List Mgmt. 2024 National Draft - November 20-21

[Jen2310]

 

[Jen2310]

If this is the case not sure I like him making this public. Maybe club's preferences are always an open secret, but it seems like you wouldn't want to give too much away.

My thought would be we'd have a preference for talls but not an overriding one. In practise the draft will probably play out similar to most others, as I'm fairly sure we've had this preference before. Not sure if true, but seems to me this draft has more talls than usual, that may make KPP more likely.

Three talls would definitely be excessive. Would be very surprised if we went that far.

I could see two talls (one for each end) and then a mid or small forward (given we lost richards and HH recoverying from ACL) for our last pick

 

[sr36]

If this is the case not sure I like him making this public. Maybe club's preferences are always an open secret, but it seems like you wouldn't want to give too much away.

My thought would be we'd have a preference for talls but not an overriding one. In practise the draft will probably play out similar to most others, as I'm fairly sure we've had this preference before. Not sure if true, but seems to me this draft has more talls than usual, that may make KPP more likely.

Three talls would definitely be excessive. Would be very surprised if we went that far.

Personally I'd just go best available. Just pick the guys you think are most likely to make it. Talls who don't make it aren't what we want. And where we're picking those who make it are a bonus.

But if your preference is a particular player type, I'd imagine they'd score them normally and then weight their scores by player type.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

Believe you can be on the cat b list now 3 years.
You can be on the Cat A list up to 5 years if you've played 10 or less AFL games.

Even better then!

Knew Cat A was game related, but didn't know Cat B went to 3 years.

 

[Lings of Geelong]

If the first round goes the way of the espn phantom draft, our picks will be 46, 49, 53. That's without considering f/s or nga outside of the first round.

First-round AFL Phantom Draft: Who your club could pick on night 1

With six bids and 28 picks, this is ESPN draft expert Jasper Chellappah's first-round phantom mock, a month out from the 2024 AFL Draft. Who will your club pick on the first night?

www.espn.com.au

There was another phantom - can't remember where i saw it - which had Ashcroft going higher but we still ended up with 47, 50, 53. So that's the ballpark.

I think Leppa's comments about coming in 10 were aimed at calming the members that were fretting about only being left with 3 picks in the 50's

 

[Jen2310]

Even better then!

Knew Cat A was game related, but didn't know Cat B went to 3 years.

Yeah, most Cat B players gets a 3 year contract. Tom Wilson was on our Cat b list for 4 years (3 years + 1 additional AFL approved year because of his back injury)

 

[3rdMan]

Personally I'd just go best available. Just pick the guys you think are most likely to make it. Talls who don't make it aren't what we want. And where we're picking those who make it are a bonus.

But if your preference is a particular player type, I'd imagine they'd score them normally and then weight their scores by player type.

Pretty confident we'd mostly be going best available, badically incompetence not to. Any preference for talls would only come in for players rated similarly.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

I don't know whether cat b is different but it's gone up to 4 years for cat a.

However with cat a rules, your salary cap saving trick doesn't work. It's only the base wage that sits outside the salary cap, anything over is inside the salary cap.

I'm assuming the rules are same for tenure and salary for a and b, but they might not be.

Aware cat A is base payments only.

Was referring to keeping Parker on Cat B....which isn't subject to the minimum base payments.
Had a flick through the CBA Jen posted above before making my comments.

It's listed as " all football payments" that sit outside the cap for Cat B.
Can't be bothered diving into the definition of "football payments" further....mainly because that might deflate my position

If that is the case, then having solid players on Cat B for as long as possible is a win for cap management.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

Yeah, most Cat B players gets a 3 year contract. Tom Wilson was on our Cat b list for 4 years (3 years + 1 additional AFL approved year because of his back injury)

Yup knew Tom got an extension for 4 years (was a few players that got it).

Assume Oct 31 is the deadline for "year", which would make sense that Condon isn't signing until after this deadline so that next year is year 1.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

Personally I'd just go best available. Just pick the guys you think are most likely to make it. Talls who don't make it aren't what we want. And where we're picking those who make it are a bonus.

But if your preference is a particular player type, I'd imagine they'd score them normally and then weight their scores by player type.

I actually liked the strategy you put up the other day about taking all talls and hoping 1 makes the grade.

But having said that, Dekka will 100% take a slider with one of them. Tall or otherwise.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

Metranome didn't last long.

Were they suspended for misspelling their own name?

Was thinking the same

Suspended less than 30 minutes after joining.

 

[sr36]

Aware cat A is base payments only.

Was referring to keeping Parker on Cat B....which isn't subject to the minimum base payments.
Had a flick through the CBA Jen posted above before making my comments.

It's listed as " all football payments" that sit outside the cap for Cat B.
Can't be bothered diving into the definition of "football payments" further....mainly because that might deflate my position

If that is the case, then having solid players on Cat B for as long as possible is a win for cap management.

That's great. More so for Condon. I've been a bit less excited by Condon than most because I think we'll be paying him well above base if he joins, and assumed that he wasn't a really a freeby because I thought we'd be using a fair bit of salary cap space to not have to draft him.

Agree, keep them cat b as long as possible.

 

[JuniorB]

Was thinking the same

Suspended less than 30 minutes after joining.

Do we know why he was suspended?
It took me three years to get a day off.
I obviously need to spend more time baiting oppo supporters.
I noticed Chief posted a thread called "Your pick for Game of the Year".
I was tempted to pick two games - you can guess which ones!

 

[sr36]

I actually liked the strategy you put up the other day about taking all talls and hoping 1 makes the grade.

But having said that, Dekka will 100% take a slider with one of them. Tall or otherwise.

I think best available all the way, but if you are targeting a player type, make it a numbers game and load up on them. Whether it was his goal or not, early Dekka did that a few times. We had a tall draft, then a mids draft and then an interceptors draft.

 

[sr36]

Do we know why he was suspended?
It took me three years to get a day off.
I obviously need to spend more time baiting oppo supporters.
I noticed Chief posted a thread called "Your pick for Game of the Year".
I was tempted to pick two games - you can guess which ones!

Probably a usual suspect that didn't hide IP address well enough.

 

[Apex36]

I don't know whether cat b is different but it's gone up to 4 years for cat a.

However with cat a rules, your salary cap saving trick doesn't work. It's only the base wage that sits outside the salary cap, anything over is inside the salary cap.

I'm assuming the rules are same for tenure and salary for an and b, but they might not be.

It used to be that cat B rookies salary sat completely outside the cap until they started playing senior games and then a % went on the cap depending on how many games they played, but those were in the days where you had to be upgraded from rookie lists to even play AFL.
Not sure if the rules changed or are the same since they started allowing rookies to just play without the upgrading nonsense.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

Do we know why he was suspended?
It took me three years to get a day off.
I obviously need to spend more time baiting oppo supporters.
I noticed Chief posted a thread called "Your pick for Game of the Year".
I was tempted to pick two games - you can guess which ones!

No clue why.

 

[Apex36]

If the first round goes the way of the espn phantom draft, our picks will be 46, 49, 53. That's without considering f/s or nga outside of the first round.

First-round AFL Phantom Draft: Who your club could pick on night 1

With six bids and 28 picks, this is ESPN draft expert Jasper Chellappah's first-round phantom mock, a month out from the 2024 AFL Draft. Who will your club pick on the first night?

www.espn.com.au

There was another phantom - can't remember where i saw it - which had Ashcroft going higher but we still ended up with 47, 50, 53. So that's the ballpark.

I think Leppa's comments about coming in 10 were aimed at calming the members that were fretting about only being left with 3 picks in the 50's

I wrote a detailed post a week ago on what I saw happening with bids and came up with a first pick of about 46 as well iirc, so this seems like it should be around the mark.

 

[sr36]

Pretty confident we'd mostly be going best available, badically incompetence not to. Any preference for talls would only come in for players rated similarly.

Agree.

 

[unplugged]

Where did you have the matched players going?

I think the list managers would be thinking available players and would ignore slips going back due to the player being taken. So I think leooa meant 10 picks might get used for matching the 4 blokes they think will get bids early enough to be relevant. So it'd move us up a fair bit in terms of available players, but less in terms of actual draft number.

I'm only going off my sheet which combines 5+ phantoms

Has Levi Ashcroft ranked #1 but I just assumed Richmond would want pick 1, so took him as being matched with pick 2. That's about the only manipulation I considered.

Otherwise before us

Lombard pick 8

Kako 16

Marshall 20

Camporeale 33

Champion 42

Cole 43

Smith 46

Quite often on draft night some of these guys get called early. Like Lombard might get a top 5 bid. But quite often the Camporeales etc will get left alone for longer.

 

[Jen2310]

I'm only going off my sheet which combines 5+ phantoms

Has Levi Ashcroft ranked #1 but I just assumed Richmond would want pick 1, so took him as being matched with pick 2. That's about the only manipulation I considered.

Otherwise before us

Lombard pick 8

Kako 16

Marshall 20

Camporeale 33

Champion 42

Cole 43

Smith 46

Quite often on draft night some of these guys get called early. Like Lombard might get a top 5 bid. But quite often the Camporeales etc will get left alone for longer.

If richmond get pick 2 as well, ashcroft may not even get a bid until pick 4 going by the espn phantom. That would be interesting

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

Three talls would definitely be excessive. Would be very surprised if we went that far.

You'll be picking at least 1 mid

 

[Jen2310]

You'll be picking at least 1 mid

No doubt. Maybe with our last pick, just a matter of who that may be.
Hopefully key def and key fwd with the other two picks. Of course, it all depends who is left that they rate.

 

[Harry O]

You'll be picking at least 1 mid

Source?

 

[TradeDraft]

Doug Kerr working close with McStay in his ACL recovery maybe? Wonder if there is a chance we draft him. Would be a very late pick I assume.
View attachment 2146690

Rookie/Cat-B at Best you think

 

[satanshoof101]

You'll be picking at least 1 mid

Purely out of interest, how do you know? Any insider knowledge on who we are looking at?