List Mgmt. 2022 List Management and Trading Thread - Part 2

[Scorpus]

Updated list position



And 2024 as it stands

Spoiler

 

[GreyCrow]

Outside of Matty Rowell I can't think of anyone that has polled 9 Brownlow votes in his first three AFL games. What a start plus number 1 pick never going to keep up with the hype that comes with that start and pick 1. He is not playing bad footy. He is actually playing some really good footy imo. But never going to keep up with that hype.

Needed to kick of his career at a slower pace maybe just 4 Brownlow votes in his first three games not 9.

Paul Salmon

 

[Dangerousfield]

OK... so with this new information about the rookie upgrade window, the way it works is this...

Current List status: 35/4/2
2x ND selections: 37/4/2
Strachan & Butts upgraded, Player X downgraded (in same window): 38/3/2
1x RD selection: 38/4/2

... and we're done.

Trying to get my head around this. After the final list lodgement prior to the draft, the AFL will allocate clubs as many picks as they have vacant senior list spots.

So at the last list lodgement before the draft, how many vacant senior places will we have as I currently see only one. Who goes from the senior list to the rookie list before that list lodgement, Seedsman?

 

[Vader]

Trying to get my head around this. After the final list lodgement prior to the draft, the AFL will allocate clubs as many picks as they have vacant senior list spots.

So at the last list lodgement before the draft, how many vacant senior places will we have as I currently see only one. Who goes from the senior list to the rookie list before that list lodgement, Seedsman?

We were at 37 on the senior list this year.
Subtract Brown, Rowe & Frampton = 35
We will have 4 players on our rookie list as of the last List Lodgement prior to the ND, so we can go as high as 38 players on our senior list.

Thus, we would have 3x selections at the ND - though I expect us to pass with our 3rd.

Nobody goes to the rookie list before the List Lodgement. Movements between the senior & rookie lists (both up & down) happen between the ND and RD. This is when Strachan & Butts get upgraded, and Player X (probably Seedsman or Crouch) gets downgraded.

In terms of the timeline, everything happens on 29th November - as we don't have a pick in the 1st round (28th Nov).

• 7pm - 2nd round of the ND starts
• ???pm - ND finishes
• 10-11pm - Window for moving players between senior & rookie lists

 

[arrowman]

We were at 37 on the senior list this year.
Subtract Brown, Rowe & Frampton = 35
We will have 4 players on our rookie list as of the last List Lodgement prior to the ND, so we can go as high as 38 players on our senior list.

Thus, we would have 3x selections at the ND - though I expect us to pass with our 3rd.

Nobody goes to the rookie list before the List Lodgement. Movements between the senior & rookie lists (both up & down) happen between the ND and RD. This is when Strachan & Butts get upgraded, and Player X (probably Seedsman or Crouch) gets downgraded.

In terms of the timeline, everything happens on 29th November - as we don't have a pick in the 1st round (28th Nov).

• 7pm - 2nd round of the ND starts
• ???pm - ND finishes
• 10-11pm - Window for moving players between senior & rookie lists

Thank you for your efforts on this, much appreciated. A couple of comments:

1. Noting that 37-3 = 34, add Rankine = 35.

2. We're supposed to take a minimum of 3 selections at the ND, but elevations from the Rookie List count towards this. So if we make only 2 selections at the ND (as expected), we are one short of the minimum - but elevations of Butts & Strachan make up for that - but we don't make those elevations until after the ND, so at the ND we're sort of promising to make at least one rookie elevation. I guess the rule is not "must make at least 3 ND selections but rookie elevations count" but is actually "must make at least 3 additions to the senior list, by the end of the ND and the rookie movement window".

Now, maybe I'm overthinking this, but it raises this question (maybe won't happen with us this year, but in general):

• You're only allowed to use "live" picks at the ND to match a bid - that is, you can't use picks beyond the number of list vacancies.
• Club X has 3 vacancies.
• Club X has picks 23, 41 and 59. None beyond that, because they only have 3 vacancies.
• Club X picks a player with 23, then uses 41 and 59 to match a bid. They make no further picks.
• Club X comes out of the draft having filled only 2 of the 3 list spots, which is fine, because they always intended to make one rookie elevation.
• But at the same time, they were able to use a pick (59) to match a bid, despite the fact that they never intended to use it.

?

 

[Vader]

Thank you for your efforts on this, much appreciated. A couple of comments:

1. Noting that 37-3 = 34, add Rankine = 35.

2. We're supposed to take a minimum of 3 selections at the ND, but elevations from the Rookie List count towards this. So if we make only 2 selections at the ND (as expected), we are one short of the minimum - but elevations of Butts & Strachan make up for that - but we don't make those elevations until after the ND, so at the ND we're sort of promising to make at least one rookie elevation. I guess the rule is not "must make at least 3 ND selections but rookie elevations count" but is actually "must make at least 3 additions to the senior list, by the end of the ND and the rookie movement window".

Now, maybe I'm overthinking this, but it raises this question (maybe won't happen with us this year, but in general):

• You're only allowed to use "live" picks at the ND to match a bid - that is, you can't use picks beyond the number of list vacancies.
• Club X has 3 vacancies.
• Club X has picks 23, 41 and 59. None beyond that, because they only have 3 vacancies.
• Club X picks a player with 23, then uses 41 and 59 to match a bid. They make no further picks.
• Club X comes out of the draft having filled only 2 of the 3 list spots, which is fine, because they always intended to make one rookie elevation.
• But at the same time, they were able to use a pick (59) to match a bid, despite the fact that they never intended to use it.

?

1 - You are absolutely correct. I included Rankine in my maths, but forgot to include him in the text.

2 - While it's frequently stated as "3 players in the ND, including rookie upgrades", it also includes PSD selections - which happen after the rookie upgrade window closes. Remember, we just paraphrase it - the actual rule is a bit more complex in its wording.

Your scenario is just fine - there is no problem, and no contradiction. When a club uses 2 picks to match a bid, the first pick moves up to the bid location. The second pick moves to the back of the queue (if all its points are required), or is shuffled back in the draft order to reflect the number of points used. The 3rd pick doesn't cease to exist. At the end of the day, the club has only made 2 selections, even if all 3 picks (or the points attached to them) were required to make it happen.

This is an extremely common scenario, noting that clubs with 37/5 and 36/6 mixes can effectively take 2 more picks into the draft than they actually intend to use.

 

[arrowman]

1 - You are absolutely correct. I included Rankine in my maths, but forgot to include him in the text.

2 - While it's frequently stated as "3 players in the ND, including rookie upgrades", it also includes PSD selections - which happen after the rookie upgrade window closes. Remember, we just paraphrase it - the actual rule is a bit more complex in its wording.

Your scenario is just fine - there is no problem, and no contradiction. When a club uses 2 picks to match a bid, the first pick moves up to the bid location. The second pick moves to the back of the queue (if all its points are required), or is shuffled back in the draft order to reflect the number of points used. The 3rd pick doesn't cease to exist. At the end of the day, the club has only made 2 selections, even if all 3 picks (or the points attached to them) were required to make it happen.

This is an extremely common scenario, noting that clubs with 37/5 and 36/6 mixes can effectively take 2 more picks into the draft than they actually intend to use.

Now I know for sure you're not an AFL journalist, you understand the systems too well

You should do special comments on draft night.

 

[Disco Fox]

He's a one-paced work-horse .....no tricks, but a contested beast

Rowell always looks to be running on his heels .....there's no spring in his step ....he just charges at the contest, using his strength .....didn't see him take a contested mark all year & he's only 180 cm ....same height as Rankine

He's a larger version of our Ned isn't he? Acts before he thinks - doesn't have a Plan B once he's rushed to the fall of the ball.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

He's a larger version of our Ned isn't he? Acts before he thinks - doesn't have a Plan B once he's rushed to the fall of the ball.

Rowell's better than Ned, by some margin .....Ned clutch's at the ball too much for my liking

But Rowell is over-hyped .....i like the Dane Swan comparison though, as his ceiling

 

[GrommoT]

...

• You're only allowed to use "live" picks at the ND to match a bid - that is, you can't use picks beyond the number of list vacancies.
• ...

I think it might be more accurate to say ' bring "live" picks into the ND ' (corresponding to no. of list vacancies) - "live" picks being picks from the current draft year.

But once the ND is underway, I don't think the rules stop a club from live trading for picks during draft night to the point of exceeding list vacancies, even though the club wouldn't actually draft more players than fit their vacancies.

 

[GrommoT]

...
In terms of the timeline, everything happens on 29th November - as we don't have a pick in the 1st round (28th Nov).

• 7pm - 2nd round of the ND starts
• ???pm - ND finishes
• 10-11pm - Window for moving players between senior & rookie lists

Maybe there's a small chance we trade into the 1st round is, say, Phillipou slides to the pick of a club willing to trade it to us. Probably unlikely, but not impossible.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

......Hamish was there when Danger was recruited ....

Valuable experience he apparently learned nothing from.

But it was also Stewart that had a strong say .....even though he was not officially part of the recruiting team

I remember reading somewhere that Stewart was the guy who recommended Ogilvie to the Crows.

 

[crow2crow]

Valuable experience he apparently learned nothing from.


I remember reading somewhere that Stewart was the guy who recommended Ogilvie to the Crows.

we aren't the only club that gets high picks wrong

look at schache, a.francis, there are many others I cant be bothered typing

 

[Mr_Moogle]

we aren't the only club that gets high picks wrong

look at schache, a.francis, there are many others I cant be bothered typing

Yes every team picks up the odd dud. Crows do it too often though.

 

[CharlieCrow]

So, revisiting the Philipou question.
Isn't the question simply, "Is he better than the player we could draft at our second pick in 2023?"
If we can trade 2023 2nd to pick him up at 12 or so, despite next year's draft apparently being better, is he better than who we might get at pick 25-30 in that year? Even if we finish last our second pick will be 19 or worse after FS picks etc and most probably after about 25.

 

[Mostyn]

Pedlar was a half forward in his draft year, and Rachele a small forward.

Rachele was the best in the nation as a 16 year old midfielder and Pedlar played some dominant football in his draft year in the midfield.

 

[Sanders]

Paul Salmon

Adrian McAdam

 

[Sanders]

But Rowell is over-hyped .....i like the Dane Swan comparison though, as his ceiling

Which is it?

 

[Moe Ron]

Caleb Poulter delisted by Collingwood... if we had enough room (I think one spot in the Rookie List?) would we go for him or Turner? I'd personally go Poulter but do feel bad for Turner only getting 6 months... seemed like a funny selection at the time.

 

[Dangarman]

So, revisiting the Philipou question.
Isn't the question simply, "Is he better than the player we could draft at our second pick in 2023?"
If we can trade 2023 2nd to pick him up at 12 or so, despite next year's draft apparently being better, is he better than who we might get at pick 25-30 in that year? Even if we finish last our second pick will be 19 or worse after FS picks etc and most probably after about 25.

And which benefactor was going to give us a first round pick this year for next year's second rounder?

The question I think becomes "is he better than who we could draft with our first round pick next year?" If the answer is yes, we keep offering our future first to whoever is picking next until he finally gets taken. Probably more in hope than expectation though.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Which is it?

Was Swan a champion of the game ? .....I accept he's a great player of COLL .....he's no Ablett, Pendlebery though

 

[Sanders]

Was Swan a champion of the game ? .....I accept he's a great player of COLL .....he's no Ablett, Pendlebery though

If you don’t think Swan was a champion then give yourself an uppercut

Leigh Matthews trophy for AFL MVP
Brownlow medalist
AFLCA MVP
5x all Australian

Maybe a double uppercut is merited!

 

[Dangerousfield]

Was Swan a champion of the game ? .....I accept he's a great player of COLL .....he's no Ablett, Pendlebery though

Champion of the off field stuff!

Was a great player

 

[King Elvis]

Which is it?

Overhyped but comparable to a Brownlow medalist.

What's not clear there?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

If you don’t think Swan was a champion then give yourself an uppercut

Leigh Matthews trophy for AFL MVP
Brownlow medalist
AFLCA MVP
5x all Australian

Maybe a double uppercut is merited!

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Overhyped but comparable to a Brownlow medalist.

What's not clear there?

I'm going back to my data to get a better comparison for Rowell .....this comparison hasn't gone well ....maybe a bit hasty