rpfc
-
Posts
22,918 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
130
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Everything posted by rpfc
-
WELCOME TO THE MELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB - SAM WEIDEMAN
rpfc replied to xman97's topic in Melbourne Demons
As a club, we shouldn't make decisions based on what a player may or may not do in 2 years time. Let's just fake some confidence in ourselves shall we? -
Mate, we have moved the pick ahead a year - if we finish bottom 4 that isn't great but the pick 'we missed out on' is already at the club and is a pick 3. There is your 'subsequent top 4 pick'...
-
If they don't have any picks left this year that have any points attached to them that will happen. BUT, the round of the nomination that sends them into deficit is the round that their deficit will be paid next year. So that will mean that their 1st rd pick in 2016 is only affected if a bid from Rd 1 sends them into deficit this year.
-
Ok, mate.2016 Rd 1 - if Dawes is fit he is playing for the Dees. But continue thinking that Goodwin doesn't like him with zero evidence.
-
Yeah, because they traded it away to mitigate the pain. Look at the sum of the parts and look beyond the sound bite: IN: Sinclair, Talia OUT: Jetta, Bird, ND14, They traded Bird and ND14 to give them enough points to help them get Mills and possibly Dunkley. Getting both will see them have no other picks in top 60.
-
Running out of spots for him - we only have 4 spots on the list for 3, 7, 46, and 50. Harmes has yet to be signed either for the PL or the 3rd year RL from what I have read. Not sure the state of Michie's contract - I had him down as OOC next season but his player sponsor said it was this season. Hunt would find it difficult to survive the next delist window. Lovett is up against to get a spot purely because we don't have many... Maybe a rookie spot?
-
Sydney will have picks 47, 60, 65, and 68 (611 points) and a parachute of 1728 points of deficit for remaining Academy players. GWS will have 51, 57, 58, and 59 (769) and the parachute. BL will have 38, 56, and 64 (760) and the parachute. Would be a bit difficult to get the lower ranked Academy players; the AFL has made it easier to get the lower rounds players by stipulating that the discount for Rd 2 players and onwards will be kept at 197 (the discount for Pick 18).
-
Ok, so when Syd, GWS, and the BL get picks kicked to the end of the draft it will be on ladder position so from my scenario: Bl has 4 picks at the end, GWS 5 and Sydney 6. ND98 BL ND99 GWS ND100 Syd ND101 BL ND102 GWS ND103 Syd ND104 BL Etc.
-
Yes, and what is funny is that the pick (29) we gave up to GC is the 28th live pick because most of the 'burnt' picks will be after that pick and before 46 and 50. I have to say - I don't know whether who thought about this or whether we even did - but excellent work by the FD.
-
Ok, so with the 'live' moving up of picks - this is going to be a draft that will just confuse the [censored] out of you... If Mills is nominated at 3, Hopper at 5, Kennedy at 11, Hipwood at 15 and Keays at 18 (please let me know if they are off in your opinion). Sydney will pay 33, 36, 37, 44 for Mills and 63. GWS will pay 10 and 34 for Hopper and 43. GWS will pay 40, 43, and 50 for Kennedy and 73. BL will pay 35 and 36 for Hipwood and 62. BL will pay 36 and 37 for Keays and 56. No, the above is not a typo, because the picks disappear and pick below move 'up' the draft - the Lions will most likely pay with the same picks for their Academy players... You are forgiven if I have lost you here but if this occurs or something similar - we will have the 35th and 39th 'live' picks in the draft.
-
Last year Sydney got the best midfielder in the draft for Pick 18, we had to pay Pick 2 and Pick 3 for similar talents. This year Sydney will do it again, but this time they will pay with 33, 36, 37, and 44 and while one might say that that is not making them pay enough - it has forced them out of the draft till Pick 54.
-
DL5 - explain what you are doing - this is bloody confusing stuff to footy fans. Can't assume everyone understands the premise (and effect) of academy bidding.
-
I don't think Dr thought that through but I would change it to 6 IF the players relinquished the trade veto.
-
I will have a look in a sec, but I will also try to get some clarity around what 'the end of the draft' means. Pick 74 (0 points) or Rd 8 the first round that isn't listed in the 'indicative draft order'... If Syd burns through 4 picks for Mills do they get picks 74-77 or 131-135?
-
Patrick Keane confirmed the fluid nature of the picks on the night - so once Mills is taken - Brisbane's, and GWS's picks become more valuable. They go 'up' the draft as picks are burnt through. Essentially it becomes easier and easier for teams to get their talented academy kids the more there are.
-
They are both set at 20%.
-
Actually, this is wrong, the discount is 20%, not 25% which is the assumption above. It was changed to 20% mid year. I will give it another go when I have time.
-
Yeah, well, baby steps.
-
A team that 'bids' on a Northern State Academy player, or a Father/Son player, will make the team that wants to keep that player pay a certain price through draft picks rather than just be allowed to use their next available pick. All the picks in the draft up to 72 have points attached to them to determine how many picks they must 'give up' to take that player. For example, if Sydney had a player that was worth Pick 1 - Carlton would bid on him with Pick 1. Sydney would then have to surrender all the picks they have to meet the equivalent amount of points as Pick 1. How's that?
-
I don't have an issue with it - they are trying to maximise points and some clubs benefitted. It loosened up trade week. It also meant that players that really wanted to go to other teams - did.
-
Definitely.
-
The deficit will go against the pick in the round that caused the deficit - so if a club nominate Dunkley with a 2nd round pick and that causes them to take hium and go into deficit - their 2nd round pick and onwards will be affected - not their 1st round pick.
-
It will affect the next pick - there is no skipping of a pick.
-
Unfortunately, while creative - it is wrong. There is no mechanism for us to Rookie Fitzpatrick before he would be available in Delisted FA. And even if we didn't delist him, Hawthorn would be able to take him at ND94 before we did in the Rookie Draft. I think they did it as a statement of intent to Jack and because they know that means something to people and they are a strong club.
-
We have the best CHF of this generation - we do not have a 'need' to take a tall forward at 3.
