not a big deal, and maybe we said to him 'we are taking you at 58 the Crows will not look at you until the RD, come under DFA and let us keep our flexibility.'

I still think either Pick 58 or PSD2 will be a 'live' selection, I don't think we are done delisting.

I guess we will see at the next lodgement.

You need to get over the fact that Byrnes is on our list, and is contracted.

If all goes well in 2014 he'll be playing for Casey anyway. But if not, then he is a part of this club, just like Pedersen is, and we can't afford to be throwing money out the window just because you don't like Byrnes.

What if Roos shares my view?

I don't follow the kids but I do read the so called expert opinions on them. It seems fairly consistent opinion that this is an extremely shallow draft and with that in mind the club may be happy to go in with pick 9 and 40 plus Clisby. They see more value in Riley than what would be available at pick 57. We then focus on some developing talls and another mature midfielder to fill our rookie spot.

The PSD is almost dead, the introduction of delisted free agents will kill this.

Have to love what the club has done, they identified a massive weakness and have added Tyson, Michie, Vince, Cross and Riley, all of the sudden we have midfield depth and hopefully 4 young players that can be very good midfielders in Tyson, Toumpas, Viney and Pick 9.

I don't follow the kids but I do read the so called expert opinions on them. It seems fairly consistent opinion that this is an extremely shallow draft and with that in mind the club may be happy to go in with pick 9 and 40 plus Clisby. They see more value in Riley than what would be available at pick 57. We then focus on some developing talls and another mature midfielder to fill our rookie spot.

The PSD is almost dead, the introduction of delisted free agents will kill this.

Have to love what the club has done, they identified a massive weakness and have added Tyson, Michie, Vince, Cross and Riley, all of the sudden we have midfield depth and hopefully 4 young players that can be very good midfielders in Tyson, Toumpas, Viney and Pick 9.

Totally agree, and we are only aiming to improve this year not be world beaters.

We will add to this midfield with a few more middies wishing to move on from elsewhere.

Edited November 11, 201311 yr by Chippy