Rookie Upgrades

[MO FINE 171]

James Jordon to come back onto the Primary List.

Clubs confirm seven AFL rookies set to be upgraded to the Primary List

 

 

[Turner 1,516]

see this annoys me and this is what the afl needs to wipe out, carlton delists cottrell & o'brien promising to re-rookie them and then upgrades kennedy (1yr as a rookie) and honey (3yrs/4possible) get promoted to the senior list... why can't they just leave as is? the same 60k still gets paid outside the salary cap regardless of who the player is thats down there? is the only reason to shove a rocket up two players clackers by delisting and relisting so they realise how close to the edge they are? 

pleased for hughes and Willkie who earnt their go as rookies and toiled away for 3 years to make it to the senior list and jordon for working back to his spot. also for reeves and Frederick who are proper rookies who've earnt their digs as proper traditional rookies in the sense that they're a cross code beanpole ruckman convert and a cat b multicultural prospect respectively

[WERRIDEE 5,534]

Looks like Chandler stays a rookie in the first year of his contract.

[IvanBartul13 2,564]

9 hours ago, Turner said:

see this annoys me and this is what the afl needs to wipe out, carlton delists cottrell & o'brien promising to re-rookie them and then upgrades kennedy (1yr as a rookie) and honey (3yrs/4possible) get promoted to the senior list... why can't they just leave as is? the same 60k still gets paid outside the salary cap regardless of who the player is thats down there? is the only reason to shove a rocket up two players clackers by delisting and relisting so they realise how close to the edge they are? 

pleased for hughes and Willkie who earnt their go as rookies and toiled away for 3 years to make it to the senior list and jordon for working back to his spot. also for reeves and Frederick who are proper rookies who've earnt their digs as proper traditional rookies in the sense that they're a cross code beanpole ruckman convert and a cat b multicultural prospect respectively

It is with great trepidation that I reply to an acolyte from the Spirit of Norm Smith tree of influence after Mitch O’Neill won South Adelaide’s best first year player award this year,  but I will try and help you out.

Firstly, there are some incorrect facts in your post.  Josh Honey was a second year rookie this year and Cottrell was also a rookie (rendering obsolete your complaint about Carlton’s use of him.)

There are some list and TPP mechanics that are relevant but arent referred to in your diatribe.   One of the most important is that rookie promotions count towards the AFL’s mandated minimum three national draft picks per club.  So by switching players from the relative ‘lists’, it helps clubs satisfy that requirement.  In the current AFL world where list sizes are incredibly tight that has a value.  Carlton are positioned to have only one National draft pick, perhaps two, this year, so they’ve covered the AFL’s draft requirements with the rookie promotions. 

We can now move to TPP.  To recontract O’Brien they would have to pay the AFL senior list minimum at worst, now they can pay him the rookie list minimum, a saving of at least $30k in actual real dollars.  The movement of Kennedy is a counterweight to any TPP benefit most likely but its still a positive financial result for the club.  The actual rookie list TPP saving maximum is closer to 100k than the 60k from your post. 

So the O'Brien for Kennedy switch has at least a real world money saving benefit, plus it has extremely positive list size and national draft implications. 

In terms of Honey,  the National Draft pick factor is relevant, plus Carlton had a huge rookie list last yeat with high retention into this year, so promoting him helps with that, given that the AFL tightened the rookie list screws with its latest list size announcement this year.  Him moving to the primary opens the extra slot for one of the delisted players.

Im not sure but as a third year supplemental rookie draft player, Cottrell may have reached the ceiling to the amount of time he could stay as a rookie, they may have been forced to either delist or promote. If thats the the case, the former is a more sensible line of attack.

The moves are about satisfying AFL rules and dealing with list size issues.

Edited November 5, 2021 by IvanBartul13

[deejammin' 2,373]

On 11/5/2021 at 11:53 PM, WERRIDEE said:

Looks like Chandler stays a rookie in the first year of his contract.

Yeah, it’s interesting isn’t it? Maybe it’s about him having backloaded the contract and being on Rookie money this year with the bulk of his new contract in 2023 when he’s upgraded to the senior list?
From a list spots perspective it’s largely academic 3-4 main list + 0-1 A rookie vs 2-3 main list + 0-2 A rookies.

There seems to be some clever rookie contract money at play otherwise I’d have thought he would be elevated this year.
 

I’d imagine if we have any long term injuries or intend to pick someone up in the mid season draft he may be elevated during 2022 like JJ was this year.

The only other really strong reason to keep him on the rookie list this year would be if we intend to use all 4 draft picks or Delisted FA for main list spots, which would be exciting. 

Edited November 7, 2021 by deejammin'

[Fritta and Turner 4,548]

On 11/6/2021 at 3:15 AM, IvanBartul13 said:

The moves are about satisfying AFL rules and dealing with list size issues.

Thanks Ivan, I'm glad someone understands this stuff...I think