Club lists finalised with further signings

[Lucifers Hero 37,131]

25 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

The minimum senior list is 36 not 37, but we'll have at least 37.

Given we have 1 Cat B in Bradtke, I'd suggest the best thing to do is to have a senior list of 37, and then 6 A rookie spots (filling 5 initially). 

If we went 38 main list, Bradtke, max 5 A rookies we'd be paying 80k extra in the cap for no reason.

So we either take just the live 3 draft picks or we demote someone back to the rookie list (assuming we still can) if we want to take a 4th pick or a delisted free agent on to the main list. 

I have updated my earlier post for senior list size.

The 6 rookies allowed is the total of A and B types.  As long as we have Bradtke we can't have 6 A rookie spots.

Edited November 25, 2020 by Lucifer's Hero

[DeeSpencer 23,189]

22 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I have updated my earlier post for senior list size.

The 6 rookies allowed is the total of A and B types.  As long as we have Bradtke we can't have 6 A rookie spots.

Quote

To reach the maximum of 44 players, clubs can carry between 36 and 38 senior listed players and four to six Category A rookies, plus the two Category B rookies. 

It is expected most clubs will use up to six Category A rookies to help offset money against their salary cap. 

That's from Mitch Cleary.

Then this from the AFL press release:
 

Quote

• Each club must have a minimum of 37 players with a maximum of 44 players.  The primary list must have no less than 36 players and no more than 38 players. The maximum number of Category A rookies will be 4-6 (depending on the number of Primary List Players and with the maximum across those two lists not exceeding 42) and the maximum number of category B rookies shall be 2. 

So it looks like the Category B isn't restricted based on the number of A rookies. It's independent of it and capped at 2. So we should be going out and finding another Cat B guy at the some stage.

But the main and A list are restricted to 42 total.

So we really should aim to just have 36 on the main list. Given we're currently at 34 that might be hard to achieve. 

[Lucifers Hero 37,131]

12 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

That's from Mitch Cleary.

Then this from the AFL press release:
 

So it looks like the Category B isn't restricted based on the number of A rookies. It's independent of it and capped at 2. So we should be going out and finding another Cat B guy at the some stage.

But the main and A list are restricted to 42 total.

So we really should aim to just have 36 on the main list. Given we're currently at 34 that might be hard to achieve. 

A max of 6 (A+B) rookies is based on a max list of 44 and filling the 4 senior vacancies we have which gives 38 senior players. 

Of course we may not fill all 4 senior list spots and then there are any number of combinations of senior, A or B players to reach 44.  My initial point was the club has maxed the rookies in recent years so saving on the sal cap.  It is not a new strategy for mfc.

As I noted I have little doubt the club will leave a rookie (A type) spot (or two) for the PSSP or next year's mid season draft.

[Ohio USA - David 107]

2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

A max of 6 (A+B) rookies is based on a max list of 44 and filling the 4 senior vacancies we have which gives 38 senior players. 

Of course we may not fill all 4 senior list spots and then there are any number of combinations of senior, A or B players to reach 44.  My initial point was the club has maxed the rookies in recent years so saving on the sal cap.  It is not a new strategy for mfc.

As I noted I have little doubt the club will leave a rookie (A type) spot (or two) for the PSSP or next year's mid season draft.

That's all good BUT how does the proposed mid season (2) drafts work ? Can a Club with 44 players compete in those Drafts ?

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,462]

15 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

That's from Mitch Cleary.

Then this from the AFL press release:
 

So it looks like the Category B isn't restricted based on the number of A rookies. It's independent of it and capped at 2. So we should be going out and finding another Cat B guy at the some stage.

But the main and A list are restricted to 42 total.

So we really should aim to just have 36 on the main list. Given we're currently at 34 that might be hard to achieve. 

I wonder about the value of that. What's the success rate of Category B rookies across the AFL? (Of course, it depends a bit on the definition of "success".) I wonder whether the resources used to identify and then develop a category B rookie might be better spent elsewhere. I appreciate the concept of "high risk, high reward", but if the evidence to date suggests the rewards aren't there, maybe we are wasting our time with Cat Bs.

[Lucifers Hero 37,131]

25 minutes ago, Ohio USA - David said:

That's all good BUT how does the proposed mid season (2) drafts work ? Can a Club with 44 players compete in those Drafts ?

No, a club cannot exceed 44.  But it seems the AFL is not beyond changing the rules in these weird times.

They are Rookie drafts.  A club can keep a rookie spot free or create one by retiring/LT injury list a player from their senior list and promoting an existing rookie.  rookie-draft-details

NAB AFL Mid-Season Rookie Draft

The AFL today proposed an alternative model to the NAB AFL Mid-Season Rookie Draft for 2021 that would allow Clubs to fill vacant list spots or replace inactive players on a monthly basis.

Details of that proposal are as follows:

Between the end of the SSP and prior to Round One, undrafted and other eligible players can opt into being upgraded to an AFL list during the 2021 Toyota AFL Premiership Season.

Clubs can then nominate to upgrade a previously undrafted or eligible player to their respective Rookie List at three different periods throughout the 2021 season (eg. following Round Four, Round Eight, and Round 12).

In the instance that the same player is nominated by two or more Clubs, the player will go to the team lower on the ladder under a rolling process (eg. if a Club selects a player, that Club goes to the back of the line).

The AFL informed Clubs it would discuss this model further with both AFL and State League Clubs over the next month with the view to finalising whether it is introduced in the 2021 Toyota AFL Premiership Season.

So players can nominate their cub just like a DFA.   As a lot of players will go undrafted this year some gems are bound to be available.

 

As an aside, if we have managed our sal cap well which so far looks like we have, I don't see a need to move senior list players to rookie list and prevent us from participating in the PSSP or mid season drafts of which there are 3. 

Some would say a player that goes from senior to rookie list could be promoted back to the senior list when the mid season drafts arrive.  But do we really want to mess with a players standing.  We have a history of treating our players with respect.  Moving them around like chess pieces wouldn't be the go I don't think.

Edited November 25, 2020 by Lucifer's Hero

[drdrake 3,038]

Looks like the AFL is trying to encourage clubs to pick up more players that had been disadvantaged by not playing in 2020.  The Rookie change yesterday, plus now the proposed change to mid Season draft will give the chance for players to train with clubs and hopefully get picked up.  

 

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,618]

On 11/23/2020 at 2:13 PM, Deespicable said:

V- Richmond had nine of their premiership 22 under 6 feet.

But which of Rioli, Castagna, Bolton, Short and Edwards are regarded as slow or without weapons. Then there's workaholics like Lambert, Baker and Graham and their bull in Prestia.

!

Do they include Cotchin's hair when they quote his height?

[Turner 1,482]

2 hours ago, Ohio USA - David said:

That's all good BUT how does the proposed mid season (2) drafts work ? Can a Club with 44 players compete in those Drafts ?

so technically yes because a player is removed from that 44 and placed as inactive and u recruit someone to fill there place meaning at the end of the season u will have to bring your numbers back down under the 44 for the next season. so 2 LT injuries and a retirement would technically give u a squad of 47 but you'd have to cut back extras that offseason

[whelan45 202]

I'd be leaving as many rookie spots open as possible if I was Dees. In my opinion there is going to be a heap of players undrafted who if they played in 2020, would have easily been drafted. Could be a real one off opportunity.

Has anybody looked into comparing historical mock draft's at the start of a season to what the actual draft at the end of the year looks like? Would be fascinating to see in the context to this upcoming draft

[Cheesy D. Pun 1,762]

On 11/23/2020 at 2:13 PM, Deespicable said:

Very disappointed, although given we are talking about list pozzies 33-37, it is hardly crucial.

What annoys me, and I've said this before, is that we have a high number of sub 6-footers (less than 184cm) on our list - 12 in all. Obviously some small guys are necessary and very deserving - Richmond had nine of their premiership 22 under 6 feet.

But which of Rioli, Castagna, Bolton, Short and Edwards are regarded as slow or without weapons. Then there's workaholics like Lambert, Baker and Graham and their bull in Prestia.

Of our 12, only Viney, Langdon, Kossie and Salem are walk-up starts and I'd add Lockhart to that (although the coach wouldn't).

That's seven little guys battling for spots and four of them - Bedford, Chandler, Spargo and ANB - are battling for a small forward spot that isn't even a pre-requisite spot given Kossie has nailed down the main one.

As I said, it's not a biggie in the overall scheme of things, but one of that four should have been delisted. Imagine the outcry if we have five ruckmen on our list battling for one spot!

You've struck a nerve for me with that call, Dee.

A second or third small forward could be the key to unlocking our entire game plan. We're trying to play Richmond's mosquito fleet game plan with only one mozzy (Kozzy).

Whether we have the right guys on the list ATM is debatable but we need to find some support for Kozzy and stop relying on stop-gap,  medium-sized solutions.