Rumour 2024 Rumours and Speculation Part 2

[Scorpus]

Spoiler: Older Rumors

I've deleted confirmed information

Rumor summary September 30

• FiveAA claims we are after Scott Borlace, current Head of Development at Brisbane (link)
• Claims of Rory Sloane
  9

  Rory Sloane

  Age

  34

  Ht

  183cm

  Wt

  87kg

  Pos.

  Mid

  Career

  Season

  Last 5

  D

  23.7

  5star

  K

  11.7

  4star

  HB

  11.9

  5star

  M

  3.5

  4star

  T

  6.6

  5star

  CL

  5.7

  5star

  D

  15.3

  4star

  K

  7.3

  3star

  HB

  8.0

  4star

  M

  1.3

  1star

  T

  3.3

  4star

  CL

  4.2

  5star

  D

  22.2

  5star

  K

  8.6

  4star

  HB

  13.6

  5star

  M

  3.2

  4star

  T

  6.0

  5star

  CL

  4.6

  5star

  heading to Melbourne Demons as a development coach, but maybe not before asking for a job at the Crows first?
• Inside Trading suggests we are interested in Gold Coast's pick 12 (link)
• Inside Trading also suggests Clayton Oliver
  13

  Clayton Oliver

  Age

  27

  Ht

  189cm

  Wt

  88kg

  Pos.

  Mid

  Career

  Season

  Last 5

  D

  27.8

  5star

  K

  9.5

  4star

  HB

  18.4

  5star

  M

  3.2

  3star

  T

  6.3

  5star

  CL

  6.3

  5star

  D

  25.1

  5star

  K

  11.1

  4star

  HB

  14.0

  5star

  M

  3.6

  4star

  T

  5.6

  5star

  CL

  5.9

  5star

  D

  19.2

  5star

  K

  4.6

  2star

  HB

  14.6

  5star

  M

  2.0

  3star

  T

  4.4

  5star

  CL

  3.8

  5star

  is possibly back on the trade table, but doesn't link him to any specific clubs

Rumor summary October 1

• We have offered Darcy Fogarty
  32

  Darcy Fogarty

  Age

  25

  Ht

  194cm

  Wt

  100kg

  Pos.

  Fwd

  Career

  Season

  Last 5

  D

  8.5

  2star

  K

  5.7

  2star

  HB

  2.8

  2star

  M

  3.7

  4star

  T

  1.7

  4star

  G

  1.2

  4star

  D

  6.3

  1star

  K

  4.0

  1star

  HB

  2.3

  2star

  M

  3.0

  3star

  T

  2.3

  3star

  G

  1.0

  4star

  D

  8.0

  2star

  K

  5.4

  2star

  HB

  2.6

  3star

  M

  3.4

  4star

  T

  2.6

  4star

  G

  1.0

  4star

  a five year contract extension early ahead of free agency (link)
• We are attempting to lure Graham Wright to our football department (link)

Rumor summary October 2-3

• Graham Wright, who we are chasing as a head of football, is also being chased by Carlton for a CEO position (link)

Rumor summary October 4-5

• Gettable claiming pick 25 for Neal-Bullen and a future 2nd for Peatling (link)

Rumor summary October 6

• Tom Morris claims we are open to splitting pick 4 (link)

Rumor summary October 7

• No new rumors, although Justin Reid confirmed we'll use pick 28 on Neal-Bullen

 

[FR0GGY]

F/S picks come with a 20% discount

Yeah but surely points can still be higher than your single pick?

 

[relapse]

We can't hold off until after the draft. In any case, it's almost certain that his 2025 contract has already been signed.

On SM-X205 using BigFooty.com mobile app

Of course you can, clubs has done it before.

You "delist" Brodie Smith and then either select him with your final pick or sign him in the delisted free agency window that opens up after the draft.

Obviously if he has a deal already then you can't do it, but if he isn't signed the club could definitely do it.

 

[relapse]

Smith more or less made the comment to waiting media after exit interview to a question about his future that "I'm contracted for 2025 and have every intention of fulfilling that contract"

If he does have a contact for 2025 then the club has kept that very quiet (I'm not surprised)

 

[PeterSalt]

Yeah but surely points can still be higher than your single pick?

Sure

My understanding is that if you don't have the points to match a bid in a draft, you simply go into a points deficit on the same pick in the next draft

I think you need to clarify with Mostyn or Vader

 

[PeterSalt]

If he does have a contact for 2025 then the club has kept that very quiet (I'm not surprised)

He made another comment that he would do everything to put himself in the best possible position to be selected for the 1's .. but he wouldn't shy away from playing in the 2's

 

[FR0GGY]

Sure

My understanding is that if you don't have the points to match a bid in a draft, you simply go into a points deficit on the same pick in the next draft

I think you need to clarify with Mostyn or Vader

But that’s the whole point, why wouldn’t you make sure you have enough not to go into deficit and once you match the bid you shop that excess pick into 2025.
But all im reading in here is we didn’t need anymore as we don’t have the list spots.
You don’t need them from what I can see.

 

[PeterSalt]

But that’s the whole point, why wouldn’t you make sure you have enough not to go into deficit and once you match the bid you shop that excess pick into 2025.
But all im reading in here is we didn’t need anymore as we don’t have the list spots.
You don’t need them from what I can see.

I think what happened is a number of years ago the AFL changed the rules to stop clubs going to the draft with dozens of junk picks to pay for F/S or academy players

To do this they specified that you could only take the number of picks to the draft as you had open list spots

It why quite often you see clubs with a number of players without new contracts going into the ND. These are essentially treated as open list spots. This gives clubs the flexibility to take a few extra picks to the draft



"this could be wrong"

 

[Mutineer]

I think your 100% wrong on this one.

Father-son picks could put Pies into draft points deficit

Chasing father-son prospects now could see Pies in debt at 2017 draft

www.afl.com.au

The AFL added a safeguard to its complex system last year to protect the future first-round picks of clubs who want to take a father-son or academy player late in the draft.

It means that a club will not risk pushing back its first pick in the following year's draft if it goes into a points debt by choosing a later-round selection.

Instead, any points incurred for later round players can be repaid in the round the bid is received. A first-round draft position would only be altered if a bid came in the previous year's first round, which seems unlikely for the Collingwood pair.

This means that if the Pies go into deficit by matching an early third-round bid for Daicos, then their third-round pick next year would be shuffled down the order to make up the leftover points.

As I said earlier on the subject I was pretty sure I heard one of the AFL talking heads probably Twomey say exactly this.

I just wasn't sure it was for this year or the future.

 

[Cromulant]

He made another comment that he would do everything to put himself in the best possible position to be selected for the 1's .. but he wouldn't shy away from playing in the 2's

He's probably been told already really, or that's what his tone of voice sounded like in that grab

 

[FR0GGY]

I think what happened is a number of years ago the AFL changed the rules to stop clubs going to the draft with dozens of junk picks to pay for F/S or academy players

To do this they specified that you could only take the number of picks to the draft as you had open list spots

It why quite often you see clubs with a number of players without new contracts going into the ND. These are essentially treated as open list spots. This gives clubs the flexibility to take a few extra picks to the draft



"this could be wrong"

Haven’t they solved that by removing points from picks past a certain point.

 

[PeterSalt]

Haven’t they solved that by removing points from picks past a certain point.

That doesn't kick in until next year

 

[crow2crow]

Rowey’s comments showed a lack of knowledge on the player - he even went as far as saying he’s Peatling is behind Pedlar and Berry

I would”t say Peatling has elite speed but he definitely has above average speed, and his agility in traffic is elite IMO

We are getting a player that is on the rise as a player - let’s be honest if he was behind Pedlar and I rate Peds he wouldn’t have had 6-7 clubs chasing him.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

As I've said its about traits and whilst the highlights tape looks good I'm yet to be convinced peatling will be an A Grade mid. If anything I can see him being more that quick smaller goal kicking tackling fwd (184cm not really small) we are seeking and hence I dont see a need for Rosas now.

To me Pedlar is a mid not a forward and should have been developed there from the start. As for berry, well as i said countless times I would have traded him.

 

[PeterSalt]

He's probably been told already really, or that's what his tone of voice sounded like in that grab

Yeah, he didn't seem overly happy at the time

 

[Betts are off]

I just saw the GWS has a suite of late picks this year. I assume any deal we make for Peatling will likely land us a % of those in return to cover off a Welsh bid. GWS don't really need late picks this year right?

 

[Vader]

Why can’t you?
Surely matching a bid requires more than 1 pick if the bid is higher?

Because clubs are only allowed to take as many picks into the draft as they have list vacancies to fill. We will only have 2 senior list vacancies, so we will only be allowed to take 2 picks into the draft.

Clubs with a 36+6 structure have an advantage here, because they can effectively take 2 extra picks into the ND (which they use for points), even if they have no intention of filling those vacancies until the RD.

 

[Vader]

But that’s the whole point, why wouldn’t you make sure you have enough not to go into deficit and once you match the bid you shop that excess pick into 2025.
But all im reading in here is we didn’t need anymore as we don’t have the list spots.
You don’t need them from what I can see.

Because we can't take any excess picks into the draft. We have 2 senior list vacancies, so we can only take 2 picks into the ND. It's that simple.

 

[Vader]

I think what happened is a number of years ago the AFL changed the rules to stop clubs going to the draft with dozens of junk picks to pay for F/S or academy players

To do this they specified that you could only take the number of picks to the draft as you had open list spots

It why quite often you see clubs with a number of players without new contracts going into the ND. These are essentially treated as open list spots. This gives clubs the flexibility to take a few extra picks to the draft

"this could be wrong"

You're not too far off the mark. It's clubs with 36+6 list structures, which offers them the flexibility to bring 2 extra picks into the ND (provided they don't have more than 4 rookies), even if they don't plan on filling those extra vacancies until the RD.

It's not leaving players uncontracted until after the ND. They're not allowed to do that.

 

[Vader]

I just saw the GWS has a suite of late picks this year. I assume any deal we make for Peatling will likely land us a % of those in return to cover off a Welsh bid. GWS don't really need late picks this year right?

We can't take more picks into the ND than we have vacancies, and we can't trade for more picks once the ND has started.

What we can do is trade 46 + F3 for something in the 30s, if required - as long as we end up with the same number of picks in the 2024 ND.

 

[FR0GGY]

Because clubs are only allowed to take as many picks into the draft as they have list vacancies to fill. We will only have 2 senior list vacancies, so we will only be allowed to take 2 picks into the draft.

Clubs with a 36+6 structure have an advantage here, because they can effectively take 2 extra picks into the ND (which they use for points), even if they have no intention of filling those vacancies until the RD.

So we’ve hamstrung ourselves?

 

[PeterSalt]

You're not too far off the mark. It's clubs with 36+6 list structures, which offers them the flexibility to bring 2 extra picks into the ND (provided they don't have more than 4 rookies), even if they don't plan on filling those extra vacancies until the RD.

It's not leaving players uncontracted until after the ND. They're not allowed to do that.

So list vacancies or open list spots going into the ND are only considered if players have been traded out, have retired or been delisted?

And players that don't have contracts for the following year are not considered as vacant? I understand that this often happens when a club is unsure of exactly how many players they'll draft, dependent on who is available at their picks.

For some reason I thought clubs also did this in order to allow some 'stockpiling' of draft picks if needed

 

[jackster83]

We can't take more picks into the ND than we have vacancies, and we can't trade for more picks once the ND has started.

What we can do is trade 46 + F3 for something in the 30s, if required - as long as we end up with the same number of picks in the 2024 ND.

The other thing is our pick in the 60's will likely come forward a fair bit after all the academy picks which might end up being enough to match a bid in the 40's for Welsh.

 

[jackster83]

So list vacancies or open list spots going into the ND are only considered if players have been traded out, have retired or been delisted?

And players that don't have contracts for the following year are not considered as vacant? I understand that this often happens when a club is unsure of exactly how many players they'll draft, dependent on who is available at their picks.

For some reason I thought clubs also did this in order to allow some 'stockpiling' of draft picks if needed

Clubs hold off upgrading rookies until after the draft.

 

[Vader]

So we’ve hamstrung ourselves?

I think they're well aware of the other clubs' intentions re: Welsh, and see the risk as minimal. Even if a bid does come in slightly earlier, we can just go into debt for 2025 points.

We currently have pick #48, which is worth 302 points. This gives us the ability to match bids worth 362 points - or from pick #44 onwards. Presumably they're not expecting a bid to come inside the top-40.

As to where that pick ends up once bidding commences, with picks moving up & down all over the place as a result, is anyone's guess.

 

[Vader]

The other thing is our pick in the 60's will likely come forward a fair bit after all the academy picks which might end up being enough to match a bid in the 40's for Welsh.

We won't have a pick in the 60s to "come forward". We will enter the ND with only 2 picks - currently #4 and #48.

 

[jackster83]

We won't have a pick in the 60s to "come forward". We will enter the ND with only 2 picks - currently #4 and #48.

Sorry, I should have added "assuming we trade our third rounder out".